Hi, it is the boy from Barrystown, charming, charismatic, witty, learned, sincere, scholarly, erudite, humble, modest and—wily; a right boyo, a historian supreme and a man far ahead of his time. The wonder is that one small head may carry so much information. Gold and silver for the Barrystown children.
I hope to be on the Bannow Historical Society Tour that is if I can get to Carrig village that morning and get back home that evening! Maybe they could pick me up during the tour. It is inexplicable that the boy from Barrystown is never asked to recite a bit of poetry on the tour , bla, bla, but I did recite Raglan Road on the journey home made by the Clonroche tour.
Edward Hogan wrote a manuscript book describing Ireland anno 1598, that is in Ireland in 1598 [the boy from Barriestown was a whiz at Latin]. It is now online. Fr Hogan described himself as a priest of the Society of Jesus, a Jesuit. He lived a long time ago. He lists the gentlemen of the Barony of Bargy [in which the parish of Carrig-on-Bannow is situate.]; among them are “Barrie of Barriestoune” and “Nevell of Tallokenaye [Tullicanna]”. I have little doubt that the Nevilles that so abound in the parish of Carrig-on-Bannow are descended directly or indirectly from Nevell of Tallokenaye. The population then was very small: demographics are an ever exploding series as countless generations hurtle through time. Furlonge is given as Portrief of Bannow. In one of her stories Anna Maria Hall confuses—as a deliberate literary ploy and to introduce a para-normal interplay of the dead and the living—Jonas King (the bachelor Jonas who died circa 1833) with Mr Barrie who held Barriestown before his dispossession after the Rebellion of 1641. A Nevell owned Rosegarland at one time and I will have the exact dates on that next week.
On February 4th 1871 The People noted:–
“Derelict Goods—The strong south-westerly wind prevailing for the past few days has caused a considerable quantity of casks containing paraffin oil to be driven in between the Bar of Lough and Bannow Bay, from some wreck which may have occurred in the channel during the late storm.”
The Bannow and District Notes in The People on September 30th 1950 had these items:–“Corporation Election—Mr Ml. Broaders, South Main Street, Wexford, who is a native of Ballygow, Bannow, was elected to Wexford Corporation. The people of the are pleased that a person from the parish has been selected to such a position in the principal town of the county. Mr Patrick Colfer, Clonmines, elected in the interests of Labour on the Co. Council, has, also, associations with the Bannow area; his father hailing from the district….
E. S. B.—Work on the rural electrification scheme in the area has now been practically completed. Lights were switched on in the Cullenstown area on Friday night last. Bannow area has had the light for the past few weeks. All regard the scheme as a great boon to the district.”
At the Land Commission Court in Wexford in July 1898:–
“Simon Roche, Grange, tenant; Major Boyse, landlord; old rent £32 10 shillings. Mr Boyd for tenant and Mr Huggard for landlord.
The tenant stated that the farm was not worth half what it was now when he got it. He dealt in artificial manures and no man that he knew of put more manure on the farm. For everyone having a horse drawing seaweed there was a rule on the estate that he would have to pay 1 shilling, and although he understood this included the right to draw stones, he had been prevented drawing them twice. He was perfectly satisfied to give up all right he had to seaweed or sand or salt water, as he got enough of it in his time. Major Boyse reared a lot of pheasants in Ballygow knock and they did a great deal of harm to his land. He would venture to say that he would give £5 a year to have them all shot. To Mr Miller—He used no seaweed last year. Mr Huggard—Are you anything of a farmer at all? Witness—What sort of question is that? I am a first class sailor as well.
The cross-examination was continued and Mr Huggard mentioned that the witness was swearing pretty strongly. Mr Boyd—You have no right to make the statement that the witness is swearing what is not true. Mr Huggard—I will make the statement if I am driven to it. (To Mr Boyd)—You will sit down and conduct yourself. Mr Boyd—I will not allow my client to be bullied. Mr Huggard (to witness)—You will conduct yourself there. Witness—You will do the same; a gentleman would not talk that way. The cross-examination continued with some tension and in the course of it the witness said that he considered himself as good a man as Mr Huggard. The latter said he would seek the protection of the court and ask to have the case adjourned. Mr Boyd (to witness)—Answer the questions quietely. Witness, in the course of further cross-examination, said, “My God, man, I am answering you as well as I can.” Mr Huggard said that the tenant should not be allowed to be cursing in the box. Finally the examination was concluded without further noise.”
At the Duncormack Petty Sessions in July 1898:–
“Mr James O’Farrell, Main Street, Wexford, and Mr Nicholas Barry, Carrig-on-Bannow, applied for occasional licenses to sell spirits, wine, etc., at Cullenstown in August on the 15th, the occasion of the annual “pattern”. District-Inspector Fleming said he would oppose the granting of any licenses for the 15th August at Cullenstown. There was a public house which he considered quite sufficient for the occasion. The free use (sic) of intoxicating drinks would necessitate the sending of an extra force of police and he did not believe the bench desired to give a chance for any scenes of disorder by granting any licenses. The bench refused all the applications.”
Maureen Frawley of Carrig-on-Bannow was elected Treasurer of the Co. Wexford board of Muintir Na Tire in September 1962. The organisation then anticipated an important future for itself at that time. The emblem of Muintir Na Tire was a combination of the Cross and the Plough; in itself explanatory of the philosophy of the organisation. It was essentially located in rural Ireland, and promoted the agricultural paradigm of society so important in Ireland, then. Their model of society would have involved the leadership of the Catholic clergy—in tandem with the laity—in Irish society plus co-operation of all classes—an organic metaphor of society based on Papal Encyclicals. The local branches or guilds seemed to concentrate on small local projects, either of practical value or relating to the local heritage. There was a branch in Clonroche in those years when I was attending Clonroche National School. In 1964 the Clonroche Muintir Na Tire organised a bus trip for the children of Clonroche School to the sea-side, either Curracloe or Courtown. I ignored this trip and barely knew that it was taking place. A film was made of the trip. If I had been on it that would have enhanced the value of the film, blah, blah, etc….
They set up a branch of Muintir na Tire in Ballymitty in November 1950 and this was the parish council elected:–
President—Fr L. Kinsella C. C. Ballymitty; Chairman, Mr Sean Mc Cormack, Arnestown; vice-chairmen, Messrs Edward Donnelly, Kilderry and Wm Harpur, Tullicanna; hon. Treas., Mr Martin Donnelly, Hilltown; hon. Secs., Messrs E. White, Maxboley and Patrick Garvey N. T. Ballymitty; committee—Farmers, Messrs P. J. White, Knockbyrne, John Codd, Kilderry and Patrick Codd, Ballymitty; Labour, Messrs Sean Ennis, Kilderry, John Marsahll, Ballyfrory and Thomas Culleton, Kilcavan; Youth, Michael Molloy (junior) Hilltown, Sean Clancy, Kilderry and P. White, Kilcavan; Ladies, Misses B. Mc Cormack, Ballymitty, M. Dermody, Ballymitty and S. Harpur, Busherstown.
Messrs J. Wallace, Wellingtonbridge, M. Molloy, senior, Hilltown and J. Gallivan were co-opted to the council.
John C. Tuomey wrote to The Wexford Independent on December 2nd 1850 (as usual) a very long letter—this is a part of it:–
“As the most antagonistic parties in Ireland, at present, are the landlords and the land leaguers and as each are very busy calculating their chances at the far and near but at least expected elections, it will not be here uninteresting to give you Dicky Kane’s recollections of the last election for the old borough of Bannow and as nearly as possible in his own words:–
“The morning was very fine and at noon, the lord, himself and three or four more gentlemen came dashing down in a carriage to the ould church. They pulled out their big books and laid them down upon the chimney of what they called the Town-Hall. After talking and writing for some time, a big black cloud covered the sun and shortly after, the rain came down pell mell. There was no house at hand and parliament men and myself, ran for shelter under the walls of the ould church. The lord was a fine gentleman and a good fellow and as plain spoken as a poor man. Richard, says he to me, do you see that ould castle and that little garden behind it. I said yis my lord. Well, Richard, says he, if we ever have another election here, I will have a house built upon that garden, so that we will not be cot again in the rain. But his lordship never again; he went to Dublin and I heard that shortly after died. I was then a young man but I never saw another election in Bannow, nor the big books laid open upon the ould chimney.”
Elections were easily managed in those days and this story bears me out in the assertion “that the massive chimney of the Town-Hall” derived its name, from the fact of the “parlement men” using it as a table in lieu of a better.”
At the Duncormack Petty Sessions in August 1891:–
“The Bannow Foreshore
Moses Colfer, complainant; Major A. H. Boyse, defendant. This was a summons requiring the magistrates to authorise the complainant, who is a road contractor, to take sufficient gravel and stones off the foreshore at Bannow as to enable him to repair his road.
Mr Healy for the complainant and Mr Corvan B. L. (instructed by Mr Huggard) for the defendant.
Mr Healy said that up to this all the road contractors in the neighbourhood had been in the habit of drawing stones from the foreshore and paying Major Boyse a yearly sum for what they drew. In consequence of recent law proceedings, which Major Boyse was under the impression were instituted by Colfer, he wrote through his solicitor (Mr Huggard) to the plaintiff and another contractor, named Walter Harpur, forbidding them to take any more stuff off the foreshore.
Complainant was examined and stated that he and the other road contractors had always been in the habit of drawing stones and gravel off the foreshore at Bannow. In cross-examination by Mr Colfer he said that there were other quarries in the neighbourhood, none of which would be as convenient to him as the foreshore.
Walter Harpur swore that he had drawn some stones from the quarry at Johnstown. It would be nearer to the complainant than the foreshore but the stuff taken out of the quarry was so unsuitable for road material that the deputy county surveyor threatened him that his contract money would not be paid if he used it any more.
A man named Carroll for the defence deposed that there were three quarries in the neighbourhood—one at Ballytore, one at Graigue, and one at Johnstown. He was, also, a road contractor and stones for the repairing of roads could be got from either of these quarries.
On cross-examination by Mr Healy, he admitted that he himself never got any stones out of these quarries, not did he ever know of any other road contractor to get them. It would be so expensive for the complainant to quarry stones out of these places that it would be impossible for him to fulfil his contract.
Major Boyse was, also, examined and stated that the reason that he prevented Colfer and Harpur from taking stones and gravel off the foreshore was on account of the annoyance they had given him in connection with the road at Cullinstown. He had, however, no objection to them taking stones out of a quarry on his estate at Coolseskin.
Mr Corvan submitted that on the wording of the section and on the evidence that the summons should be dismissed. He said the word “sewer” was not covered by the section of the Grand Jury Act and, even if it were, all the evidence went to show that other quarries were as convenient in point of distance as the strand, though it might cost more to take the stuff from them.
Mr Healy, in reply, pointed out that the word “sewer” was not excluded by the wording of the section. A certain number of terms were excluded by the section and everything not covered by these, should, he contended, be included. He argued that as no mention was made of the word “sewer” it therefore came within the wording of the Grand Jury Act. He further stated that the word “convenience” was in no way limited to distance and in his opinion the quarry could not be said to be convenient, even though near the complainant if, owing to the nature of the stones and the cost of working them, it would be impossible for Colfer to use it.
The Chairman [Major Irvine] held that as far as he could see the evidence went to show that the other quarries were sufficiently convenient and he accordingly refused the order.” The translation of this is that Mr Colfer and Mr Harpur lost the case. I am not sure if it was a correct decision as it would seem that a point of law or points of law were involved: the Petty Sessions would not have jurisdiction in regard to points of law. Conversely, it would be big steps for a Petty Sessions to make a landlord or landowner give access to a quarry on his land if he did not wish to. There would have to an urgent necessity of the public good to justify taking such a measure.
From The People, February 11th 1871:–
On Saturday 21st January at Philadelphia, Rev. Mark Crane O. S. A., pastor of St Augustine’s Church to the deep regret of all who knew him. The Reverend deceased who was born August 10th 1831, in the parish of Bannow, was one of a family, counting six of its members devoted to the service of Almighty God, four of his brothers being in the priesthood and his only sister a nun…..”