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
The judgment of the Court, however, turned mainly on the “additional
records” prior to the reign of Charles II. which have already been
analysed. Rightly regarded, every one of them multiplied discredit on
the Donegall title, but proofs had not then accumulated that official
frauds were palmed off as Royal grants, and instruments of crime as
genuine acts of kingly power. It is, therefore, hardly to be wondered
at that parchments of apparently reputable origin should sway a
Court guided by the reticences of an archivist—the main of whose
history and compilations met with no contradiction. So judgment went
against the fishermen and an end was decreed to public right in Lough
Neagh A.D. 1908.
An appeal was taken, and was heard in the same year. The chief
deliverance of the Appellate Court was made by Lord Justice Holmes,
who, too, had been captured by the “additional records.” He
said:—“Having some experience of Ulster titles, I have been surprised
to find that of King Charles II. to the fisheries of Lough Neagh
and the Bann at the date of the Patent of 1661 so satisfactorily
supported by earlier instruments.” If they be “satisfactory,” then
what must other “Ulster titles” be like?
Lord Justice Fitzgibbon remarked:—“I cannot believe that all the
documents of title in the case rest upon usurpation or pretence.”
This Court also decided against the possibility of public rights
of fishing in Irish inland waters, because no such rights exist in
England. The Irish Fishery Act of 1842, however, recognises that “a
general public right of fishing” may exist in fresh water, but its
provisions went for naught, as Lord Chancellor Walker explained that
this was a “misapprehension as to the law” on the part of Parliament.
In other words, mere enactments may be ignored. The history of the
Statute thus slighted shows that, instead of its words being a
“misapprehension as to the law,” they were the considered language
of the strongest and most representative Select Committee that ever
dealt with an Irish measure.
The Bill was discussed by a Committee of 27 members, including
lawyers like Daniel O’Connell and Lalor Sheil, as well as the
Solicitor-General for Ireland and the Chief Secretary. The landed
gentry manned the panel, and the ancestors of peers like Lord
Leitrim, Lord Newry, Lord Downshire, Lord Stuart de Decies, Lord
Fermoy, and Lord Dunraven, served upon it, with several members from
Ulster counties, and one from the City of London.
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