Search the Catalogue

CSO/RP/1825/1166

Report by John Sealy Townsend, King’s Counsel and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary’s Office, on a claim to compensation by the usher of the Court of Exchequer in Ireland [Charles Fleetwood, usher, equity side of the Court of Exchequer]. Gives full consideration to the case at issue and remarks the criteria resorted to by the legislature in settlement of the claim is fair. With comment added beneath [at a later date] by Townsend acknowledging a recent ruling on the matter of the payment of recompense to other officers of the court; admits that Fleetwood is entitled to some financial consideration but remarks he is ‘unable to say out of what fund it ought to come’. Also note on reverse in different hand [likely from a senior law officer] with observation of the provisions of the law [especially the 1st and 2nd acts of George IV, chapter 53] in relation to compensation of officers of the court.

28 Dec 1824-8 Jan 1825

1825

CSO/RP/1825/1179

Letter from John Page, secretary to the trustees of the turnpike road leading from Dunleer to Dundalk in County Louth, Dundalk, County Louth, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, enclosing a memorial from the trustees to Richard Wellesley, 1st Marquis Wellesley, Lord Lieutenant, Dublin Castle, requesting that interest on a capital sum of £5,000 employed for making improvements and repairs to the road be reduced from 5% to 4% per annum. Makes reference to the act under which the loan was advanced to the commissioners and notes a reduction in interest on government securities made by an act of Parliament of 1822. Complains of the heavy cost of maintaining the road in repair, which together with the reality of diminishing tolls and interest demands ‘at the high rate of £5 per centum per annum’, represents a particular hardship from which they wish to be released. Drawn up at Castlebellingham, County Louth, and signed by 6 trustees. Annotation on back from John Sealy Townsend, King’s Counsel and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary’s Office, stressing they has no entitlement to the indulgence sought and expresses doubt whether the Lord Lieutenant is vested with power to make any change to the rate of interest charged.

1 Sep 1825-5 Sep 1825

1825

CSO/RP/1825/1194

Petition of Garrett Lynch, vintner and grocer, Killarney, County Kerry, to Richard Wellesley, 1st Marquis Wellesley, Lord Lieutenant, Dublin Castle, seeking an order to force the magistrates of the petty sessions of Killarney [George Cashel and James Francis Bland] to investigate in court a charge of unlawful behaviour against Reverend Arthur Hyde, Church of Ireland vicar of Killarney and Kilcummin. Expresses frustration over his unsuccessful attempts to have a case brought against Hyde at the local petty sessions, and at the magistrates' apparent partiality towards the clergyman. Appends overleaf a copy of the affidavit of Lynch in which he alleges Hyde entered his business premises on 6 August and made use of abusive language and issued threats of physical harm against him, sworn before the magistrates, 30 August 1825. With note on back from John Sealy Townsend, King’s Counsel and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary’s Office, indicating that in the circumstances Hyde should be bound to keep the peace. He suggests, however, that a report on the matter should be submitted by Cashel to government, 7 September 1825. Also letter from Lynch to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, indicating no answer has been forthcoming to his complaint against the magistrates for failing to subject Hyde to the full rigours of the law. With draft reply from the CSO on back stating the Lord Lieutenant has no power to interfere in the matter but if the issue deserves further legal consideration, an application may be made to the Court of King’s Bench in Dublin, 2 October 1825.

30 Aug 1825-2 Oct 1825

1825

CSO/RP/1825/1220

Letter from William Kemmis, crown solicitor, Kildare Street, Dublin, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, reporting on the preparation of a number of precepts under the guidance of the Attorney General [William Conyngham Plunket], that arose in the context of an investigation of Nicholas Murray Mansfield, sub sheriff of the city of Dublin, by the Commissioners of Inquiry. Refers to case [in relation to Mansfield’s refusal to comply with precepts for attendance or produce documents] with opinion of the Attorney General [William Conyngham Plunket] on same; also mentions three draft precepts drawn up by John Sealy Townsend, King’s Counsel and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary’s Office [none present]. Also letter from Kemmis to Goulburn, conveying three additional draft precepts for use of the Commissioners of Inquiry in their investigation of Mansfield [none present]. Observes the document have been compiled by Townsend and approved of by the Attorney General. [See also description CSO/RP/1824/612].

5 Sep 1825-24 Oct 1825

1825

CSO/RP/1825/1260

Letter from John Galloway, secretary, commissioners for the issue of money for public works [Consolidated Fund], 37 North Cumberland Street, Dublin to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, requesting to have the determination of government on whether a sum of £300,000 set aside under the last sitting of Parliament for public works, is at their disposal, or if public applications can be accepted on same. With query annotated on base from CSO on issue and response from John Sealy Townsend, King’s Counsel and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary’s Office. Also draft letter from the Chief Secretary’s Office to the commissioners stating that no power is given under the act permitting their access to the £300,000 in question. Points to an error in the wording of the act of last session which gives an incorrect reference.

6 Sep 1825

1825

CSO/RP/1825/1297

Letter from John Killaly, civil engineer, Ennis, County Clare, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, stating intention of transferring responsibility to the directors general of Inland Navigation, Dublin, of various public works in the central district by the 12th of September. Remarks the roads, both finished and part complete, cover a distance of 110 Irish miles. He undertakes to convey to the directors general at the same time any tools or implements used in the works, 1 September 1825. Also letter from Killaly, Milltown Malbay, County Clare, to Goulburn, conveying a specific list of roads in counties Galway and Clare which he recommends be vested in the directors general out of his total remit in the central district. He admits, at present, to having under his supervision one assistant [engineer], a paymaster, a clerk, two principle overseers and some minor ones plus ‘a small number of men’ employed on the works. Observes they cannot be discontinued until the works are formally handed over to the directors general, 19 September 1825. Also letter from the Chief Secretary’s Office, Dublin Castle, to the directors general of Inland Navigation, expressing the Lord Lieutenant’s sanction of the transfer of roads previously under Killaly to their care. Describes specifically a number of roads in Galway and Clare which are to be entrusted to them in accordance with ‘an act to provide for the repairing, maintaining and keeping in Repair certain Roads and Bridges in Ireland’. With some amendments to text by John Sealy Townsend, King’s Counsel and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary’s Office, and inscription on side marked ‘settled’, October 1825.

1 Sep 1825-21 Oct 1825

1825

CSO/RP/1825/1367

Letter from Thomas Abbott, Lord Mayor of Dublin, and Major Alexander Taylor, 21 Mary Street, Dublin, commissioner for erecting fountains to supply water for the use of the inhabitants of the Liberties, Dublin, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, reflecting upon an infringement to the walls of the reservoir by Thomas Connor, of 37 Usher’s Quay, Dublin. They observe that Connor, despite having received a notice to the contrary, has continues work on a shed that touches the north and east walls of the water basin. As it stands, they complain, the ‘shed gives an easy access to Idle persons to pass over the Basin wall and injure the water and the works’. They continue, in the event of Connor getting formal permission to build his shed at that location, he should be compelled to raise the basin wall by at least 3 feet. With note on base from John Sealy Townsend, King’s Counsel and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary’s Office, on the matter at issue. Encloses copy report of Edward Mitchell, inspector of water fountains in the Liberties, drawing attention to the risk of breach of the basin wall due to the proximity of Connor’s shed to that structure, sworn before Taylor.

13 Oct 1825-17 Oct 1825

1825

CSO/RP/1825/1434

Letter from Alderman Frederick Darley, Major Henry Charles Sirr and Peter Low, chief magistrates, Head Office of Police, Dublin, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, reporting on an application from Simon Hatch, supervisor of watch tax [head office of police, Dublin], for an increase in remuneration. They comment favourably upon Hatch’s service in the role of supervisor and recommend his retirement on an allowance of £100 per year. The income of watch tax for the year ending January 1825, they note, is £7, 755 10s 8d. With query from CSO on base and answer by John Sealy Townsend, King’s Counsel and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary’s Office, stressing the law does not permit the Lord Lieutenant to grant more than two-thirds of the original salary paid to an officer. Returns memorial from Hatch to Richard Wellesley, 1st Marquis Wellesley, Lord Lieutenant, Dublin Castle, requesting for his past labour a salary of more than £100 per annum. Points to his long tenure as supervisor comprising a period of 30 years and adds he has a family to ‘maintain and educate’. Compares his own income to that of employees of the paving board, one of whom, he claims, has been awarded a salary of £200 per year.

11 Nov 1825

1825

CSO/RP/1825/1438

Letter from Thomas Finlay, register and paymaster, Foundling Hospital, Dublin, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, communicating the intention of the board to issue a retirement allowance of £65 per annum to Winifred Innes, superintending school mistress at the hospital, for the duration of her life. With query from CSO on base and answer by John Sealy Townsend, King’s Counsel and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary’s Office, stressing the payment proposed is permissible under the act [50th of George III, chapter 192]. Encloses an extract of the minutes of the board of the Foundling Hospital, stating their readiness to pay a pension to Innes upon getting the sanction of the Lord Lieutenant. Also encloses memorial from Innes to the governors of the Foundling Hospital, requesting payment of an allowance to carry her through retirement. Remarks she has been employed at the hospital for a period of 10 years, but due to a deterioration in health over the past 5 months, is now unable to perform her duties. Emphasises the heavy workload attached to her post; states her working day normally begins at 6 in the morning and continues until 10 at night; remarks in her role as mistress she has sole responsibility for the ‘Education, Morals, Work, Meals, Dormitories, personal cleanliness, and Comforts of seven hundred Girls’. With certificate added below by Reverend Henry Murray, chaplain of the Foundling Hospital, stating her submission is true and authentic; also certificate from John Creighton, surgeon of the Foundling Hospital, indicating Innes is suffering from a severe debilitation. [Contains list of names not given in this description.]

10 Oct 1825-20 Oct 1825

1825

CSO/RP/1825/1557

Letter from William Edward Major, assistant barrister for County Donegal, 34 Blessington Street, Dublin, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, drawing attention to uncertainty over interpretation of the 12th section of the act for the assimilation of weights and measures [5th of George IV, chapter 74] and requesting further information. Stresses he wishes to learn if under the act a set of standards need be purchased by the magistrates for each division within the county or one for the entire county. With query from the CSO on base and answer by John Sealy Townsend, King’s Counsel and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary’s Office, stressing the law requires a set for each county division.

23 Nov 1825-24 Nov 1825

1825