Crimes
now browsing by category
From Danny’s Files: Prosecution of 4 Glenmore Men
Danny Dowling (1927-2021) spent over 7 decades interviewing people and collecting information concerning Glenmore and nearby areas. Found within Danny’s voluminous files was an article from the Waterford Standard concerning the Kilmacow Petty Sessions court held in August 1903. Two cases were reported in that newspaper that involved the Sunday closing of pubs law and the prosecution of four Glenmore men.
Irish Temperance League
According to the webpage of the Irish Temperance League it was formed in the 1850’s and continues to operate to this day. By the 1870’s across Ireland, Catholic and Protestant Clergy were united in efforts to curb alcohol consumption. In Glenmore all pubs in the Village were closed by the Parish Priest and there was no pub in the Village until 1963. See our previous post of 8 May 2023.
Known as “The Great Social Experiment” Bills were introduced several years in a row in the House of Commons, seeking to control and curtail the sale of alcohol. In 1872, it became a legal requirement to display the proprietor’s name over the front door. (For more interesting facts regarding Irish pubs see the Irish Post, (2016) “A Brief History of the Pub.”) The following year, when a Bill was introduced to close pubs on Sundays the MP for Leeds argued it was a bad idea because the populace would be left without access to alcohol for medicinal uses. It was also argued that the working man lived in poor conditions and needed the comforts of a pub (Irish Post (2016)). Interestingly there was no mention or concern for the wives and children who also lived in poor conditions.
The 1873 police returns revealed that there were 1,586 publicans, beer dealers and spirit grocers in Ireland. By 1880 the number fell to 1,284. The reduction of 302 over 7 years was due mainly to the closure of “the worst case of house” and others were temporarily closed due to the economic decline in that decade that left thousands of labouring men without work (T. W. Russel (1884) A Social Experiment: Five Years Before and After Sunday Closing in Ireland, p. 6).
The Sunday Closure Act 1878
Until 1878 pubs could remain open until 11 p.m. on Sundays. The Sunday Closing Act came into operation on the 13th of October 1878. Under the ACT the hours of sale were reduced to 2 to 7 p.m. and from 2 to 9 p.m. in all places with a population exceeding 5,000. The cities with the longer hours were Dublin, Belfast, Cork, Limerick and Waterford. During the 4.5 years after the enactment Sunday arrests for drunkenness fell by 53% (T.W. Russel (1884) p. 1).
Two interesting aspects of the Act was that the Sunday patrons were limited to bona fide travellers, and the Act was not permanent. A Bill was introduced into the House of Commons in 1882 to make it permanent and to extend its provisions to all Ireland. A bona fide traveller was a patron who traveled a prescribed distance from his home.
Saturday Early Closing Bills
With the deemed success of the Sunday closures the Irish Temperance League and united clergy turned their attention to Saturdays. The Saturday Earlier Closing Bill was introduced year after year commencing in 1879. Eventually, a Committee was formed which had 18 sittings for taking evidence from 40 witnesses. In total 11,091 questions were put to the witnesses.
After two days of discussion the Committee reported that “The witnesses…have given strong evidence in favour of curtailing the hours of sale on Saturdays. The Committee are of opinion that a great deal of excessive drinking which has been proved to take place on Saturday nights, and much of the squandering of the wages of the working classes would be avoided if public-houses were closed earlier on that day, and they are satisfied that such a measure would be supported by public opinion generally throughout Ireland.”
The Committee recommended that the Act of 1878 should be made perpetual and extended to the five cities exempted from the full operation of the Act. That the qualifying distance under the bona fide provisions should be extended to six miles. That all houses for the sale of intoxicating liquors in Ireland should be closed at 9 p.m. on Saturdays (Irish Temperance League (1889) Summary of the History of the Sunday Closing and Saturday Evening Closing Movement ion Ireland, and the Position of the Government in Relation to the present Bill—February, 1889.
Kilmacow Petty Sessions 27 August 1903
The Kilmacow Petty Sessions were held on Thursday the 27th before Ulick Bourke, Resident Magistrate and Major Giles. Mr. Bowers, CPS was also present.
Catherine McDonell, a Mullinavat Publican
Two cases involving pubs were reported in the Waterford Standard newspaper. The first involved Catherine McDonnell a Mullinavat publican who was charged with having permitted drunkenness in her house on Sunday the 5th of July. It was alleged that Mrs. McDonnell had put “everyone out” by 7 p.m., but James Dalton regained entry by climbing over the wall that surrounded the premises.
The police found James Dalton drunk on the licensed premises after 7 p.m. when they visited. Mrs. McDonnell swore that she did not provide Dalton with any drink after 6:30 p.m. Major Giles was strongly in favour of a conviction, but Mr. Bourke did not agree with him. “After a lengthened debate Major Giles gave way on a point of law, and the case was dismissed.” (Waterford Standard, Sat. 29 Aug. 1903, p. 3).
Four Glenmore Men Arrested in Slieverue
The second pub case was entitled, “A Serious Question for Publicans—How long Can a Man Stay in a Publichouse?”
Sergeant Quinn charged Richard Grant, Slieverue, with a breach of the Sunday Closing Act. Head-Constable Keegan prosecuted, and Mr. P. A. Murphy defended.
Sergeant Quinn testified that on Sunday, June 28th, he visited the premises of Richard Grant at twelve o’clock noon and found about 40 people on the premises. Quinn went through the drinker and thought they were all bona fide travellers. Quinn belived that Edward Murphy, Pat McDonald, Robert Walsh and Francis Rielly were from Glenmore.
At 2:30 Quinn again went to the “house” and found the same men drinking. He spoke to them in the presence of the publican and asked Murphy why he was there so long. Murphy replied he could remain from six in the morning until six at night if he liked. “He went away with Rielly. Walsh and McDonald were there also, and they had been there the same time.”
“Mass commenced at eleven and was over about twelve, and these people attended the service. All four men live in the parish of Glenmore, and Glenmore Chapel would be nearer to any of them than going to Slieverue, but they could not get a public house” in Glenmore. Sergeant Quinn noticed Rielly “had the appearance of drink.” Sergeant Quinn went on to testify that Murphy and the publican had been summoned some time previously for similar offences, and the cases had been dismissed.
Mr. P.A. Murphy for the defendant cross examined the sergeant. Quinn testified that “his case was that these men stayed an overlong time in the house, and though bona fide travellers at 12 o’clock they had no right to stay until 2:30.”
“Mr. Murphy said the case would undoubtedly go further, but he would like it clearly understood the case for the Crown was that at 12 o’clock these men were admittedly bona fide travellers, but they were not bona fide travellers at 2:30. He contended that no such offense as the present one against the publican should have been brought. The police could only have brought a case of permitting drunkenness, but there was no such charge in this case. Mr. Murphy then read several recorded cases to prove his contentions. An exactly similar case occurred before, and the magistrates’ decision was reversed by the County Court Judge. “
The magistrates dismissed the case, but allowed a case to be stated, where the matter “will be thoroughly threshed out in the Superior Court. Mr Bourke, R.M. drew up the various points to be submitted for argument. The cases against the four men found on the premises were adjourned.”
Cases Adjourned for the Bona Fide Glenmore Travellers
Thus, it appears that the publican with legal representation had his case dismissed, but the four Glenmore patrons had their cases adjourned until the unnamed Superior Court could rule on various points of law the magistrates sent to it. No further newspapers articles could be located regarding these cases from 1903, so the question of whether a bona fide traveller could lose his status and thus fall foul of the law was not published. However, the reporting of the case clearly illustrates the Sunday Closure Act was still in operation and any Glenmore person seeking a drink on a Sunday when he went beyond Glenmore parish he became a bona fide traveller within the meaning of the Act. As a bona fide traveller Glenmore people were entitled to seek alcohol at pubs more than 6 miles from home.
Whether the men were bona fide travellers is another issue. A quick search of the 1901 Census reveals more then 1 person named Robert Walsh and Edward Murphy in Glenmore parish. Two of this group with the same names lived within 2 or 3 miles of Slieverue. However, there were no persons found named Pat McDonald and Francis Rielly, although a family of Riellys lived in Slieverue parish in Ballyrowagh adjacent to the Glenmore line.
Please send any additional information or corrections to glenmore.history@gmail.com.
The photo of Stapleton’s pub of Slieverue was taken today. It is not known where Richard Grant’s pub was located in 1903 in Slieverue.
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh
The Killing in 1822 of Catherine Hanrahan of Rochestown, Glenmore
Due to a typographical error, 1822 was placed in a newspaper search engine rather than 1922. However, from this simple mistake sprang an apparently long forgotten story concerning a young pregnant mother, named Catherine Hanrahan, of Rochestown, Glenmore, who was shot and killed by a one-armed Waterford bailiff in July 1822.
Catherine Hanrahan née Power (c. 1798-1822)
From the newspaper accounts of her killing we know that Catherine was the daughter of Thomas Power and her husband was Thomas Hanrahan. We were able to find a marriage record for Catherine Power and Thomas Hanrahan. Thomas Hanrahan and Catherine Power of Rochestown married 14 February 1820 at Slieverue. The witnesses to the wedding were: William Hanrahan, Thomas Hanrahan and James Cashin. The following year the couple had their first child, Judith Hanrahan. Judith was baptised 12 April 1821 at Rochestown. Her godparents were Luke Power and Nelly Foristal (sic). It does not appear that Luke Power was a brother of Catherine because the newspapers in reporting on her killing noted her parents and younger sisters mourning her death. One newspaper recorded Catherine being aged 23 at the time of her death and another gave her age as 24. The only Catherine Power we found in the Slieverue records for the years 1797-1799 was Catherine Power, of Boherbee, baptized 25 May 1797 to Thomas Power and Mary Welsh. Glenmore did not become a separate parish until 1844, so the earliest parish records are in Slieverue.
1822
The year 1822 was a year when food was not plentiful in Ireland and famine visited the west of the country. This was also the year that the Royal Irish Constabulary was established by Sir Robert Peel (1788-1850). Catherine was shot on Monday, 1st July 1822 and lingered in agony until her death Sunday, 7th July 1822. The Waterford Chronicle (Thurs. 11 July 1822, p. 3) stated that a report was circulating in Waterford City for a couple of days “…that a poor woman had been fired at and severely wounded, near Rochestown, by a man from this City, named Marks, employed to watch some property distrained. We forbore to notice the rumour at the time, having been unable to trace it to any authentic source; but we have since learned the melancholy fact, that the unfortunate woman died of the wound on Sunday. As the circumstances will of course undergo a judicial investigation, we refrain from saying more at present.” The Waterford Mirror (reprinted in the Carlow Morning Post, Mon. 15 July 1822, p. 3) noted that it had twice reported on the “unhappy occurrence” at “Rochestown, Barony of Ida, County Kilkenny, a place not under proclamation.”
“Not under proclamation” was a phrase used to describe the area as law abiding. Sir Robert Peel (1788-1850) was the chief secretary of Ireland from 1812 to 1818 and the driving force behind “An Act …to provide for the better execution of the laws in Ireland, by appointing Superintending Magistrates and additional constables in Counties in certain cases…[that] are in a State of Disturbance (54, George III, c. 131, 25 July 1814). Generally, if it was declared by a public Proclamation that an area was in a state of disturbance additional police and magistrates were put in place to quickly quell disturbances. Due to Sir Robert Peel’s establishment of professional police groups police were often referred to as “peelers” and “bobbies.” These terms are still used today.
The most detailed account of Catherine’s killing was found in the Leinster Journal (Sat. 13 July 1822, p. 2).
COUNTY POLICE—On the morning of the 1st instant, six or seven bailiffs were sent to Rochestown, in this county, to distrain of Thomas Power, for rent due to Pierce Edward Forrestall (sic), Esq. They arrived at the village long before sun-rise, and appear to have endeavoured to seize the pigs. Power’s daughter, Catherine, a good young woman, aged 23, wife of Thomas Hanrahan, who was gone to the bog, having heard the noise, got up, and seeing no person in the bawn, went to drive back the pigs to rest, when one of the bailiffs, a ruffian of the name of Thomas Marks, a pensioner, who has only one hand and has an iron hook fixed on the stump of the other, jumped from a loose stone wall, and hooked her by the throat with that substitution for a hand. She screamed which roused her mother, sisters, and a neighbour. Having disengaged herself from the miscreant’s iron hook, she fled towards the house, on which this ruthless barbarian placed his foot on an elevated stone in the yard, rested his pistol on his knee, took deliberate aim at the poor woman, and fired. She received the ball to the region of the kidney and fell to the ground. Surgical aid was soon procured, but in vain. The ball could not be extracted, and she lingered in excruciating agony until Sunday morning last, when she died in the arms of her heart broken mother, and in the presence of her afflicted father, husband, four younger sisters, uncles, aunts, other relatives, and of her own babe which is only 14 months old. The hapless victim of the fiend was in a state of pregnancy. John Snow, Esq. on hearing of the affair, attended to take her information, but she was in too great tertiary to give the necessary details. On Monday last, that Gentleman and Samuel Warring, Esq., held an inquest on the body, when a verdict of wilful murder was returned against Marks. The ruffian was publicly and most unaccountable at large in Waterford until the woman died, and he was seen last Monday in Clonmel. Happily for ourselves, perhaps we have no space left for commentary. Never in our recollection did so many police murders and outrages occur in the same space of time as during the last three months, but happily the population of the county have been guilty of neither, and notwithstanding the provocation we have recorded above, the inhabitants of Rochestown, always distinguished for their good conduct, offered no insult to the wretches who had brought mourning late their peaceful village.
It is assumed that Thomas Hanrahan and his father-in-law Thomas Power had left the house earlier to travel to a bog to cut peat. From the newspaper account it appears that only Catherine, her mother, and four younger sisters were at home when Catherine was shot by a one-armed pensioner employed as a bailiff.
A little over a month after Catherine Hanrahan died, her killer Thomas Marks was tried on Saturday the 12th of August 1822 in the Kilkenny Assizes for her murder. Unfortunately, there is some confusion among the newspaper accounts as to the outcome of the murder trial. It was reported in one newspaper that he was found guilty of murder (Saunder’s News-Letter, Tues. 20 Aug. 1822, p. 3). Several newspapers reported that Thomas Marks was found guilty of the manslaughter of Catharine Hanrahan and sentenced to six months imprisonment (e.g. Freeman’s Journal, Thurs. 15 Aug. 1822, p. 4; Dublin Weekly Register, Sat. 17 Aug. 1822, p. 3). The Leinster Journal (Sat. 17 Aug. 1822, p. 2) provided further detail regarding the punishment. A verdict of manslaughter was returned and the sentence was “to be burned in the hand and confined six months.”
Unfortunately, no newspaper appears to have covered the murder trial itself, so we do not know why Thomas Marks was convicted of manslaughter rather than murder. In the 19th century “malice aforethought” or pre-meditation had to be proven, or was it the case that the jury was swayed by the killer’s disability, age, or occupation? The burning of the killer’s hand raises an interesting point. During the Middle Ages clergy were immune to the civil law and could claim “Benefit of Clergy.” Later “Benefit of Clergy” became a procedural device where laymen could mitigate the harshness of the common law which provided that murders were hanged. To make certain that a layman was not able to claim the benefit more than once his thumb would be burned to mark him. Benefit of Clergy was greatly curtailed when transportation to a colony became a sentencing option and eventually it ended in the early 19th century. It is doubtful that the killer Thomas Marks sought the Benefit of Clergy. It seems more likely that the Judge believed that the jury had exercised mercy and wanted the killer marked to keep him from enjoying further mercy if he killed again.
In attempting to find more information on the killer we came across another man named Thomas Marks sentenced in 1821 to six months imprisonment with hard labour. This sentence of six months with hard labour puts the sentence of six months for killing a pregnant woman, running away from her killer, into perspective. The other Thomas Marks was convicted of stealing “four ducks, four hens and a cock, the property of Mr. Robert Macaulay of Crumlin” (Belfast Commercial Chronicle, Sat. 22 Sept. 1821, p. 4).
Killing No Murder
Perhaps the best clue as to explanation as to why Thomas Marks was convicted of manslaughter may be found on other pages of the Leinster Journal. In addition to the statements made in the article provided above entitled “County Police,”– that in his recollection there were never as many police killings and police outrages as in the previous three months of May, June and July 1822–the editor of the Leinster Journal wrote several other articles concerning the police killings in County Kilkenny. One entitled “Killing No Murder” (Wed. 7 Aug. 1922, p. 2) states,
A correspondent promises to send queries and observation for the consideration of the Grand Jury or Judges of the Assizes, relative to the apparent indifference of the functionaries of Government in the case of an aimable girl, Mary Delaney, who was killed on the spot by the rash and unwarrantable firing of the police on the people assembled at Bawn fair. He also bespeaks our indulgence for a few remarks on the employment of Ralph Deacon as a Peeler at this place where he so recently killed James Aylward, by shooting him through the body, having previously declared, according to the testimony of three witnesses, that he would do something of the kind. He [correspondent] thinks if the services of this man cannot be dispensed with in Ireland, he might be employed in more advantage at a distance from the justly irritated friends and relatives of the deceased.
UPDATE: See our post of 15 Dec. 2024 for additional information concerning the trial.
Lastly, although Griffith’s Tithe Applotment books (1829) records the names of tenants of townlands was performed in 1829 neither Thomas Power nor Thomas Hanrahan are found listed in Rochestown or adjacent townlands.
If anyone has any further information or corrections, please send to glenmore.history@gmail.com.
Special thanks to Bernie Ryan of the Local Studies unit of the Kilkenny Library for her aid and patience as I pursued this very cold case through old newspapers not yet digitalised.
The featured photo of the two pistols is a cigarette card and is courtesy of the New York City Library. George Arents Collection, The New York Public Library. “Pistols.” New York Public Library Digital Collections. Accessed November 6, 2022. https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/5e66b3e8-c668-d471-e040-e00a180654d7
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh
John L. Conn (1812-1893) of Mount Ida, Rochestown, Glenmore [Updated]
Bigamist John Lamley Conn (1812-1893)
Martin Forristal, of Ballinlammy, Glenmore wrote an excellent article entitled “Mount Ida” which may be found on our guest authors’ page by clicking here. In tracing the history of Mount Ida, Martin revealed that John L. Conn (1812-1893) of Mount Ida was a bigamist keeping his lawful wife in Glenmore and his mistress and children in Dublin.
While searching for other information we came across two articles involving John L. Conn. The first is from May 1859 and involves the attempted burglary of Mount Ida. The second article is from May 1883 and involves a criminal case brought against a Glenmore man named Patrick Walsh for intimidation. Both newspaper accounts provide an interesting glimpse into the state of criminal justice in Glenmore in the mid to late 19th century.
Attempted Burglary of Mount Ida, Glenmore
On Wednesday the 4th of May 1859 men attempted to burgle Mount Ida. The following account was found in the Waterford Mail (Tues. 10 May 1859).
Burglarious Attempt—We regret to hear that on Tuesday night, or rather Wednesday morning last, between the hours of 12 and one o’clock, a party of burglars attacked Mount Ida House, the residence of John L. Conn, Esq., situate at Rochestown, barony of Ida and county of Kilkenny. They forced the shutters of a window in the east wing of the building, and were in the act of breaking open a door, with an iron bar and a wooden bar acting as levers under it, when the noise was heard of one of the maid servants who slept in the apartment over it, and who ran up and called her master. Mr. Conn, with more courage than prudence, sallied out armed with a gun, but the scoundrels heard the opening of the lock and ran off, leaving their implements behind, and the night being very dark, Mr. Conn did not get a shot at them, they were, however, disappointed of their booty.
We are astonished to hear that there is no magistrate in the district, which contains at least 30 square miles, and that the nearest police station is several miles off, and we have no hesitation in saying that the government authorities incur a deep responsibility if this exceptional state of things be not at once rectified. We hear the constable of the nearest police station made an examination of the place the following evening.
This article indicates that in 1859 there was no police barracks in Glenmore Village.
Glenmore Intimitation Case
Nearly 25 years later, a former tenant of John L. Conn was charged and convicted of intimidation concerning the letting of his former 40 acre farm. The account of the trial appeared in the Waterford Standard (Sat. 19 May 1883, p. 3). Patrick Walsh in May 1883 was in the employment of Mr. Cody and was charged with intimidation under the provisions of the Prevention of Crimes Act.
It was alleged that on 3 May 1883 at Rathinure without legal authority, the defendant used intimidation toward Michael Roche, when he advised him through his cousin to abstain from doing what he had a legal right to do—namely, to become tenant of a certain farm on the estate of John Lamley Conn, of Mount Ida. A special petty sessions court was held at Kilmacow on 17 May before Mr. Bodkin R.M. (Resident Magistrate) and H. Thynne, R.M. Mr. Hartford, the Kilkenny Crown Solicitor, prosecuted, and the defendant had no legal representation.
The defendant, Patrick Walsh, and his brother John Walsh, had been in possession of a farm which was the property of John Lamley Conn. Their uncle had the farm before they took possession. They fell into arrears on the rent, but went to John Conn and came to an agreement that in consideration for a sum of money, they agreed to give up the land and not attempt to redeem it. At the time of the trial the farm had been idle for three years.
On the 5th of February 1883, Michael Roche sent a proposal to John Conn that he would rent the farm for £1 per acre. On 3 May 1883 about ten o’clock in the evening the police were on patrol at Glenmore. The police observed the defendant with his brother John Walsh and in the company of James Costello.
The police overheard the defendant speak to John Roche, a cousin of Michael Roche. It was alleged that in a lane of Rathinure, Patrick Walsh said, “That is my land; I had the land before Conn had it. What do I care about Conn, even if he has two bobbies [police] mind him—I will pull the trigger, for I will swing for any person who takes that land.” [At this time murder was a hanging offence. The defendant’s alleged use of the phrase “I will swing” was a threat to kill anyone who took the land.]
Witness 1: John Lamley Conn
The first witness called was John Lamley Conn who was summoned to appear. It appears from the newspaper account that he would not have attended except that he received a summons. Conn testified that he lived at Mount Ida and had some land in Rochestown. He owned the lands in Rochestown for about 40 years. He acquired them by purchase in the Court of Chancery.
Conn stated that he knew the defendant and his brother John Walsh, and the farm that they once occupied was about 40 acres. They fell in arrears and were given every facility to redeem the farm. They came to Conn and asked for money as good will. Conn gave them money in exchange for them voluntarily leaving the farm. Conn testified that he had not seen the defendant since he left the farm voluntarily.
Witness 2: Constable Williiam Broderick
The second witness was Constable William Broderick who testified that he and Sub-Constable Patrick Donohue were patrolling on 3 May 1883. While in Rathinure in a lane off the public road he heard Patrick Walsh say, “That is my land. I had that land before; what do I care if Conn has two bobbies minding him. What do I care about Conn?”
Constable Broderick then testified that he believed the defendant said, he would “pull his finger if any man would take the land.” He testified that the sub-constable said that he heard the defendant say that he would “pull the trigger.” He testified that the defendant said, “advise him, advise him—you know him; for I will swing for any man who takes that land.”
The constables jumped over the ditch into the lane and from John Roche obtained the names and addresses of all the men present. The defendant walked past the constables. When the constables caught up to the defendant the defendant was asked about the language he used concerning Conn. The defendant replied that “they would be all good friends yet.”
The defendant asked Constable Broderick concerning his character and the Constable responded that he only knew the defendant about 8 months, he knew nothing against the defendant and had heard nothing against him. Magistrate Thynne asked if the defendant was “worse of drink that night.” Constable Broderick replied that the defendant had drink taken, and he had been coming from the public house, but he could have been justified in summoning him for drunkenness.
Witness 3: Sub-Constable Donohoe
Sub-constable Donohoe was called and sworn and stated that he did not want to correct the information provided by Constable Broderick. At this point the Magistrates wanted Mr. Hartford to examine Mr. Roche. Mr. Hartford refused and Magistrate Bodkin said that they would examine the man themselves. Mr. Hartford replied, “If you do, you must do it on your own responsibility—I am here on behalf of the Crown.” The defendant then called John Roche, but did not ask him any questions. The Magistrates began to ask Roche questions who merely testified that the defendant told him to tell his cousin, Michael Roche, not to take the land.
At this point from the newspaper account the magistrates appear to have lost patience with the defendant. He had a list of witnesses, but then stated he had no questions for them. The defendant was asked, “Who is John Fitzgerald?” The defendant replied, “He is the man I worked with for the last two years; he is the only man I worked with since I left the farm.”
Mr. Cody then testified, “This man is now in my employment, and I never heard anything against him.” When asked if the defendant drank much, Cody replied that he did not. However, when he did drink “he does not be very steady.” The Magistrates then began to quiz Cody on whether he wanted the land in question. Cody replied that he did not; he had enough land of his own.
The Magistrates
Prior to 1898 defendants could not testify on their own behalf. In this case the Magistrates asked the defendant if he had every been convicted. Thus, while not considered competent to testify concerning what occurred the defendant was considered competent to incriminate himself. The defendant responded, “It was for being drunk; drink is my failing; I was convicted of being drunk 11 years ago.”
Magistrate Bodkin: “You are accused of a very serious offence, which has been very clearly proved against you. The constable says you were not so drunk as not to know what you were about. However, he has taken upon himself to give you a good character so long as he has known you. That has had an influence on our mind, and, therefore, we will let you off with two months’ imprisonment at hard labour.”
Some of our readers might recall that Magistrate Bodkin was present at the Ballyfacey Eviction Riots of August 1885 and was told by Fr. Neary that his wife would be going to bed a widow if he persisted. For our article concerning the Ballyfacey Evictions click here.
Unfortunately, without first names or townlands it is difficult to determine who was the employer, Mr. Cody. Even with first names it is difficult to identify the persons in the newspaper account of the intimidation trial with common names like Walsh and Roche and without townlands or ages. If anyone can provide further information concerning any of these local men please post below or email glenmore.history@gmail.com.
[Update: Ann FItzgerald was able to identify the two Walsh brothers. John Walsh (1835) and Patrick Walsh (1837) were born in Rathpatrick, Slieverue to Nicholas Walsh and Judith Magrath. We were able to locate baptismal records for other children including: Jeremiah Walsh (1833); James Walsh (1840); William Walsh (1843) and Anne Walsh (1847). Patrick Walsh (1837) never married. John Walsh (1835) married Margaret Fitzgerald, of Aylwardstown, on 16 Feb. 1870. Margaret was the daughter of Richard FItzgerald. Two of John & Margaret’s sons emigrated to New York and married two Hanrahan sisters from Glenmore Village.]
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh
From Danny’s Files: The 1837 Killing of Michael Phelan of Rochestown, Mullinavat
In Danny Dowling’s files an article was found which was copied from the Waterford Mail (Sat. 15 June 1839, p. 2). It provides that Laurence Foley, who brutally murdered his landlord, Pat. Phelan, of Rochestown, County Kilkenny in October 1837 evaded arrest for two years. Foley was arrested in County Tipperary and identified by the mother of the deceased. According to the Ballyshannon Herald (Fri. 21 June 1839, p. 3) Foley was arrested by Chief Constable Roney and Head Constable Mason. This is an interesting pre-Famine case because no motive was revealed for the killing although the newspapers at the time drew attention to the fact that the victim was a landlord of the defendant Foley. However, it appears that the victim had a modest holding.
Unfortunately, the Waterford Mail published the wrong name of the man killed, and from the information presented it was not clear which Rochestown in Kilkenny was the home of the victim. The victim was identified as Patt Phelan, Michael Phelan and sometimes Whelan in the newspapers. Knowing that trial accounts often are the more reliable of newspaper information we located reference to the trial of Laurence Foley in the Freeman’s Journal (Wed. 24 July 1839, p. 1). Baron Foster arrived from Clonmel for the Kilkenny Assizes the previous day and opened the Kilkenny Commission in the County Court at 10 a.m. Baron Foster addressed the Grand Jury and stated that he was happy to be able to congratulate them on the state of the court calendar. There were sixteen defendants for trial. He said that it was gratifying to find that agrarian outrages had ceased in County Kilkenny. However, he regretted that of the few cases to be heard there were four homicides. The totality of the report on the Laurence Foley case in this particular newspaper was that he was indicted for the manslaughter of Michael Whelan (sic) and found guilty.
Luckily, the Kilkenny Moderator (Sat. 27 July 1839, p. 20) provided details concerning the case that arose with the slaying of Michael Phelan (sic) near Mullinavat on the 3rd of October 1837. From this article and a review of Griffith’s Valuation we were able to determine that the victim lived in Rochestown, Mullinavat rather than Rochestown, Glenmore. The article provided the names of the jurors that heard the case: Richard Lalor, John Power, Edward Hunt, Edward S. Delaney, John Brenan, Anthony Nugent, James Butler, Emmanuel Fitzpatrick, Nicholas Cahill, Robert Walshe, Daniel Lalor, and Daniel Phelan.
The first witness to give evidence was John Phelan, a brother of the victim. John Phelan testified that the defendant, Laurence Foley, struck his brother Michael two years previously at Moonvoor, near Mullinavat. He had seen the defendant at the Mullinavat fair that day, and the defendant walked part of the way home with John and his brother, the victim. The brothers stopped at Patt Browne’s house on their way home to enquire about shoes that Browne was making for the victim. Soon after they went into Browne’s house the defendant Foley came to the door with a stone in his hand. Browne saw the defendant and as Browne went to push him out of the house the defendant dropped the stone. He then “caught up” a spade. With the help of the brothers, Browne pushed the defendant out of his house. The brothers then pushed the defendant outside the yard and “desired him to go home.” They turned to go back into Browne’s house and the defendant took up a stone and threw it at the victim, Michael Phelan, who was knocked down. John Phelan turned and saw defendant at the yard wall after throwing the stone. He heard one blow. The stone hit his brother in the back of the head. John immediately collared the defendant and tripped him up. When his brother did not rise he called out “murder.” He let go of the defendant and ran to his brother, but his brother could not stand. The victim lived till the following day. He did not see anyone other than the defendant near his brother when his brother was struck.
John Phelan testified that the defendant had taken “a sup” that night, and had been in the Police barracks that evening before he struck the victim. There had been no previous quarrel and he could not say why the defendant struck his brother. After striking the victim the defendant ran away, and the defendant left the place where he had been living. John Phelan admitted that he struck the defendant when he had him collared.
To questioning by the Judge, John Phelan stated that the defendant was not very drunk that night as he was well able to walk and talk when he came to the door with the stone in his hand. John Phelan could not say whether the defendant said anything. Prior to the attack the three men walked about a quarter of a mile together. The defendant called Browne a Whitefoot. John Phelan stated that Browne was a cousin of the Phelan brothers. He admitted they were all in dread of the defendant Foley because he was a bad character. The defendant was their tenant for some ground.
Patrick Browne then testified that he was working in his shop on the evening when the Phelan brothers came in to look for a pair of shoes. They were with him a few minutes when he heard shouting on the street. The defendant came and called the boys out to fight. Browne wanted to keep the defendant out, but the defendant managed to enter his door. Browne wanted the defendant to go home. While Browne was pushing the defendant out of the door a stone dropped from his hand. The defendant then seized a spade, but they shoved him out. The defendant then said to Browne, “You have my two landlords with you—to the devil with them—I’ll have my revenge.” He heard the cry of “murder” soon after, but when he heard it a second time he ran out and saw Michael Phelan nearly dead. He did not see the defendant then or later in the neighbourhood after that occurrence, nor since until the present assizes.
Doctor A. Cuilinan proved the nature of the wound which, he said, caused the death of the deceased. The Judge shortly “recapitulated the evidence” and the Jury, in a few moments returned a verdict of Guilty of Manslaughter. Foley was sentenced to transportation for 7 years.
The Kilmainham Prison Register provides that Laurence Foley, prisoner number 2405, was sentenced to 7 years for manslaughter by Baron Foster on 20 July 1839 at Kilkenny. The New South Wales, Australia, Convict Indents, 1788-1842 reveals that Laurence Foley, of Kilkenny, arrived in Australia on 8 October 1839 aboard the Nautilus although this appears to be too quick a sailing time even if the ship left immediately following the trial. Perhaps the 8 October 1839 date reflects the date the ship sailed from Ireland? The records reveal that Foley was 30 years of age, 5 feet 6 inches tall and had hazel eyes, brown hair and a fresh complexion.
Three Rochestown townlands were located in Kilkenny. In the Griffith’s Valuation: Tithe Applotment Books there were no Phelan/Whelan in Rochestown, civil parish of Kilcolumb, Glenmore. Likewise, there were no Phelan/Whelan in Roachestown, civil parish of Rathkieran of Mooncoin (1833). Rochestown in the civil parish of Ballylarkin in 1827 had a Thomas Whelan who held 14 acres. It appears that Ballylarkin was originally in the Catholic Parish of Kilmacow but was transferred to Mullinavat Parish in the early 1840’s about the time Glenmore became a parish distinct from Slieverue.
In searching for Michael and John Phelan, utilizing the possibility that Thomas was their father, we located a John Phelan baptised on 16 June 1811 in Templeorum the son of Thomas Phelan and Catherine Crowly with an address of Kilonerry. Michael Phelan was baptized on 26 December 1807. Unfortunately, we cannot be certain that this is the correct family, and we were unable to locate a baptismal record for Laurence Foley.
Please send any additional information or corrections to glenmore.history@gmail.com.
The featured sketch above is from the New York Public Library, Digital Collection, The Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs: Picture CollectionShelf locator: PC IMM. “London : printed and published at the Office, 198 Strand, in the Parish of St. Clement Danes, in the county of Middlesex, by William Little, 198, Strand, aforesaid. Saturday, June 19, 1852.”Source note: Illustrated London news. (London : Illustrated London News and Sketch Ltd., 1842-).
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh
From Danny’s Files: Miscarriage of Justice? The Case of Patrick Aylward of Rochestown, Mullinavat (1860-1935)
In addition to Glenmore related information Danny Dowling also collected a vast amount of information concerning people and events in nearby parishes and cities. Today, we are going to highlight the unusual case of Patrick Aylward, of Rochestown, Mullinavat who was accused of murdering the 18 month- old child of a neighbour. This case generated lurid headlines, questionable trial tactics and undoubtedly was the subject of conversation for quite some time in Glenmore and other local parishes.
Patrick Aylward (bapt. 7 April 1860) was the son of James Aylward and his wife, Nancy Delahunty of Rochestown, Mullinavat. Patrick had six known siblings: [1] John Aylward (bapt. 30 June 1849) [his mother on the baptismal record is recorded as Nancy Carroll]; [2] William Aylward (14 Aug. 1853-20 Oct. 1922); [3] Mary Aylward (bapt. 24 July 1856); [4] Mary Aylward (bapt. 7 July 1858); [5] Bridget Aylward (bapt. 21 March 1862); [6] Edward Aylward (b. 17 Sept. 1863).
Per the 1911 Census only William and John Aylward were living on the farm at Rochestown, Mullinavat. William’s age was recorded at 58 and John’s was recorded as 62. Patrick had emigrated to the US where he lived in Connecticut until he returned to Ireland to help his two brothers. William died in 1922 shortly after Patrick’s return after 39 years in the US.
The Inquest
Most of the information concerning the inquest regarding the death of William Holden was gleaned from the Munster Express (Sat. 12 May 1923, p. 5) and the Kilkenny Moderator (Sat. 5 May 1923, p. 8).
On the 21st of April 1923 William Holden, aged 18 months, the youngest of 9 children, suffered horrific burns to his back and arms. At the time the child was burned he had been left in the care of his 8 year old brother Patrick Holden. At five in the evening the mother, Mary Holden née Franklin left her four younger children in the care of 8 year-old Patrick. She told the Coroner that she went to Lisronan, about a quarter of a mile from her house to allegedly obtain an outfit for one of her children’s Confirmation. Although the country was turbulent she left the children alone and instructed Patrick to lock the door behind her. She alleged that William was in a bed not far from the fire, but although he was 18 months-old he could not walk or creep around the small house. At the time she left the children her husband, John Holden was at work. John Holden (c. 1862-1924) worked for James Malone, a farmer in Rochestown.
Mary Holden née Franklin stated that there was no fire screen; it was an open grate fireplace. The family burned wood. When she left the house she said that the fire was almost out. When asked whether the child had gotten out of bed and fallen into the kitchen fire she said it was impossible because the child could not walk or creep. She said that the other children could not lift him onto the fire. She said her husband came and told her that Willie was burned. She went home and found him in bed with burns. Her husband went to summon Dr. Coughlan of Waterford. She stated that her son Patrick said that Patrick Aylward had placed Willie on the fire. She testified that she had not been on good terms with Patrick Aylward for a long time. They had a row over a spring on Aylward’s land and there was a dispute where he accused her children of removing a stick from a gap. She alleged that he threw a stone at her and stated “I have great suspicion because I think the man would do anything. He struck me last November for little or no cause.”
Patrick Holden did not answer the Coroner when he was asked if he understood what it was to take an oath. The Coroner took the child’s unsworn testimony. The child testified that he did not go to school and was not able to write his name. The child testified that Patrick Aylward came to the door, knocked, came in without saying anything and put Willie on the fire. The child testified that Willie did not scream and that Aylward was only in the house a few minutes. When he left he lifted Willie off the fire and doused his clothes with water and put him in the bed. When another man came to the door he did not let him in and when his father came in from work he told him what happened. The father, John Holden admitted that he had been in a mental institution for two years and that another child of the family had suffered severe burns and died.
Mr. Healy one of the inquest jurors questioned the evidence. The mother stated that the boy Patrick could not lift the child onto the fire, but Patrick Holden stated that he lifted the child off of the fire.
Patrick Aylward testified that he was a farmer and resided at Rochestown, Mullinavat. He testified that from four o’clock he was with his brother and a friend taking care of a sick cow. He stated that he did not visit Holden’s house. Patrick Aylward stated that the last time he was at the Holden’s house was about five months previously when her boys were chasing his sow. He went to tell the mother to keep her boys from chasing his sow, and he alleged that she hit him in the head with a scrubbing brush. He said that he hit her back. “I have nothing against her; she may have it against me.” Although the Holdens had access to other water he allowed them to use a spring on his land. Previously he had threatened to stop them using the well if her children did not stop using his spring well for their toilet.
On Sunday, the father John Holden went to Patrick Aylward and accused him of putting his child on the fire. “Really I thought the man was crazy that was the first I knew of the child being burned. I didn’t believe it because I thought the man was crazy. I didn’t believe it until I saw the doctor come there….as far as I know this is the second child that was burned… I can not believe that any man would be guilty of taking a child and putting it in the fire to burn.” Aylward went on to state that he could not bear to look at a child burning on the fire not to say to do it himself. A charge like that should not be brought against a man.
Dr. Coughlan did not travel to Mullinavat until Sunday morning. He knocked on the Holden door but there was no answer. He saw Patrick Aylward and asked him where the Holden’s lived. Patrick Aylward stated that the father had accused him of putting a child in the fire, but he thought the man was crazy. The doctor returned to the Holden home and Mary eventually answered the door. He sent the burned child to Kilkenny Hospital where he died later that day.
The Coroner supposed they were all inclined to sympathise with the parents, but he did not know whether they should sympathise with the mother having regard to the fact that she left this little child and two other little children in the charge of a boy 8 years and 7 months old.
The jury retired, and after a short absence returned with a verdict in accordance with the medical testimony—“that the deceased died from shock and toxaemia as a result of burns received” but that there was not sufficient evidence to show how the child came to get into the fire. “Mr. Healy—we consider that it is a matter for further investigation by the Civic Guard.”
The sequel to the inquest was that Patrick Aylward was arrested by the Civic Guard on a warrant for murder. He was brought before Mr. Molloy, District Justice, at a special court in Waterford Courthouse, and indicted on the capital charge. Formal evidence of arrest was given by Sergeant Jeremiah Kelly, of the Civic Guards stationed at Mullinavat, who deposed that he arrested the accused on a warrant at Rochestown and charged him with the murder of William Holden. After being cautioned Patrick Aylward said, “I did not do it.”
The Murder Trial
Most of the following information concerning the murder trial of Patrick Aylward was found in the New Ross Standard (Fri. 7 Dec.1923, p. 11).
The trial was held at the Commission in Green Street Courthouse on Monday the 3rd of December, before the Lord Chief Justice and a jury. The prosecution was conducted by Mr. Carrigan, K.C. and Mr. Dudley White, KC (instructed by the Chief State Solicitor). Mr. M. J. Leanon (instructed by Mr. P.R. Buggy) defended. The newspaper noted that there were no women on the jury.
Barrister Carrigan, said that the prisoner was charged with a crime, which, if proved against him, was as terrible a crime as anyone described as a human being could commit. He was charged with having taken a helpless infant from its bed, put it on a fire, and roasted it so that the child died within 24 hours. It might be thought inconceivable that such a thing could happen, but it would be proved that the child died of burns that could not have been inflicted by itself. Counsel went on to say that the prisoner could not be a normal man at all. The house in which he lived was not fit for human habitation. He kept cattle on the ground floor, and the place was a veritable cesspool and manure heap and he lived in a loft. The case would rest on the evidence of the children.
Dr. Matthew Patrick Coughlan, testified that he could not answer whether the child could walk, but noted the boy had rickets. He opined that the child could creep around the kitchen. When the State’s Barrister asked if the defendant was a degenerate the doctor replied, “yes. When I met him at first I made up my mind that he was mentally abnormal… A degenerate is a person whose reason does not always control his actions, and might be subject to ungovernable impulses.”
Although Patrick Holden had not been able to answer if he understood an oath at the inquest, and had never been to school, the newspaper stated that the child showed extreme intelligence. The child at the trial also altered the evidence he gave at the inquest and stated that Patrick Aylward came in and said, “What do you meant letting goats into the haggard.” The child added that Patrick Aylward then broke a mug before burning the infant. The State then called Patrick’s younger brother, Michael Holden, who also stated that he saw Pat Aylward burning Willie on the fire. Patrick Aylward was also said to have risen a stick toward Michael Holden and said to the boys not to tell their mother or he would kill them. These statements and acts were not in the deposition previously made. Mary Holden testified that the burned child was not able to creep and that Mrs. Malone, a neightbour, dressed the burns with cotton wool. Interestingly Mrs. Malone does not appear to have been called as a witness.
William Alldrick, a farm labourer, testified that the defendant had asked him which of the children was burned. Alldrick informed the defendant that he was being blamed for the burning. Alldrick testified that the defendant then stated, “Don’t you think I have a soul to save as well as anyone else, or what do you think I am?”
Dr. Bartholomew Hackett (Mountjoy Prison) testified that he kept the defendant under close observation. He believed him to be fully responsible for his actions.
In addition to Sergeant Kelly, testifying when arrested the defendant stated, “I did not do it,” James O’Keefe (farmer), and John Aylward, brother of the defendant, were examined in support of an alibi. Unfortunately, the newspaper provided no detail concerning what the two men testified to at the trial.
At twenty-five minutes past seven o’clock the jury retired to consider their verdict. After ten minutes the jury returned with a verdict of guilty, with a recommendation to mercy. The prisoner declared—“I am not guilty at all. I have not been in the house for five months. God forgive the woman that put that lie on me, and God forgive the jury.”
The Lord Chief Justice amazingly said the jury could come to no other conclusion on the evidence. A majority of the jury had made a recommendation to mercy. He would have that conveyed to the proper authority. Meanwhile he sentenced Patrick Aylward to be executed on Thursday, December 27th.
The Stay of Execution
On the day set for his execution, The Minister for Home Affairs announced that on the advice of the Executive Council, Patrick Aylward’s death sentence was commuted to penal servitude for life (Freeman’s Journal, Thur. 27 Dec. 1923, p.5). According to Colm Wallace, in Sentenced to Death: Saved from the Gallows (2016), several people including the Bishop of Ossory petitioned the government questioning the guilt of the elderly Patrick Aylward. The Bishop apparently mentioned the Holden family’s “bad moral character” as well as a previous incident where another Holden child burned to death in suspicious circumstances in 1910. Patrick Aylward was released from prison in 1932 and died 3 years later in Rochestown, Mullinavat.
The Holden Family
John Holden married Mary Franklin on 1 August 1905 at Owning, Parish of Piltown, Co. Kilkenny. His father was listed as Thomas Holden (farmer) and the bride’s father was listed as John Franklin (labourer). John Holden and Mary Holden née Franklin had nine children. We were able to locate the following children: [1] Margaret Holden (bapt. 20 April 1906) (married John Whelan 28 Oct. 1936, Mullinavat); [2] Catherine Holden (bapt 29 Apr. 1907); [3] Thomas Holden (b. 11 June 1908-8 Nov. 1910) Per the death register Thomas died, aged 2, from burns “accidentally received.” [4] John Holden (b. 20 Sept. 1909); [5] Patrick Holden was born 14 Sept. 1924 at Owning, Piltown. [6] Michael Holden was born at Owning on 29 Sept.1916; and [7] William Holden (c. 1921-1923).
John Holden, died in the Thomastown County Home, just three months after Patrick Aylward’s death sentence was commuted. John Holden became an inmate shortly after his son William died in April 1923 (Irish Independent, Thur. 13 March 1924, p. 8). According to the death registry John Holden died on 6 March 1924 of senile decay at the age of 62 or 65.
Please send any corrections or additional information to glenmore.history@gmail.com
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh
One Hundred Years Ago: February 1922
In February 1922 all the national and local newspapers were full of coverage of pro-Treaty and anti-Treaty stances being taken across the country by various politicians and groups. Today, we are going to focus on more local events or events that directly impacted on Glenmore residents just after the signing of the Treaty and before the Civil War commenced.
British Troops Withdrawn
The process of withdrawing British troops from the military barracks began in early February. On the 8th the Kilkenny military barracks were formally handed over to representatives of the Irish Provisional Government (Kilkenny People, Sat. 11 Feb. 1922, p. 5.) The Ferrybank barracks were evacuated by the R.I.C. nine months previously and on 10 February the Ferrybank Company of the Waterford City I.R.A. Battalion flew the Tri-colour from the building. Other local barracks taken over by the I.R.A recorded in the Munster Express included Dunmore, Portlaw and Tramore (Sat. 18 Feb. 1922, p. 5). In some areas, the local economy suffered with the withdrawal of the British troops. For example, in one week 400 men were thrown out of employment in the Curragh area (Munster Express, Sat. 25 Feb. 1922, p. 4).
The Glenmore Barracks could not be taken over because it was burned in April 1920 by the Glenmore Company of the I.R.A. as were several other local rural R.I.C. barracks during the War of Independence. The Glenmore Barracks was rebuilt in 1925. For more information concerning the burning of the barracks see our post of 11 April 1920. For more information concerning the re-building of the barracks see our post of 26 September 2021.
Crime
Although crime had been a feature during the War of Independence it continued and appeared to flourish as the Free State began planning for taking over the running of the country. The I.R.A. on the 30th of January 1922 proclaimed martial law in five parishes in the Dundrum area of South Tipperary “in consequence of a number of hold ups, robberies, and in one case murder, by armed desperadoes” (New Ross Standard, Fri. 3 Feb. 1922, p. 5). A similar martial law proclamation was issued in County Kilkenny on the 9th of February “…owing to grave disorders and serious injury to property, resulting in throwing a large number of men out of employment…regulations will be rigorously enforced…in the Parish of Glogh, Parish of Doonane and that portion of Castlecomer Parish lying to the north of the town of Castlecomer…signed George O’Dwyer, commandant, Kilkenny Brigade I.R.A.” (Kilkenny People, Sat. 11 Feb. 1922, p. 5).
The Co. Kilkenny proclamation appears to have been made following an attack on coal mines near Castlecomer. On 9 February 1922 a large body of men, estimated to be 80 or more, went to the Rock Bog and Vera Pits and caused £15,000 of damage to the mines and mining equipment. The Vera Pit immediately closed throwing 250 men out of employment. It was estimated that it would take five months to get the other mine back to its normal production (Kilkenny People, Sat. 11 Feb. 1922, p. 5).
However, in the policing vacuum it wasn’t just groups of men attacking various business, that caused unemployment. Sometimes it was direct action against businesses by the I.R.A., or members of the I.R.A., that caused businesses to threaten to close. The Munster Express published an article that the Going and Smith Mills of Cahir were to close their large mills after the 25th of February. Prior to the end of hostilities several motor cars, each worth £800, belonging to the owners of the mills were seized in lieu of levies by the I.R.A. Decrees of compensation were obtained by the owners against the British authorities. Subsequently another I.R.A. levy of £100 was made on the mills, but the owners, because of the previous seizures declined to pay. In response a load of materials sent out from the mills was seized in Cahir, but the representatives of the labourers of the Mill caused the materials to be returned to the Mill. On the 17th of February materials were again seized along with a motor lorry. The owners then gave notice of their intent to close the mills. Commandant Robinson sent a notice to the firm that there would be no more commandeering and the owners agreed to continue operating the mills (Munster Express, Sat. 25 Feb. 1922, p. 4).
Closer to Glenmore, lawlessness in New Ross became such an issue that the I.R.A. directed that the electric and gas lamps in New Ross were to remain on all night (New Ross Standard, Fri. 10 Feb. 1922, p. 7). In Waterford City, toward the end of February, a man named Conway, described as being of the “tramp class,” smashed a large plate glass window valued at £70 of the Phelan Brothers, drapery shop on George’s street. It was stated that there was no known reason for the damage. Conway was immediately apprehended by the staff and held until the I.R.A. arrived and placed him under arrest. He was brought before the local Sinn Fein magistrates and remanded in custody to the Ballybricken jail (Waterford News & Star, Fri. 24 Feb. 1922, p. 5).
During this period two “catch and release kidnappings” were reported. On the 31st of January two men, who were not disguised, entered the offices of Colfer and Sons, Solicitors, New Ross, and asked for Mr. Colfer. When he came out of his office, he was placed in a motor car and driven across the bridge and up through Co. Kilkenny. After crossing the bridge Mr. Colfer was blindfolded and he heard shots being fired. When the car stopped he was placed in an outhouse and kept there until about 1 o’clock the following morning He was given some tea, blindfolded, put back into the motor car and driven to the Mile Bush and released. He walked from the Mile Bush to Rosbercon and was at his office at ten that morning (New Ross Standard, Fri. 3 Feb. 1922, p. 4). The newspaper gave no indication why Solicitor Colfer was kidnapped.
In February the courts continued to operate alongside the newly formed I.R.A. courts. In February, three railways officials from Aylwardstown, Glenmore, on their way to the Rosbercon petty sessions court were kidnapped by three or four men and held until the petty session court was over. One of the men kidnapped was Michael Fleming, a signalman, who was the complainant against Glenmore native Thomas Morrissey for assault. It was alleged that on the 23rd of January Thomas Morrissey assaulted Michael Fleming at Aylwardstown. Another signalman and the stationmaster were summoned as witnesses and were also kidnapped. When the case was called before Col. R. Tyndall, it was noted that Denis Daly had left the summons with the wife of the defendant Thomas Morrissey. The defendant did not turn up either. The railway sent Solicitor James J. O’Connor to the proceedings who reported to the court that he was instructed by the railway company to appear on behalf of the prosecution. When queried why the complainant was not prosecuting Solicitor O’Connor stated that he was and asked for the case to be adjourned. Col. Tyndall adjourned the case for a fortnight (New Ross Standard, Fri. 24 Feb. 1922, p. 4).
The New Ross Standard published the following editorial calling on citizens to help put down crime and restore social order.
“A National Duty—In every community the criminal is ever on the alert watching his opportunity to perpetrate crime. Pending the setting up of a regular police force in this country during the transition stage there are offences committed against persons and property, mainly against the latter, and all of a more or less serious character. Robberies and minor thefts are terribly prevalent. Under our own Government, therefore, which is functioning under very great difficulties, it is the obvious duty of our people—irrespective of political views—to help to put down crime. That is the first essential of good Government, and no good citizen will hesitate to co-operate with the existing authority to restore social order. These are not the days of foreign rule when assistance in this direction would be regarded as the action of a loyalist. Our temporary police force are displaying much activity, and it is a national duty to assist them in protecting our people from opportunist criminals who are becoming so numerous” (New Ross Standard, Fri. 17 Feb. 1922, p. 4).
Football, Fishing and a Runaway Deer in Glenmore
In February 2022 Glenmore played Cloneen for the senior Co. Kilkenny football final and won by a large margin. It was described by the New Ross Standard (20 Feb. 1922, p. 7) as a “splendidly contested match” which we will feature in a forthcoming blog post. For information on the 1920-1921 Glenmore football seasons see our previous post of 9 August 2021.
Although it was reported that the salmon fishing season had started off well by mid-February it was reported that it “…had become rather poor primarily because the weather was against fishing” (New Ross Standard, Fri. 17 Feb. 1922, p. 5).
Lastly, events described in a small article in the New Ross Standard may have rivalled the football title as a conversation topic when Glenmore people met each other. It was reported that a “runaway deer” caused excitement as it “careened through parts of the South Kilkenny districts.” Unfortunately, the article does not indicate where the deer escaped, but it did note “that near Glenmore it jumped a gate eight feet high, dashed through the village and headed towards Coolnashaw.” A dog then began to chase it and “it jumped clean over a donkey and cart with a woman in it. The cart was drawn across the road whilst the woman was speaking to a neighbour. The dog soon lost sight of the antlered monarch” (New Ross Standard, Fri. 17 Feb. 1922, p. 5).
The advertisement for Barry and Butler dressmaking Carrigcloney, Glenmore appeared in the New Ross Standard (Fri. 17 Feb. 1922, p. 8). More Glenmore related advertisements may be found in our post dated 19 December 2020.
The drawing of the deer is courtesy of the New York City Public Library digital collection. (The Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs: Picture Collection, The New York Public Library. (1849). Common deer Retrieved from https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47e1-4213-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99.)
If anyone has any further information or corrections please send them to glenmore.history@gmail.com.
Dr. Kathleen Moore Walsh