Crimes
now browsing by category
From Danny’s Files: 19th Century Abuse of Sons
Unfortunately, our home internet failed six days ago as I was researching the cases below. (Yes, we are finally dumping Eir for what we hope is a more reliable service.) In any event, over the 70 years that our founder Danny Dowling (1927-2021) collected information on Glenmore he often copied non-Glenmore newspaper specific articles that caught his attention. The two articles below were in a file Danny marked “family relations.”
Corporal punishment was a fact of life in the 19th century. Corporal punishment was practiced in public institutions such as prisons, schools, the workplace as well as in the home. The chastisement of wives has been widely discussed such as the “rule of thumb.” Husbands were allowed to “chastise” their wives with implements that did not exceed the circumference of the husband’s thumb. Men were allowed to physically chastise their children, and it was common for daughters to be locked into rooms until such time as they agreed to marry a suitor chosen by their father. However, once a son or daughter married they were emancipated and the father’s duty to chastise ceased. The married daughter now was subject to “chastisement” from her husband. The emancipated son was a man in his own right and was no longer subject to corporal punishment by his father.
The cases below provide a glimpse into 19th century family relationships. These cases were considered controversial at their respective times. Undoubtedly, these sensational cases were discussed across the country including in Glenmore.
Spencer v. Spenser & Spencer
In 1828, the Southern Reporter and Cork Commercial Courier (Thur. 21 Feb. 1828) published an article entitled “Extraordinary Case.” John Spencer, a married man, charged his father Benjamin Spencer, and his step-mother, Catherine Spencer with imprisoning him in their home for three weeks and mal-treating him. Unfortunately, none of the ages of the parties was provided. John Spenser alleged that he was “manacled, fettered and chained down to a bed frame in a garret room without fire or bedding and with little more nutriment than potatoes and water…” He was “stripped of his small clothes, waist-coat, shoes and stockings—and received occasional floggings…”
The Witnesses
John Spenser’s wife stated that the day before the hearing she had taken her husband to Edward Butler, Esq. to show Mr. Butler the condition of her husband. Her husband had a manacle on each hand that were connected by a short chain. There were horse-locks on each ancle and a hook was on one of the horse-locks. A chain ran between the short wrist chain to the hook which kept her husband from standing up straight. She removed the chain from the hook. His hair “was cut closely off.” Although she knew that her husband was in his father’s house she did “venture to go and see him, for fear of ill-treatment to herself.” She learned of her husband’s condition from “old Spencer’s maid, Anne Condran.”
Mr. Edward Butler, Esq. stated that John Spencer “came to him yesterday morning, without any small-clothes, or stockings—that he wore a kind of woollen apron which descended to his knees—that he had all the irons described about him.” Mr. Butler went to the father’s house. The keys to the irons were provided. The irons on John Spencer were then removed and his vest and small clothes were returned to him. John Spencer was at liberty.
Ann Condran stated that she was a servant maid to Benjamin Spencer for the past three months. She saw Benjamin’s son John in a room above stairs—he had bolts his hands and feet, and was chained—he was tied to the bed with other chains. She stated that she thought that John Spenser was mischievous. He once broke a pane of glass in the parlour with his hand. While he was confined, she brought him potatoes and milk, sometimes stirabout, another time meat, and sometimes dry potatoes. She could not state who chained him but she knew his step-mother cut his hair to clean him. She repeatedly stated that the neighbours knew of his confinement perhaps to show that his parents did not think they were doing anything wrong, or perhaps to relieve any guilt she may have had for not informing John Spencer’s wife earlier regarding his mal-treatment.
According to Ann Condran John Spencer got loose himself and escaped from the window. She stated that without the restraints he would have beat and bruised everyone in the household, “and had ill used his father and mother. She noted that he was chained to a bed that had a mattress but no covering on it. John Spencer was forced to eat with his handcuffs on for the entire three weeks. One time when his mother went to clean him John Spencer allegedly threw a hammer at her which was an extraordinary statement given his irons. Unfortunately, it was not reported how he obtained the hammer.
Mr. M’Dowell, governor of the gaol, testified that it is not usual in the gaol to keep the criminals hand-cuffed for three weeks. He stated that such a punishment was greater than what he used. M‘Donnell said that when young Spencer escaped from his father’s home, his head and legs bore marks of violence. He had five plasters on his wounds, and his hair was cut close off.
John Spencer, was sworn and testified that he was confined against his will in his father’s home. He was told not to expect to escape until his father’s death. He described the irons that held him and stated that his mother beat him with lashes. His father did not strike him during the three weeks. For food, he only once got stirabout and milk and potatoes twice a day. He got meat once when his step-mother was absent from the home.
John Spencer stated that he was chained to the bed and could lie on it but it did not have a stitch of covering on it. He asked for covering and it was refused. Once a “lock of straw was left in the room, he took it to lie on, under the bed, and his step-mother then took it away and used it in the shop under her feet.”
The Ruling
“Magistrates having investigated the case, consulted awhile. It was directed that Benjamin Spencer and his wife should be confined for trial Assizes, or find bail for appearance, two persons each in and themselves in £100. each. The husband subsequently, on giving the bail required for himself, was dismissed—but Catherine Spencer, in default of security was sent to prison.” In other words, Benjamin Spencer and his wife were to stand trial when the circuit judge next came to the area and could either await the judge in jail or pay £100 each as bail. Benjamin Spencer, the father, made bail for himself, but his wife was sent to prison to await the trial.
“A Melancholy Domestic Affair in Cashel,” O’Ryan v. O’Ryan
In 1847, during the Great Famine, a “family squabble” in Cashel appeared in newspapers across Ireland and in England. The victim Francis O’Ryan, Jr. was next of kin to the Right Hon. Richard Butler, Earl of Glengall, of the barony of Cahir (Liverpool Daily Post, 1 Sept 1858). The son was shot in the face by his father, Francis O’Ryan, Sr. It was initially thought that the son would die. At the time of the shooting the son was a couple of months from reaching his majority.
The Cork Examiner (Fri. 3 Sept. 1847) after noting that various versions “of the fearful affair in Cashel” appeared in various newspapers “after much deliberation” decided to publish an editorial written by the father from his prison cell to the Tipperary Vindicator. The Cork Examiner went to pains to state that it was “offering no opinion of our own, one way or the other, on this most unfortunate matter.”
Statement of Francis O’Ryan, Sr.
TO THE EDITOR THE TIPPERARY VINDICATOR. Cashel, August 29, 1847- Sir–I beg to set you right relative to a statement of an occurrence that took place in Cashel, and was mentioned your paper of the 28th inst. It is not true that I had any argument or difference with my son in consequence of his refusing to join in making leases or lease. No such circumstance ever occurred. His signature or consent to any lease made or to be made by me is not requisite; neither will entitled any property from his coming of age, or in fact until after my death.
No, Sir, what led to the unfortunate occurrence was the infliction of the greatest wrong one person could do another. I am sorry be obliged to allude to it, but the letter in your paper of yesterday leaves me no alternative. I caught my son in bed with my wife—his step-mother. This, Sir, was what led to the unfortunate affair, and not the foolish and malicious statement furnished in your paper. I am ignorant as to who the writer of the article may be, or his intentions in furnishing you with a statement so totally at variance with truth; but his information is evidently derived from the poisoned source of malicious fool well known here.
I beg also to state, that am not, nor never was, in the habit of carrying fire arms about me; neither am I, or was I, in dread of thieves. I fear more the villain who attacks character through the instrumentality of wanton and malicious lies. His remarks about my mental illness etc., are not worth answering. Requesting a place in your paper for this note, I am, Sir, your obedient servant, Francis O’Ryan.
Readers may wonder why the father would make such a statement to a newspaper. During the 19th century defendants could not testify in their own defence. By getting his version of events out into the public the father hoped to influence potential jurors. If the son had died the father would have faced murder charges, and if convicted he would have hanged. By making this public statement the father was putting forth a provocation defence which if successful would have reduced a conviction to manslaughter. Luckily, for him his son did not die.
Statement of Francis O’Ryan, Jr.
After the ball was removed from Francis O’Ryan Jr.’s head he too wrote a letter to the editor disputing what his father said occurred before the shooting.
The Tipperary Vindicator (Wed. 15 Sept. I847) published the following letter to the editor dated 9 September 1847.
Sir—Now that my medical advisers say I may use so much exertion, after life being despaired of, I hasten to reply to letter my unfortunate father, dated 29th August last (which I am much surprised you inserted in your columns), containing most diabolical charge against me-a charge deeply affecting my character, and impeaching the reputation and fidelity of an innocent woman.
More particularly when his letter was written in prison, where had been committed on a charge the most serious and aggravated, from which he would of necessity exonerate himself whether right or wrong. I totally and distinctly deny his statements; they are at utter variance with truth. I positively assert that I never did, in thought or deed, commit any act that could justify him in such cruel and un-parental violence as he has resorted to. On the night of the melancholy occurrence I repaired to bed about ten o’clock, labouring under intense agony from tooth-ache and swollen jaw, which I have been long time subject. About twelve o’clock Mrs. O’Ryan, her way to procure a drink for one of her children, having heard me complain, came into my room (which is quite near my father’s) and asked me if she would send for anything to allay the pain, when my father, armed with pistols, rushed into the room, drove Mrs. O Ryan out, left the room, and locked the door on the outside.
I got out of my room, and in some time after proceeded to the door of that in which he was, asked him for the key, and the reason for acting as he had done, when he deliberately fired a pistol at me, inflicting a most dangerous wound. His statement that he had no argument with relation to joining him in leases, also untrue, as he did ask me to a short time since, for the purpose of enabling him to raise money for his own purposes, which I refused. Ever since he has been most violent in his conduct and treatment towards me.
A statement which appeared in some papers written by a newly acquired friend of my father’s (who gave the Limerick folk reason to think of him), that he (my father) was recently married, and other insinuations reflecting on me, is equally false, as my father married nine years since, and has got two children by said marriage. I could adduce many and strange circumstances to convince the most incredulous of the motives which actuated him to commit this awful crime, but as the matter must undergo legal investigation at the proper time, I trust the Press in general will, in justice to me, insert this letter, as they have published that of my unfortunate parent, and refrain from publishing any further comments on this very deplorable subject. I am, your very obedient, Francis O’Ryan, Jun.
Junior was referencing some statements that appeared in various newspapers including the Sun (London) (Tues. 31 Aug. 1847). “Mr. O’Ryan having been for some time a widower, recently married a young and interesting lady, who, according to the version of the story on the father’s side, become an object of the son’s passion. That this sentiment was reciprocated by the youth’s stepmother, the father had, as is stated, for some short time back, more and more reason to be suspicious; and on Tuesday evening on entering his bedroom was horrified to beheld his place occupied by his unfortunate son. Maddened with rage, the unhappy father reached a loaded pistol, and fired… The lady made a precipitate retreat, and escaped before her infuriated husband could reload his weapon. An instant alarm was given and Mr. Ryan was taken into custody, and consigned to the gaol at Cashel.”
Before the internet crashed, we were able to learn that Junior went to Australia and returned to Ireland in 1858 to claim a title. At that time it was noted that his father was deceased (Liverpool Daily Post, 1 Sept. 1858). As time permits and the internet is restored we shall update these cases.
Please send any corrections or additional information to glenmore.history@gmail.com and we shall acknowledge and reply as quickly as we are able.
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh
Special thanks to Nial and Maeve C. for allowing us to “borrow” their internet to post this.
From Danny’s Files: The Rest of the Story of the Murder on Glenmore Hill
In one of his many notebooks, Danny Dowling (1927-2021) recorded contemporary newspaper accounts regarding the executions of three local men for murder in 1834. Patrick Meany, a native of Glenmore, had moved to Rosbercon and was convicted and executed for conspiring to kill his landlord Joseph Anthony Leonard, Esq. Please see our post of 9 February 2020 for the shocking details of how the murder was perpetrated and details of Philip Malone’s trial. Perhaps the biggest surprise Danny discovered and recorded in his notebook concerned Meany’s corpse after his execution. The place of the murder, and two of the executions arising from it, took place at the site of the murder just about a mile east of the N 25 Glenmore roundabout.
Danny found and recorded the following articles from the Waterford Mail newspaper.
Robert Malone (?-1834)
On Saturday the 26th of July 1834 at the Kilkenny County Assizes Robert Malone was convicted of the murder of Joseph Anthony Leonard, Esq. Robert Malone was sentenced to be hanged. The newspaper article noted, “It will be recollected that last Assizes his brother, Philip Malone, suffered for the same murder” (Waterford Mail, Mon. 28 July 1834).
After being found guilty and sentenced when Robert Malone was being taken from the court to the gaol “he exhibited great and disgusting levity. His execution took place in front of the gaol. Among the very great assemblage that witnessed his ignominious end, all seemed to think that he deserved his fate” (Waterford Mail, Wed. 30 July 1834.) [It is not clear why Robert Malone was executed outside the gaol in Kilkenny City after his brother Philip Malone was executed at the place of the murder on the Hill of Glenmore on the old mail coach road between Waterford and New Ross. Later Patrick Meany was also executed at the place of the murder.]
Patrick Meany (c. 1784-1834)
Patrick Meany was tried on Monday the 28th of July 1834 for conspiring to murder his landlord, Joseph Anthony Leonard, Esq. and inciting others to commit the murder. The jury was out for three hours and returned at 8 P.M. The jury returned a guilty verdict “The judge pronounced the culprit’s awful doom—to be hanged on Thursday.” The newspaper noted that Meany was the owner of the goods [cattle] Mr. Leonard had distrained (Waterford Mail, Wed. 30 July 1834).
The execution of Patrick Meany was set to take place on Tuesday the 12th of August at the scene of the murder (Waterford Mail, Sat. 2 Aug. 1834).
The Execution
“Another of the misguided persons concerned in the sanguinary murder of the late estimable Joseph Anthony Leonard, Esq. atoned for his share in the dreadful deed yesterday, at Shanbo (sic), the scene of the consummation, within three miles of New Ross, and 9 of this city. The malefactor upon this occasion was Patrick Meany…”
“An immense concourse of persons assembled yesterday to witness Meany’s ignominious departure from this world. A strong force of cavalry, infantry and police was also collected. The culprit—who seemed a man advanced at least to middle age—appeared to suffer very much from exhaustion, so much so that he was obliged to depute to his Reverend attendant the duty of addressing the immense multitude…”
“Although he expressed his contrition for having uttered denunciation against his prosecutor, he died without acknowledging the justice of the sentence or declaring his innocence. Soon afterwards the culprit was launched into eternity and the motely group of spectators separated. Five children we are informed, witnessed the execution of their guilty parent.”
Since the above was in type we received the following from a correspondent.
New Ross, August 12—Patrick Meany …was executed at the scene of the murder and where Philip Malone, one of the perpetrators of the murder, was executed on last St. Patrick’s Day. Meany was present at Philip Malone’s execution and also travelled to Kilkenny to attend the execution of Robert Malone during the last assizes.
“At half past eleven the cavalcade, consisting principally of the 9th Lancers, passed through New Ross. The unhappy individual who was the object of this mournful procession was seated in a chaise receiving religious consolation from his clergyman. He appeared to be fully sensible of his awful situation. If this could be a criterion to judge by he was fully resigned to meet his fate in a becoming and Christian like manner.”
At New Ross the 32nd Reserve and a large party of constabulary joined the cavalcade as did the Sheriff and Resident Magistrates. When they arrived at the fatal spot Meany descended from the chaise, accompanied by his Clergyman. He kneeled for some time in prayer at the foot of the gallows.
“The grim finisher of the law put the rope about his neck from behind. Meany turned suddenly round, and seemed to shrink from the trial he had to encounter. The Rev. Gentleman interposed his hand to shade his eyes. The man again looked agitated when his arms were being pinioned. When all was ready, he ascended the ladder with a firm step attended by the Rev. Gentleman, who first retired, and then returned again to strengthen the individual about to depart into eternity. He supported him by his back.”
“Meany now seemed weak, and the attentions of his spiritual adviser were continued to the last moment. His cap fell off, but it was quickly readjusted, and the fatal drop having been withdrawn, he died almost instantaneously.”
“Before ascending the gallows, the clergyman told the people that Meany felt sorry for having accused his prosecutor as he did in the Courthouse, that he willingly forgave all men and begged the prayers of all Christians” (Waterford Mail, Wed. 13 Aug. 1834).
The Wake & Burial of Patrick Meany
After having been suspended for some time, the body was taken away in an ass’s car by the family of the criminal, but it was afterwards removed to the Police Station at Rosbercon, to be conveyed back to Kilkenny (Waterford Mail, Wed. 13 Aug. 1834).
The body of Patrick Meany was waked on the night of his execution in the Rosbercon police barracks. His friends were admitted, and the body was interred the next day by the family, in the presence of the police (Waterford Mail, Mon. 18 Aug. 1834).
Generally, by the 19th century executions were public and carried out in front of gaols, and after 1868 executions were required to be held within the confines of the gaols. The corpse of an executed prisoner belonged to the State. Most were buried within the confines of the gaol in an unmarked grave in un-consecrated ground. From the time of Henry VIII authorities provided fresh executed prisoner corpses to doctors for training new doctors in anatomy. Due to religious and other beliefs families sought the bodies of their executed kin. The Meany family is the only family we have found so far that was allowed to wake and bury their father after his execution.
Thirteen years’ later convicted murderer Henry “Bounce” Walsh of Cat’s Rock, Glenmore asked the judge to give his body to his father and the request was refused. See our post of 16 August 2020 regarding the execution of Henry “Bounce” Walsh.
Please send any corrections or additional information to glenmore.history@gmail.com.
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh
Trial for the Killing of Catherine Hanrahan (c. 1798-1822) of Rochestown,Glenmore
On 6 November 2022 we published newspaper accounts of the manslaughter of Catherine Hanrahan in July 1822 at her home in Rochestown, Glenmore. While transcribing another Danny Dowling (1927-2021) notebook we discovered that Danny recorded articles from the Waterford Mirror that outline the testimony presented during the murder trial. These newspaper accounts provide more detail including the testimony of the landlord Pierse Edward Forristal, Esq. and conflicting testimony of other witnesses. It appears that the testimony of Pierse Edward Forristal, Esq. influenced the jury that only considered the case for a few minutes before returning its manslaughter verdict.
The Arrest
Danny recorded the following from the Waterford Mirror (Sat.20 Aug. 1822). Thomas Marks was charged with the murder of Catherine Hanrahan, at Rochesstown, in Co. Kilkenny. Thomas Marks was taken without resistance at a house in Kilmacthomas. Marks when arrested stated that he was on his way to surrender. He was transmitted to the County Kilkenny gaol.
The Waterford Mail on Wednesday the 14th of August 1822 provided an account of day three of the Kilkenny Assizes. In this account Thomas Marks was indicted for the murder of Catherine Hanrahan and the assault of Luke Power “by presenting a pistol at him.” Hereafter Marks is described as the prisoner.
The Testimony of Luke Power
Luke Power was sworn and testified. Unfortunately, the newspaper account does not provide his relationship, if any, to the deceased Catherine Hanrahan née Power, his occupation or residence. Later in defence testimony it appears that Luke and Thomas Power are brothers. Luke Power testified that he knows Rochestown and was there the Monday after the fair of Thomastown. He knows Thomas Power who lives at Rochestown. On that Monday, very early in the morning, he saw the prisoner at Rochestown.
Luke Power testified that the dog barked at the prisoner. Luke Power got up and asked who was there. The prisoner responded that he was distraining for Mr. Forristal. Luke Power testified that the prisoner was armed. Witness shut the door and would not let the prisoner in. Luke Power then went down to where the cows were and saw three bailiffs there, but the prisoner was not with them.
Luke Power heard a shot and returned to the house and saw Catherine Hanrahan “kilt” on the floor. She died six days after being shot. Luke Power went out to the road where some of the neighbours were gathered. The prisoner said “here’s the man was going to kill me,” and cocked his pistol at Luke Power. It was an hour before sunrise when the prisoner came with six men.
Cross-Examination of Luke Power
Luke Power testified that Mr. Forristal was his landlord. He stated that he paid some rent to Mr. Sherlock and owed Mr. Forristal one hundred pounds “or that way rent.” His brother was his partner in the land. He first saw the prisoner and his assistants in the yard, it was not then 3 o’clock.
Sherlock distrained Luke Power four weeks earlier, but he did not think there was a reason at that time. He did testify that a horse had been taken away to the bog at that time. The prisoner distrained Luke Power before for Mr. Forristal, but could not say how long before. At the time the shot was fired Luke Power was four or five fields away and had not walked a step with the prisoner that morning.
The Testimony of Alicia Power of Rochestown, Glenmore
Alicia Power testified that she was the daughter of Thomas Power and the sister of the deceased Catherine Hanrahan. She remembered people coming to her father’s on the first of July last before sunrise. She saw the prisoner there. She testified that her sister was driving pigs out of the bawn. The prisoner desired that her sister leave them there. When she refused Alicia Power testified that the prisoner ran over and caught her sister by the neck and “squeezed her.” Her neck was cut by his “iron hand.”
Alicia Power stated that she could hear “all that occurred” between the deceased and the prisoner. The prisoner said, “Come leave the pigs there.” Deceased answered, “How do you know who owns them?” Prisoner then struck the deceased and was choking her. Prisoner lifted his foot on a stone and saying, “by G-d I’ll shoot you,” and then fired his pistol. Deceased was then running away and was shot 6 yards from the prisoner. She fell at the door, the ball entered her back. There was another man there minding the pigs where the deceased left them.
Her sister was “shot on Monday morning and died the Sunday following.”
Cross Examination of Alicia Power of Rochestown, Glenmore
Alicia Powers was driving the pigs with her sister the deceased. “They had been in the cabin and were driving them out of the bawn.” Deceased had a stick in her hand. She usually brought a stick to drive the pigs. The deceased did not strike the prisoner and Alicia Power never saw a stone in the deceased’s hand. Alicia Power testified that she never saw the prisoner fall or see any stone thrown at him. She testified that the deceased could not have thrown a stone without her seeing it. Alicia Power was at the prisoner’s side when he fired.
Alicia Power said that the prisoner had only one pistol. She saw Luke Power come up. But never saw the prisoner “present a pistol at him.” Alicia Power swore information against prisoner before Mr. Snow. She did not swear against any other person except the prisoner. She did not hear the deceased, or any other person calling out, “kill the black protestant,” and firmly stated that she did not say it either.
Examined by the Bench—Alicia Power clarified to the judge that the prisoner had six or seven men in his party, one of whom was present when the shot was fired. Bridget Cashin was present but no boys or men. They were down on the land where the cows were.
The Testimony of Bridget Cashin
Bridget Cashin was present when Catherine Hanrahan was shot. She saw the prisoner that morning and saw him fire a shot at Catherine Hanrahan. The deceased was Bridget Cashin’s cousin. She observed the deceased driving the pigs out of the bawn. Only her sister was with the deceased. None of the men of the house were present. She testified that the prisoner had two men with him. She denied that the deceased struck the prisoner or threw stones at him. “He cursed G-d, he would fire at her in a minute.”
Bridget Cashin testified that the prisoner caught the deceased by her neck and choked her. The prisoner laid the pistol on his left knee and fired. The deceased walked four steps and fell. “She did not get up since.” Deceased was 24 years of age, was married 2.5 years, and had one child. Interestingly the Waterford newspaper did not acknowledge that the deceased was pregnant when she was shot in the back.
Cross Examination of Bridget Cashin
Bridget Cashin could not identify the two men with the prisoner. The house was distrained for Mr. Forristal’s rent, but she could not say whether the men were “keepers.” Deceased refused to leave the pigs and was driving them away. The deceased said she would drive them in spite of the prisoner. Bridget Cashin stated that she did not say anything, and the deceased did not say “kill the bloody or the black protestant.” She did not see Luke Power come up. She went to Mr. Snow’s and swore information about six days after “the business occurred.”
The Testimony of Dr. John Briscoe of Waterford
Dr. Briscoe testified that he attended Catherine Hanrahan at Rochestown on the second of July. She had received a gunshot wound in the lower part of the back “of which she afterwards died.”
Cross Examination of Dr. John Briscoe
The wound was horizontal in the lower part of the spine on the right side near the hip. The doctor did not see a mark of bruises or a cut on the deceased’s neck.
The Crown rested and the defence began.
The Testimony of William Cooney
William Cooney testified that he knew the prisoner and went with him to Rochestown on the first of July to distrain for Mr. Forristal. The distraining party consisted of: Thoman and John Marks; William and Richard Jeffers; —Lonergan and himself. They first went to the fields where they collected three horses and some cows. Three men were left in the field to guard the animals. Prisoner then brought Lonergan and William Cooney to the house and told them to take charge of all the property there both inside and outside. He testified that they never entered the house. The pigs were seized in the lane. Prisoner brought William Cooney down towards the fields and they met Luke Power and his brother Thomas.
Prisoner advised the Powers to get bail to release the cattle. Thomas Power had a wattle and struck at Lonergan. The blow was prevented by Luke Power. Prisoner went down to Mr. Forristal’s which was about a field away. Lonergan and Cooney were left in charge of the house. Whilst prisoner was away the two Powers and a woman (not the deceased) pushed Lonergan out of the yard. Lonergan left to tell the prisoner. Cooney was alone and went out onto the road.
Power’s two daughters and another girl were driving the pigs out of the bawn. Deceased had a wattle in her hand. When Lonergan returned one of the girls said, “Mr. Forristal knew nothing of the pigs and for God’s sake let them go.” Lonergan and Cooney refused and the deceased then said, “she would have them (the pigs) or she would knock one of their brains out sideways with the wattle.”
Cooney testified that the wattle was heavy and two and a half yards in length. Prisoner returned and upon hearing the deceased told her, “for God’s sake go in and be quiet and all will be well.” Cooney stated that deceased advanced toward prisoner and said, “you black protestant are you come again to rob us?” She made a blow of the wattle at him. She said the words in Irish. Prisoner gave the deceased a shove and said, “go in God’s name and don’t be aggravating me.”
The deceased raised the wattle and struck the prisoner two or three times. She called out for someone to come “knock the black protestant’s brains out.” The deceased then took up a stone according to Cooney and struck the prisoner in the knee. The other two women were running with stones in their hands. Cooney and Lonergan went between the women and the prisoner. Cooney saw and heard the shot fired. The deceased when shot was stooping for a stone.
The prisoner when he fired was down, “having dropped down sideways when hit on the knee with the stone.” The prisoner was not flat on the ground. He was supported by his elbow. A quarter of an hour later Luke Power came up. The prisoner only had one pistol and it was re-loaded. Luke Power was very angry and was according to Coney going to injure them if he could. Luke Power called the prisoner a “bloody rogue” and “all of them robbers.”
Cross Examination of William Cooney
Cooney was asked to repeat what the deceased had said in Irish and he did. No men of the Power family were present from the time the pigs were driven out first until after the shot was fired. Cooney admitted that he and Lonergan had sticks, but were not otherwise armed. He continued to assert that the three women were very violent, but admitted that the three men could have defended themselves without a shot.
It was daylight when they came on the ground. They left Waterford at 11 o’clock at night. They stopped at Mackey’s on the way and too refreshment. They remained at Mackey’s until “clear daylight.” Cooney described Mackey’s as 4 or 5 miles from Rochestown. Deceased had not run from the prisoner she was sideways, stooping for a stone, about 6 or 8 yards from prisoner.
When the prisoner fell his pistol went off. Cooney stated that the prisoner had not aimed at the deceased. Cooney stated his belief that the prisoner did not intend to fire at the deceased or to pull the trigger. About an hour after the shooting the prisoner said that the pistol went off by accident. Although Cooney stated that the prisoner’s life was in danger, if Cooney was in the same situation he would not have fired at the deceased. Cooney could not say how the pistol went off.
Dr. Briscoe Recalled
Dr. Briscoe was asked about the wound. He testified that it was horizontal. He stated that if the deceased was stooping he could not conceive how she received such a wound unless she and the shooter were both kneeling. Thus Dr. Briscoe did not find injuries on the deceased’s neck and ruled out that the deceased was stooping when shot.
The Testimony of Pierse Edward Forristal, Esq. of Rochestown, Glenmore
“Recollected the morning when this transaction happened.” He saw the prisoner 6 or 8 minutes after the shooting. Prisoner was distraining for Forristal and had frequently before acted as bailiff on his lands. He had distrained them a short time before. The prisoner had “always behaved himself well, and if he had a bad character, he would not have employed him.” Forristal stated that the prisoner is a pensioner and lost his hand “on service.” He went on to testify that the prisoner “frequently interfered” with Forristal in favour of the tenants by always speaking kindly of them and “procured time for them.”
Cross Examination of Pierse Edward Forristal, Esq.
Forristal testified that he sent for the prisoner to act as bailiff and bring 5 men with him. He also instructed that they should be very early on the land “as the Powers had removed their cattle on a former occasion.” Prisoner called to Forristal about 3 o’clock in the morning and told Forristal he had affected the distress. Forristal ordered his horse to be got ready. Jeffers arrived and said that the Powers had taken away horses and cows. The prisoner returned to Power’s. When Forristal arrived he learned of the shooting.
Forristal asked the prisoner why he fired. Prisoner responded that “he’d rather he had wounded himself than the girl.” Forristal testified that Tom Power said to the prisoner, “you have murdered my daughter.” The prisoner replied, “I did not intend to shoot her, but if I did it was her own fault.” The prisoner then unbuttoned the knee of his breeches and showed a large mark on his knee saying, “See Mr. Forristal, how I have been used.” [Of course he could have injured his knee at any time stumbling around in the dark after leaving Mackey’s where they had “refreshments.”]
The prisoner did not tell Mr. Forristal that the pistol went off by accident and Forristal never heard that it did.
The last witness called was Rev. Francis Reynett who testified that he knew the prisoner for about 18 years. He considered him a well conducted man and never heard anything against his character.
Jury Decision
The Lord Chief Justice charged the jury and they retired, “and in a few minutes they returned with a verdict, acquitting the prisoner of murder, but finding him guilty of manslaughter. They also acquitted the prisoner of presenting the pistol at Luke Power.”
The Chief justice sentenced the prisoner to be burned on the hand and imprisoned for 6 months.
What Happened to the Power Family of Rochestown, Glenmore?
We know that no one by the name of Power or Hanrahan were listed as tenants in Rochestown in the 1829 Tithe Lists. We are currently searching Prof. Mannion’s Newfoundland records of Irish emigrants 1750 to 1850 because several Rochestown families moved there in the early 19th century.
For some information on Rochestown see our post of 3 December 2023.
******************
Please send any corrections or additional information to glenmore.history@gmail.com
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh
A Ballyhobuck, Glenmore Murder?
In January 1846 nearly every newspaper in the country carried multiple articles concerning starvation and “outrages,” which included threats, attacks and murders. One article that was included was a mysterious death in Ballyhobuck, Glenmore that one newspaper listed in their murder column. The deceased that garnered such attention was John Crosby (c. 1796-1846) a saddler by trade, from Dublin, who was approximately 50 years of age and working in the Glenmore area for the previous four years. On Sunday the 25th of January 1846, John Crosby was last seen alive by a constable near the Mile Post. His corpse was found the following morning on the High Road, the former main road between Waterford and New Ross, in Ballyhobuck, Glenmore.
The account below was taken primarily from the Kilkenny Journal & Leinster Commercial & Literary Advertiser (Wed. 28 January 1846, p. 4). Extra or differing facts reported in other newspapers and explanations are contained in square brackets.
The Deceased John Crosby (c. 1796-1848)
On Wednesday, the 21st, Mr. Izod held an inquest at Ballyhobuck, near Glanmore (sic) on the body of a man named John Crosby, a saddler by trade, from Dublin, and about 50 years of age. [Mr. Izod the Coroner of County Kilkenny, upon arriving at the scene on Wednesday the 21st of January, “a jury was sworn on the spot” and while a post mortem was being performed, by Dr. James Boyd, the deceased was identified. The deceased was described as a quiet man and not known to have a quarrel with anyone. (Waterford Mail, Sat. 24 Jan. 1846, p. 2)].
Deceased was occasionally employed by the farmers in that neighbourhood, and, about 4 o’clock in the evening of the previous Sunday, was seen by a policeman near the Mile Post. From his appearance, the policeman conceived him to be drunk, but on entering into a conversation with him discovered that such was not the case, but that he seemed weak.
The Scene
About three miles onward, on the old Waterford and Ross Road [today called the High Road], at Ballyhobuck, he was subsequently discovered dead, and lying by the ditch. Six or seven yards from the body, there was a stream of blood on the centre of the road, which is very rough and having a quick descent. At the commencement of the run of blood there were stones fixed in the road, which might have inflicted the injuries apparent on the head of deceased, had he fallen thereon sideways with considerable force, to effect which he should have been running at the time.
The Deceased’s Injuries
There was a puncture wound on the head, baring the skull, which was fractured, with extravasation of blood underneath, causing death. [Extravasation refers to the leakage of fluids]. [There were marks of violence upon the body, consisting of several wounds on the hand and arm, all on the right side. The principal wound that caused his death was one likely to be produced by the blow of a blunt instrument inflicted with force—that it and all the other wounds might have occurred from a fall with great force whilst running, and that he might have been able to get up and walk afterwards to the ditch (Waterford Mail, Sat. 24 Jan. 1846, p. 2).
No food had been in the stomach for six hours before death, nor was there any trace of intoxicating liquor; consequently the man, from weakness, was not supposed to be likely to run so as to endanger life. The medical witness also stated that a blow of a stick or blunt instrument, would have inflicted the injury received.
A noise, as of persons in anger, had been heard near where the body lay, at about the time the deceased may have been passing there. He might also, it seemed, have recovered sufficiently to move from the spot where he had first fallen, to where he was subsequently found. [There was no noise heard the evening before by anyone in the neighbourhood, except the voices of a few men about 9 o’clock as if passing by quietly (Waterford Mail, Sat. 24 Jan. 1846, p. 2)].
The Verdict
The respectable jury found that “death from the effect of a blow or injury to the head.” [After evidence was summed up the jury returned a verdict “that Crosby’s death was occasioned by a wound on the right side of the head, but whether the blow was effected by design or accident they could not determine (Waterford Mail, Sat. 24 Jan. 1846, p. 2)].
Evidence Viewed Today
One hundred and seventy-eight years have passed and modern forensics might have been able to shed light on this death if sketches of the injuries had been recorded and kept. In fact the death of John Crosby occurred about four decades before the world was introduced to the fictional Sherlock Holmes. Although fictional Sherlock Holmes helped shape forensics and he would have been searching for trace evidence in the deceased’s wounds. There is little doubt that a man weak from not eating could fall on a roadway and injure himself, however it is unlikely that such a collapse would lead to such an extensive injury to the right side of the deceased’s head causing his skull to be exposed and fractured.
Additionally, wounds to his right hand suggests that if he fell he was able to get his right hand out to break his fall. However, this would not account for the injuries to his right arm unless the injuries were on the lower arm. Although it was not discussed, at least not in the newspaper accounts, could the injuries to his right hand and arm have been what today are called defensive wounds? If so, the death was not an accident.
No time of death was established and probably could not have been established in 1846. We know the deceased was last seen alive at the Mile Post on Sunday afternoon at 4 p.m. and was found dead in the road on Monday morning. Did he die while walking on Sunday afternoon or did he die late on Sunday or early Monday? Today it seems odd that no passerby found his corpse until Monday, but before automobiles on a cold winter’s night there were probably not a lot of people traveling along that road.
What do you think murder or an accident from being weak from hunger?
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh
For further information and maps of the High Road see our post of 14 December 2019.
A Ballinclare, Glenmore Murder, Part II
In our last post we published the accounts of the arrest of Michael Walsh of Ballinclare, Glenmore for the murder of his neighbour Simon Power by poison in August 1849, his one day trial and the jury verdict of guilty on 24 July 1850. Today, we tell the rest of the story.
Sentencing
After the late jury verdict on Thursday, Baron Pennefather had the prisoner brought back to the court for sentencing on Friday. Before sentencing Walsh’s barrister, Mr. Harris, asked Pennefather what “course he intended to pursue on behalf of the prisoner, with regard to the point raised against the reading of the depositions of Power [the victim] at the trial…” Harris stated that he intended to argue the legality of admitting the depositions before the Court of Appeal.
“The Judge said he did not think there was anything in it, but he would give Mr. Harris any information in his power, if would wait upon him before he left Kilkenny. He would afford the prisoner time for having the point argued in his favour. The officer of the court then informed the prisoner in the usual form of the nature of the verdict against him, and asked him If he had anything to say why sentence of death should not be upon him. The prisoner, who exhibited no external emotion whatsoever, answered in rather husky and smothered accents—”God help me; I gave him the whiskey, but I had no harm in it. The Lord help me; I leave myself on your mercy” (The Kilkenny Moderator, Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2).
Judge Addresses Convicted Murderer Michael Walsh
Baron Pennefather replied—”Michael Walsh, you had a very fair and full investigation of your case; you have been ably defended by your Counsel; the Jury have paid the most anxious attention to the evidence, and every point which could be suggested as favourable to you was put forward by your Counsel, subsequently by myself to the jury. They, having considered all the circumstances of the case have come to the full consideration that you were Guilty—that you are guilty of a foul and deliberate murder.”
Addressing his sisters and workmen who testified for him the Judge stated, “You attempted to defend yourself by evidence which the Jury did not believe, and which was palpably untrue to every person attending the trial. The Jury have come to that conclusion which consigns you to the grave, and to which they were compelled to come by the evidence, which, being believed, was irresistible to show your guilt.”
“That the unfortunate Simon Power met his death by poison—by poison of a most deadly kind—poison of a mercurial nature, called corrosive sublimate—has been demonstrated by the opinions of men whose judgment the jury could not fail to rely on, and who expressed their opinion without any doubt as to the nature of the poison, and without any consideration but the assertion of truth. The only enquiry then to be made, was as to who had committed the fatal deed” (The Kilkenny Moderator, Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2).
“The jury have come to a conclusion discrediting the story told on your part, being constrained by other evidence to believe your guilt. I feel bound to say that I cannot disapprove of that conclusion, nor can any man who duly reflects on the evidence. The Jury was almost selected by yourself. The Crown did not use its prerogative in putting by a single name, while on the contrary you exercised the power which the law undoubtedly gives you, of putting by numbers of persons. It may then be said that the jury was much more of your own selection, but they were men of understanding and conscience, and they have done their duty by returning a verdict such as they were bound to do by the obligation of their oaths. It now only remains for me to pass sentence upon you” (The Kilkenny Moderator, Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2).
Murder Linked to Agrarian Violence
Baron Pennefather was just warming up and told the prisoner, “I have already had occasion this morning to observe on the fatal consequences of the agrarian outrages—they lead from one step to another, and if in the first instances property only be assailed, it comes shortly to this, that life itself is not safe from the attacks of those who desire to hold their land without paying the rent contracted for.”
“Unfortunate Simon Power went as a bailer to make a distress on you. There does not appear to have been any personal enmity between you; he was your neighbour, and you had never quarrelled—but such was the spirit entertained—such was the reckless disposition constituted—such was the wicked purpose conceived, that to strike terror into others—perhaps to defeat the distress made, you did not scruple to take away his life, because he discharged this trifling duty for your landlord, or his agent” (The Kilkenny Moderator, Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2).
“Is not this a frightful proof of the extent to which this crime has grown in this County? Is it not proof of the necessity of redressing it by the strong arm of the law, and that those who counsel this interference by attacks on property, be warned of the frightful consequences of proceeding further? You gave way to the plan you had settled in your mind, and regardless of the consequences, administered the deadly drug which produced the death of your victim under dreadful agonies” (The Kilkenny Moderator, Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2).
“Can there be any crime greater than this? and can a man who administered deadly poison in this this matter, hope or have the least expectation of receiving pardon in this world; and ought, he not turn his mind that future world to which he must shortly belong? Let me conjure you, then, to turn your mind to your God, and by repentance and contrition, endeavour to make atonement to Heaven for that crime for which your life has been forfeited to the laws of your country, and seek that mercy there, which this tribunal cannot allow” (The Kilkenny Moderator, Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2).
The placed the black cap on his head and stated, “It is now my painful duty to pronounce the awful sentence of the law, which is, that you, Michael Walsh, be hanged by the neck till you are dead, and that your body be buried within the precincts of the prison where you have been confined … and may the Lord have mercy on your soul” (The Kilkenny Moderator, Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2).
The prisoner remained unmoved throughout the sentence and communicated with his solicitor for some moments before leaving the dock. We understand that the 23rd November has been named as the day of execution, in order to give time for the appeal (The Kilkenny Moderator, Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2).
The Appeal
According to the newspaper account the appeal was taken because Mr. Harris, the prisoner’s barrister, objected during the trial to the admission of Simon Power’s depositions because he alleged them to be irregular. “Mr. Cooke, R.M., went to the dying bailiff, Power, and, in the presence of the prisoner, took down a statement of the administration of poison mixed in whiskey, by Walshe. This statement was not made under oath; and when it was made, Walshe put a few questions to the dying man, which, with the replies, were added to the statement; and as the then stood, the dying man was sworn as to the truth of it—that is he was sworn after the statement had been taken, instead of being sworn before.”
This statement, so sworn to was read at the trial at Kilkenny, on the part of the Crown, against the prisoner. Mr. Harris, Counsel for the prisoner, objected to its admission, but Baron Pennefather allowed the document to be read, except one or two questions. He refused to give the document itself to the jury. The newspaper opined that “… the depositions, its questions or answers, or its post swearing instead of ante-swearing, had no influence except the remotest, in inducing the jury to arrive at a conviction that Walshe (sic) was guilty.”
Before sentence was passed, Mr. Harris, urged that the admission into evidence “of the informal deposition was illegal, and consequently a ground why Walshe should not be sentenced. Baron Pennefather, after some discussion, took a note of the objection on the record under which counsel might bring the question before the judges of criminal appeal.”
Murder Conviction Overturned
Three out of the five justices hearing the appeal that, “as the dying man was sworn after he made the statement instead of being sworn before, the deposition was bad; and should not have been used against prisoner; consequently, as illegal evidence had been received on the trial, the conviction should be reversed” (Kilkenny Journal & Leinster Commercial & Literary Advertiser, Wed. 20 Nov. 1850, p. 1).
On Saturday the 17th of November, just a week before Walsh’s execution date, Mr. Robins, the Governor of the County Gaol, “communicated to Michael Walshe the (to him) agreeable intelligence that he was to walk forth again a free man…Walshe, accordingly, left the prison, where, it was confidently presumed he would have been executed” (Kilkenny Journal & Leinster Commercial & Literary Advertiser, Wed. 20 Nov. 1850, p. 1).
The newspaper concluded, “And so it has been; and Walshe is now upon his farm once more! It is stated, on good authority, that since his conviction he confidently reckoned upon being set at liberty; and it is also the impression of many who have considered the circumstances of the case, that the poison was administered to the two bailiffs, one of whom suffered only temporarily, not with a view to their death; but only to lay them up for a few hours, or for a day perhaps, in order that, in their absence, some of the property distrained might be removed.”
Who Was Michael Walsh, of Ballinclare, Glenmore?
With no hint of his age it is difficult with any certainty to identify the prisoner Michael Walsh. We did locate Michael Welsh (sic) who was baptized on 25 September 1803 at Ballinclare, Glenmore, the son of John Welsh and Ellen Doherty. If this is the correct Michael Walsh he was 46 when he poisoned Simon Power. From the newspaper accounts there is no mention of a wife or children, just his two sisters. His sister Mary Power, who testified that she drank the whiskey may have been the Mary Walsh who married Robert Power of Ballinclar at Slieverue on 14 July 1837. Michael Walsh was one of the witnesses.
Another Michael Walsh (1803-1868) was baptized on 28 September 1803 at Ballinlammy, Glenmore, the son of Patrick Welsh and Catherin Shee. We were able to find that Michael, of Ballinlammy died 26 March 1868 aged 64. He was a married, farmer and Johanna Walsh (c. 1798-1870) was present at his death. This Michael (Ballinlammy) had a sister, Margaret Walsh (bapt. 5 April 1808).
Who Was The Victim, Simon Power?
The provision of his children’s names in the newspaper account of the trial aided in the tracking of Simon Power. The victim Simon Power was married to Mary Savage. When Walter Power was baptized at Glenmore on 27 February 1828 the family was residing at Ballyinguile. His sister, Catherine Power was baptized 9 October 1829 at Gaulstown, Glenmore. Another brother, Michael Power was baptized at Ballyinguile on 24 December 1826, but he was not mentioned in the newspapers and may not have survived infancy.
In 1831, Simon Power, of Ballihibuck (sic), Glenmore married Mary Walsh of Ballinclar, Glenmore on 14 February. To this union, three children were born: James Power (bapt 22 March 1834 at Ballanguile); Joney Power (bapt. 21 Dec. 1835 at Ballanguile) and John Power (bapt 10 June 1837 at Ballanguile). It is not known if this Simon Power is the victim as none of these children were named in the newspaper accounts of the trial.
1901 Census
We could find no marriage record for Michael Walsh, of Ballinclare, nor could we locate a death record. However, death records only began being kept in the 1860’s. We do not know if Michael Walsh, of Ballinclare, remained in Glenmore or left the area. Perhaps as more of Danny Dowling’s (1927-2021) notebooks are transcribed we will learn how Michael Walsh, his sisters and workmen were treated after the trial and his release. We do know that by 1901 there were no persons named Walsh in Ballinclare or Ballinlammy, Glenmore.
Please send any corrections or additional information to glenmore.history@gmail.com.
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh
For a list of persons executed in Ireland from 1835 to 1899, see, Richard Clark.
A Ballinclare, Glenmore Murder
Several years ago when Danny Dowling (1927-2021) was talking about the killer Henry “Bounce” Walsh he mentioned another murder that occurred in Ballinlammy and concerned the poisoning of a bailiff. Danny believed that the killer lived where Irish’s are today. We were never able to locate a Ballinlammy murder, but did come across a case where Michael Walsh of Ballinclare, Glenmore was charged with murdering his neighbour Simon Power by poison in 1849. According to Paddy O’Connor (his mother was Bridie Aylward of Ballinclare) a Walsh family once lived at the Ballinlammy Cross where Ballinlammy and Ballinclare meet.
September 1849–Poisoned Whiskey
The Kilkenny Moderator (Sat. 15 September 1849, p. 2) published a short article that Michael Walsh, residing at Ballinclare, in the Barony of Ida, was committed to the Kilkenny County Gaol, by W. R. Croke, Esq., R.M. Walsh was due to stand trial at the next Assizes, for attempting to murder by poisoning.
Two local men were hired as bailiffs or “keepers” and placed in charge of Walsh’s crop which had been distrained for rent. Their names were James Murphy and Simon Power. Walsh asked the bailiffs to take some whiskey, and they accepted the invitation and received some liquid from a bottle, which caused them to become deadly sick. Power, who took more of the liquid than the other, was reported as being in a dangerous state. Dr. William Boyd who treated Simon Power, declared that corrosive sublimate had been mixed with the whiskey.
It was reported that Michael Walsh absconded, but was arrested in Waterford through the exertion of Acting Constable Smullen of the Glanmore police station. Smullen is not a Glenmore name. A quick check of the Glenmore parish registers revealed the first name of the RIC Acting Constable Smullen was Patrick. Patrick Smullen was married to Margaret Macmanus. The couple had three known children which provides a bit of insight into where Patrick was posted. His daughter Mary was baptized in 1841 at Tulloroan, Kilkenny. In 1843, his daughter Catherine was baptized at Ballycallan/Kilmanagh, Kilkenny, and his son Laurence was baptized at Glenmore on 4 April 1849.
Dying Declaration
Before Simon Power died, William Cooke, Esq., R,M. went to his house early in September. Cooke found the victim, Simon Power, stretched upon a pallet. The prisoner was there in custody. Cooke first took the information from the deceased and told the prisoner he had a right to examine the dying man. Cooke took down the questions the prisoner asked the dying man and the answers he received.
Arraigned for Murder
Michael Walsh was arraigned for the murder of Simon Power, committed on the 13th of August 1849, at Ballieclare (sic). The indictment set out at great length that the prisoner had, with malicious intent, mixed in a “naggin of whiskey two drachmas of a deadly poison,” termed mercurial salts, which he induced Simon Power, to drink, and in consequence the deceased languished from the 13 August to the 14th of September, and then died.
When the case came before the Kilkenny Assizes in July 1950 and it “excited considerable interest.” It had been tried at the previous Assizes, where “the jury disagreed,” and a new trial became necessary. The newspaper reporters wrote that prisoner, Michael Walsh, “was a man apparently of the class of comfortable farmers.” The Counsel for the Crown was Mr. Scott QC and counsel for the defence were Messrs. Harris & Armstrong. The trial judge was Baron Richard Pennefather (1773-1859). For further information regarding Pennefather see our previous post of 24 July 2021. Michael Walsh’s trial for the murder of Simon Power took one day.
The Murder Trial–July 1850
The Kerry Post, (Wed. 31 July, 1850, p. 4) has the clearest printed account of the trial which was held on Thursday the 24th of July 1850. It has been supplemented with facts reported in the Kilkenny Moderator. “Michael Walsh, a farmer of respectable appearance, was indicted for the wilful murder of Simon power, on the 30th of August 1849, at Ballyclare (sic) by administering to him a deadly mercurial salt in whiskey. There were 17 challenges on the part of the prisoner prior to a jury being empanelled” (Kilkenny Moderator, Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2).
Testimony of James Murphy
James Murphy—I was placed last August as keeper over the land of the prisoner. The deceased, Simon Power, was another keeper. I lived near the prisoner. It was on Tuesday morning we went, and we remained night and day on the grounds. On Thursday morning the prisoner told me and Power to go up to the house and warm ourselves. We went up. We refused at first, as the women would not be satisfied with our going into the house. He said they were not up. When we got into the house the prisoner took a bottle off the dresser. He went into the yard and brought back a tea cup. He brought me then to the inner room and filled the cup with whiskey which I drank.
Power was not in the room with me when I took the whiskey. I went back to the kitchen and was there about 10 minutes when the prisoner from the inner room called Power. Power went up to the room and remained about two minutes. Power returned to the kitchen. Power went out of the house, and after a few minutes the prisoner and I and a man named Lennan, the landlord’s man, went out of the house. The deceased was at the gable end of the house. He was vomiting. He went with me a quarter of a mile to his own house, and still continued sick.
I also became affected when I got 40 perches away. I left Power at home in his house. He had been well for the two days before that morning. The distress was subsequently canted. About a naggin of spirits was in the bottle after I got a drink.
Cross Examination of James Murphy
During cross-examination James Murphy stated that Lennan had told the prisoner that if he went to Mr. Sherlock, and paid his rent, it would be all right. He testified that he drank about half a glass. “We had taken nothing that morning. The door was open between the kitchen and where the prisoner remained after I got the whiskey. The prisoner’s sister, Mary Walsh, came down after I got the whiskey, but not before the deceased was called into the parlour. Both of us got the whiskey before she came in. I felt a pain in my stomach after the drink. The prisoner and the deceased were very good friends. I saw Power walking on three different days after he was sick, and remained one day as a keeper. I did not see him sick after those occasions. Power complained to me that he was sick.
The jurors were allowed to ask questions of James Murphy.
The second day after that Thursday Power was at the prisoner’s and remained about three hours. When asked if there was anything put into so small a quantity of whiskey would it not have left a disgusting taste, James Murphy responded, “I did not feel that there was anything remarkable about it.” If he had been offered more, he believed he would have drank it. However, if offered it half an hour after, he would not have taken it (Kilkenny Moderator, Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2). Lastly, James Murphy was asked if “after the deceased was placed as a keeper, did the prisoner manifest any unkindly feelings towards him.” James Murphy testified, “He did not.”
The Testimony of Anastatia Power
Anastatia Power, the daughter of the deceased Simon Power testified that her father came home at 6 in the morning with James Murphy. Her father had been keeping at the prisoner’s. Her father was vomiting. He went to bed and “he continued very bad during the whole of that day.” When he came home his cheeks were yellow. After some time his tongue and cheeks swelled and turned red. The middle of his tongue was white but the borders were red. He would start up when asleep, and bawl as if in fright. The first week his feet were warm and sore, and they got cold the second week.
The vomiting continued until he died fifteen days afterwards. Dr. Boyd attended her father a week after he was ill. He was very often sick and vomiting during that week. He was very sore and not able to go a out his business. “His mouth was sore and scalding, and the flesh inside his mouth would come away when he was spitting. I could pull out the flesh and it was black. His teeth were also black. The odour of his breath was most offensive. The water from his mouth was green and thick. It was often coloured bloody. He complained of pains cutting him in the bowels, and of pains in his head. Before he died lumps of lard like came from his stomach.”
Cross Examination of Anastatia Power
On cross examination Anastatia Power stated that her father on Wednesday night ate a supper of peas. He never went about his business after that Thursday and he never had any of these symptoms before. The newspaper noted that Anastatia’s brother and sister were examined, but no record of their testimony was provided in the Kerry Post. The Kilkenny Moderator note that Walter Power, testified that he took his father’s place at the prisoner’s farm as his father was not able to attend. His sister Catherine Power also stated that their father was too ill to work (Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2).
Testimony of Dr. William Boyd
Dr. William Boyd testified that he attended the deceased on the 6th of September and prescribed “for him on the 3d for a sore mouth.” He found the deceased lying on the ground in bed with a profuse flow of saliva from his mouth with a disagreeable odour. The deceased’s tongue was swollen and protruding, indented at the sides and thickly coated. His gums were ulcerated as was the palette behind the teeth. His face was swollen and re and he had great difficulty swallowing and talking.
“His pulse was excited. I got him out of bed to examine his body to see if he had been rubbing his body with ointment. I could detect nothing. I asked if he had been taking medicine. He said not, but that that day week he got something from the prisoner in whiskey which was not right—that immediately after getting the whiskey he became sick—that he was not able to remain that day…That on swallowing the whiskey it had a very queer burning taste, and he felt a burning in his mouth and throat. That about the third day his mouth became salivated and continued. He had a pain in his stomach. The chief pain he complained of was his mouth and head, and he never used any mercurial preparation, except four years earlier when he was in fever. He frequently drank whiskey without any ill effects from it, and he was in rude health immediately before he took the whiskey. “
The doctor visited the deceased on the 8th, 10th and 13th. “From the symptoms I perceived, I think he died from the effects of mercury. Corrosive sublimate is a sort of mercury. It could have been administered by an ointment rubbed to the body, or by its being given by a drink. I considered it must have been administered to him in a drink from what he said.”
“Corrosive sublimate is soluble in whiskey, and would not colour the drink, or have any smell. It would have a dry, caustic taste, like as if a man got a taste of lime when in a kiln. From the symptoms, and from what the man said, I believe his death was from corrosive sublimate…It is a deadly poison.” The doctor then described the body parts he collected from the post mortem and sent them in jars to Dublin for further examination.
In response to further questions, the doctor explained that the deceased died from weakness, the corrosive sublimate interfered with the digestive organs. On the 13th the deceased was aware of his approaching death. Dr. Boyd told the deceased that there was no hope. The deceased sent for his priest. “When I first saw him I did not consider him dying. I knew him to be in a dangerous way.”
The Cross Examination of Dr. William Boyd
On cross examination the doctor agreed that both cholera and dysentery were prevalent in the area. He said that the deceased was a stout, strong, well built man, not likely to be affected by dysentery. He attended the deceased for mercurial salivation. “The deceased described as accurately as any medical man the effects which would follow the taking of this poison, and I was confirmed in my belief of what he had taken by finding an ignorant man describe day by day with the utmost accuracy what symptoms should follow the administration of corrosive sublimate.” He disputed that this was not a simple case of bad whiskey containing bluestone and Verdigris. Verdigris has no mercury. Just three grains of sublimate can kill. “One may take as much of the poison and escape from death that would kill three others. Some are more susceptible than others of the influence of poison.” The doctor stated if sublimate was in powder he would not expect it would be dissolved in ten minutes (The Kerry Post, Wed. 31 July, 1850, p. 4).
Defense Objected to Deceased’s Dying Deposition
When the Crown attempted to read into the record the deposition of the deceased the defence council objected and a mighty row broke out. Judge Pennefather ultimately decided to admit the deposition into evidence.
The Defence
The defence put on several witnesses. From the newspaper accounts all were relatives of the prisoner or worked for him. Mary Power née Walsh,, the prisoner’s sister, stated that she was present when her brother gave whiskey to both men at the same time. She herself had a glass as did two workmen, William Bryan and Patrick Dwyer. She later had a bit of a headache but wasn’t sure if it was from the whiskey. Another sister Ellen Walsh testified that she was the deceased working the rest of the week and noticed thereafter that his son Watt Power replaced him. Both workmen testified that they often started the day with Michael Walsh treating them to a drop of whiskey. Both indicate that there was no upset over the local men acting as keepers for the landlord. It was better to have neighbours than strangers about (Kilkenny Moderator, Sat. 27 July 1850, p. 2).
Jury Deliberations
According to the Kilkenny Moderator, “Baron Pennefather delivered a most luminous and impressive charge.” The jury retired at 8 p.m. and after thirty minutes the foreman came out and said that there was no chance of a verdict. Pennefather sent them to deliberate more. At half past ten the jury returned a verdict and notwithstanding the lateness of the hour the courtroom was packed.
Our next blog we will discuss the verdict, the sentence and appeal as well as information concerning the victim and his family. If you were on the jury how would you have voted?
Please send any corrections or further information to glenmore.history@gmail.com.
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh
For further information see, Kilkenny Journal & LCL Advertiser, Wed. 31 July 1850, p. 1