-- The Cork Examiner 15 Jul 1844


On yesterday a party of the 33d Regiment, who were billeted in Mallow on
Saturday, attended Mass, accompanied by an officer.  They were kindly
ushered into the end gallery, facing the altar, and several of the
inhabitants vacated their seats to afford them accommodation. The officer
went to the west gallery, nearly over the altar.  The Rev. Justin
M'Carthy, the patriotic and exemplary Curate, exhorted those who did not
as yet receive the Sacrament of Confirmation, to be diligent in their
attendance at Chapel during the ensuing week, as the Bishop is to visit
this parish on Sunday, 21st Inst.  The exhortation which was a lengthened
one, was listened to with great apparent reverence by the officer, until
the Rev. Gentleman addressed those from the rural districts (who generally
occupy the aisle of the chapel) in the vernacular tongue, to the same
purpose.  Up starts the officer immediately; he darts out of the chapel,
then into the end gallery, and beckoned the men out, thus depriving the
brave fellows of the privilege of attending their religious duties.  The
noise of the firelocks and the tramp of the men caused great annoyance to
the congregation.  I heard one of those poor fellows say within ear-shot
of his officer - "is it because we are soldiers that we are compelled to
insult our religion?" - Comment is unnecessary. 
Mallow, 15th July 1844.  R.B.B.


DUBLIN, SATURDAY. - At one o'clock this day the Board-room of the Head
Police-office was crowded with civilians and military, to hear the charge
of Ignatius Ennis against Captain Mathews, of the 34th Regiment, for
assault and larceny, in forcibly taking from his breast a Repeal button. 

Rickard O'Connell, Esq., appeared as counsel for Ennis, and Mr. Charles
Fitzgerald, attorney for Captain Mathews.

Mr. O'Connell said he appeared on the part of Ignatius Ennis, to complain
of an illegal and wanton assault committed by Captain Mathews of the 34th
Regiment, and to apply for informations for that assault and for
larceny.  It was petty larceny, certainly, that of two buttons.  The
complainant was a carman, and he was owed some money by Lieutenant Agnew,
of the 34th , stationed in Portobello Barracks.  That gentleman desired
his client to call for the amount on last Monday morning.  He accordingly
proceeded to the barracks for that purpose.  He passed the sentinel at the
gate, and was going towards the quarters of Lieutenant Agnew, when he
observed a body of soldiers, in marching order, moving towards him.  When
they came up to him, Captain Mathews stepped up to him and said, "You
scoundrel, how dare you come in here with that button," seizing him by the
lapel of the coat, and tearing the button from it, which he retained.  He
then collared him, and roughly pushed him, again calling him foul names,
such as you "rascal, scoundrel."  The button which excited the ire of the
gallant officer was what is called a Repeal button, and rumour had it that
there was a military order against admitting persons wearing it to pass
into any of the barracks; but he (Mr. O'Connell) contended that his client
had a right to wear it, and that no man could legally deprive him of it,
much less assault him in compelling him to yield up his property.  A man
might as well think of depriving another of his watch, under the imaginary
authority of a military order.  He would examine the prosecutor, to prove
the facts of the case, and then call upon the bench to receive
informations, and send the case for trial to the next Quarter Sessions. 

Ignatius Ennis was then examined, and deposed that on Monday morning last
he went by appointment for payment of an I. O. given him by Lieutenant
Agnew. The officers very frequently dealt with him in that way, as they
had not at all times small change by them.  He stated the nature of the
assault as mentioned by his counsel, and added, that when Mr. Mathews
first addressed him, he said - "Sir, I beg your pardon, but I did not
think of the button."  Had he ordered the deponent out of the barrack he
would have instantly complied. 

Ennis was cross-examined by Mr. Charles Fitzgerald - He admitted he had
heard that car-drivers wearing Repeal buttons were not allowed to drive
their cars into the barracks, but he did not think that a man, walking as
he was, would be prevented; at the time he went into the barrack he was
not thinking he wore one in his coat; it was not himself that employed
Counsellor O'Connell, that was done by Mr. Conran, but he supposed he
would have to pay the  expenses of the prosecution.  After a long and
desultory cross-examination, Mr. O'Connell said he closed his case. 

Mr. Porter then observed, that  they had now only to deal with the charge
of assault --- they had nothing to do with the charge of felony.

Mr. Fitzgerald addressed the bench.  He said there was a positive order
from the Commander of the Forces that no person wearing party emblems of
any kind should be permitted to enter any of the barracks in Ireland, and
that order applied as well to orange lilies as to Repeal buttons.  Captain
Mathews would as soon remove an orange lily from the breast of a person
appearing within the precinct of the barrack, as he would a Repeal
button.  His client avowed the act, and he believed that in it he was
strictly performing his duty.  He did not seize hold of the man, as was
alleged, until he had first told him to go out; but as he paid no
attention to what he said, he took hold of the lapel of his coat, and used
no more force than was necessary to remove the button. - He also denied
having called Ennis any such names as rascal and scoundrel.

Private John M'Clean stated that he was present when this circumstance
occurred; Captain Mathews did not use any violence; he took the button
from Ennis' coat, and then said, "Now be off;" there was an order against
admitting persons to the barracks with Repeal buttons, but never having
been on guard at Portobello, he had not seen it.

Cross-examined by Mr. O'Connell - Was about four paces from Captain
Mathews when this matter took place; would not undertake to swear that he
did not call Ennis a scoundrel, if he did, he did not hear him; all he
heard him say was, "Now be off out of this."  Mr. Fitzgerald said he had
four other men to give similar evidence. 

Mr. Porter observed that it was conceded Captain Mathews laid hold of the
man and took a button out of his coat - now, he understood that the
defendant would justify his act in point of law.

Serjeant Walcott examined - There was an order against party
badges.  Mr. O'Connell - Produce it.  After some discussion as to the
production of the original document, bearing the signature of the
Commander of the Forces, it was agreed to send to the Ship-st. Barracks
for the Order-book acted upon there, and to ascertain the precise words of
the order against Repeal Buttons.

The Book was produced and the following read to the Bench:-- "The
Lieutenant-General commanding directs that civilians wearing any political
or party badges shall not, under any circumstances, be permitted to enter
the gates of the several barracks throughout Ireland, Signed by order,
F.E. Napier, D.A.G."

Mr. Fitzgerald submitted that under all the circumstances of the case, if
it was not admitted that Captain Mathews strictly fulfilled his duty, the
most that could be said was, the ground of complaint against him was
extremely trivial.

Mr. Porter - It appears to me to be a very trifling case indeed.

Mr. O'Connell - I would admit it, your worship, if the country was not in
the very excited state in which it is at present; but what has occurred
here is not an isolated case, and similar cases of complaint will arise if
this is passed over.  His client would press his application on principle,
as it would be of service to the country to ascertain by what authority
the Commander of the Forces can issue such an order.  He (Mr. O'Connell)
denied that he could, and he also denied that men should be treated as his
client had been, under any military order whatever.

Mr. Porter was of the opinion that an assault in law had been committed,
and further, that nothing to justify it had been brought before him.  He
hoped, however, that as it was a mere misdeamenour, the parties would come
to an amicable arrangement, and not put him to the pain of sending the
case for trial to another tribunal. 

Mr. Fitzgerald - Then, your worship, as such is your opinion, we will
submit to the decision of the bench.  I admit my client was wrong. 

Mr. O'Connell wished to have the question of right settled, and,
therefore, should press the informations to be

-- The Cork Examiner 22 Jul 1844


Last week a circumstance occurred at the New Barracks, which is well
calculated to turn into ridicule the glorious war now raging against a
button! A smith in this city, whose name we can mention if necessary, was
called on last week to make a key for Sir Warwick Morshed, an officer of
the 15th regiment, lying at the New Barracks, and while the smith's
apprentice was fitting the key to four other locks in the apartments of
this officer, an orderly sergeant and a private entered the room and
became almost thunderstruck at seeing the Repeal button in the lad's
coat.  The orderly asked him how did he get in, or was it possible he came
through the gate - if so did he wear the button?  The lad, nothing
dismayed, said it was through the gate he came, and that he also wore the
button coming through.  He was then ordered by the sergeant to take down
the button, or leave the barrack at once.  The lad refused to comply with
the first order, but had to obey the latter, as he was marched out between
them (they keeping a respectful distance from him) lest the rebellious
button (with "God save the Queen," for its motto) might explode, and leave
the barrack, and all therein in complete chaos! 

In the meantime the lad brought away the key, though called after
repeatedly by the servant to come back and open the drawer his master's
money was in.  On his arrival at the gate he was met by two bold dragoons,
one of whom said "if your coat was covered with button, the Union won't be
repealed;" the other said "a straw would throw him down."  The lad turned
cooly, and said "though lightly you think of me and my Repeal button, I
would stop a ball as well as either of you."

The day following the servant of Sir Warwick Morshed called upon the smith
to have the locks finished, and stated that his master was waiting at the
gate to pass his apprentice in.  The boy was accordingly passed in wearing
the Repeal button, to the no small astonishment of the soldiery, who
stared at him as if he were a prodigy.  Thus, by the firmness of a patriot
apprentice and a patriot master, triumphed the Repeal button, turning into
contempt the ridiculous war now raging against it on the part of her
Majesty's troops - fit employment, truly, for the British army! - Limerick


The following is a copy of the bill for renewing the Party Processions

"Whereas an Act was passed in the second and third years of the reign of
his late Majesty, entitled 'an Act to restrain for five years, in certain
cases, party processions in Ireland; and the said Act has been continued
by another Act, passed in the first and second years of the reign of her
Majesty Queen Victoria, and will expire at the end of this present session
of parliament; and whereas it is expedient that the said Act should be
further continued; be it therefore enacted, by the Queen's most Excellent
Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and
Temporal, and the Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by
the authority of the same, that the said recited Act of the second and
third years of the reign of his late Majesty shall be and continue in
force until the first day of June in the year one thousand eight hundred
and forty-five.  And be it enacted, that this Act may be amended or
repealed by any Act to be passed in this present Session of Parliament"


Mr. WYSE said, that seeing the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary at War,
in his place, he wished to ask him the question of which he had been given
notice.  He (Mr. W.) had noticed in a late publication of the Dublin
Evening Post, the following particulars of a circumstance which was stated
to have taken place within the precincts of her Majesty's Castle of
Dublin:-- A young man named Osberry was driving a lady through the gates
of the Castle of Dublin, and the  soldier guard asked him if he had a
Repeal button.  He replied "no," and the lady told the soldier he ought
not to have stopped the man.  The soldier followed him, and asked if he
had a Repeal button in his pocket, to which he replied that he had; upon
which he was taken to the Chancery-lane station-house, and was next day
brought before the magistrates, who dismissed him, as not being guilty of
any offence.  A case of a similar description had occurred to a person
named Ignatius Ennis.  He wished therefore to ask the right hon. Gentleman,
the Secretary-at-War, whether any, and what orders had been given from the
Horse Guards, or by the Commander-in-Chief in Dublin with respect to
persons wearing or having in their possession Repeal buttons, and
appearing in the barracks, or within the precincts of the Castle?

Sir T. FREMANTLE said that in reference to the question which he had been
asked by the right hon. Gentleman, no orders had been issued with regard
to the Castle of Dublin, but the Commander of the Forces forbade any
civilian wearing political badges from being permitted to pass through the
barracks in Ireland....

Submitted by dja


Ireland Home Page
County Cork

IMPORTANT NOTICE: All rights to the pages found within this site are retained by the original submitter of the information. Pages may be printed or copied for personal use only. They may NOT be reproduced in any form in whole or in part by any individual or organization for profit.