The great fraud of UlsterHealy, T. M. (Timothy Michael)
History
The great fraud of Ulster
Healy, T. M. (Timothy Michael)
Ireland -- History -- 17th century; Ulster (Northern Ireland and Ireland) -- History
In 1801, after the Dublin Legislature had been abolished by the Act
of Union, a fresh appeal reached the Lord Chancellor. He delightedly
entertained it, and for the third time heard a case in which he
had been counsel for the appellants. The Irish House of Lords was
no more, and, sitting alone, he learnedly decided in favour of the
Londoners. Lord Donegall was not only beaten, but condemned in costs,
and the traps were saved. Safe though they were, his Patent was still
safer, for its validity had never once been called in question in any
Court, and the legal struggle was confined to the right to erect the
traps in a part of the river to which he laid no claim.
Thus ended a thirty years’ litigation. The plaintiff never stirred
more. The Londoners, grateful for their escape and for the Act which
dispensed with the Great Seal to their Charter, were content to
enjoy the tidal fishings with the traps, unmolested. Accepting the
view of their trusty Lord Chancellor, that Lord Donegall’s Patent
had received confirmation by the Act of Settlement, they silently
abandoned their rights in the non-tidal Bann.
Taking courage at this, Lord Donegall began to make lettings of the
river. He first gave his brother-in-law (and agent), the Reverend
Edward May, a lease of the Bann in 1803 for 61 years at £50 a year of
the salmon “within the known and accustomed limits of the fishery.”
In 1805 this lease was registered publicly, and as no one challenged
the letting, the Reverend Edward May assigned it in 1811 for £500
to Sir George Hill, Recorder of Derry, who was also a lessee of the
Londoners’ fishery in the tideway. Other persons then consented to
pay rent for the river to Lord Donegall, in the belief that the
litigation of 1769-1788-1795-1801 had made the Bann his. In 1827 Lord
O’Neill accepted from him a lease of the eel-fisheries of the river
at £369 a year, paying the enormous fine of £7,384.
Thus in the first half of the nineteenth century the Donegall
interest formidably entrenched itself behind the Patent. There was,
however, no attempt to exclude the public from Lough Neagh until
1873, and it was then only made as a consequence of the litigation
as to the Bann. For in 1868 the Londoners woke up to the fact that
they were owners of “the entire Bann.” After centuries of torpor they
claimed it by ejectment, as if nothing had happened since the reign
of James I. While, however, they lay asleep, successive Marquises of
Donegall had made themselves masters of the stream. The ejectment
was met by numberless defences; and, after some legal sparring, they
lost heart. In 1872 the suit ended in a settlement, whereby the
“Irish Society” bought up a lease of the non-tidal salmon fishery for
£2,250, and covenanted to pay a rent of £80 a year to Lord Donegall.
The valuable eel-fishery of the river they left in his hands.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account