Search the Catalogue

CSO/RP/CA/1831/13

Memorandum providing eye-witness account of case brought before the King’s Bench entitled ‘The King v Lavelle & Staunton’, with verbatim transcription of speeches. The Attorney General, Francis Blackburne, outlined the parties in the case brought against two newspaper proprietors; Patrick Lavelle and Michael Staunton were both accused of deserting their usual places of abode as well as their places of business in order to avoid prosecution. He explained that under the various stamp acts, newspaper proprietors were required to file a signed copy of their paper at the Stamp Office. He stated that Staunton had submitted a signed copy of a paper which contained a copy of the conditional order issued against him – he argued that as he had signed the paper, he must have been acquainted with its contents, and was therefore aware of the order. The Lord Chief Justice [Charles Kendal Bushe] noted however, that as Lavelle had not signed the copy of his paper submitted to the office, his awareness of the order against him could not be presumed. Blackburne conceded, and agreed to only substitute service on Staunton.

1 Feb 1831

1831

CSO/RP/CA/1831/14

Memorandum providing eye-witness account of case brought before the King’s Bench entitled ‘Rex v O’Connell’, with verbatim transcription of speeches [some passages include later additions, and some passages are omitted] and reference to previous court rulings, concerning the rights of Daniel O’Connell and his co-accused to demur the charges brought against them, and the setting of a date for the trial. The defence counsel argued that they were not given enough notice of the hearing and thus had little time to prepare. [Thomas] Wallace, on O’Connell’s behalf, withdrew his demurs with regard to counts 1-14, 30 and 31 of the indictment brought against him, and thereby submitted to go to trial. The counsel for the defence requested that the court retire until Monday, at which time the demurs of the other 6 traversers, who were not present at the hearing, could be argued; if, at this stage, the court dismissed their right to demur, the counsel moved that the defendants would then also enter a plea of ‘not guilty’ and submit to enter a full trial. The Attorney General, [Francis Blackburne], summarised that counts 1-14 of the indictment related to the violation of a proclamation of the Lord Lieutenant, a power given to him by law [Dangerous Assemblies (Ireland) Act, 1829] to declare illegal certain meetings and assemblies considered ‘dangerous’ to the public, while counts 30 and 31 related to unlawful assembly ‘for the purpose of exciting in the King’s subjects disaffection and discontent against the Laws and Constitution of the Realm’, as well as exciting disaffection and ‘hostility’ against the Lord Lieutenant and his government. He opposed the defendants’ right to demur, as well as the subsequent delay in the trial, as it went against the ‘prerogative’ of the crown in prosecution cases such as this. He noted that if the court ruled in favour of O’Connell, it would be a precedent case; it would significantly reduce the power of the act, and effectively signal its repeal. The Lord Chief Justice [Charles Kendal Bushe] described the case as both ‘novel’ and ‘important’, and observed ‘I dare say the traversers will be… willing to have the case stand over for a trial at Bar next term’. Court adjourned until the following Monday.

5 Feb 1831

1831

CSO/RP/CA/1831/15

Memorandum providing eye-witness account of case brought before the King’s Bench entitled ‘Rex vs. O’Connell & others’, with verbatim transcription of speeches. Speaking for [Daniel] O’Connell, [Louis] Perrin applied to the court to withdraw his plea of ‘not guilty’ to the first 14 counts of the indictment. [Robert] Holmes, speaking for the other defendants, requested likewise. The Attorney General [Francis Blackburne] ruled that such a judgement was ‘sufficient to answer all the objects of this prosecution’ and declared ‘nolle prosequi’. He congratulated the court and the country ‘on being spared the labor and the distracting agitating conflict which such a trial would necessarily have produced’.

12 Feb 1831

1831

CSO/RP/CA/1831/16

Memorandum providing eye-witness account of case brought before the King’s Bench entitled ‘Rex v Steele’, with verbatim transcription of speeches and reference to previous court rulings. [Dominick] Ronayne requested that the libel trial against Thomas Steele be postponed, as Edward Geoffrey Stanley [Chief Secretary], a material witness, was currently in England. The Attorney General [Francis Blackburne] and Solicitor General [Philip Cecil Crampton] objected to the postponement. They noted that Stanley had left Ireland on 28 January, and that notice of the trial was given on 4 February. They argued that the traverser and his legal advisors knew the trial was imminent before Stanley left for England. Furthermore, Stanley remained within the jurisdiction of the courts while in England, but no attempt had been made to serve him with a subpoena there, which would have compelled him to return to attend the trial. Case postponed until Monday week.

12 Feb 1831

1831

CSO/RP/CA/1831/17

Memorandum providing eye-witness account entitled 'Proceedings at a Meeting of The Wine Porters of the City of Dublin', held at the Swan's Rooms, Batchelor's Walk, Dublin, chaired by William Davis, with verbatim transcription of speeches outlining a number of resolutions relating to the impact of the union on the wine trade, and calling for repeal. Lengthy speech by [Daniel] O’Connell largely concerning to his return to parliament following his recent prosecution at the King’s Bench and a number of grievances he would put forward for debate in the House of Commons. He noted the misrepresentation of his court case in the ‘Dublin Evening Post’ the previous day, which stated that he had pleaded ‘guilty’ to the first 14 counts of the indictment – O’Connell claimed that he would rather cut off his own arm than plead guilty to one of the charges against him. He claimed that he was accused of 'taking up the question of the repeal of the union' because he failed in the House of Commons; his reply was met with laughter from the assembly: 'I made no great way there that is not my fault. I brought 3 or 4 measures and I had fifteen or Sixteen to support me and I had 2 or 300 against me and I think that is odds even at foot ball'. He stated that while he previously had to alter his ‘sentiments’ on repeal for a time while he sought catholic emancipation as he knew that it was not possible to campaign for both at the same time, he would now seek to convince the English that repeal would be ‘as useful to England as to Ireland’. He acknowledged that while he was ‘the spoilt child of popular feeling’ in Ireland, his views would not be as well received abroad. Although he stated that this was his last opportunity to speak at an Irish meeting for many months, he reminded the assembly that he would write often, ‘for when my tongue is absent my fingers shall be going’. Also speech by [John] Lawless referring to recent comments made by Lord Althorp [John Charles Spencer, 3rd earl of Spencer] that he would ‘recommend blood to be shed’ in Ireland before he would agree to the repeal of the union, in contrast to the Duke of Wellington [Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington], who stated that having been witness to much human suffering in the field of battle, ‘I as a soldier will sheath my sword, I would rather surrender… than have one hour of civil war’. Lawless stated that the Irish people wished for no such battle, but rather ‘a moral peaceable tranquil contest’. However, he remarked that if violence was to break out, repeal could be achieved within 6 months. Gratitude of assembly expressed to O’Connell, and motion carried that the meeting’s resolutions be published in the ‘Morning Register’ and the ‘Freeman’s Journal’.

13 Feb 1831

1831

CSO/RP/CA/1831/18

Memorandum providing eye-witness account entitled 'Proceedings at a Meeting of the Brick and Stone Layers', held at the Chapel of Kingstown [Dun Laoghaire], County Dublin, chaired by Mr O’Brien, with verbatim transcription of speeches outlining a number of resolutions relating to the impact of the union on the brick and stone trades, and calling for repeal. Noted that [Thomas] Steele and [Patrick] Costello could not attend the meeting as they were presently in County Kilkenny, agitating for the election of Col [John] Butler over Lord Duncannon [John William Ponsonby, 4th earl of Bessborough, known as viscount Duncannon]. Refers to the decline of the industry in Kingstown over the previous 30 years as a result of unemployment and emigration. Lengthy speeches made by a number of contributors concerning the current state of Ireland; William Rattigan, who wore a medal of the Order of Liberators adorned with a green and orange ribbon, stated that rather than quenching agitation in Ireland, the Lord Lieutenant, the Marquis of Anglesey had ‘like a little drop of water thrown into the fire… only raised the blaze higher’, while [John] Lawless commented that meetings such as these demonstrated that ‘the days of agitation are not over’. Lawless referred to his recent arrest, along with Daniel O’Connell and 5 others, stating that the Attorney General was not aware of the ‘excitement’ and ‘inflammation’ their prosecution would create among the people of Ireland. Mr Curran remarked that he would refer to Dun Laoghaire only by its ‘true and real name… Kingstown! Psha!’ He argued that the fact that the indictments brought against O’Connell and his co-accused were outlined on a mere ‘33 yards of Parchment’ was evident of the weakness of the argument against repeal in the face of ‘numberless arguments’ of the Irish who sought to show the world ‘the slavery and degradation and misery and wretchedness it is suffering from an unnatural connexion’. Resolutions passed to express the gratitude of the assembly to O’Connell and to issue a petition to both Houses for the repeal of the union.

20 Feb 1831

1831

CSO/RP/CA/1831/19

Memorandum providing eye-witness account entitled 'Proceedings at a Meeting of the Glovers, Skinners, Parchment-makers and Spanish Leather finishers', held at the Shakespeare Gallery, Exchequer Street, Dublin, chaired by Cornelius Dungan, with verbatim transcription of speeches outlining a number of resolutions relating to the impact of the union on the leather trade, and calling for repeal. He outlined that at the time of the union, there were 116 leather skinners in Dublin who ‘lived in comfort and affluence’, where now there were less than 12; while the number of leather breeches makers had been reduced from 115 to 4 or 5. He moved that the assembly petition parliament for repeal through Daniel O’Connell, in order to halt the reduction of Ireland ‘to a miserable province and [the conversion of] the mansions of its Nobility… into an Asylum for our unfortunate and starving artizans’. Thomas Hughes commented that never before in the annals of history had a country given her legislature to another, except Ireland. He noted that since 1806 when leather tradesmen could earn between £3 and £4 a week, the industry was in decline, with the majority of its workforce subject to either emigration, ‘walking the streets of Dublin… [or] dragging out a wretched existence’. Also refers to the ‘serious injury’ of French imports to Irish manufacture, and the lack of restrictive legislation in this regard. Resolved to express the gratitude of the attendees to O’Connell. Lengthy speech by [Dominick] Ronayne concerning the achievements of O’Connell; the recent case brought against O’Connell and others in the King’s Bench; and his belief that repeal was imminent, as ‘the wishes of an united people will speak irresistibly to our Rulers and that they will see the necessity of yielding to public opinion’. Also speech by [John] Lawless concerning the growing ‘principle of Reform’ in England, the success of which he argued was wholly dependent on the repeal of the union with Ireland.

6 Mar 1831

1831

CSO/RP/CA/1831/20

Memorandum providing eye-witness account entitled 'Proceedings at a Meeting of the Mechanics and Trades Society of the City of Dublin held in Mr Sheil's great room at the back of the Crown & Anchor Tavern Lower Abbey Street', Dublin, chaired by R Pemberton, with verbatim transcription of speeches. Sheil noted that this was to be considered a ‘meeting’ of mechanics, and not a ‘society’. Meeting called to discuss a number of resolutions relating to a petition on the subject of ‘corporation abuses’ such as the exclusion of members on the basis of ‘creed sect or party’, as well as its ‘monopoly’ in the Dublin area – Pemberton commented that until these issues were addressed, ‘neither reform nor repeal will do us any good’. Lengthy speeches made by a number of contributors concerning the current state of Ireland; [Patrick] Costello outlined the financial drain of the union on Ireland, and commented that current events suggested that Ireland was inevitably building towards a civil war, when the administration would suppress any ‘wretched creatures that rise up to ask for Bread… and perhaps commence a massacre similar to that of 1798’; Mr Cleave noted that ‘castle reporters’ who recorded the meetings’ proceedings had an important function, giving the government an opportunity to know what its people ‘said and did’; and William [Richard] Mahon announced that he was contesting the upcoming election in County Clare in light of the recent rejection of his brother [James O’Gorman Mahon]. Noted that a resolution to express the gratitude of the assembly to Daniel O’Connell was met with ‘very high eulogiums’ of his character.

8 Mar 1831

1831

CSO/RP/CA/1831/21

Memorandum providing eye-witness account entitled ‘Proceedings at a Meeting of the Linen and Cotton Corduroy dyers dressers & Finishers', held at the School Room, Dolphin's Barn, Dublin, chaired by William Kenny, with verbatim transcriptions of speeches outlining a number of resolutions relating to the impact of the union on the linen and cotton trades, and calling for repeal. Refers to the increasing ‘Poverty, wretchedness & degradation of our Country which are chiefly owing to that harmful and suicidical [sic] measure the legislative union with Great Britain’. Mr Linsay referred to the grievances caused by the subletting act and the ‘disfranchisement’ of the forty shilling freeholders, whose misfortunes had in turn affected the industry as they were the principal consumers of corduroy; he remarked that all tradesmen were currently ‘smarting’, and would ‘die under the severity’ if the union was not repealed. Mr McGorley observed that if previous trade agreements which had seen Irish manufacturers and tradesmen prosper had not been destroyed by the union, ‘instead of having Millions of poor half slaved half fed and spirit broken people which she now has [Ireland] would have additional Millions of a happy people who would be the best support of the Throne and the Chiefest bulwark of England’. Mr Nolan commented that, although he was not a member of the industry, ‘the first Breeches I wore were Corduroy’, and stated that if his children should want the same, he would be sure to purchase them from an Irish manufacturer – to which the assembly replied ‘that is all we want’. Noted that where the industry in Dublin city once employed over 800 men, it was now reduced to a workforce of less than 50; the unemployed, if not emigrants to England or America, were left destitute. Resolved to express the gratitude of the attendees to Daniel O’Connell, and to send a petition for repeal to both the earl of Shrewsbury [John Talbot, 16th earl of Shrewsbury] in the House of Lords, and O’Connell in the House of Commons.

20 Mar 1831

1831

CSO/RP/CA/1831/22

Memorandum providing eye-witness account entitled 'Proceedings at the Dinner of Saint Patrick's Orphan Society', held at Morrison's Great Room, Dublin, chaired by [Daniel] O’Connell, with verbatim transcription of speeches and a note by the authors that they observed approximately 100 attendees including [John] Redmond, [Richard] Barrett, [Edward] Dwyer and [Patrick] Lavelle. In a lengthy speech, O’Connell commented that ‘the prosperity of the people mainly depends upon the health and happiness of our excellent King’; in contrast to the disinterested and ignoble George IV, he declared his anticipation of the ‘great charter of Reform’ recently conceded by the new king [William IV]. O’Connell reiterated that an argument for repeal was not an argument for separation from England, but rather repeal was vital in order to continue the connection between the two countries. Referring to the grievances suffered in Ireland since the union, he asked ‘why do not our rulers read our history… [or] look at the political thermometer’? He professed that neither the King nor the Lord Lieutenant knew the Irish people, as it was clear to him that it was through discussion alone that they were pacified, and not the suppression of discussion which had led to civil unrest and agrarian violence in January 1822. He argued that the current state of ‘inanition’ in Ireland could not continue; it was the first duty of the government to ‘stand between famine and the people’; and that the administration needed to acknowledge that ‘all the old material of mismanagement fills the castle and surrounds the Vice Regal Throne’, apparently in reference to the records of the Lord Lieutenant and the Chief Secretary. Also speeches by Barrett and Lavelle concerning the present state of Ireland. Refers to upcoming election in County Clare, which was contested by O’Connell’s son, Maurice. Contains note stating that a lengthy speech by Mr Barnes, President of St Patrick’s Orphan Society, was not included in the transcription. Various toasts include those to Lord John Russell [1st earl of Russell] ‘and the cause of Parliamentary Reform’; the repeal of the union; the freedom of the press; and O’Connell, ‘the peerless and Patriotic Member for Waterford’.

7 Apr 1831

1831