Search the Catalogue

CSO/RP/1823/1757

File of papers relating to progress and costs of work at Kingstown [Dunleary; Dún Laoghaire] harbour, County Dublin. File contains letter from George Harrison, Treasury Chambers, London, assistant secretary to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, to Henry Goulburn, 24 September 1823, enclosing a report from Joseph Whidbey, civil engineer, proposing cost saving alterations to the work underway at Kingstown harbour [report not present]. Harrison requests that the alterations are submitted for the opinion of the commissioners for Kingstown harbour, emphasising the desirability of the proposals, and 'the great importance of keeping the miscellaneous expenditure of the Country as low as possible..', 24 September 1823. Also letter from the commissioners for Kingstown harbour, harbour board room, Kingstown, to Goulburn, 30 October 1823, reporting in detail, as requested, on the subject of Whidbey's report on the state of works at the harbour. Their letter includes a transcript of Whidbey's report, addressed to John Charles Herries, joint secretary to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, and originally dated Plymouth, England, 3 September 1823. Their report also includes a transcript of the detailed response of their own resident engineer at the harbour, John Aird, dated 20 October 1823, responding in turn, to each of Whidbey's proposals, including the height of the harbour's west pier, the harbour entrance, and the construction of cut stone walls. Aird defends the decisions made at the harbour, and states some concerns with Whidbey's proposed cost savings; report signed by Richard Verschoyle; James Crofton; Graves Chamney Swan, Francis Hodgkinson; Alderman Abraham Bradley King; and Captain Charles Malcolm, commissioners for Kingstown harbour. Also letter from Herries, Treasury Chambers, London, to Goulburn, concerning the conflicting expert opinions with respect to the work at Kingstown harbour, and proposing the referral of the matter to the Board of Admiralty, to obtain their 'professional & technical opinions', 10 July 1824; with subsequent annotations by Goulburn, and by John Sealy Townsend, KC and legal advisor to Chief Secretary's Office, Dublin Castle, 16 July 1824.

3 Sep 1823-16 Jul 1824

1824

CSO/RP/1823/1761

Letter from Michael Sharkey, grand jury secretary's office, Roscommon, County Roscommon, secretary to the County Roscommon grand jury, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, seeking clarification on the question of 'whose duty it is to attend the Magistrates in Discharging the Presentments at Special Sessions' in relation to the roads and public works legislation, 59 Geo III chapter 84. Refers to a disagreement between Sharkey and the county's clerk of the peace on the matter, 18 October 1823; with subsequent annotations by Goulburn, and by John Sealy Townsend, KC and legal advisor to Chief Secretary's Office, 22 October 1823.

18 Oct 1823-22 Oct 1823

1823

CSO/RP/1823/1896

Letter from Joseph Baker, Ballynaule, near Crookhaven, County Cork, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, complaining of problem of lack of enforcement of forfeited recognizances, and citing recent local example of a 'ruffian' named Downey flouting bail and prosecution due to lack of enforcement. Also complains that local magistrates frequently fail to take sufficient bail from offenders, 14 October 1823; with subsequent annotations on reverse, by Goulburn, and by John Sealy Townsend, KC and legal advisor to Chief Secretary's Office, 22 October 1823. Also letter from Thomas Sterling Berry, Hume Street, Dublin, comptroller of the pipe in Irish Court of Exchequer, to Goulburn, responding, as requested, to the case referred to by Baker, in relation to the unenforced recognizance in County Cork, and reporting that no estreat for the forfeited recognizance for Downey has yet been received in relation. Berry complains at the lack of foundation to Baker's complaints in respect of the office of comptroller of the pipe, 29 October 1823; with subsequent annotation by Goulburn. Also letter from James Chatterton, Cork city, clerk of the peace for County Cork, to Goulburn, responding, as requested, concerning case of Downey, and suggesting that 'the reasons which probably induced the Court of quarter sessions, not to enforce the Recognizance of Downey was, that the offence charged, was merely a common assault upon an individual, and as far as appeared unconnected with any outrage on the publick [sic] peace', 12 November 1823.

14 Oct 1823-12 Nov 1823

1823

CSO/RP/1823/1907

Letter from John Woodlock, Roscrea, County Tipperary, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, reporting the appointment of Woodlock, and others, at a recent vestry held in the parish church of Roscrea, to act as officers of health for the parish, and requesting the sanction of the Lord Lieutenant, for the appointments, 13 November 1823. With subsequent annotation on reverse of opinion of John Sealy Townsend, KC and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary's Office.

13 Nov 1823-14 Nov 1823

1823

CSO/RP/1823/1912

Letter from Richard Townsend Herbert, Account Office, Foster Place, Dublin, first commissioner for auditing public civil accounts, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, seeking an interview on the subject of concerns amongst the commissioners for public accounts, respecting certain expenses appearing in the accounts of Dublin city police, which were incurred outside the jurisdiction of the Dublin city police district, in the vicinity of the residence of the Lord Lieutenant in County Wicklow.

14 Nov 1823

1823

CSO/RP/1823/1919

Letter from Henry Prittie, 2nd baron Dunalley, Killboy, County Tipperary, chairman of board of commissioners of mail coach road between Naas, County Kildare, and Limerick, to Chief Secretary's Office, Dublin Castle, 6 November 1823, enclosing a letter from Dunalley, Nenagh, County Tipperary, to Richard Wellesley, 1st marquis Wellesley, Lord Lieutenant, Dublin Castle, 4 November 1823, accompanied by a copy of resolutions agreed to at a meeting of the board, held at Nenagh, 4 November 1823. Resolutions concern the legislation relating to the repair and maintenance of turnpike roads, and refer to work already carried out, and funded by grand jury presentment, on filling in ditches at the side of the road, and widening and repairing bridges on the route. Emphasises the ongoing dangers on the part of road passing through County Kildare, caused by 'deep and wide pits or ditches' along the roadside, and by narrow bridges in poor repair, noting the particular problem posed to mail coaches travelling on the route at night. Praises the work of Mr [William] Bourne, holder of the contract for the mail coach road between Dublin and Limerick, in constructing new sections of road along the route and. Requests that Wellesley compel the County Kildare grand jury to make a presentment for the filling in of ditches and repair and widening of bridges, in order that Bourne can make similar improvements on the old road. The names of 10 individuals are affixed to the resolutions, including Dunalley. With subsequent annotations on Dunalley's letter, by Goulburn, and by John Sealy Townsend, KC and legal advisor to Chief Secretary's Office, 11 November 1823

4 Nov 1823-11 Nov 1823

1823

CSO/RP/1823/1966

File of papers relating to concerns of Reverend Edward WM Rice, Church of Ireland curate of Ardstragh, County Tyrone, respecting resistance to church cess in the parish. Includes letter from Rice, Newtown Stewart [Newtownstewart], County Tyrone, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, highlighting the 'very difficult' situation facing Church of Ireland rectors, as a result of the recent tithe legislation, and emphasising 'the very defective state of the laws relating to Vestries & to Church-rates'. Details the circumstances which prevented the collection of the parish cess in Ardstragh parish in the years 1822, noting the ability of those enemies of the established church, to successfully oppose its collection, and also the inability of magistrates to act to enforce payment, due to 'confusion' respecting the relevant legislation, 2 October 1823; with subsequent annotations on reverse, by Goulburn, and by John Sealy Townsend, KC and legal advisor to Chief Secretary's Office, Dublin Castle, 8 October 1823. File also includes damp press copy of letter of reply from Goulburn, to Rice, 14 October 1823 [very feint and difficult to read], and also a further letter from Rice, to Goulburn, lamenting the legal judgement in the case of the church wardens of Ardstragh versus John Given, a parishioner refusing to pay his parish cess, held recently in Omagh, County Tyrone. Rice emphasises that such resistance within the parish has stemmed from personal animosity towards the parish's rector, Reverend Nash, and one of its church wardens. Urges the appointment of a government commission to investigate the subject of church cess, 5 November 1823. Also further letter from Rice, to Goulburn, condemning the efforts of 'a turbulent faction' to weaken the interests of the established church, and enclosing copies of the proceedings of the vestries of the parish of Ardstragh, referred to in the recent trial at Omagh, and reiterating the state of confusion into which the parish has been thrown, as a result of the recent judgement. The copies of the proceedings of 10 vestries run from 24 April 1821 to 23 April 1823. Rice also encloses a copy of a requisition, from parishioners and landholders in Ardstragh, served on the Reverend Nash, requesting him to hold a vestry, 'in order to ascertain in what manner certain sums of money levied of said parish has been expended [sic]…', originally dated 15 November 1823, with the names of 13 individuals attached. Rice complains that the latter is chiefly the work of, 'Two or three persons..' within the parish, emphasising their 'contempt' towards the established church, 17 November 1823.

24 Apr 1821-17 Nov 1823

1823

CSO/RP/1823/1987

File of papers relating to applications of Reverend Edward Wingfield, of St. James' parish, Dublin, for payment of church cess due on properties and lands in Phoenix Park, Dublin, which comprise part of the parish. Includes petition of the minister and church wardens of the parish of St. James', to Richard Wellesley, 1st marquis Wellesley, Lord Lieutenant, Dublin Castle, concerning 460 acres of land in Phoenix Park, 'belonging to the Parish of St. James, for which, during many years no Parish Cess has been paid'. Emphasises that the parish is 'one of the poorest in Dublin', and that the cess burden on its parishioners would be significantly reduced if cess was paid by government on the lands in question. Refers to a precedent set by a similar case involving land in Phoenix Park belonging to the parish of Castleknock, Dublin. Requests that the cess and all arrears due be paid to the parish of St. James' [1822]; with subsequent annotation by Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle. Also letter from Reverend Wingfield, 3 Blackhall Street, Dublin, Church of Ireland rector of St. James' parish, to Goulburn, 8 January 1824, enclosing a further petition from the parish, to Wellesley, renewing their claims for payment of the cess.; Wingfield observes, '….What great sufferers the inhabitants of the Parish have been, from the circumstances of Government….having resisted the payment of their share of the Cess'; with subsequent annotation on letter, of legal opinion of John Sealy Townsend, KC and legal advisor to the CSO, 24 January 1824. Wingfield also encloses a copy of the legal opinion of Sir Henry Meredyth, barrister, 25 Rutland [Parnell] Square, Dublin, on the case of the parish of St. James' and its rights to claim the cess, originally dated 6 December 1822. He also encloses a statement containing extracts from the parish registry of Castleknock, supplied by its rector Reverend George O'Connor, 24 July 1823, concerning their application for payment of cess on their lands in Phoenix Park. File also includes further petition from Reverend Wingfield, to Wellesley, referring to an annual payment settled on the parish's clergyman, during the reign of Charles II, in lieu of all tithes due from Phoenix Park lands, and requesting that the allowance be increased, in line with the times, 31 December 1824; with subsequent annotation by Goulburn. File also contains notes and a memorandum, prepared by CSO officials, concerning the case, and in particular, the question of the ownership of lands in Phoenix Park by parishes in Dublin. File also contains a petition from Hugh Thomas Echlin, Dublin, proprietor of the tithes of upper Castleknock, to William Gregory, Under Secretary, Dublin Castle, stating that the area of Phoenix Park beside the Castleknock gate, belongs to the parish of Castleknock, and is therefore liable for cess. Requests that government compensate him accordingly for the tithes due, 26 September 1821; with note annexed to petition from Philip Kerin, 32 Queen Street, Dublin, Echlin's agent, submitting the petition to government, 27 September 1821 [this latter petition presumably retrieved from the 1821 incoming correspondence, by the CSO clerks, for consultation in connection with the subsequent application from St. James' parish].

27 Sep 1821-31 Dec 1824

1824

CSO/RP/1823/1996

Letter from John Maxwell Barry, 5th baron Farnham, Farnham, County Cavan, governor and MP for County Cavan, to Henry Goulburn, Chief Secretary, Dublin Castle, requesting, on behalf of the magistrates gathered at Cavan petty sessions, the legal opinion of the crown, concerning a disagreement amongst the magistrates respecting judicial arrangements for the trial of criminal offences in the county. Notes that criminal offences are tried alternately at Cavan and Cootehill, and refers to the practice of some magistrates of holding over individuals for trial for 6 months, rather than travelling to the more distant town, whilst other magistrates order trial at the next general quarter sessions, irrespective of the district in which the crime was committed, 13 November 1823; with subsequent annotation on reverse, of legal opinion of John Sealy Townsend, KC and legal advisor to the Chief Secretary's Office, 14 November 1823. Also note by Goulburn, issuing detailed instruction for the content of letter of reply from Goulburn, to Farnham.

13 Nov 1823-[Nov 1823]

1823

CSO/RP/1823/2002

Letter from J & J Ardill, clerks of the peace for County Westmeath, to Chief Secretary's Office, Dublin Castle, concerning the case of Michael Murry [sic], imprisoned on a green wax process issued against him. Reports that following consideration of his petition to the court of quarter sessions, he was released, 3 November 1823; with subsequent annotations by Goulburn, and by John Sealy Townsend, KC and legal advisor to the CSO, concerning the legality of the release, 7 November 1823.

3 Nov 1823-7 Nov 1823

1823