Shivers Family Legends Website ©
A Family History of Religious Migration
From Max Chevers 12/10/2004 in email.
"The Diocese of Meath" relating to Dr. Augustine Chevers and lesser pieces on
Rev.Laurence Chevers and Rev. Christopher Chevers, which I will attach.
Also I have a document relating to the estate Edward Cheevers the outlawed
Viscount, who accompanied James 11 into exile, when the family fought to keep
part of the estates.
Thom Cheevers of Brantford, Ontario did a very interesting paper on The
Mystery of the Chevers Baronetcy and I will send this for inclusion
on the site as long as Thom's son is agreeable - it would be a pity
not to publicise his work, as he did a great amount of research before
the benefit of the internet.
THE DIOCESE OF MEATH ANCIENT AND MODERN By The Rev. A Cogan Published 1867 CHAPTER V111 1. Dr. Augustine Chevers 1. AUGUSTINE CHEVERS was born at Killyan, County Galway, about the year 1686. He was descended from the ancient family of Chevre* of Normandy, a branch of which accompanied William the Conqueror into England, and a descendant of which invaded Ireland with Strongbow. In course of time this family extended its ramifications through various parts of the country, but the elder or senior branch, settled at Ballyhaly, County Wexford. Sir Christopher Chevers of Ballyhaly married Anne Plunkett of Macetown, + an heiress, and thus the Macetown property passed into the family. At the confiscations of Cromwell Sir John Chevers was dispossessed of the estate, and was transplanted to Connaught. He married, as his second wife, Jane daughter of Edward Sutton, Esq., and had issue by her (who died in 1688) Edward, created Viscount Mount Leinster and Baron of Bannow, who married a sister of Sarsfield.s, Earl of Lucan; second, Andrew, whose male issue became extinct; third, John, who married Ellis, daughter to Edward Geoghegan, of Castletown, Westmeath (who died in 1739), whose mother was a daughter of Lord Trimlestown.s. *See Sir Bernard Burke.s Landed Gentry. + For the inscription on the stone at Macetown, commemorating Christopher Chevers and Anne Plunket, see Diocese of Meath, vol.1, p. 277. By the marriage of John Chevers with Miss Geoghegan there was issue- first, Michael of Killyan, Edward of Leckafin, Christopher, Mathias, who became a Lieutenant-Colonel in the Spanish Service, and a Knight of San Fernando; Augustine, the Bishop; and Margaret, who was married to Sir Richard Burke of Glinsk. Of the early life of the future Bishop of Meath we regret that we know but little. It is said that he was brought to France, when a boy, by his uncle, Lord Mount-Leinster,* and it is certain, that after some years, he joined the Augustinian Order, + and became conspicuous amongst his contemporaries for ecclesiastical virtues. No doubt his ancestral respectability, his many excellent qualities, and the devotion of his family to the fallen fortunes of the Stuarts, contributed largely to recommend him for promotion. Accordingly he was consecrated Bishop of Ardagh, ¬ and, after the death of Dr. MacEgan, was translated by Pope Benedict X1V, to the See of Meath.$ I have been told this by several old respectable families throughout the diocese, who stated that they frequently heard their grandfathers quote Dr. Chevers as their authority. + The late Very Rev. Austin Killeen, Prior of the Augustinian Convent of Galway, wrote to me, a few years ago, that Dr. Chevers had made a bequest to the Convent of Galway, and that the Community are bound to celebrate a certain number of anniversary Masses for the repose of his soul, to the present day. ? Dr. Chevers was appointed to Ardagh on the 17th of July, 1751, and was translated to Meath on 7th of August, 1756.$ Dr. MacEgan had, as we have seen, the administration of the diocese of Clonmacnoise,or the Seven Churches, after his translation to Meath. In his old days, when unable through infirmity to perform visitations in that district, he requested Dr. Chevers, then in Ardagh, to supply his deficiencies, and this induced Dr. Chevers to petition the Holy See for the union of Clonmacnoise and Ardagh. He assigned as his principal reasons, the vast extent of Meath as more than enough to tax the energies of one bishop, the poverty of Ardagh, its proximity to Clonmacnoise, and the fact that he had the labour of it. Dr. Chevers was translated to Meath, and then found to his mortification, that his reasons induced the Holy See to incorporate Clonmacnoise with Ardagh. He petitioned, it is said, for the administration of Clonmacnoise, on the ground of being able to attend to it, and received for answer a copy of his reasons why Clonmacnoise should be united with Ardagh. The above may not be circumstantially accurate, for I have seen no documentary evidence, but it is substantially so, as many of our old pastors heard the facts from the lips of the late Dr. Plunket. After his arrival in the diocese, the first ecclesiastical matter of importance which occurred, and in which he took part, was the assembly of seven bishops in the Castle of Trimlestown,* County Meath, for the purpose of drawing up a joint Pastoral+ to their flocks refuting the odious doctrines imputed to the Catholic Church by the interested bigots of the day, and explaining how their spiritual obligations were perfectly reconcileable with their temporal allegiance. The prelates who met on this occasion, were the Archbishop of Armagh and the Bishops of Meath, Clogher, Kildare, Derry, Kilmore and Raphoe. The Irish Church, almost exhausted with prolonged persecution, was at this time sadly circumstanced for the want of missionaries, and, only for the friars, whose fidelity in the hour of trial should never be forgotten, most of the parishes would have been without pastors. To apply a remedy, as far as he could, to this state of things, Dr. Chevers collected £600 throughout the diocese, and with this sum founded burses in the college of Douay. In July, 1765, he sent a learned priest, of Rathmoloyn, with letters to the Bishop of Arras, dated e loco refugii nostri, and gave him full authority to bring matters to a successful issue. Rules and regulations to meet all contingencies, were drawn up, agreed upon, and were duly signed by Dr. John Bonneguize, Lord Bishop of Arras; Rev. Luke McKiernan (an Ardagh priest), President of the College of Douay; and Rev. James O.Flynn, representative of Dr. Chevers.+ Previous to his return, Rev. James O.Flynn$ placed on a secure footing all the Meath Burses which, at various times, had been founded in the various colleges of France, and Flanders; and thus our young students received their literary and religious training, until the French Revolution, in its insane fury, confiscated and swept away every vestige of religious endowments. * There was a tradition some years ago in the neighbourhood, that on this occasion of the meeting of the Bishops on Trimlestown Castle, they were clad in frieze, like farmers, in order to conceal their ecclesiastical dignity. The bigots of that day pretended to apprehend a French invasion as the result of any gathering of the clergy or people. + A copy of this Pastoral is in my possession, and shall be published (D.V) in Appendix to vol.iii. + In his letter to the Bishop of Arras, Dr. Chevers concludes thus:- .Documenta igitur nostra dedimus delecto filio et vicario nostro Reverendo Domino Jacobo Flynn, Parocho de Rathmolyon et Rathcore, cui vires nostras commissimus, ut de his apud Celsitudinem Vestram agat, eaque tractet ac sinet, quae ad majorem Dei gloriam, ad animarum salutem, et ad Ecclesiae nostrae Midensis utilitatem in perpetuum tendant.. The Letters and Rules shall be incorporated in the Appendix to vol.iii. $ See Pastors of Rathmolyon and Father Flynn.s entry in the Registry. 2."For several years after Dr.Chevers' translation to Meath, he had no regular residence. We have seen in his letter to the Bishop of Arras, dated 1765,that he wrote "from his hiding place" and for several years, after stealing through the diocese , performing his visitations, he was accustomed to retire, during the winter months to his friends in Connaught. In 1766, or early in 1767, his niece, Margaret Chevers, daughter of Edward of Leckafin, got married to James O'Neill,son of Con O.Neill of Rathcarron, and as they lived at Crackenstown, near Ratoath, County Meath, Dr. Chevers usually resided with them. Thus on the 1st. of May, 1667, Michael Chevers of Killyan writes to his nephew William (brother to Mrs. O'Neill), who was captain in an Irish regiment in the service of Spain. "They (Mr. and Mrs. O'Neill) have fitted up a handsome room and chapel+ for the Doctor, which, he tells me in his last letter will be his chief place of residence; and the more so, as he was always uneasy for a convenient place in his diocese to live in, which he said was his chief obligation. I hope we will now and then see him, when his affairs permit." Dr. Chevers writes to his nephew, Captain Chevers, dated Glinsk, the residence of his sister, Lady Burke, July the13th. 1769: .Your sister, Mrs. O.Neill, has been with her aunt Burke since the beginning of June. She and her husband are now in Killyan, and next week both of them will begin their journey for Crackenstown, within eleven miles of Dublin. It is a handsome place, and I am convinced, as the young man is full of industry, he will give her a decent independence. *Family correspondence of Dr. Chevers, at present in the possession of John Lentaigne, Esq., who in the kindest manner placed all the papers at my disposal, of which we print a few letters. +This house is at present occupied by James Kelly Esq., and there is a room there still called the Bishop's Chapel. I see by your letter that General O.Reilly and my friend Captain Nugent are going to the West Indies- the latter, without doubt, if the Almighty preserves him his life, will return to Europe with a considerable fortune. He is a gentleman for whom I have a particular regard, and you.ll be sure to give him my most affectionate compliments....my dear child, my advice to you is to live abroad, and never see your native country. This advice I gave my dear brother Matthew. He kept close to it, and I hope you will do the same. The excessive troubles I met with in the County of Meath these twelve months past have ruined my constitution to such a degree, that I wish I was with Matt in Fuentarabia, or in any other part of Spain.. He writes to his brother, Matthew, who was a Knight of the order of St. Jago, and a colonel in the Spanish service, then stationed in the fortress of Fuentaravia. The letter was written in July, 1769, and dated Killogues: .The excessive troubles I met with in Meath these twelve months past have ruined my constitution; those fatigues made me retire to our friends in Connaught, where my indifferent state of health delayed me longer than I expected. All I can say is, that I could wish myself to be with you in Fuentarabia, and I do believe, were I able to undertake the journey in my old age, I would embark for Spain; but at present my bad state of health hinders me from quitting this unfortunate country. Enough on this disagreeable subject. . . . The Great and Almighty God prepare us all for the dreadful approaching hour. All here at Killyan and Glinsk are well. . . . I am ordered by the physicians not to apply myself to anything. My disorder is owing to a disturbed mind. I send you this short letter from the bottom of my heart, and receive it as if it were the longest letter I ever wrote. I am hindered from reading or writing, but not from assuring my dearest Matt that I am .Entirely your .Ever loving Brother till death, .AUGUSTINE CHEVERS.. He writes again from Killogues to his nephew, Captain Chevers, on the 17th of March, 1772: .It gives me more pleasure than you can imagine to find you are better, and that I shall soon have the pleasure of seeing you in this unfortunate country, where I hope you will settle your own affairs to your entire satisfaction, as I am not able to transact them in consequence of my illness. However, thank God, I am better than I expected, but cannot appear in a Court, in opposition to your tenants, who will not pay your rent until you appear in person. Wherefore, I do again desire you will begin your journey for Ireland as soon as your health will permit; but, by all means, I desire you not to expose your life, which is more precious than the value of your property in Loughrea. . . . . There is now a good deal due to yourself, and for the above reasons, I am sure you will not be paid, till you appear in this country, and more so as they know a person of my character cannot safely appear against them in a Court of Justice . . . . . I do, therefore, again desire you will come as soon as possible; and, immediately after your arrival, you will by all means come to see me here, or wherever I may be lodged.. He writes to a friend about this time, but there is no date in the letter. He seems to have entertained a poor opinion of the generality of the Irish Gentry of his day: .Unavoidable business brought me to the neighbourhood of Drogheda and Navan, where I was delayed longer than I expected. . . . . In my last I gave you to understand that the people of this unfortunate country who are rich have no good nature in them; they despise their nearest relations when poor, and will show a seeming friendship to the greatest stranger, especially if they find he has some thousands in Letorche.s Bank, or a large sum at six per cent, with girts and sirsingles in the hands of men who will punctually pay. Moreover, they look upon themselves to be extremely wise because they have money, and if a man had the wisdom of Solomon without cash, they think him to be a fool and incapable of giving advice. . . . . Your letter, together with the printed paper, I received eight days ago in the chapel of . . Ratoath, where I was obliged to confirm numbers of people. . . . . . . Irish gentlemen speak a vast deal of polite education, and principles of honour, and I think they are greater strangers to both than those of any other nation in Europe. In short I shan.t disturb my mind about them, will leave them to themselves, and pray that the great God may direct them. . . . . . . . . . I see in this country, very often, few are inclined to have their disputes in regards to property to a reference, &c. .I am your most affectionate kinsman and humble servant, .AUGUSTINE CHEVERS.. On the 13th of March, 1773, he thus writes from Ballikelchriest, to his nephew, Captain William Chevers: .Your long-wished-for letter, dated 13th of February, has reached this post. It gives me particular pleasure to see by the account you give of your health (though not perfectly recovered) that you are better, and I do hope that your native air will be of greater service than Montpellier, &c. Your sister Elly, you are aware, is happily married to Mr. John O.Reilly,* son to my old friend, Philip O.Reilly, for whom you know I have a particular regard. Elly and her husband are as happy in the matrimonial state as any in their situation can wish. He does all in this power to please and indulge her, and, at the same time, she leaves no stone unturned to make him happy. She is very careful, full of economy, and, at the same time, when an occasion offers, decently generous. Since I have come here, both John and she have taken all imaginable care of me, for which I am most thankful. . . . . My dear William, as long as you live in this deceitful world, we must have either sickness or troubles. They are all a small punishment for one sin alone. The Almighty grant us patience to bear them with Christian resignation, and grace to practice all the supernatural virtues in this miserable life that are necessary to conduct us to eternal happiness. . . . . In one of your former letters you assured me you would sail for Cork, which is without doubt the safest harbour, and where you can be supplied with everything necessary to make a proper appearance, as well and as cheap as you could in Dublin. *Dr. Chevers. niece Ellie, was married to John O.Reilly, of Annville, Ballikilchriest, and, in 1798, the Orange yeomanry, after the battle of Granard, plundered this house, and trampled on the vestments which they found in the house, and which had belonged to the bishop. By this means these barbarians wished to exhibit their hatred of Popery. Your brother O.Reilly and sister Elly covet nothing more than to have the pleasure of seeing you. You may easily believe I sincerely wish to see you before my death; I do perceive a thickness in my tongue and lips, as also a lowness in my voice. The most I can ride is seven or eight miles a day, and not even that without fatigue. With regard to the chaplain whom your worthy Colonel and Major Nugent (to whom you will present my most affectionate compliments), together with the corps, are desirous to have, had I known a secular or regular, master of the languages, or possessed of some of the other conditions required, I would with pleasure send him without delay. You will let the Colonel and Major Nugent know from me that I am most thankful for the confidence they are pleased to repose in me; but as I cannot name a person to my entire satisfaction, I cannot with honour accept of the commission. . . . . You will find many in Cork that will direct you the shortest way to Mullingar, and from thence you can be with me in less than three hours. Let me know when you will be there, and John will send horses for you. .Believe me to be, my dear William, always .Your affectionate Uncle, .AUGUSTINE CHEVERS.. Although the following letter has no reference to Dr. Chevers, yet, as it concerns the Irish regiments then in the service of Spain, it will have some interest for the reader. The letter was written by a brother officer, and directed from Valencia, dated September 28th, 1773, to Captain William Chevers, then on leave of absence in Ireland: .I would have written to you much sooner, in answer to yours from Lisbon, but waited to have the destiny of the regiment determined, this city having represented against our marching this season, to no purpose, as we this day got orders to part directly from Pampelona, which garrison our Colonel preferred to St. Sebastian, having had his choice of either. Ireland.s regiments are divided- one batallion in Totova and the other in Terragona; and Ultonias.,who were lately sent to the lines of Gibraltar, are now ordered to Cerita. Navarr.s come to this place, and Coxonas. go to Tanona. Brabanti.s have been sadly disappointed in not going to Madrid, and are sent to Alicant. O.Connor Phaly is on his road to Tanona, and the Major of the Spanish Guards named to succeed him. The Governor of Madrid acted as Commissariat-General of New Castile since Count Arandas. departure; and this post brings an account of the King.s naming Count O.Reilly intexino, as the former was taken desperately ill. Now for regimental news. Bourke and White have got the Adjutancies, and, in consequence of the Lieutenant.s representations , informations were taken, by the inspector.s orders, to find out the promoters; upon which Kelly, Rutledge, Foley, Bourke and Fitzgerald were sent to the Castles ( on the frontiers of Portugal, fifty leagues distant) as the most culpable. The Lieutenancy of Grenadiers, vacant by Tommy Bourke.s advancement, was given to Dr. Lintote, to the prejudice of honest Billy Kelly. . . . . There are still two vacant, which I believe will be given to (obliterated) and Concannon, so that you may soon expect to hear that Cadets O.Neill and Bray are made Ensigns; and Lord Treagh, who is expecting a government, will soon leave another vacancy. The Major (who is taking the waters of Annadillo) desired me to tell you to be with your colours without fail the 1st of April, as no officer can be absent at that time under pain of being suspended. Therefore finish your affairs, as your promotion partly depends on your punctuality. I can.t express my desire to have a letter from you. .Indulge me then, dear Bill, and command yours eternally, .DENIS KELLY. .P.S. - As we have no account of your arrival in Ireland, we are all vastly uneasy. Coleman and Concannon expect with impatience to hear from their friends, and propose writing to you one of these days. . . . . My love to my dear sisters, and compliments to all friends, particularly the families of Killyan, Tycooly, Cloonagh, and Ballysancke.. Captain Chevers was now about to leave the Spanish Service, and as it was contrary to English law to enlist in the service of any foreign power, he was obliged, on his return, to sue for pardon. On the 12th of June, 1774, Colonel William Vaughan, writes from Pampelona to Captain Chevers, then in Ireland: .I am heartily glad your native country agrees so well with you, and the favourable prospect you have of settling yourself there to your satisfaction; calling for your Dimmission plainly shows it. When I acquainted the officers of it, nothing could concern them more than to think of your quitting them. You did ill to admit to have been in the Spanish service, as they could never prove it against you. . . . However, you do well to solicit your pardon. I forwarded to the Minister your memorial and character (always so good). I am obliged to give him an account of the officer.s conduct every four months. His answer was, that he was sorry the King lost so good an officer, and that as it is your own request, you could not be refused, consequently would send it in a few posts. I can assure you there is not one in the regiment but is sorry for it, except Howard. I can.t believe he is, as he expects your post. . . . . According to your request, I wrote your situation to our Minister, earnestly praying that he would take it to consideration, and recommend you to the Court of England. In the letter I had from him about your Dimmission, he wrote me he would not alone write to the Ambassador, but also to the Prime Minister, in the King.s name, and make it a point you would get your pardon; so make yourself quite easy about it. I have no doubt his letter will be there before you receive this; but as great people are apt to forget, through hurry of business, I wrote to Count O.Reilly to put him in mind of it. I am certain he will, as he always professed a friendship for you. As we lose you, the least we can do is to endeavour to secure you. . . . . I sincerely wish you success in all your undertakings, and be persuaded that none of your numerous friends on this side will be more rejoiced to hear of it than, .Dear Chevers, .Your assured friend on all occasions, .WILLIAM VAUGHAN.. Lord Suffolk to Lord Gormanston: .Lord Suffolk presents compliments to Lord Gormanston, and has the satisfaction to inform him that the King has been pleased to grant his most gracious free pardon to Mr William Chevers, for the penalties incurred by having been in the Spanish army. Lord Gormanston will be pleased to give notice of this to Mr. Chevers. friends, that they may apply at the proper offices for his dispatch. .St. James.s, Thursday, 16th June, 1774.. Lord Gormanston to the Duchess of Wharton:* .Lord Gormanston.s best respects to the Duchess of Wharton, sends her the enclosed note he this instant received from Lord Suffolk, and wishes her Grace joy for Mr. Chevers. speedy success, and will wait on him to-morrow to congratulate him thereon. The enclosed her Grace will please keep for Lord Gormanston. .Burlington-street, Thursday night, 11 o.clock.. 3.Dr. Chevers became parish priest of Kilberry, after the death of the Rev. William Clarke, in 1758. He resided principally at his house at Randalstown, where he was accommodated by the family of Everard, during the closing years of his life. Feeling himself declining in health, and unable to discharge his episcopal duties, he petitioned for a coadjutor, in the person of Rev. Eugene Geoghegan, parish priest of Tubber, and had the gratification of witnessing the consummation of his wishes, in the consecration of his friend. The end at length came: on the 18th of August, 1778, Dr. Chevers died at Randalstown, in the ninety- second year of his age, and was buried, after due honour and celebration, on the south side of the old churchyard of Donaghpatrick. + In the Freeman.s Journal of August, 1778, the following entry was inserted of his death:- .Dr. Augustine Cheevers, Titular Bishop of Meath, died in his ninety-second year, 1778.. No tomb has been erected to his memory; no headstone or slab marks his resting place; but in the Registry of Deaths of the parish of Kilberry there is an entry of his death and place of repose: *She was related to Mr. James O.Neill, who was brother-in-law to Captain Chevers. + An old man pointed out the bishop.s grave to the writer, a few years ago, and stated that his father, who had been with Dr. Chevers. funeral, often showed him the green turf under which he rests. 1778. 18 Augusti-Piissime ex hoc soeculo migravit Illustrissimus et Reverendissimus Dominus Augustinus Chevers, Episcopus. 7 Octobris- ut supra-item-Fra. Michael Walsh. Quorum Reliquiae conditoe sunt in ecclesia de Donaghpatrick. Requiescant in pace. Amen.. Erratum: Letorches Bank: Most likely LaTouches Legal Terms: The conveyance of John Chevers to Nicholas Netterville was subject to an indefinite ondition of Redemption which means that JC or his successors could reclaim the land at any time on payment of the outstanding mortgage. Other legal terms translated: Cautionary claim lodged with land registrar requiring him to notify of any proposed dealings on the land in question Capias Writ of arrest Ejectment Action to take possession of a freehold Enure to take effect Decretal order of the court The Diocese of Meath By The Rev. A. Cogan Onknewtown and Dowth Pastors: Rev. Patrick Dunan succeeded. This patriarchal and saintly confessor officiated in the worst days of the last century and suffered accordingly. For celebrating Mass and refusing to take the oath of abjuration, he was arrested, thrown into prison, and kept in close and lingering confinement for several years. Despairing of shaking his fortitude, his enemies next shipped him off to the Continent, under the penalty of being hanged, drawn and quartered if he returned. Nothing daunted, the faithful priest returned and officiated as pastor in the union of Grangegeith. In his advanced years he lost the use of his sight, and had for administrator his distinguished nephew, Rev. Christopher Chevers. Tradition still vividly hands down how the young priest used to lead the venerable and infirm old pastor by the hand, on Sunday mornings, to the mud-wall thatched chapel, and after Mass conduct him back to his humble abode. Father Dunan died, full of years and merits, on the 20th of May, 1761, and was buried in the church-yard of Ardmulchan. Over his remains a tomb has been placed, with a primitive and expressive inscription. See vol. 1, p. 343. The Rev, Christopher Chevers succeeded, and was translated elsewhere. The Rev.Patrick McDermott succeeded, and was also in a short time ranslated. Rev. John Kelly succeeded, and was translated to Blacklyon. Rev. Patrick Smith succeeded, and was translated to Ardbraccan. Rev. Laurence Chevers succeeded. This pastor was born in the neighbourhood of Navan, and officiated for several years as curate under his cousin, Rev. Christopher Chevers. He died on the 3rd. of July, 1818, deeply regretted by his flock, and was buried in the church-yard of Grange. On his headstone is the following: Beneath this monument lie the remains of the Rev.Laurence Chevers Parish Priest of Grange-Geeth and Mount-Newtown 33 years. He departed this life July 3rd. 1818, in the 73rd year of his age.. Carolanstown, or Kilbeg. This union comprises the ancient porochial divisions of Staholmock,Robertstown, Emlagh and Kilbeg; all of which are situated in the Barony of Lower Kells. Robertstown....Pastors...Very Rev. Christopher Chevers afterwards succeeded . This eminent priest was born in the neighbourhood of Kilbeg, about the close of the 17th century; he was descended by his father from the illustrious house of Macetown, many members of which were dispersed after the confiscations of Cromwell; his mother was sister to the Rev. Patrick Dunan, the venerated pastor of Monknewtown and Dowth. After receiving ordination he was sent, as was then the custom, to complete his studies on the Continent, and, under the disguise of a merchant.s clerk, succeeded in baffling the watchful emissaries employed by Government for pursuing and arresting Irish ecclesiastics. He tells us in his poem, * which he wrote soon after his arrival, of his narrow escape from Vavasour, who strongly suspected the object of his mission, and of many perils with which his voyage was accompanied. How long he remained in France, or what year he returned, cannot now be ascertained, but at all events he officiated for a time as curate in the union of Grangegeith, and discharged parochial duty in Ardbraccan, Carnaross, Monknewtown, and finally in Kilbeg. He assisted his uncle, The Rev. Patrick Dunan, as administrator in Dowth; and tradition still preserves how, when the venerable old Priest was infirm and blind, the nephew would lead him by the hand on a Sunday morning to the little mud-wall thatched village chapel, and after celebration, lead him back to his humble home. Father Chevers was translated to Kilbeg about 1767, became Vicar-General of the diocese, and took a prominent part in all the ecclesiastical movements of the day. The name by which he was familiarly known amongst the people was .Thar Chevers mor. to distinguish him from the Rev. Laurence Chevers, his cousin, who for several years officiated as curate under him, and who subsequently became pastor of Gragegeith. Father Christopher was a very polished scholar, and his society was much courted by the Protestant gentry of his day. He is said to have been an eminent preacher, and a man of deep and varied information. He composed poems and songs on a variety of subjects, in the Irish, English, Latin and French languages. He died at an advanced age, on the 28th of December, 1785, and was buried in the churchyard of Staholmock, where neither tombstone nor headstone marks his resting place. Chapter IX. The Old Bridge - The Bridge-street - Gormond's Gate - The New-Row - Mullinahac. No record has hitherto been discovered to determine the period at which the first bridge was erected across the Liffey at Dublin. The native Irish chroniclers state that King Melaghlin or Malachy, in the year 1001, built a causeway at Ath Cliath or Dublin till it reached half the river (Tochar Atha Cliath do denamh La Maolsechlainn, go ruige leth na h-abhunn); and the ancient historical narrative of the wars of the Irish with the Northmen, in describing the last combat which took place on the battle-field of Clontarf A. D. 1014, says: "Then the men of Connacht and the foreigners of Ath Cliath (Dublin) commenced to slaughter each other, and but few escaped on either side. This was the last general fight on Cluain Tarbh, and of the two battalions of the foreigners of Ath Cliath who had come thither, there survived but nine men, who were pursued by the household troops of Tadhg O'Kelly (King of Hy Many), and slain at the head of the bridge of Ath Cliath that is the Bridge of Dubhghall. These details are narrated as follows in the original work: "Iomthusa Connacht: Do gabadar fein acas goill Atha Cliath ar chomhmargad a cheile, acus ba suaill nar bo comtuitim diobh uile leth as leth, acus is in imbualadh deidenach boi ar Chluain tarbh. Acas ni deachaidh don dara cath do cuatar goill Atha cliath ann ar aen rian acht nonbar amhain, acus ro leansat lucht tighe Taidhg i Ceallaigh iad, gur marbhsat a-ccinn droichit Atha cliath iad .i. droichet Dubhghaill." [I have transcribed this as accurately as I can from the old Irish characters. KF] A pedigree in the "Book of Leinster" mentions that Maelmordha Mac Murchadha was slain after the same battle by Gilla Barrini at the "Bridge of Dubhghall;" and the native annals record that in 1112 the great northern clan of Cineal Eoghain ravaged Fingal as far as the "Bridge of Dubhghall." Of the personage from whom the Bridge of Dublin acquired the title of Droicheat Dubhghaill, no account is now extant. The name Dubh- Gall signifies literally a black or dark-complexioned foreigner; the appellation of Gall or stranger having been indiscriminately used by old Irish writers to designate the inhabitants of distant countries. The Tuatha de Danann tribes who settled in Ireland at a very remote period have been always described as a dark-complexioned people, highly skilled in arts and mechanism; we find, however, that the name of Dubhghall existed among the northern Irish clans in the 10th century, and Dubhghall, son of Amhlaeibh, one of the " Tanists," or heirs apparent, of the Northmen, is recorded to have fallen at the battle of Clontarf, A. D. 1014. From being the medium of communication with the Scandinavian colonists on the northern side of the Liffey, the bridge was occasionally styled, in early Anglo-Irish documents, "Pons Ostmannorum," or the Bridge of the Ostmans, whence its erection was conjecturally ascribed to the Danes, styled Dubh-ghaill by Irish chroniclers. This supposition, however, was mainly supported by a misinterpretation of the phrase Droiciteat Dubhghaill, meaning literally the bridge of a certain person named Dubhghal, Dugald, or Doyle - whereas, had it been designed to convey the idea of the bridge of the Danes, the correct construction of the phrase would have been Droicheat na-nDubhghall. We have, moreover, no notice of any bridge having been built in Ireland by the Scandinavians, while various bridges are stated to have been erected by the native Irish at an early era. Fiachna, King of Uladh, or Ulster, in the eighth century, is recorded to have been styled "Black Fiachna, the Bridge-builder," from the edifices erected by him: "as lais," writes Mac Firbis, "do ronadh droicheatt na feirsi agus droicheatt Mona Daimh et alios, gona Fiachna dubh droithcheach a ainm sidhen." The name of Drogheda, Latinized into Vadi-pontum, or Pontana, was originally formed from the Gaelic Droicheat atha, the Bridge of the Ford. King Cormac's Sanasan or Glossary, compiled in the ninth century, tells us that the word Droichet, then and still used by the native Irish to designate a bridge, was derived either from the verb Doroichet, to pass, or from the word Drochshet, a strait or bad passage: "Droichet .i. doroichet cach taris ón ur co araile do'n uisce no na fede: drochshet din i set direch, ar is droch cach n-direc .i. ni talla nemdirghe do ar nab tusledach. No droch-shet ar a olcás." The old Brehon Laws required that the Ollamh Saor or chief builders should be proficient in the art of erecting bridges, the payment for which was minutely regulated, and the art displayed in the construction of various ancient stone edifices in Ireland confirms the accounts transmitted to us of the skill of the early Irish architects, one of the most eminent of whom was Goban, whose father Tuirbhi possessed the locality a few miles from Dublin, now styled Turvey, and formerly called Traigh Tuirthi, or the strand of Tuirbhi, "the affectionate keen father of Goban." Goban, who flourished in the seventh century, is still commemorated in the traditions of the peasantry as "Goban Saer," or Goban the artificer, thus confirming the ancient prediction that his fame as a builder both in wood and stone would exist in Erin to the end of time; "famossisimus," says the old writer, "in omni arte lignorum et lapidum erat in Hibernia nomine Gobbanus, cujus artis fama usque in finem saeculi erit in ea." One of the public city officers, cursed by Lorcan O'Tuathal, Archbishop in 1162, is recorded to have died from the effects of a fall upon the Bridge of Dublin; various grants of land in the vicinity of which are still extant. King John, in 1200, exempted the citizens from the impost of pontage, a tax levied for building and repairing bridges; and in a despatch dated 23rd August, 1214, the same monarch informed the Archbishop, Henri de Loundres, that he had given the citizens permission to erect a new bridge across the Liffey, and to take down the former one, should they so desire - "quod," says the record, "fieri faciant unu~ ponte~ uta aquao de Avenlith ubi poci vioint expedire ad utilitateo civitatis n're, et qo aliu ponte ult aquam illam pri' factu diriu faciat, si hoc expediens fuerit i dempnitati eor, et ideo vob' mandam' qo hoe ita fieri permittatis." [The Latin is littered with symbols I have never come across before. I have done my best to transcribe them. KF] The existence of the ancient bridge here referred to is further confirmed by the following statement: "In sinking for a foundation for the south abutment of Whitworth Bridge, in 1816, it was found that the foundation of the Old Bridge, which occupied the site, stood upon the ruins of another still more ancient. The stones of which it was formed rather resembled Portland stone than any of the sorts found in Ireland. These were regularly laid, connected by iron cramps, on a platform of oak timber, supported by small piles, shod with iron, which was completely oxidated, and being incrusted with sandy matter, the lower ends of the piles were as hard as stone, as if entirely petrified. It is supposed," adds our authority, "that the Old Bridge was first constructed as early as the reign of King John, but these ruins indicate that a bridge of a better and more artificial construction had, at a more remote period, preoccupied the situation." On the 3rd of July, 1215, King John formally granted his charter to the citizens of Dublin, authorising them to erect a bridge across the Liffey, in such a situation as they deemed most expedient: "Quod faciant unum pontem ultra aquam de Avenlith, ubi p[?]vioint si t [?] civitati nre pdce mag' expedire." The old Anglo-Irish tradition relative to Little John's visit to Ireland is narrated as follows by a local chronicler in the 16th century: "There standeth in Ostmantowne Greene an hillocke, named Little John his shot. The occasion proceeded of this. In the yeare one thousand one hundred foure score and nine, there ranged three robbers and outlaws in England, among which Robert Hood and Little John were cheefeteins, of all theeves doubtlesse the most courteous. Robert Hood being betraied at a nunrie in Scotland called Bricklies, the remnant of the crue was scattered, and everie man forced to shift for himselfe. Whereupon Little John was faine to flee the realme by sailing into Ireland, where he sojourned for a few daies at Dublin. The citizens being done to understand the wandering outcast to be an excellent archer, requested him hartilie to trie how far he could shoot at random: who yeelding to their behest, stood on the Bridge of Dublin, and shot to that mole hill, leaving behind him a monument, rather by his posteritie to be wondered, than possiblie by anie man living to be counter-scored. But as the repaire of so notorious a champion to anie countrie would soone be published, so his abode could not be long concealed: and therefore to eschew the danger of lawes, he fled into Scotland, where he died at a towne or village called Moravie." A deed of 1307 mentions shops with certain other buildings upon the Bridge; and Edward II., in 1310, licensed Geoffroi de Mortagne, citizen of Dublin, to erect a well fortified and embattled tower on the southern end of the bridge, and a second tower at the corner of the wall from the aforesaid bridge towards the west, permission being granted to De Mortagne to build his own houses between those erections. The citizens having complained that De Mortagne had encroached upon the city wall, Edward II., in 1313, directed John Wogan, then justiciary, with the Chief Justice of the King's Bench, to examine those buildings, and restore the wall to its former condition, by the removal of all obstructions. Letters Patent were granted on the 24th of October, 1348, to John De Graunstete to found and construct a chapel on the stone bridge of Dublin, in honour of the Virgin Mary, with an endowment of one hundred shillings annually for the support of two chaplains to celebrate divine service therein daily for Edward III., Queen Philippa, their ancestors and successors, also for the welfare of the founder, the Mayor, and commonalty of the city, and for the souls of all the faithful departed. Richard II., in 1385, in consideration of the damages and inconveniences which ensued to himself, the citizens, and other subjects of Ireland, by the fall of the great bridge of Dublin, and desiring to provide for its repair, granted to the Mayor, bailiffs, and citizens, his ferry beyond the river Liffey, with all the profits and customs for four years; empowering them to take for every passenger a farthing; for every cow, horse, &c., of twelve pence value and above, and every carcase of beef; a halfpenny; for every sheep, hog, or carcase of the same, a farthing; and in reasonable proportion for all other things at discretion, according to their quantity and value; the same, above the reasonable costs of the ferry, to be expended in rebuilding the Bridge, under the inspection of the Abbot of St Mary, Edmund Serle, Nicholas Sergeant, Robert Burnell, Nicholas, twelfth Baron of Howth, John Birmingham, and Thomas Maurewarde, to be faithfully expended by them annually during the said term. During the viceroyalty of Richard Duke of York, 1478-9, a corporation styled the Guild of English Merchants trading in Ireland or the Fraternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, was established in the building called the Chapel del Marie du Grace, on the "Brygge end," Dublin. A Parliament held at Dublin in 1481 enacted a Statute incorporating this body at the petition of its master and wardens, James Welles, Thomas Whelbred, and Richard Pylkynton, authorizing the admission of honest and skilful men and women into the Fraternity, and prohibiting all English merchants, except members or agents of the Guild, from trading in those parts of Ireland where the writ of the King of England was obeyed. The Fraternity was authorized to elect masters and wardens, to enact laws for their own government, to appoint beadles, use a common seal, to hold a court, and adjudicate upon all disputes and differences arising amongst the English merchants trading in Ireland, and to commit all transgressors to the city gaol or to the Castle, the constable of which was directed to receive prisoners upon the warrant of the master and wardens of the Guild. The Fraternity was also licensed to acquire property to the annual value of forty pounds for the support of their institution, and the maintenance of a priest to celebrate divine service daily for the welfare of the King, the Lord Deputy, and all members of the Society. The chantry of the Guild of Merchants, having fallen into disuse at the Reformation, was leased to Ralph Grimesditch, who in 1592 paid an annual rent of 13s. 4d. as "farmer of a chapel called Out Lady's Chapel, on the north side of the Bridge." Dr. Thomas Burke, Roman Catholic Bishop of Ossory, who erroneously ascribes the construction of the Bridge to the Dominican order, tells us that he remembered having seen in his youth an ancient vase on the Bridge, which, according to tradition, had been used for holding holy water to sprinkle the passengers. The Bridge-gate is described, in the reign of Elizabeth, as "a square tower, two stone hie, the loer storie is a vawte with two lowps, the upper storie is a timber lofte and no lowpe. The towre is square, eighteene foote one waye, and fourteene foote another waye, the wall seven foote thicke, and thirty foote hie from the pavement." A public clock was, in 1573, set up on the southern side of this gate, on the northern end of which were subsequently erected the royal arms with an inscription, dated 1593, in which year the edifice was repaired, having become decayed through age. After the execution of Sir Felim O'Neil, in 1652, his head was "set upon the gate that stood at the foot of the Bridge," his body having been cut into quarters, which were sent to different parts of the kingdom. The "Old Bridge," popularly so called, continued to be the only edifice of that nature connecting the northern and southern sides of the city of Dublin, until the erection of the "Bloody Bridge" in 1670. A Statute passed in 1697 enacted that lamps should be erected for "sufficiently enlightening the Old Bridge," the feat of leaping off which into the Liffey became, at the commencement of the 18th century, much in fashion among the apprentices and youths of Dublin. With reference to the performance of this exploit the biographer of Charles Macklin, the actor and dramatist, observes that: "While at school he was celebrated for feats of prowess and valour. He was more than a match at boxing and cudgel-playing for any boy of his age - and excelled in swimming, even there, where that art has always been carried to a degree of perfection so great as to surprise all foreigners who have occasion to visit Dublin. The practice of leaping off the bridges of Dublin, and off the masts of ships into the river, was not then so common as it has since become. It was at that time (1705) deemed an act of heroism, and Macklin was among the first, if not the very first, who undertook that seemingly hazardous feat of leaping from the Old Bridge into the Liffey." Among the notorieties of Dublin for half a century, from the year 1720, was a poor paralyzed cripple, popularly styled "Hackball," who stationed himself on the Old Bridge, whence he occasionally drove through the city in a small car drawn by a young mule or by two large dogs. Various attempts made to restrain him from begging having proved ineffectual, he became generally recognised as King of the Dublin Mendicants, and many jeux d'esprit in prose and verse were published relative to "His Lowness, Prince Hackball." The Old Bridge, built upon four arches, "remained a long time mouldering in decay; a blemish amidst so many fine pontal edifices;" and Dr. John Rutty, the Quaker naturalist, was so strongly impressed with the belief that the structure would fall while he was crossing it, that for thirty years he made a detour to avoid that danger. The Old Bridge was at length replaced by Whitworth Bridge, so styled from its foundation having been laid on the 16th of October, 1816, by Charles Earl of Whitworth, then Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. The passage from the southern end of the Bridge to Cook-street was anciently known as "Vicus Pontis," and still retains the name of Bridge-street. Portion of Bridge-street was destroyed in 1393 by a fire, which also consumed various rolls of particulars ("Rotuli particularum") in the custody of John le Sargeaunt, then resident in this locality. Mr. Plunket's house in the Bridge-street is mentioned as one of the places frequented by Roman Catholic priests in the reign of James I., and the order of Capuchins, established for the first time in Ireland in 1623, under the presidency of Father Edmund Ling, founded a convent about that period in this street, where they celebrated Mass and preached in "a pretty little chapel or chamber." A Dublin writer in 1634 comments as follows on the costumes of the Capuchins and Franciscans:- "The Capuchin hath a large frise coat to the foot, with a piece of course canvas square, one halfe yard upon the back, girded unto him with a rude massie rope, with a great knot before, and unto this coat sewed a steepled hood, or capuch, from whence they have the name of Capuchins, of wellneere two foot long, from the basis to the conus, and over this coat they have a cloake of the same frise, comming a little below the waste. When as the Cordelier professing the same order of S. Francis, and the same rule, hath a coat of much better frise, without that square canvas on the back, with a hood or a capuch not steepled at all, but round, and fitted unto his head, a girdle of a cord, from whence he bath his name of Cordelier, the same handsomely wrought with many artificiall knobs, orderly placed by equall distances, asleeve, O, heavenly wide, which, besides the arme, will well containe a couple of cheeses quartered, or a gamon of bacon a-piece, or as many puddings as would well neere serve a whole convent of friars for their breakfast, and over all this they have a cloak of the same frise descending almost unto the foot. Observe then how different these habits be, and yet these Franciscans againe which are of the reformation of S. Diego, they have a distinct habit both from the Capuchin and Cordelier." In 1630, the Capuchin Convent, with another Roman Catholic chapel in Bridge-street, was seized by the Government, and, with the Jesuits' College in Back-lane, conferred on the University of Dublin, from the records of which it appears, that "two Bachelors were appointed Masters in Bridge-street, and their place to be annually elective. And, some time after, there is an entry that a Bachelor was appointed Lecturer of all the Undergraduates in Bridge-street, to receive a quarterly tuition, and also the same quarterly rent for their chambers as were paid in Trinity College, viz., 3s. 4d. from a Fellow Commoner, and 1s. 8d. from a Pensioner. How long these houses remained in the possession of the College cannot be ascertained. They were certainly occupied by them in 1637. The enemies of Lord Strafford laid to his charge at his trial, that he had restored to the Papists two Mass-houses which had been assigned to the use of the University; but he defended himself by alleging that they had been restored in consequence of suits at the Council Board; and that he had endeavoured to maintain their seizure." The University located about 18 scholars in this convent, which was styled "St. Stephen's Hall," prayers being read there twice a day, and it continued to be known as "the College in Bridge-street," down to the year 1647. Roger O'More of Ballynagh, the originator of the Irish movement in 1641, is stated to have escaped apprehension on the 22nd of October in that year, by removing from his lodgings at the house of Moor, an inhabitant of Bridge-street. "Next morning he heard of the seizure of Maguire and Mac Mahon, that a diligent search was made for him, and a large reward offered for apprehending him. Some friends got a boat, put themselves in sailors' clothes, and he, in the same garb, got into it, was rowed to Island Bridge, from whence in time of the night, he got to his daughter, Sarsfield's, at Lucan, rested a few hours, and went to Ballynagh, where he had hopes of being able to conceal himself, as the country was then all wooded, and that he had some dependence on the people." The host of Roger O'More appears to have been Patrick Moor, merchant, father of Dr. Michael Moor, who was born in Bridge-street in 1640, and after having completed his studies abroad, was appointed Vicar-General of Dublin by Patrick Russell, Roman Catholic Archbishop of that See. Moor was the chaplain and confessor of the Duke of Tyrconnell, on whose recommendation James II. appointed him Provost of Trinity College, the library of which he preserved during the Williamite wars, after which he retired to Paris, and was there "highly caressed on the score of his learning and integrity." He was subsequently appointed Censor of books at Rome, and appointed Rector of, and Professor of Philosophy and Greek in, Cardinal Barberini's newly erected College of Montefiascone, which, in consequence of its progress under his government, was presented by Innocent XII. with an annual donation of 2,000 crowns. Moor returned to France after the death of James II., was twice appointed Rector of the University of Paris, Principal of the College of Navarre, and was nominated Royal Professor of Greek and Hebrew by Louis XIV., who was directed by him in restoring and new-modelling the University of Paris, until then " perplexed by the quiddities and entities of the Peripatetic School." Moor established a Chair for Experimental Philosophy; and principally on his account Louis XIV. founded the College of Cambrai. He was so distinguished for pulpit eloquence, even in the era of Burdaloue, Bossuet, and Massillon, that the city of Paris selected him in 1702 to deliver the annual eloge upon Louis XIV.: "le Sieur Morus," says a French contemporary, " Recteur de l'Universite de Paris, et cy-devant President du College de Dublin, prononca, avec beaucoup d'eloquence, le panegyrique du Roy, fonde par la Ville, qui s'y trouva en corps, avec un grand nombre de persones de qualite." Dr Moor joined with one Dr. John Farrelly in purchasing a house contiguous to the Irish College for the reception of such poor young men of Ireland who came there to study. He was blind for some years before his death, and obliged to keep a person to read to him, who made him pay dear for his trouble by embezzling and selling many hundred volumes of his choice library, the remainder of which he bequeathed to the Irish College, as he did his plate to the Leinster Provisor. He died, aged 85, in his apartments of the College of Navarre, on the 22nd of August, 1726, and was buried in the vault under the chapel of the Irish College, as he had requested in his lifetime." Moor's published works are principally Latin philosophical treatises, deprecatory of the system of Descartes. Among his pupils, who, we are told, became the most celebrated in Europe, he numbered Boileau, Fontenelle, Montesquieu, Fleury, Languet, Poree, and, with many others, the famous Rollin, his immediate successor. A place called "The Cucull or Coockolds Post," noticed in the 16th century as "hard by Gormond's Gate," was subsequently built upon, and in 1669 Alderman Peter Wybrant held "a corner house, called Cuckold's Post, at the end of Bridge-street, half standing in Pipe-street, and halt in Bridge-street." Among the residents in Bridge-street were Sir Paul Davis, Principal Secretary of State, 1661-1665; John Cheevers, whose son Edward was created Viscount of Mount Leinster and Baron of Bannow by James II.; Simon Luttrell of Luttrellstown, ancestor of the Carhampton family; Sir Erasmus Borrowes of Grange-Mellon, county of Kildare; and Sir John Read, racked in 1641 by the Lords Justices, who endeavoured to extort information from him concerning the relations of Charles I. with the Confederate Irish. Here also resided Patrick Darcy, seventh son of Seamus or James O'Dorchaidhe, surnamed Riabhach, or the Swarthy, head of the Galway sept of that name, although modern pedigrees have been constructed to prove that this family was descended from the D'Arcys of France. Patrick Darcy, born in 1598, was one of the most eminent Irish Roman Catholic lawyers of his time, and took an active part in the Parliamentary proceedings in 1640-41, having been selected in June of the latter year to deliver an argument at a conference of the House of Commons with a Committee of the Lords, on certain questions propounded by the Judges. His oration on this occasion was printed at Waterford in 1643, and republished at Dublin in 1764. Darcy became a member of the Supreme Council of the Confederate Irish, by whom he and his nephew Geoffrey Browne were appointed to draw up the articles of peace with the Marquis of Ormond in 1646; and he was subsequently nominated one of their commissioners to raise an army of 10,000 men, and to tax the kingdom for their pay to aid Charles I. against the Parliament. In 1660 Darcy acted as second to Sir Jerome Alexander, second Justice of the Common Pleas in his quarrel relative to precedency with his brother Judge, Sir William Aston. Darcy died in 1668, and was buried in the old Abbey of Kilconnel, county of Galway, leaving an only son, James. His house in Bridge-street, after 1641, became occupied by Derrick Westenra, a Dutch merchant, who, with his brother Warner, was naturalized in 1661. Warner Westenra purchased considerable tracts of land in the King's County from Colonel Grace, and by marriage with Eizabeth Wybrants, became ancestor of the present Lord Rossmore. Copper tokens are still extant, issued in 1665 by Warner Westenra, whose name was for some time preserved in a lane off Bridge-street, called " Westenra's-alley." On the eastern side of Bridge-street was the residence of Sir George Gilbert, Coroner of the city, and Mayor in 1661, who in 1675 was appointed Keeper of his Majesty's great beam and common balance, with license of setting up the same in all ports, cities, and boroughs in Ireland for 61 years. Among the residents in Bridge-street at the Restoration were the Marquis of Antrim; the Duke of Marlborough's father, Sir Winston Churchill, one of the Commissioners of the Court of Claims; and Sir Hercules Langford, whose estates passed to the Rowleys by the marriage of his daughter Mary to Sir John Rowley in 1671. Of the merchants who resided here about the same period may be noticed Marks Wolfe, whose name was preserved in Wolfe's Alley; John Desminier, "at the Sugar Loaf," Lord Mayor in 1666; Walter Motley, Lord Mayor in 1689; Sir Michael Creagh; and Alderman Luke Hore. The latter was appointed by James II. in 1689 to receive the money subscribed for the relief of his sick and wounded soldiers:- "Whereas," says the King, in a Proclamation dated 5th August, 1689, " an address bath been made to us by several good and pious persons, for our license to make a collection, for the better assistance of such of the souldiers of our army, as now are, or shall be, sick and wounded in our service, - We could not but very well approve of so charitable and Christian-like a proposal, and have therefore thought fit hereby, not only to license, but also earnestly to recommend the same to all the nobility, gentry, and others throughout this kingdom, to contribute towards so good a work, in such proportion as they shall think fit. And for the further promoting and effecting thereof, We do hereby likewise recommend it to the several Archbishops and Bishops, as well Roman Catholicks as Protestants, to appoint in their respective diocesses and parishes, some fit persons to demand and receive the benevolence and charity of all good Christians for the use of the said sick and wounded souldiers; and that they do also take care) that the names of the persons who shall so contribute, together with what money stall be so collected upon that occasion, be returned and paid into the hands of Luke Hore of Dublin, merchant, who is hereby authorized to receive the same. And we shall take care that the same (over and above our allowance to such sick and wounded souldiers) be applied and issued from time to time, for the use and purpose aforesaid." Sir Michael Creagh sat as Member for Dublin in the Jacobite Parliament, was elected Lord Mayor in 1689, and appointed Paymaster-General by James II., for whom he levied an infantry corps styled Creagh's Regiment. After the Williamites had obtained possession of the metropolis, Creagh's house, together with his plate and goods, stated to have been of very great value, was seized and embezzled by Coningsby, one of the Lords Justices. Creagh subsequently solicited either a restitution of portion of his property, or a pension upon the establishment of Ireland; and in a memorial to Lord Carteret, dated 23rd of November, 1725, he speaks of the "vast losses and innocent sufferings" of himself and his three sons; adding that he had been " reduced to the utmost want and indigency, whilst serving His Majesty or the Crown, it being now two years and a half ago since the petitioner and family parted from London:' Creagh's name is appended to a broadside, styled "A Poem to his Excellency the Lord Carteret, Lieutenant-General and General Governor of his Majesty's Kingdom of Ireland, upon his safe arrival in said Kingdom." Addressing the citizens of Dublin in 1727, Creagh alludes to his having resided for seven years in Amsterdam, and speaks as follows of himself:- "I have once been elected and sworn chief magistrate of this city, and served the usual time thereunto, though I have paid dear for it, and that but little regard is now had for my sufferings upon that account, though it were but reasonable that some consideration were had for what is justly due to me upon said account, and what all those, who preceded, and succeeded me in said station, have had to this time, I mean the £500 out of the Exchequer, besides the rest, and the more than ordinary expenses, charge, and trouble, I have been at, to save and preserve this city, and its inhabitants, when crowded and overcharged with French and other foreign Popish troops, who aimed at nothing more than the plunder and ruin, chiefly of the Protestant inhabitants; and but myself and regiment the chief protectors, and opposers to said mischief (as the worthy prelate, his Grace my Lord Archbishop of Dublin, has solemnly certified, since my coming last for Dublin), that I am, in some measure, intitled to wish and desire its welfare, and consequently may without offence to any body, give my advice and opinion to promote the publick welfare, both spiritual and temporal of its inhabitants." In Bridge-street, in one building, were held the Marshalseas of the city and the Four Courts, until the removal of the farmer in 1704; the latter prison was subsequently transferred to Molesworth's Court, an Act of Parliament having been passed in 1698, directing the separation of these two gaols. A Dominican convent was established on the eastern side of Bridge-street about the year 1708, mainly through the exertions of the Rev. Stephen Mac Egan. Nine clergymen resided in this convent, in which a sermon was preached in the Irish language at 7 o'clock on every Sunday morning. The most eminent divine connected with this convent was Dr. Thomas Burke, Roman Catholic Bishop of Ossory from 1759 to 1786, and author of the history of the Irish Dominicans, published in 1762, under the title of "Hibernia Dominicana." Dr. Burke compiled the offices of the Irish saints appended to the Roman Catholic Missal and Breviary, and also issued, in 1772, a supplement to his "Hibernia Dominicana." The Dominicans removed from Bridge-street about 1770, from which period their establishment there, to which theyc was also an entrance from Cook-street, became the Roman Catholic chapel of St. Audöens parish, for which purpose it was used till the completion of the new edifice in High-street, within the last few years. In Bridge-street resided Dr. Walter Skelton, Roman Catholic Dean of Leighlin, and Rector of the parish of St. Peter, Dublin. Skelton, who was educated at the Irish College at Paris, and ordained in 1688 at Kilkenny, by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Ossory, acquired great reputation as a mathematician, and became the instructor of Charles O'Conor of Balenagar, who was sent to Dublin in 1727 to study mathematics, and make a further progress in the dead languages. The Rev. Charles O'Conor has left us the fdlowing notice of his grandfather's instructor: "A Mr. Walter Skelton, a Roman Catholic priest, to whose care Mr. O'Conor was consigned in Dublin, and whose many acts of friendship he often mentioned to me with grateful remembrance, was well aware of the many inconveniencies brought upon youth by confining them too long to Greek and Latin. He was satisfied that his pupil should perceive the beauties of Virgil and Horace, Homer and Demosthenes; and instead of the eternal pedantry which prevailed at this time, not only among the poor vulgar Irish, but even at College, he showed him the cause of the variety of the seasons, of the inequality of days and nights, the wonders of vision, the nature of fluids, and the order of the universe. 'Mr. Skelton,' says he, in a letter to his friend Dr. Carpenter, 'was the first who gave me a relish for these entertaining, edifying, and sublime studies; my mind was enlightened, and my heart, contracted hitherto by the narrowness of such selfish and bigoted times, began to dilate and to expand itself by contemplation. - What is the reason, said Skelton to me one day after dinner, that you see the light of the sun after sunset? I made some ridiculous answer, upon which he smiled, and taking the punch bowl, observe, said be, the sprig at the bottom of this bowl; withdraw from it just to such a distance as merely to lose sight of the sprig, and no more. When I had done so, he took the kettle, poured in some water, and without his moving the bowl, or my moving from my place, I again saw the sprig. There, said he, is one of the wonders of vision, and you will not tell why or how you see the light of the sun after sunset, until you can explain the cause of this other phenomenon, no less extraordinary. Here,' adds O'Conor, 'I called to him eagerly for an explanation, which he gave, on condition that I would apply to natural philosophy."' Skelton died in Bridge-street on the 31st of October, 1737, and was buried in the church of St. Fiech, at Sletty, in the Queen's County, which had been the ancient inheritance of his ancestors. In Bridge-street in 1739, died John Dowdal or Dorrell, Provincial of the order of Augustinian hermits, and author of a Life of St. Augustin, and of a Treatise on the Infallibility of the Roman Catholic Church. Having studied in the great Augustinian Convent at Paris, he was appointed, on his return to Ireland, preacher to James II., after whose dethronement he was intrusted by several English noblemen with the education of their children, whom he accompanied in their travels. Dowdal revisited Ireland in 1727, and in the succeeding year was appointed Provincial of his order, which office he held till the period of his death. At the sign of the "Crown" in Bridge-street a masonic lodge used to assemble in 1751, on every second Thursday. David Gibson (1755) and Bartholomew Gorman (1763-1771) publishers, also resided in this street, which in the middle of the last century was chiefly occupied by merchants of wealth and eminence, amongst whom was Thomas Braughall, afterwards distinguished as an active advocate of the removal of the disabilities of the Irish Roman Catholics. Braughall's house, No. 13, Bridge-street, came in 1785 into the possession of another merchant named Oliver Bond, a native of the north of Ireland, who, from the year 1782, had traded in Pill-lane as a wholesale woollen draper. Bond became a prominent member of the original Society of United Irishmen of Dublin, and on the 1st of March, 1793, he, together with the Hon. Simon Butler, were committed to Newgate by the House of Lords, and condemned to pay each a fine of #500, for having, as chairman and secretary of a meeting of the Society, authorized the publication of a document condemning the inquisitorial proceedings of Parliament, and setting forth the limits of the powers of the House of Peers. At a full meeting of the Society held on the same day, Beauchamp Bagenal Harvey, chairman, and Thomas Russell, secretary, a resolution was passed that "a deputation of five do wait, as early as possible, on the Hon. Simon Butler and Mr. Oliver Bond, to express the feelings of this Society as men, as citizens, and as United Irishmen, on the events of this day; to testify our warmest sense of gratitude for their dignified and magnanimous avowal of the resolutions of this Society before the House of Lords; and to pledge to them our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honour, that we will never forsake our officers, nor abandon the post of legal and constitutional principle which we and our officers have hitherto maintained, unshaken, unseduced, and unterrified." Bond and Butler were obliged to discharge the fines imposed upon them, and excluded from making any appeal by the payment having been enforced at the Treasury without passing through the ordinary medium of the Revenue side of the Exchequer. On their egress from gaol, on the 16th of August, 1793, after the expiration of the term of their imprisonment, the Society presented them with a congratulatory address on the sacrifices which they had made in support of the objects of their institution. Bond, who became "prosperous in a very extensive trade, and by that tie connected with every part of the kingdom," was described as "a man of strong mind and body, and of talents which, if perverted to the purpose of mischief, would become formidable indeed." In 1797 he was exceedingly active in administering the oath of the United Irishmen, and in arming and embodying men for the promotion of the objects of the Association, whose meetings were generally held at 10 a. m., at his house, where Thomas Reynolds, the informer, was sworn in early in the year 1797. On the 19th of February, 1798, a provincial meeting, held at Bond's, passed a resolution: "That we will pay no attention to any measure which the Parliament of this kingdom may adopt, to divert the public mind from the grand object we have in view, as nothing short of the entire and complete regeneration of our country can satisfy us." This meeting was adjourned to Monday, the 12th of March, which was appointed for the general assembly of the Delegates from the province of Leinster. Information relative to those movements having been conveyed to Government by Thomas Reynolds, a warrant was issued against the suspected members of the Society, and committed for execution to William Swan, justice of the peace, who having on the night of the 11th of January privately reconnoitred Bond's house, proceeded thither at 11 on the following morning, accompanied by 12 sergeants in coloured clothes. Sergeant-Major Galloguely was the first who entered the house, and finding Bond standing in the middle of his office, on the left side of the door, talking to two ladies and gentlemen, repeated to him the pass-words, "Where's Mac Cann? Is Ivers from Carlow come?" Before Bond had time to make any reply, Swan entered and stated he had a warrant against him for high treason, and that he and all his inmates were the King's prisoners. Bond was secured without any resistance; and Swan gives the following account of his subsequent proceedings: "I then bounced up stairs; the sergeant had got into the lower part, but I bounced immediately after, and proceeded to the room - a back room - that appeared to be an addition to the house, where I received positive information they were to meet. Upon entering the room, I saw a number of persons about the room in small groups, and one man sitting at the table, with pen, ink, and paper, and a prayer-book. I snapped at the paper directly; my anxiety to seize the paper was so great that the man sitting at the table took advantage of it, and went among the groups, so that I could not identify him. The paper was fresh written - the ink hardly dry. I then, after seizing the paper, directed the several persons to hold up their hands, to prevent their destroying their papers, as I had previously directed the serjeants to be particularly attentive to watch the hands of the people, and if they saw any papers to bring them immediately to me." Under the table was found a shamrock made of green ribbons, inscribed in gold letters, "Erin go bragh," underneath which was a harp without a crown; and Sergeant Mac Dougall of the Dumbarton Fencibles raked with his bayonet from under the borate a small account or memorandum-book, with some other papers. The prayer-book found on the table had been used by the Delegates in swearing that they had been duly elected to attend the Council; and among the documents seized, which consisted of various letters, provincial returns, and accounts, was a list of printed toasts and sentiments, including the following: "The green flag of Ireland-May her sons unite and support it." "Ireland a republic and the world free." "A speedy and radical reform." "May revolution never cease till liberty is established." "The United Irishmen - success to their efforts." "Mother Erin dressed in green ribbons by a French millner, if she can't be dressed without her." The Delegates arrested at Bond's were - Peter Ivers, Laurence Kelly, George Cummins, John Lynch, Laurence Griffin, Thomas Reynolds, John Mac Cann, executed on 28th July, Patrick Devine, Thomas Traynor, William Michael Byrne, hanged on 19th July, Christopher Martin, Peter Bannan, James Rose, and Moore's friend, young Edward Hudson, who was said to have fainted when Swan entered the room. Bond was brought to trial for high treason on the 23rd and 24th of July, 1798, and although defended by Curran and Ponsonby, the jury, after a deliberation of seven minutes, returned a verdict of guilty. When asked what he had to say why sentence should not be passed upon him, Bond made no reply, and Justice Day, addressing him, remarked: "It is a melancholy subject of reflection that a gentleman of your condition and figure in life, - who, under the existing laws and constitution, which you would have subverted, have flourished and accumulated great property - in the prime of life and vigour of health - endued by nature with rare accomplishments of mind and person, should have unfortunately, not only for yourself and afflicted family, but for that country to which you might have been an ornament, perverted those precious gifts of Providence, and have made so unhappy and calamitous a use of them." At the conclusion of his address, Judge Day pronounced the following sentence upon the prisoner: "You, Oliver Bond, are to be taken from the place in which you stand to the gaol from whence you came, and thence to the common place of execution, there to be hanged by the neck, but not until you are dead, for while you are yet living, your bowels are to be taken out and thrown in your face, and your head is to be cut off, and your head and limbs to be at the King's disposal." Bond subsequently received a conditional pardon, but died of an apoplectic attack in Newgate; his house is now known as No. 9, Lower Bridge-street. Various meetings of the United Irishmen were held in the "Brazen Head," an inn located, from the year 1668, in a recess at the rere of the western side of Bridge-street, where it still exists. At one of those assemblies, in February, 1797, Oliver Bond laid before the Society a plan for obtaining possession of the metropolis; and some days after the arrest of the Delegates, another meeting held here was attended by "one Michael Reynolds of Naas, who was said to be a distant relative of Mr. Thomas Reynolds, and who had been particularly active in the Society, and useful to it. This young man addressed the meeting at some length; he said that circumstances had lately transpired in the country, and steps, with regard to individuals, had been taken by Government which made it evident that a traitor was in their camp, who must belong to one of the country committees, and one who held a high rank in their Society: that traitor, he said, was Thomas Reynolds of Kilkea Castle, and if he were allowed to proceed in his career, they and their friends would soon be the victims of his treachery. In a tone and manner which left an indelible impression on the minds of his hearers, and produced an extraordinary effect, he asked if the Society were to be permitted to be destroyed, or if Reynolds were to be allowed to live; in short, he demanded of the meeting their sanction for his removal, and undertook that it should be promptly effected. The proposal was unanimously and very properly rejected by the meeting." Michael Reynolds, who later in the same year led the peasantry in their attack upon the barracks of Naas, was a "young man of great muscular strength and activity, of a short stature and dark complexion, and somewhat celebrated in the country for his horsemanship." Until late in the last century the only passage from the upper part of Bridge-street to the western side of the town was through "Gormond's-gate," at the south-western extremity of the street; the site of the present upper Bridge-street being occupied by the "Black Dog" Gaol, and New Hall Market, the latter containing upwards of 80 butchers' stalls, for which the city received an annual rent of #239 15s. Gormond's Gate, or "Porta Gormundi," in the city wall, appears to have been so styled from the personage whose name is preserved in "Grange Gorman," on the northern side of the city, and who, according to legendary chroniclers, was an African prince, who subdued Ireland, and subsequently with his Irish troops, aided by Hengist and Horsa, conquered the kingdom of England. These legends were resorted to by the lawyers employed to compile the Statute declaring Elizabeth's title to the kingdom of Ireland in 1569, which document sets forth that "afore the comming of Irishmen into Ireland they were dwelling in a province of Spain, called Biscan, whereof Bayon was a member, and chief citie; and that at the said Irishmen's comming into Ireland, one King Gurmonde, sonne to the noble King Belan, King of Great Britaine, which nowe is called England, was Lord of Bayon, as many of his successors were to the time of King Henry the Second, first conqueror of this realm, and therefore the Irishmen should be the King of England his people, and Ireland his land." Thady Dowling, Chancellor of Leighlin, mentions a tradition that Gurmund, or O'Gormagheyn, founded the cathedral of that town, in which he was said to have been interred, and tells us that in 1589, "Karolus Rowac, alias Makeyigan, clerk, Donagh M'Gilpatrick, and Gilleranoy, carpenters, saw the tumbe with their eyes, and Thady Dowling cancellar ecclesiae found his epitaph in simple verse as followeth: "Hic jacet humatus dux fundator Leniae, ici id est Leghleniae. En Gorindi Burchardus vir gratus ecclesiae.'" Dowling also adds that further vestiges of this personage were extant in the names of Gormond's Grove and Gormond's Ford, in the vicinity of Leighlin. My own decided opinion," says Gratianus Lucius, "is that those names are derived from some of the family of the O'Gormans, who were once famous for their heroic achievements. For even at the present day (1662), Gormanstown is wratten in Irish baile Ghormain, that is, the town of Gorman; and Gorman's Wood and Ford are called in Irish Coill and Ath Uí Ghormaín. It is highly probable, also, that Leighlin was built by an O'Gorman, and not by a foreigner called Gurmund. No person named Burchard is found in the genealogical tables of the O'Gorman family. But there is a Murchard in that line, the fifth in descent from the founder of the family; and Murchard, by a slight change of one letter, might become Burchard. He was called the son of Gorman, according to the usual custom of the Irish, who generally gave the name of some illustrious man to all his descendants, by prefixing the word Mac, that is son. But the Gorman who founded that family and name, was neither a Norwegian, as Cambrensis will have it, nor a Dane, as Ware says, but a thorough Irish-man, descended from Daire Barrach, son of Cathaeir Mor, King of Ireland, as Keating proves from the old annals. His descendants were called Mac Gormain, and, according -to O'Dubhagain, were Lords of Leinster and Kings of Ui Mairche, a tract of country lying near Sliabh Mairge." The importance subsequently acquired by this clan in Leinster is recorded to have been predicted in the testament of Cathacir mor, King of Erin, in the second century, in which document that monarch is represented to have addressed as follows his second son Daire, the progenitor of the Mac Gormans. My valor, my martial impetuosity, I bequeath to my fierce, vigorous Daire; The darling of the assembly Shall every steadfast son of the tribes of thy loins be; O, Daire, with boldness, Sit on the frontier of North Leinster; Thou shalt harass the lands of South Leinster. Receive not price for thy protection; Thy daughters shall be blest with fruitfulness If they wed; thy old father Cathaeir, the head of this province, Gives thee his benediction, That thou shouldst be a powerful champion Over the green Gailians (men of Leinster)." Cambrensis, who, in the twelfth century, resided for some time in Dublin, observed that no vestiges of Gurmundus were then extant, whence the legend of his having erected one of the city gates would appear to be of comparatively recent origin. Harris controverts the supposed foundation of this gate either by "Gormundus" or the Danes, and assigns its erection to a period after 1316. The latter conjecture is nevertheless erroneous, as among the manuscripts of Trinity College is preserved a deed executed about 1280, whereby Jean Le Gros granted to Roger d'Esseburn a certain piece of ground, with the buildings thereon, under Gormond's Gate, paying 11 shillings annually to the Commonalty of Dublin: witnesses, Elyas Burel and Richard Olof; and the building appears to have been the stone gate, near the Bridge of Dublin, alluded to in a document of the year 1200. Gormond's Gate is subsequently described as "a square tower, two stories high, whereof one room is upon a vault, with three loop-holes, the other room is a timber loft with three loop-holes, and a slate roof. The tower is square, 18 feet one way and 15 feet another way; the wall five feet thick, and 30 feet high, with a portcullis for the same gate." In the 16th century the name of Gormond's Gate became converted into Ormond's Gate, which, although a mere corruption, gave rise to a legend that "the Irish assaulting the citie were discomfited by the Earle of Ormond, then by good hap sojourning at Dublin; and because he issued out at that gate, to the end the valiant exploit and famous conquest of so worthie a potentate should be ingrailed in perpetual memorie, the gate bare the name of Ormond his gate." The name of Gormond's Gate, thus converted into "Ormond's-gate," was still further corrupted by the native Irish, who styled it Geata na n-Iarla, or the Earl's Gate, from its supposed connexion win' the Earls of Ormond ; and finally, by another change, the name of "Ormond Gate" was transformed into "Wormwood Gate:" "Haec," observes a Latin writer, "Ormondia dicitur, Hibernicis Orwown, id est Frons Momoniae, Anglis Ormond, et plurimis corruptissime Wormewood." A house near Gormond's Gate was fitted up in 1678 by the Dublin Quakers for a place of worship, where "a meeting was usually held in the time of the half-year's meeting, and Dublin Friends kept their meeting here upon the first days in the morning." "About the middle of the summer of 1683," says the Quaker chronicler, "the Government gave orders to the several sorts of Dissenters in Dublin, that they should forbear meeting publicly together in their worship-houses as formerly; the Archbishop of Dublin (Francis Marsh) also sent for Anthony Sharp, and told him it was the mind and desire of the Government that Friends should also forbear meeting in their public meeting-houses; but Friends returned answer, that they believed it was their indispensable duty to meet together to worship the great God of heaven and earth, from whom we receive all our mercies, and not to forbear assembling ourselves together for fear of punishment from men, for that we met purely to worship the Lord, and not upon any other account. So, according to the desire of the Government, other professors generally left their meeting-houses, but Friends met together to worship the Lord as formerly, as they were persuaded it was their duty to do. So upon a first day in the sixth month this year came the Marshal and several of the Mayor's officers to the meeting at Wormwood Gate, where John Burnyeat being speaking, the Marshal commanded him to go with him, which after some discourse he did. He commanded the meeting to disperse, but Friends kept quiet in their places. John was carried before the Mayor, with whom he had some discourse to this effect: he asked him, 'Why they did act contrary to the Government, having been commanded not to meet?' John answered, 'We do nothing in contempt of the Government.' But, said he, 'Why do you not obey them?' John replied, 'Because it is matter of conscience to us, and that which we believe to be our indispensable duty, to meet together to worship God.' To which he answered, 'You may be misled.' John told him, 'If we are misled, we are willing to be informed, if any can do it.' Then it was urged, 'other Dissenters had submitted, and why would not we?' John said, 'What they dowill be no plea for us before the Judgement-seat of the great God. So after some other discourse the Marshal committed John to the Marshalsea Prison, to which also were taken afterwards Alexander Seaton, Anthony Sharp, and others. Now," adds the Quaker historian, "several sober persons observing other professors to shrink in this time of persecution, whilst Friends kept their meetings as usual, came to our meetings and became faithful Friends." In 1686 the Quakers relinquished the house at Wormwood Gate, which was found to be too small and not sufficiently commodious. In the last century Elizabeth Salmon held from the Corporation, at an annual rent of five pounds, a part of the old town ditch near "Gorman's Gate;" and although no vestiges of the portal now exist, the name of" Wormwood Gate" is still applied to 11 houses erected on portion of its site. Extending towards Newgate from the southern side of Gormond's Gate stood a range of buildings styled the "New Row," erected about the middle of the 16th century. In this locality was the residence of Samuel Molyneux, third son and heir to Daniel Molyneux, Ulster King-at-Arms, and father of Thomas and William Molyneux. Samuel Molyneux, although originally educated for the Church, entered the army, and served through the wars of 1641, in which he distinguished himself as a proficient in engineering and gunnery; and it is recorded that, at the battle of Ross, he so disposed the small cannon, that one discharge of two pieces destroyed 80 men and horses. After the termination of the civil wars, Molyneux declined the appointment of Recorder of Dublin, as well as an offer of a portion of the Down Survey, preferring to occupy the office of Master-Gunner of Ireland. "He had a gun-yard enclosed in the field belonging to the Soldiers' Hospital, with a butt and culverin mounted, and about half a mile of ground worked out for the random shot of the mortar; he was eminently skilled and curious in the art, and kept the place of Mortar Gunner merely for the delight he had in making experiments in that way; he used to say, it was his friend in time of need, when he had no other support; that he loved it, and would stick to it for old friendship's sake. He wrote a book of gunnery according to the principles of Gallieo and Torricelli, 'de motu projectuum,' after he was 70 years of age;" and William Molyneux in a letter in 1684 says:- "My father is now employed in casting a mortar piece for the King, of 14 inches' diameter, which carries a ball of 200 lbs. We shall so fortify it, that I question not but to shoot two miles, as the French do at Genoa." Captain Samuel Molyneux, who died in 1693, was a "man of excellent judgment, and, at the same time, of a lively and vivacious disposition - tolerably well read in natural philosophy, and a nice and curious observer of nature - an excellent mathematician, and particularly remarkable for pleasantry in conversation, and aptness in story-telling-and so much was he admired by all who knew him that he bore the soubriquet of 'Honest Sam Molyneux.' So smoothly did this good man glide through the vale, that he never had a contest or a law-suit with any one. His filial piety was the theme of admiration, and the poor weekly partook of his bounty at his door. He has declared that he was never guilty of intemperance but once in his life, and that by accident; and this is more astonishing in the life of a soldier of his time. He was a constant reader of the Sacred Scriptures, and so attached to the Church of England, that even in Cromwell's time he always found some private meeting where the Liturgy formed part of the service - and for fifty years he had never laid down on a bed of sickness." His son William, after having passed through the University of Dublin, studied for three years in the Middle Temple, and through his interest with the Duke of Ormond, was appointed in 1684, joint Surveyor of the King's Buildings and Works in Ireland, having in the preceding year originated the Philosophical Society of Dublin, to which he was elected Secretary. Molyneux was sent by Government in 1685 to survey the most important fortresses in the Netherlands, and in 1690 constituted Commissioner for stating the accounts of the army, elected Member of Parliament for the University in 1692, and appointed Master in Chancery in 1695. William Molyneux distinguished himself by various writings on philosophy, natural history, and astronomy, the two principal of whch were the following:- Sciothericum Telescopicum, or a new contrivance of adapting a telescope to an horizontal dial for observing the moment of time by day or night; useful in all astronomical observations, and for regulating and adjusting curious pendulum watches, and other time-keepers, with proper tables requisite thereunto." 4to, Dublin, 1686: and - "Dioptrica Nova: a treatise of Dioptricks, in two parts; wherein the various effects and appearances of spherick glasses, both convex and concave, single and combined, in telescopes and microscopes, together with their usefulness in many concerns of human life, are explained." 4to, London, 1692. Writing to his brother Thomas, in 1694, William Molyneux says: "My library consists of but a few volumes (I think at present not much above one thousand), but they are such as are choice and curious on those subjects wherein I delighted, chiefly mathematical and philosophical; there are also many volumes, philological and miscellanys. I have likewise a good collection of common law-books, and amongst each kind of these there are some volumes scarcely to be met with. As to my instruments, I had formerly some large astronomical ones, but these I parted with, intending to procure better; but the distractions of the times, and now, an infirm constitution in my health coming on me, I have desisted from prosecuting celestial observations, as exposing me too much to nocturnal colds, and other inconveniencys. The instruments therefore which I yet retain (besides the mechanick tools left by my father, and a few mathematical trifles I myself purchased) are chiefly dioptrical, such as glasses for telescopes of all lengths, from one foot to thirty feet, microscopes of all kinds, prismes, magick lantern, micrometers, pendulum clocks, &c." After recapitulating the names of his literary friends, William Molyneux adds: "An ostentatious man would perhaps have preferred and mentioned, before all these learned acquaintances, a visit from a person of quality, or a title, but to me there seems no comparison, or else I might have told you of visits I have received from the Duke of Wirtenberg, General Ginckel, and Scravemoer, when in this kingdom, but this deserves but just naming, if so much itself." One of Molyneux's most intimate acquaintances was Robert Molesworth, author of the celebrated work on Denmark, to whom he alludes as follows in a letter to his friend John Locke in April, 1698: "I am here very happy in the friendship of an honour-able person, Mr. Molesworth, who is an hearty admirer, and acquaintance, of yours. We never meet but we remember you; he sometimes comes into my house, and tells me, it is not to pay a visit to me, but to pay his devotion to your image that is in my dining room." Molyneux's last and most celebrated work - the "Case of Ireland being bound by acts of Parliament in England stated" - was published in 1698, with the object of arresting the English Parliament in their proceedings for the destruction of the Irish woollen manufacture. Writing to Locke, at the period of the publication of the book, the author observes: "This you'll say is a nice subject, but I think I have treated it with that caution and submission that it cannot justly give any offence, insomuch that I scruple not to put my name to it; and, by advice of some good friends here, have presumed to dedicate it to his Majesty. - I cannot pretend this to be an accomplished performance; it was done in haste, and intended to overtake the proceedings at Westminster, but it comes too late for that: what effect it may possibly have in time to come, God and the wise Council of England only know; but were it again under my hands I could considerably amend and add to it. But, till I either see how the Parliament of Westminster is pleased to take it, or till I see them risen, I do not think it adviseable for me to go on t'other side the water. Though I am not apprehensive of any mischief from them, yet God only knows what resentments captions men may take on such occasions." The preface of this work is dated February 8, 1697-8, and its author's death, occasioned by the rupture of a blood-vessel, took place on the 11th of the following October. He was buried, as before noticed, in St. Audoen's Church, and his portrait, painted by Kneller, is to be seen in the Examination Hall of Trinity College, Dublin. His son Samuel, born in 1689, was appointed Secretary to George II. when Prince of Wales, constituted Lord of the Admiralty and member of the Privy Council, and married Elizabeth Diana, eldest daughter of Algernon Capel, Earl of Essex. Samuel Molyneux, who was highly skilled in optics and astronomy, died without issue in 1727-8. His estates, after his relict's death, devolved upon his uncle, Dr. Thomas Molyneux, who continued to reside in the family mansion in New Row till the year 1711. In the reign of Charles II. a meeting-house was erected in New Row by a congregation of Dissenters, formed by Dr. Samuel Winter, Ex-Provost of Trinity College, and the Rev. Samuel Mather, who, on the passing of the Act of Uniformity, resigned the offices which they held in the Established Church. "The accession of these excellent men to the system of conformity was much courted. Had they subscribed to its tests, professed its creeds, and complied with its ritual, they might have attained to the highest ecclesiastical dignities in the land." Dr. Winter, who possessed a considerable private estate, which descended to his heirs, "was a man of great zeal, rich in good works, and his faith and patience were very signal both in his life and death." The Rev. Samuel Mather, "a member of one of the most remarkable families of Nonconformists in England, and Puritans in the American colony at Boston," came to Ireland with Henry Cromwell, was appointed Senior Fellow of Trinity College, and ordained in 1656 co-pastor of St. Nicholas' parish, a portion of the congregation of which, adhering to his tenets, used to assemble at his house till their building in New Row was completed. After having suffered various persecutions for his Nonconformist principles, Mather died on the 29th of October, 1671, and was interred in his former church of St. Nicholas. He was succeeded by his brother, the Rev. Nathaniel Mather, who continued minister in New Row till 1689, having had as co-pastor, till 1681, the Rev. Timothy Taylor, appointed colleague to the Rev. Samuel Mather in 1668. The New Row congregation removed to Eustace-street in 1728, during the ministry of the Rev. Nathaniel Weld, who had been ordained co-pastor of the Society in February, 1682. The "Ram Inn," kept by Mr. Matthews, was located at the lower end of New Row, in 1730; and at No. 32 here resided Thomas M'Donnell, bookseller and publisher from 1781 to 1788. At the northern extremity of New Row stood "Mullinahac," a name which appears to have been formed from the Irish Muilenn-a'-chaca, signifying the foul or unclean mill. So early as the close of the 12th century a mill near the Bridge was bestowed upon the convent of the Holy Trinity, by a native Irishman named Gilla Muire, and the mills of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem appear also to have stood in this vicinity. The first person of any importance who settled here was John Allen, "sent over as a factor for the Dutch in the latter end of Queen Elizabeth's reign; who being very handsome in his person, and of great skill in architecture, was much esteemed, and consulted by the most eminent of the nobility and gentry in their buildings, particularly by the Earl of Strafford, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, in his large intended edifice near Naas; and laid out the plan of his own house at Mullinahac near Dublin, leaving it to be finished by his son, Sir Joshua, for whom he acquired a considerable fortune, and who made very large additions thereto by purchase, and an extensive trade, being a merchant of the first rank. In 1664 he was Sheriff of the City of Dublin, and in 1673 served the office of Lord Mayor; was knighted and appointed 8th June, 1679, one of the Commissioners for administering the oaths of supremacy and allegiance to such as should be entered into the artillery garden; but was involved in the general Act of Attainder, passed by King James' Parliament in 1689; and had his estate of #2,720 a year in Ireland, and #200 a year in England, sequestered." His son, John Allen, created, in 1717, Baron Allen of Stillorgan, and Viscount Allen, was succeeded by Joshua Allen, a weak and dissipated man, who was trepanned by Lionel Duke of Dorset into a marriage with Margaret, daughter of Samuel Du Pass, first clerk in the Secretary of State's Office, whom he subsequently refused to acknowledge as his wife. "But the lady, after living some time in close retirement, caused an advertisement to be inserted in the papers, stating the death of a brother in the East Indies, by which Miss Margaret Du Pass had succeeded to a large fortune. Accordingly, she put on mourning, and assumed an equipage conforming to her supposed change of fortune. Lord Allen's affairs being very much deranged, he became now as anxious to prove the marriage with the wealthy heiress as he had formerly been to disown the unportioned damsel; and succeeded, after such opposition as the lady judged necessary to give colour to the farce. Before the deceit was discovered, Lady Allen, by her good sense and talents, had obtained such ascendance over her husband, that they ever afterwards lived in great harmony." Lord Allen was satirized as follows under the name of "Traulus," by Swift, whom he had offended by some observations made in 1730, relative to the presentation of the freedom of the city of Dublin to the Dean:- "Let me now the vices trace, From the father's scoundrel race Who could give the looby such airs? Were they masons, were they butchers? Herald, lend the Muse an answer From his atavus and grandsire: This was dext'rous at his trowel, That was bred to kill a cow well Hence the greasy clumsy mien In his dress and figure seen; Hence the mean and sordid soul, Like his body, rank and foul; Hence that wild suspicious peep, Like a rogue that steals a sheep; Hence he learnt the butcher's guile, How to cut your throat and smile; Like a butcher, doom'd for life In his mouth to wear a knife: Hence he draws his daily food From his tenants' vital blood. In him tell me which prevail Female vices most or male? What produced him, can you tell? Human race, or imps of hell?" Another satire describes John Allen, Member for Carysfort, and Robert Allen, representative of Wicklow, as:- "--- Allens Jack and Bob, First in every wicked job, Son and brother to a queer, Brain-sick brute, they call a peer. We must give them better quarter, For their ancestor trod mortar, And at Howth, to boast his fame, On a chimney cut his name." Till about the year 1735 Mullinahac continued to be the town residence of the Allen family, whose country seat was at Stillorgan, where is still to be seen an obelisk erected by John, third Viscount Allen, with the object of clearing his park of stones, and giving employment to the poor during the hard frost of 1739. The Allen peerage became extinct in 1816, by the death of the sixth Viscount, Joshua William Allen, who had served through the Peninsular campaigns. In the middle of the last century an extensive nunnery stood on the northern side of Mullinahac, surrounded on the north and west by fields planted with large trees. At the same period a Roman Catholic chapel was located at the rere of the southern side of Mullinahac, and the "Corn Premium Office" was held here till 1780. "Allen's Court," Lord Allen's former residence in Mullinahac, came in 1770 into the occupation of Edward and John Byrne, sugar bakers and distillers. Edward Byrne had been apprenticed to an eminent Roman Catholic trader named Toole, who, becoming a convert to the Protestant religion, endeavoured to induce his children and apprentice to follow his example. Byrne, however, declined to renounce the Roman Catholic faith, and exhorted Toole's daughter not to conform to the Established Church. Miss Toole, as before noticed, sought refuge with Lawrence Saul, and her father obtained possession of her correspondence with Byrne, against whom he instituted legal proceedings; which, after a tedious protraction, terminated in favour of his apprentice, who, after trading for some years, acquired the reputation of being the wealthiest Roman Catholic merchant in Ireland, and was consequently induced to enter into co-operation with the advocates of the repeal of the Penal Laws. On the rejection of the petition of 1791, the claims of the Roman Catholics were regarded as hopeless, owing to the discountenance which they experienced from the nobility and gentry of their own religion; the Committee was consequently about to dissolve, when John Keogh, at a meeting of the "Select Committee," held in Allen's Court in 1791, proposed that a member of that body should be delegated to lay their case before the English Minister. "Every man, says Keogh, "refused to go upon so hopeless an errand, and the meeting was actually breaking up, and about to disperse for ever, when I, and I alone, offered to go to London, and at my own expense to solicit an audience from ministers. All I required was the authority of their permission; which I obtained; and I accordingly set out for the British capital, where I remained for three months, and whence I returned to this kingdom in January, 1792, accompanied, at my own desire, by the son of that illustrious Irishman, Edmund Burke." The duties paid annually by Byrne to the Revenue at this period were calculated to amount to #100,000, and in recognition of his wealth and mercantile importance, he was elected Chairman of the Roman Catholic Committee, to the various publications of which his name was officially appended. Byrne appears, however, not to have taken any prominent part in politics after the partial relaxation of the Penal Laws in 1793, and at the period of his death, in the early part of the present century, his property was estimated at #400,000.
Walking through Meath - - America
Andrew Chevers, ,John Chevers, Arthur Rogerson Esq; Respondents Terence Geoghegan and John Geoghegan, and Mary his Wife, Executrix of His Majesty.s Attorney-General in Ireland, Appellants Nicholas Netterville Esq: Deceased, John Chevers of Turpanmore, Esq: being possessed of the lands of Lisnegrogy, 1656 Creganagrogy, Moyrish, Carrowmore, Caherhehernagh, Cahernefryery, Buncan, Clonescarbery, and Blengasse, situate in the County of Galway, did by indenture, dated the 22nd Day of June, 1656, Demise the premises (except the lands of Blengasse) unto Edward, Lord Viscount Galmoy, and Walter Chevers, Esq; for the Term of Ninety Nine Years, in Trust for Joan Chevers his Wife, and the Heirs Male of her Body by him begotten, at the yearly rent of 10L.Sterl. The said Lord Galmoy dyed, and the said Term vested in the said Walter Chevers, as 1667 surviving Trustee, who at the Request and Nomination of the said Joan Chevers, did by his Deed, dated the 29th Day of January, 1667, assign the then Residue and Remainder of the said term unto John Sutton and John Wall,in Trust for such Person, or Persons as the said Joan Chevers should appoint. The said John Chevers borrowed the Sum of 400L. of Nicholas Netterville, and for May, 1682 securing the Re-payment thereof, with interest after the Rate of Ten Pounds per Cent Per nnum; he the said John Chevers, together with the said John Sutton and John Wall the Trustees, the Appellant Andrew Chevers, and his elder Brother Edward Chevers, did duly convey the said Lands of Lisnegrogy, Creganagrogy, Moyrish and Blengasse to the said Nicholas Netterville and his Heirs, subject to an indefinite Condition of Redemption, without any prefix.d Time; and soon after the said John Chevers died, leaving issue Edward Chevers, his eldest Son, (who since died without issue) the Appellant Andrew his second Son, and the Appellant John his third Son. The said John Sutton surviving the said John Wall, made his last Will and June 1697 Testament in writing and thereof constituted his wife Mary Sutton and Henry Loftus, Esq; Executors, who having proved said Will, did at the Request and Nomination of the said Joan Chevers, by their Deed indented, dated on or about the 16th Day of June 1697 grant and assign the then Residue and Remainder of the said Term of 99 Years unto Christopher Chevers of Ballynecasky in the County of Westmeath, Gent. and Andrew Crosby of Killyan in the County of Galway, Gent. By the death of the said John Chevers, and Edward Chevers his eldest son, the Equity of Redemption of the said mortgaged lands descended and came to the Appellant Andrew Chevers, who hath continued in the quiet and peaceable Possession of the said mortgaged Premises for near Nineteen Years, and duly paid the Interest-Money; and the Appellants Andrew and John have in like manner had constant and uninterrupted Possession of the said demised Premises since their Mother.s Death which happened about 19 years ago. The said Nicholas Netterville, fearing least the said Mortgagers or some of them might be forfeiting Persons, did exhibit a Cautionary Claim before the late Trustees appointed for Sale of the Forfeited Estates in Ireland, August 1700 and thereby claimed the Benefit of the said Mortgage, and the said Christopher Chevers and Andrew Crosby likewise claimed the Benefit of the said Term of 99 Years; and the said Trustees took upon them to sell the Reversion of the said demised Premises, and the Equity of Redemption of the said mortgaged Lands, as the forfeited Estate of Christopher Chevers of Killyan, commonly called Lord Mount-Leinster, on a Presumption, that the said Edward Chevers (Brother of the Appellants Andrew and John ) was lawfully Out-Lawed in the year 1696, by the Name of Christopher, or was intended to be Out-Lawed, tho. in Reality there was no such Person as Christopher Chevers called Lord Mount-Leinster. The Respondent, Terence Geoghegan, (who had been Agent and Solicitor for the said Christopher Chevers and Andrew Crosby in getting their said Claim allowed) exhibited his English Bill in the Court of Exchequer in Ireland, against the Appellants Andrew Chevers and John Chevers, the said Nicholas Netterville and Others, thereby setting forth that the said Trustees had sold the Equity of Redemption of the said mortgaged lands, and the Jan.1710 Reversion of the said demised Premises unto the Governor and Reversion Bill Filed of the said demised Premises unto the Governor and Company for making Hollow Sword-Blades in England, as the Forfeiture of ----Chevers of Killyan, commonly called Lord Mount-Leinster, and that he the said Geoghegan had purchased the same from the said Corporation; and further setting forth, that he had applied to the Appellant John Chevers for an Account of the Rents and Profits of the said demised Premises, and also to the said Nicholas Netterville for an Account touching the said Mortgage, and by his Bill relied on the Statute made in Great Britain in the Sixth Year of the Reign of Queen Anne in favour of the said Corporation, and other Purchasers of forfeited Estates, and to be relieved was the Scope of the Bill. 20th March 1710. Answer To which Bill the Appellants Andrew Chevers and John Chevers, and the other Defendants put in their Answers, and insisted on the Title herein before set forth, and severally said. They did not believe that the said Trustees, or any deriving under them, ever had any Title to, or Possession of the Premises, or any Part thereof; and insisted, that they having been all along in Possession, they could not now be affected by the said Statute made in the Sixth Year of the late Queen, there being an express Proviso, that it should not extend to prejudice the Right or Title, of any Person that was in actual Possession at the Time of making the said Act, which was the Appellant.s Case; and also insisted, that the said Edward Chevers, the eldest Son and Heir of the said John Chevers of Turpanmore was not a forfeiting Person, and was not then attainted or out-lawed, and referred themselves therein to the Record of such Out-lawry or Attainder, if any there was, and to the Judgement of the Court thereupon. Pending the said Suit, an Indictment of Foreign Treason was found by the 1710 Grand-Jury of the County of Dublin, against one Edward Chevers of Killyan in the County of Galway, Esq; commonly called Lord Mount-Leinster, on the information of the Respondent Geoghegan, who swore, he believed the said Edward was in France, in Arms against Her Late Majesty Queen Anne, and thereupon by his Procurement a Capias was awarded in Hilary Term, 1710, against the said Edward Chevers returnable Quind Paschae following; and tho. the said Edward Chevers died before the return of the said Writ of Capia yet an Exigent was awarded against him in Easter term 1712, and it is pretended that he was thereupon out-lawed in October following; however the Respondent Geoghegan did not think fit to insist upon, or make any use of the said latter pretended Out-lawry, but the said Cause being at issue, he in May 1717 examined some Witnesses to prove, that the Gentlemen of the Grand Inquest, who found the Bill of Indictment against Christopher Chevers, commonly called Lord Mount-Leinster, in 1696, Intended to indict the Person who was the eldest Son and Heir of the said John Chevers of Turpanmore, by his wife Joan tho. his Christian Name might have been mistaken in the Record. Several Hearings in 1713, 1714, 1715. The Cause came on to be heard the 20th Day of February, 1713, and the Respondent Geoghegan then produced an Out-lawry of High-Treason, promulged in the Year 1696 against Christopher Chevers late of Killyan in the County of Galway, commonly called Lord Mount-Leinster, and would have had the Court presume that it was against Edward Chevers the elder Brother of the Appellants Andrew and John, tho. there was no Pro-in the Cause to ground such a Presumption upon; and the Appellants by their Council insisted that the Respondent Geoghegan had not shown that the said Christopher Chevers, the out-lawed Person, ever had any Estate, Right, Title, or Interest whatsoever in or - the said Lands in question, and therefore prayed that his Bill should be dismissed, which the said Court on that and several other Hearings in the Years 1714 and 1715, absolute refuted. 19 Feb.1716 Further Hearings But the said Cause coming on to be further heard on the 19th of February, 1716 the said Court then ordered that the Plaintiff in the said Cause should enter on the Land in question by himself or his Attorney, and that the Appellant Andrew Chevers should then make a Lease on the said Lands, and that the Respondent Geoghegan should enter upon him, and then the Leasee should bring an Ejectment on that Entry; that the Cause should be tried at the Bar of the said Court of Exchequer on the third Friday in the next Term and if the Appellant Andrew Chevers did not try it , that it should be taken pro confesso that the Name of the eldest Son of the said John Chevers was Christopher; and if there were any Default in the said Respondent Geoghegan, it should be taken pro confesso, that the Name of such eldest Son was Edward. 19th July, 1717, Rehearing denyed. The Appellant, Andrew Chevers, being advised that the Directions given by the said last mentioned Order were improper, in regard he was thereby to admit, against Truth that he was out of Possession, and the Respondent Geoghegan was in Consequence thereof left at Liberty to set up the said irregular Out-lawry of 1712, against the Appellant Andrew, tho. it made no Title for the Respondent, and could have been of no avail to him in an Ejectment brought on his Demise, the Appellant Andrew did therefore pray a Re-hearing which was refused, altho. two of his Council Certified under their Hands that there was just Grounds to have the Cause re-heard. 7th December 1717, Further Hearing The Court being sensible, that the Tryal directed by the said Order of the 19th of February, 1716, was contrary to the usual Courte, did not think fit to enforce the Execution thereof, but on the 27th November, 1717, ordered, that the said Cause should be set down to be heard, and accordingly the Cause came on to be heard the 7th Day of December, 1717, when the Record of the said other pretended Out-lawry in 1712 was produced by the Respondent Geoghegan, and read, whereupon the Court was pleased to declare, That the Out-lawry then produced, shewed the Title to be in the Crown, rather than in the Respondent Geoghegan; but the Court nevertheless at the same time, ordered that the Respondent Geoghegan should be at liberty to amend his Bill, by making his Majesty.s Attorney General, or such other of his Majesty.s Council as he should be advised, a party thereunto. 4th November 1718, Amended Bill. By virtue of which last-mentioned Order, the Respondent Geoghegan amended his Bill by setting forth therein these further Matters, (viz.) That by virtue of a Commission issued under the Great Seal of Ireland in January 1710, the Lord Mount-Leinster was indicted in the County of Dublin, by the Name of Edward Chevers late of Killyan in the County of Galway, commonly called Edward Lord Mount-Leinster, for Foreign Treason committed against Her late Majesty Queen Anne, and that in the Year 1712 he was out-lawed thereupon, whereby the Defect in the former Out-lawry by the Name of Christopher was supplied, and in regard the eldest Son of John Chevers was the person intended to be Out-lawed in 1696, he insisted that the subsequent Out-lawry in 1712 should be deemed to enure, and be in Truth, and for the Benefit of him the said Respondent Geoghegan, so far as to Corroborate and strengthen his said Purchase under the Trustees for Sale of the Irish Forfeitures; and to the end that he might have Equity decreed to him against the King, he prayed the usual Order or Process, requiring his Majesty.s Attorney or Solicitor-General to answer the said amended Bill. John Rogerson, Esq; his Majesty.s then Solicitor-General in Ireland, immediately put in an Answer to the said amended Bill, and thereupon it was ordered the 6th of November, 1718, that the said cause should be heard on Bill and Answer, as to Mr. Solicitor-General the fourth Hearing-day in that Term, and should be then further heard as to the rest of the Defendants; but on the 10th February, 1718, it was ordered, That the Solicitor-General should be at Liberty to take his said Answer off the File, and to amend the same, which was accordingly done; and on the 20th of February, 1718, the said Solicitor-General filed his amended Answer, and on his Majesty.s Behalf he thereby said, he believed the said John Chevers late of Turpanmore deceased, left three Sons, as Per Bill,(viz.) Chevers late of Killyan, Esq; commonly called Lord Mount-Leinster, his eldest Son and the Appellants Andrew and John; and also believed, that the said Person, commonly called Lord Mount-Leinster was Out-lawed for High-Treason in Three Counties in that Kingdom, on account of the late Rebellion, and that by virtue of a Commission issued in January1710, he was indicted in the County of Dublin, by the Name of Edward Chevers of Killyan in the County of Galway, commonly called Lord Mount-Leinster, for Foreign Treason by him committed against Her Late Majesty Queen Anne, and was in the Year 1712 out-lawed thereupon, and referred himself to the Records of the said Out-lawries; and further said, he conceived if any Defect should appear in any of the former Attainder.s, by reason of any Misnomer of the Christian Name of the said Chevers, commonly called Lord Mount-Leinster, then the aforesaid Attainder of Foreign Treason in the Year 1712 ought to be applied in aid of the said Plaintiff.s Purchase; and conceived, it was reasonable the Plaintiff should not be deprived of the Benefit of his Purchase, upon the Mistake of the Christian Name of the said Chevers, commonly called Lord Mount-Leinster, who appeared to be the Person intended to be out-lawed. The said answer was the more surprising to the Appellants, for that by a Report made in August 1717, on the Order of Reference from His Majesty, granted on the humble Petition of the Appellant Andrew, praying Leave to sue out a Writ of Error for Reversing the Out-lawry in 1712. It was Certified, .That by reason of the Mistake of the Christian Name of the Person Called Lord Mount -Leinster, the said Estate was never vested in the Trustees for Sale of the Irish Forfeitures, and that consequently the sale made by the said Trustees to the Corporation for making hollow Sword -Blades, and that made bt the said Corporation to the Respondent Geoghegan were void,. as by the said Report, now remaining in the Office of one of his Majesty.s Principal Secretaries of State, may appear. 22nd January, 1718. Bill of Revivor The said Respondent Terence Geoghegan brought his Bill of Revivor, setting forth, that he had received information, that the said Nicholas Netterville was dead, (without mentioning the Time of his Death) and was informed that Patrick Neterville was his Son and Heir, and that the Appellant Mary was his Executrix or Administratrix, and was married to the Appellant Arthur Geoghegan; and therefore he prayed, that the Proceedings in the said Cause should stand revived against them, and by an Order made the 29th Day of January, 1718, the said Cause was revived against the Appellants Arthur and Mary and on the 14th Day of February the said Cause was ordered to be revived against the said Patrick Netterville, and Tho. no Process was ever awarded, nor any Order was ever made requiring the Appellants or the said Nicholas Netterville to answer the new Matter inserted in the said amended Bill, or to declare whether they should abide by their former Answers; yet on the 14th Day of February, 1718, it was ordered, That the said Cause should be set down to be heard on the sixth of the then next Sitting-days, and the same accordingly standing in the Paper to be heard, was, with other Causes, adjourned over to the Easter-Term then next following. 30th April,1719, Decretal Order. The said Cause was brought to a hearing the 30th April, 1719, without serving the Appellants, or any of them, with Process to hear Judgement, and on reading the said Solicitor-General.s Answer, it was ordered by the said Court, That the Respondent Geoghegan should be at Liberty to redeem the said mortgaged Premises, and that it should be referred to the chief Remembrancer to state the Account on the said Mortgage, and that on Payment of what should appear to be due, the said Patrick Netterville, and the Appellants Arthur and Mary, should assign and convey the said Mortgage to the Respondent Geoghegan, and that the Appellant Andrew should Account with the Respondent Geoghegan for the full improved Issues and Profits of the said Lands of Blengasse, since the said Trustees Sale; and that the Appellants Andrew and John should account for the Arrears of the 10L per Annum since the same Sale, and that the Respondent, Geoghegan should by the Injunction of that Court be forthwith put into the actual Possession of the Lands of Blengasse, with the Appurtenances, Part of the said mortgaged Lands not comprised in the Lease, and should after the Redemption of the said mortgaged Premises be put into the actual Possession and Receipt of the said 10L per Annum reserved on the said Lease, and that the Respondent Geoghegan should have and recover all and singular the said Lands, and the Rents and Reversion thereof under the Rules aforesaid; and that the Respondent Geoghegan should have and recover against the Appellants Andrew and John, his Costs expended in the said Cause; and the Respondent Geoghegan was soon after put into Possession of the Lands of Blengasse, by virtue of an Injunction grounded on the said Decree, tho. the Money due to the Appellants Arthur and Mary on the said Mortgage is not yet paid or satisfied, and afterwards the said Decree or Decretal Order was irregularly inrolled, without serving the Appellants or any Attorney or Agent concerned for them, or any of them, with the Draught of the said Order. 24th November 1719. The Appellants by their Council moved the said Court, to set aside the said Inrollment for the said Irregularity, and also to set aside the said Decretal Order made on the Hearing the said 30th of April, 1719 for that the said Cause was irregularly brought on to a Hearing against the Appellants Andrew and John who never answered the said amended Bill, and had no Opportunity to controvert the new Matters therein set forth; and for that the Appellants Arthur and Mary were not brought before the Court after the said Revivor, and were never served with a Subpoena ad faciend. attornat. in the said Cause, yet the Court absolutely refused to set aside the said Inrollment, or the said Decretal Order of the 30th of April last. 9th of December,1719 The Respondent Geoghegan moved the Court, that he might be quieted in the Possession of Blengass, Part of the said mortgaged Premises, against Distresses to be made by the said Patrick Netterville or the Appellants Arthur and Mary; and tho. it was urged on their Behalf, that until the Account was take and certified by the Officer, and until Satisfaction was made to them for what was due for Principal, Interest and Costs, the Respondent ought not to be quieted in the Possession of any Part of the mortgage Premises; yet the said Court did on the 9th Day of December, 1719, order the Appellants Arthur and Mary to make an Affidavit of what was due for Principal and Interest, and that the Respondent Geoghegan should make the same into Court subject to an Account, and thereupon be quieted in the possession of Blengasse against Distress, until the Account be stated before the Officer. The said Appellants being advised, that the said several Orders and Decrees, and particularly the said Orders of the 19th of February 1716, 19th July 1717, 7th December 1717, 6th November 1718, 14th February 1718, and the Decretal Order of the 30th Spril 1719, and the Inrollment of the same Order, the said Order made on the 24th of November 1719, and the Order of the 9th of December 1719, are erroneous, have appealed to your Lordships for these (among many other) Reasons. 1. For that it did not appear to the Court, on the Hearing in February 1713, or on any other of the subsequent Hearings in 1714, 1715, 1716, that the Respondent Geoghegan had any Right or Title to the Premises, and therefore no Tryal ought have been ordered in the Manner directed by the said Order of the 19th of February 1716, but the Plaintiff.s original Bill ought to have been dismissed with Costs. 11. For that by the Statute of the 11th and 12th of his late Majesty King William the third, for Sale of the Forfeited Estates and Interests in Ireland, no Lands were to be vested in the Trustees therein named by reason of any Out-lawry, but the Estates of Persons out-lawed before the last Day of Trinity Term, 1701. And it was thereby expressly enacted, That for Encouragement of Industry, no Person or Persons whatsoever should at any time after the said last Day of Trinity Term 1701, be Tried, Prosecuted, Indicted or Tried for any High-Treason by him or them committed during the late Rebellion in Ireland; and therefore the said pretended Out-lawry in the Year 1712, which was produced by the Respondent Geoghegan on the 7th of December 1717, could not mend his Title, or give him any better Right than he had before and consequently the said Respondent Geoghegan ought not on that Pretence to have had Liberty to amend his Bill; but the Court, on producing the said last mentioned pretended Out-lawry, ought, as the Appellants humbly apprehend, to have dismissed the Respondent Geoghegan.s original Bill with Costs. 111. For that the new Matter suggested by the Respondent Geoghegan.s amended Bill did not, as the Appellants humbly apprehend, give him any Title either in Law or Equity, nor ought the Appellants to have been concluded or prejudiced in any respect by the Consession or Admission of his Majesty.s Solicitor-General, who was only a Defendant with them in the Cause, and therefore the said Decretal Order of the 30th April 1719 ought not to have been made, but the Respondent.s amended Bill ought to have been dismissed. 1V. For that the new Matter suggested by the Respondent in his said amended Bill, as the Appellants humbly apprehend, are foreign and repugnant to the Title pretended by him in his original Bill, and do not tend to strengthen or corroborate the same, and therefore the Appellants ought to have had an Opportunity to defend their Title and Possession against these new Pretences. V. For that the Appellants Arthur and Mary were never properly in Court, and were never served with a Subpoena ad faciend. attornat. in the said Cause, nor were any of the Appellants served with Process to hear Judgement after the filing of the said amended Bill, or said Bill of Revivor; so that the said Cause was not well brought on to a Hearing against any of the Appellants on the said 30th of April 1719. V1. For that by the constant and established Rules of the said Court, the Draught of a Decree or Decretal Order before the Inrollment thereof, ought to be delivered to the adverse Party or his Attorneys who are in Eight Days to return the same signed by the Council of that Side, or to make Objection to the Draught, which has not been observed in this Case. V11 For that the Respondent has been put into Possession of Part of the said mortgaged Premises before Satisfaction was made to the Representatives of the Mortgagee, and before any Account was stated of what was due on the Mortgage for Principal, Interest and Costs; and the Appellants Andrew and John are to account with the Respondent from the Time of the Trustees Sale, tho. the said Sale was null and void and nothing passed thereby. Wherefore and for other Reasons, the said Appellants humbly insist, that the said several Orders and Decrees are Erroneous, and humbly hope that the same shall be Reversed, and that the said Respondent.s original Bill and amended Bill shall be dismissed with Costs. SPENCER COWPER SAM. MEAD Judgement 7th and 23rd March. 1720 TO BE HEARD AT THE BAR OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS, on Friday the 6th Day of March, 1720