Thank you for these Anglo Celt transcriptions! Hard to believe after so long, but I found reference to Peter Clerkin of Belturbet, finally my great-great-grandfather!! This family has been so elusive for so long, I now at least have a clue, although not much to go on, I will persevere! Thank you again for all you hard work and for sharing. Fran ----- Original Message ----- From: <JOwenG@aol.com> To: <IRL-CAVAN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 7:32 PM Subject: [IRL-CAVAN] ANGLO-CELT - MAY 11, 1854 - BELTURBET PETTY SESSIONS > ANGLO-CELT MAY 11, 1854 > > BELTURBET PETTY SESSIONS--Saturday, May 6, 1864 > > Magistrates present -- Captain PHILLIPS, Captain CLIFFORD, John > GUMLEY and John A. NESBITT, Esqrs. > > John SHEEHEY a. W. LITTLE and Kitty FARMER > > A charge of assault on complainant on 29th March, and obstruction > in the execution of his duty. > > The clerk stated that it was only on last Thursday Mr. LITTLE came > for summonses; he would not give them, it being unusual to do so at > so late a period, but Mr. GUMLEY gave an order to him to furnish them, > with which of course he complied. > > Mr. NESBITT thought it was extraordinary that when six weeks had > elapsed from the time at which the offence alleged was committed > then only a summons was issued for its perpetration. > > Mr. John ARMSTRONG said it was because Mr. LITTLE was too ill to > attend that the matter was deferred so long. > > Mr. NESBITT said even this was no excuse; the course pursued was > by him individually believed to be most objectionable. Had he not his > legal adviser to get the summonses for him? Had he not the same > means of getting them that he had of forwarding instructions and the > doctors' certificates, that they might apply for a postponement of the > trial for him? > > It was then ordered that the direct case be proceeded with. > > Mr. COCHRANE, on behalf of the police, then said--This is a most > important case. A line of railway between Clones and Cavan being > contemplated, an engineer came to Redhills to make surveys and > sketches for the purpose. Mr. LITTLE, through pecuniary or other > motives, perhaps from fear of the engine, or for some other equally > grave reason, differs from the common sentiment on the subject, and > has an objection to the making of the line. Therefore, to prevent the > engineer doing his duty, he assembled a number of persons, marched > down the streets at their heads, and when he came to where the > engineer was, he scolded and threatened him if he proceeded to make > any sketch of the police-barrack or yard which is held under lease by > the constabulary from Mr. LITTLE. He was the landlord, but was he the > less a trespasser, when he invaded the ground attached to the barracks, > as he did invade them, with the very active help of Miss Kitty FARMER, > who was most violent in her vowings, that she would demolish the engineer. > A constable was called on, who attempted to remove these parties, but > they were most vehement in resisting his efforts, and the end was, that > the engineer was obliged to leave without doing anything. Another came > later in the day, who was as badly received, and several times thrown into > a dyke by MR. LITTLE, Miss Kitty assisting him. Was this the way to > keep pace with progress? Mr. LITTLE might oppose the bid if he did not > like it, or if it did not pass through his grounds he would get would get > simple damages for any injury done him; but he took the law in his own > hands, and must now abide the consequence. > > Robert YOUNG examined--Is stationed at Redhills; recollects the 29th > March last. An engineer came that day to sketch the barrack for the > railway; saw Mr. LITTLE and Miss FARMER that day; Mr. LITTLE had > no one with him when coming from his house, but he went to his men and > called on them to put away the engineer. Mr. LITTLE was winding a > stick round his head; he said he would tear his puddings out if he did not > leave, and used other expressions so offensive that he would not repeat > them. His party consisted of ten men, at least. They gathered round the > engineer, who was in front of the barrack; he asked leave to go into the > barrack, but Mr. LITTLE and Miss FARMER stood in the door and would > not let him pass. SHEAHY and others asked LITTLE to leave the door, > and he said he would not let any one in on his property. He pushed and > dragged SHEAHY and both he and Miss FARMER followed the engineer > into the yard and would let him do nothing. The engineer had to be > escorted out of the town. > > Cross-examined by Mr. John ARMSTRONG--They are constables at > Redhills; SHEAHY is in command; the police there are not very anxious > about the railway, does not know whether Rev. Mr. M'AULEY is; that > gentleman resides some distance from the barracks; did not see Mr. > M'AULEY that morning; saw no crowd in the street before Mr. LITTLE's > men came there; hears that these men were paid to remain watching the > line for the especial purpose of keeping engineers off it, when the whole > party mustered there were thirty or forty there, most of whom gathered > when they saw the way Mr. LITTLE was going on. The engineer said > nothing, but that he wanted to have a sketch of the barracks; there was > shouting and laughing; saw Mr. M'AULEY there, he heard no orders given > to cheer and groan; hear Rev. Mr. M'AULEY say it was a shame for Mr. > LITTLE to get on so; Mr. M'AULEY was not leading a mob, nor following > a mob, when he saw him; never heard that Rev. Mr. M'AULEY was > anxious that the line should pass through the barracks, that it might > avoid his own house; does not think the laughing of the mob was > calculated to induce Mr. LITTLE to a breach of the peace. It was not > by direction of Mr. M'AULEY that the police were put under arms, but > by the orders of the Sergeant, when he saw the engineer so maltreated > and in danger. Witness went to pass in through the door, when LITTLE > and Miss FARMER pushed him back; they were then gently removed, > and when Sergeant SHEEHY went up to caution LITTLE, he was called a > d--d scoundrel, and pushed and assaulted. > > John SHEEHY examined--Is in command of the party at Redhills; on > 29th March saw Mr. LITTLE come up towards the barracks; a number of > men were standing at Miss FARMER's door; Mr. RIORDAN, the engineer, > was sketching the barracks, when Mr. LITTLE called the men to com on; > they did so, and so did Miss FARMER, when one and the others of the > two made a snap at Mr. ROIRDAN. The engineer requested leave to go > into the barrack, which he got, when Mr. LITTLE and Miss FARMER > opposed his entrance. MR. LITTLE was being removed from the door, > when he attacked witness and nudged him; he then asked where was > the engineer; witness replied in the barracks; this made him more furious, > when he assaulted witness violently. He was afraid there was danger to > the engineer because of previous conduct of LITTLE in the matter. > > Mr. ARMSTRONG objected to any evidence of what occurred from or > to the day charged in the summons. > > Mr. COCHRANE maintained its perfect lawfulness, as there was a riot > in the case, and in he case of the Queen a. O'CONNELL such evidence > was gone into. > > Captain PHILLIPS--I think it unnecessary for you to say a word about it. > > Examination continued--Saw Rev. Mr. M'AULEY, and heard him advise > the people to leave the place; he came with the engineer, and a great > many others did the same to see what kind of an animal he was. > > Cross-examined by Mr. KNIPE. Has no spate to Mr. LITTLE; goes > sometimes to Mr. M'AULEY's house; never heard him say that the > line threatened to go through his house. When Mr. M'AULEY came > down, he wanted the mob to go off; did not hear him say 'one cheer > more boys.' MR. LITTLE did not go through the barracks, though he > strove to do so, to impede the engineer. When the engineer passed > into the barracks, witness thought it was to have protection there from > the violence of Mr. LITTLE and Miss FARMER, and not to pass through > it to Mr. LITTLE's fields. > > Mr. KNIPE here made certain insinuations with regard to Mr. M'AULEY's > interference in the matter, and exclaimed rather vehemently, when > asked what they had to do with the matter, that Mr. M'AULEY was > accused of riot and leading a mob that day, and in the present state > of society, it was not new to see a priest exciting a mob, and that > mob unfortunately obeying him. > > Patrick M'LERNAN proved the assault on the sergeant by MR. LITTLE; > heard Mr. M'AULEY desire the men to leave the place, and when some > of them were going away Mr. LITTLE and Miss FARMER pulled them > back again. > > Constable MOORE also proved the circumstances, and corroborated > the fact of Mr. LITTLE and Miss FARMER standing in the door of the > police barracks, and the latter dancing about and exclaiming, "This is > Mr. LITTLE"s property, this is Mr. LITTLE's property." Thinks that only > for Mr. M'AULEY there would be a great riot there that day. > > John DAVIS examined--Remembers the transaction..Mr. LITTLE was > very much excited...Miss FARMER was also in the door...heard Mr. > M'AULEY say nothing. > > Captain PHILLIPS--Oh, Mr. KNIPE, you may let Mr. M'AULEY alone. > > Mr. KNIPE--Your worship we have not taken a feather out of him yet, > but we will take his wing off. > > Rev. Mr. M'AULEY examined--Recollects the 29th March; saw the > engineer come to his house in the morning; went towards the barracks > with him; saw Mr. LITTLE and Miss FARMER there and a number of > workmen with them going to the barracks. Witness had not one with > him going down but the engineer. > > MR. KNIPE--Oh, Mr. M'AULEY, you are not bound to criminate > yourself. > > Examination continued--I ordered off the mob, and Miss FARMER, or > Kitty FARMER, or whatever you call her, brought them back; the > conduct of the police was not riotous, but always correct. > > Cross-examined by Mr. ARMSTRONG--Is anxious about the railway as > every man ought to be; did not go with a mob upon the occasion. > > Mr. NESBITT--Surely, Mr. ARMSTRONG, you are not wanting still to > involve Mr. M'AULEY in the riot. > > Mr. ARMSTRONG--Surely yes, your worship. MR. COCHRANE will > do his bet to get him out of it, you need not shield him. > > Cross-examination continued--Did not put his stick on Mr. LITTLE's > shoulder or head, or hear the mob groaning or cheering Mr. LITTLE > that day; does not know whether he groaned him; to the best of his > belief he did not; did not order the mob to cheer, nor say down with > the Unicorn, meaning the barracks, it is too long standing; did not > summon a mob for the occasion. > > James HOWE examined--Is Mr. LITTLE's nephew; proved his uncle's > standing in the door of the barracks and refusing to leave it at the order > of the police. > > B. H. PINCHIN, Esq., proved that the police had orders not to let any > one into the barrack except on business to them. > > The complainant's case closed here. > > Mr. ARMSTRONG rose to reply--It was his duty to state the case of his > client, and to lay his grievances, his oppressions and hardships before > the bench and the public, to show that he was foully treated by a band > of men who were enrolled for the purpose of preserving the peace. Mr. > PINCHIN was here to support them, but had he been at Redhills they > would never have acted as they did. They must repent for having acted > so, for we live in a country where the rights of property are respected, > and even the police will be punished when they do wrong. Mr. LITTLE > has passed his term--three score years and ten--and during his life he > has been a loyal subject of the Queen.........Mr.. ARMSTRONG then > stated that Mr. LITTLE only prevented the engineer from going into his > field; that he did not stand in the door of the barracks at all; and that > where the police seized upon him and maltreated him was in the public > street, after which he proceed to call his witnesses. > > Patrick BROWN proved to Mr. LITTLE's ordering the engineer off the > premises and standing in his way when the police pushed and dragged > him, and nearly prostrated him when he was received into the protecting > arms of Miss FARMER. Witness did not hear Mr. M'AULEY say > anything to the mob except to advise them to go home, which some > them were doing when Miss FARMER collected them and brought them > back. > > Cross-examined by Mr. COCHRANE--Was called on by Mr. LITTLE to > prevent the engineer going anywhere he proposed to go. Heard Mr. > M'AULEY calling Mr. LITTLE an old rascal, and Mr. LITTLE returning > the compliment. Saw the sergeant speaking with Mr. LITTLE before > he commenced pushing him; he was not in the door at the time. > > Peter CLERKIN, a most jolly-looking chap, in whom there appeared > every indication that he was one who looked on a fight as the best of > all sprees, examined--Saw Mr. M'AULEY coming down the street with > people before and after him; heard that gentlemen telling Mr. HOWE > and Miss FARMER to bring away Mr. LITTLE; did not hear him groaning > or cheering, or ordering any one to groan or cheer....... > > William MOORE examined--Saw the dragging of LITTLE, but know not > who gave the first assault.... > > Stephen M'DONALD also proved the dragging of Mr. LITTLE, but said > he was called up from his work to keep the engineer off. Mr. LITTLE > and Miss FARMER were both in the barrack door, and some of the > police at the door pushed him out before the sergeant assaulted him. > > Mr. Armstrong here applied to have the cross cause entered into, but > Mr. COCHRANE said it was sufficiently heard. Mr. LITTLE himself > could not be listened to in consequence of the late hour at which he > had issued his summons. If he were upheld in coming forward at so > late an hour, then no man could be prevented from being a witness for > himself. > > Captain PHILLIPS thought it would be a most dangerous precedent > to set, if Mr. LITTLE would now be allowed to proceed with his summons. > > Captain CLIFFORD to Mr. ARMSTRONG--Was it because Mr. LITTLE > could not then get his summonses that the case was postponed? > > Mr. ARMSTRONG--No, Sir. > > Mr. KNIPE said it would be treating Mr. GUMLEY discourteously by > not hearing the summonses which he allowed to issue. > > Mr. NESBITT--Magistrates are not infallible, besides there was only > an ex parte statement. > > Mr. KNIPE then alleged Dr. COYNE's certificate that he could not > attend. > > Captain PHILLIPS--He was in the hands of two most skillful lawyers. > > Mr. KNIPE--No, your worship, he was in worse hand in those of Dr. > COYNE. > > The magistrates then refused to entertain the cross case, and, after > some consultation, pronounced their decision, that Mr. LITTLE do pay > one pound of a fine, and one pound costs; and, as Miss FARMER did > not seem to use her hands, though she acted so very prominently, > they would dismiss the case in her regard. > ______________________________________________________________ > > County Cavan Newspaper Transcription Project > > > > > ==== IRL-CAVAN Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from this list click on > mailto:IRL-CAVAN-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe (list mode) or > mailto:IRL-CAVAN-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe (digest mode) > >