LURGAN ATHLETIC SPORTS
23 August 1880
Patron - Lord Lurgan, KP. President, Hon Wm Brownlow. Starter, James Gorman, Lurgan, AC
Judges - Hon Wm Browlow, G. Hazlett. LAC and NICC, F. L. Heyn, NICC, J. Heron, LAC and NICC, James M'William, BAC, Handicapper, V.J.R. Dunbar. Timekeeper, H.H. Griffin, London AC. Referees of Walking - W Seaver, NICC, T. Falloon, LAC.
On Saturday the eighth annual sports in connection with the Lurgan Club were very successfully brought off in Lord Lurgan's demesne, being attended by weather of a truly charming description, and a large and highly fashionable gathering. The Excelsior Brass Band discoursed a large programme of agreeable music throughout the afternoon. The details and arrangements of the meeting reflected infinite credit upon the executive, who left nothing undone for the success of the sports, which were of the most interesting description, many of the handicaps producing close andl exciting interest.
Several Englishmen as usual put in an appearance at the meeting, and they did not return home unrewarded, Finlayson, of Glasgow, scored a victory in the half mile, and walk over for Lord Lurgan's mile, Dublin and Dundalk were strongly represented, the Dubliners being all rewarded with a prize, but are sorry we cannot say so much for the Louth men, who gave every promise of taking the lead in athletics in the North. The meeting, if it showed a falling off the club events, was otherwise fully up to the standard of former years, and the handicapping giving every satisfaction, a most pleasant and agreeable meeting was the consequence.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MANUFACTURING PREMISES FOR SALE
19 April 1881
IMPORTANT TO MANUFACTURERS. Valuable manufacturing premises AND DWELLING-HOUSE FOR SALE. To be Sold by Public AUCTION, at the MECHANICS INSTITUTE. LURGAN. on WEDNESDAY, the 27th day of April, 1881, at One o'clock p.m., ALL that Dwelling-House, Out Offices, Houses, Yard, Garden, and Premises, now in the possession and occupation of Mr. Alexander Lawson, situate in Queen Street, Lurgan, held under Lease dated the 11th day of November. 1868. for the term of 300 years from Ist November, 1868, at the yearly rent of £52. The Dwelling-house is large and comfortable. The Manufacturing Premises are very extensive, comprising Front Office, Brown Office, Lapping and smoothing Rooms, and a Hand-loom Weaving Factory for 32 Looms. In the Yard there are a Winding Shed and a Carpenter's Shop. The entire Premises are in good order, and are provided at present with all the requisite fittings for the manufacturing business. The whole Office Fittings, including a Screw Press will be Sold to the purchaser of the premises at a valuation. There are also Two Dwelling houses in Queen Street which produce a well-paid yearly rent of £10. 8s. and the Garden is very large and well cultivated. The Vendor for many years carried on a large manufacturing business on the Premises, which are very conveniently situated, and are well worthy of the attention of intending Purchasers. Immediate possession can be given.
For conditions of Sale and further particulars, apply to W. H. B. MOORE, Solicitor, No. 1, College Street, Dublin, and Lurgan.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TO COAL MERCHANTS
11 June 1881
THE BOARD of GUARDIANS of Lurgan Union are prepared to receive PROPOSALS for delivering at the Workhouse, Carriage Free, Two Hundred and Fifty Tons of Good English House COAL, and Fifty Tons Hand picked Welsh Steam COAL; delivery to be completed or before the 31st August next. The Coals will be weighed at the Workhouse and paid for accordingly; and the Contractor must produce the Colliery Certificate, Bill of Lading, or such other proofs of the quality of the Coal the Board may require. Proposals, stating description and price per ton. and addressed to the Presiding Chairman, will be received by me up to the hour of ELEVEN o'clock on THURSDAY, the instant.
(By order) JAMES DONALDSON. Clerk of Union. Poor-Law Office, Lurgan Union, 9th Jane, 1881.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LURGAN QUARTER SESSIONS
20 October 1881
W. Gamble, Esq., Q.C., County Court, Judge, took his seat in the Courthouse, Lurgan, and resumed the disposal of the business of these Sessions. Mr. Tyrell, Clerk of the Peace, was in attendance. Patrick o'Hanlon sued Peter Robinson for £20 damages, sustained by the seduction of his (plaintiffs) stepdaughter, Catherine McGuigan. It appeared that previous to the parties coming into Court, the defendant had agreed to marry Catherine McGuigan, but that over some dispute with regard to the girl's fortune – some £20 - the arrangement had not been carried out. After consideration, his Worship agreed to adjourn the case until the next Sessions in order to give the defendant opportunity to marrying the girl. His Worship took up the consideration of several equity cases, which, however, possessed no features of public interest or importance. This concluded the business of the Sessions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LURGAN REVISION SESSIONS
20 October 1881
Lurgan, Wednesday. To-day H. W. Gamble, Esq., Q.C., Revising Barrister, commenced the revision of the Parliamentary voters' list for the polling districts Lurgan, Portadown, and Clonmacate. The Conservatives were represented by Messrs. John B. Atkinson, solicitor, Portadown, and Henry Mehaffy, solicitor, Lurgan. Mr. T. G. Peel, the Conservative agent, was also present. For the Liberals, Messrs. P. Gallagher, solicitor, Armagh, and E. Rolston, Liberal agent, appeared.
On the long list for Lurgan the following the names were objected to on behalf of the Conservatives, and were struck out:- Denis Corr, James Grant, John Hendron, and John Livingston. Mr. Gallagher submitted that the Conservative objections were all informal, the place of abode of the objector, Mr. G. Peel, being given only as "Armagh". Mr. Atkinson cited authorities to show that the place of abode was properly stated, and pointed out that Armagh was Mr. Peel's place of residence, as stated in the voters' list for the Armagh polling district, which had heretofore been held sufficient. His Worship held that the description of Mr. Peel's residence was a sufficient one. There were no Liberal objections. The Liberals put forward 25 claims, which were nearly all objected to by the Conservatives. Only three claimants put in an appearance for the 'Liberals, and one claim - John Moore - was sustained.
There were in all 24 Conservative claims, the following which were sustained:- Wm. H. Boyce, Wm. Douglas, Adam Hewitt, Robert Sandes, James Toft, Thomas Waring, and Wm. Simenton. For the district of one Liberal claim was sustained—Albert Shemeld. The following were sustained by the Conservatives:- Richard Collins, Geo. Guiness, E. Reaney, Win. Maginness, Jas. Robinson, Wm. Wilson, John Tronton, and James Wilson. There were a number of objections served on both sides, but none were sustained. The Clonmacate lists were then disposed of, and the Court adjourned.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OBITUARY, LORD LURGAN, K.P.
21 January 1882
The Right Honourable Sir Charles Brownlow, Baron Lurgan, of Lurgan, county Armagh, Knight of the Order of St. Patrick, Lord Lieutenant and Custos Rotulorum of the county of Armagh, and formerly a Lord in Waiting to the Queen, died on the 16th instant, at Brighton. His Lordship was born April 10, 1831, the eldest son of Charles, first Lord Lurgan (so created in 1839), by Jane, his second wife, fourth daughter of Mr. Roderick Macneill, of Barra, county Inverness, and succeeded to the Peerage at his father’s death, April 30, 1817. He served, formerly, in the 43rd Regiment. The ribbon of the Order of St. Patrick was conferred on him in 1861. From 1869 to 1871 he was a Lord in Waiting to the Queen. Lord Lurgan married, June 20, 1853, Hon. Emily Anne Browne, fourth daughter of Lord Kilmaine, and leaves three sons and six daughters. His eldest son and successor, William, now third Lord Lurgan, Lieutenant Grenadier Guards, was born Feb. 11, 1858.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ST. PATRICK'S DAY
18 March 1882
St. Patrick's Day passed off quietly in Lurgan, and no disturbance took place. The authorities had drafted into the town in view of the preservation of the peace, 70 men from the counties Longford, Leitrim and Dublin, who were under the command of Sub Inspectors Hayes, Lurgan, Scott, Leitrim and Seddle, Longford, along with the resident magistrates: Captain Whelan and Captain Harvey. No signs of any preparations for a demonstration had been observed for some days past, and it was generally believed that there would either be no procession, or that the procession would be a very small one.
There was no procession yesterday and since the day was a national holiday and the factories were closed, it was devoted to pleasure by many of the inhabitants. Only one arrest was made all day, and that was for drunkenness. No disturbance is expected.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ROYAL VISIT FOR MASTER M'GRATH
24 April 1882
The following, taken from 'The Bird of Freedom', will be of more than passing interest to many of our coursing readers who possess blood in their kennels of the strains of the illustrious Master M'Grath - In his early coursing days, previous to 1868; Lord Lurgan chiefly patronised the Irish meetings, none of which, however, ever attained the popularity of the one he established on his own property at Lurgan, where Master M'Grath commenced his unparalleled career by winning the Visitors' Cup in 1867. How he carried off the Waterloo Cup, in 1868, 69, and 71 after narrowly escaping drowning in one of the ice covered ditches into which he floundered when led and defeated by Lady of Lyons in the only course he ran for the cup of 1870, when it is supposed he was 'got at' is matter of history. The only previous triple winner of the 'Blue Riband of the Leash' was Ceritd, before the Cup was increased from a thirty-two to a sixty-four dog stake, and, curiously enough, a year likewise intervened in her series of triumphs.
Lord Lurgan frequently ran greyhounds in Scotland as well as in England and was a leading patron of the Altcar Club meetings, at which he twice won the Members Cup with Lady Alexandra and Lady Grafton, in addition to whom Lady. Java, Lady Coote, Lady Beatrice, Lady Agnes, Lady Norah, Lady Mary, Lady Lonsdale, Master Burleigh, Master Nat, Master Frederick and Master Ivo, amongst others, more or less distinguished themselves over the Altcar plains and ditches. It was after his third Waterloo Cup victory that a Royal wish was expressed to Lord Lurgan in a letter, from Sir Thomas Biddulph that the Queen would much like to see Master M'Grath. Accordingly the dog, who had returned to Ireland from Altcar was hurried back to England, and the curiosity and excitement manifested by the large crowd which accompanied Lord Lurgan and Master M'Grath from the Great Western Station at Windsor, to the Castle. The spacious entrance hall was arranged for the presentation, and her Majesty, who was accompanied by the Princess Louise (Marchioness of Larne) and Prince Leopold (Duke of Albany), and attended by all the household, exhibited the warmest interest in the "Mighty Black." Inquiring from Lord Lurgan the origin of his name, his lordship explained to the Queen that he was called after the orphan boy by whom the dog was reared, in the employ of Mr. Galway (the breeder of Master M'Grath), who was a coursing confederate of his lordship and agent of Lord Dartrey in the county Waterford. After being patted and petted by all the Royal party, Master M'Grath and Spooner (his trainer) were conducted over the Castle, so that all the residents therein might see him, and before his departure her Majesty sent a handsome gold hunting watch to Spooner as a souvenir of his visit, On leaving the Castle the party returned through Eton, where the boys had turned out in expectation of seeing the “illustrious stranger;" and on a suggestion to 'give him a jolly' they cheered loud and long. Proceeding to Slough, Master M'Grath paid a visit to Dr. Hawtrey's large school, at which a son of Lord Lurgan's was a pupil, where he came in for another ovation.
Nor were his honours yet exhausted. On the following day Mastor M'Grath hold a numorous levee at his owner's residence in Eaton Square, which was attended by many of the country coursers who had never proviously seen him; and after attending morning receptions at Lady Waldograve's and Lady Dartroy's, which were held in his honour, he paid an afternoon visit to Marlborough House at the desire of the Prince of Wales, and finished up at Brooks' Club, of which Lord Lurgan was a member.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ARMAGH SPRING ASSIZE
2 March 1883
The Armagh Spring Assize will be commenced the 10th March, the Commission being opened at eleven o'clock Mr. Justice Lawson. The following is the calendar of the prisoners for trial;
Michael Ryans, arson; Hugh Savage, forcible entry; Henry Burns, larceny; Charles Kafferty, assault and rescue: John George Orr, indecent assault; Henry Holland, perjury; William, Conn, bigamy; John George Orr, shooting with intent; Joseph M'Cartin, assaulting a peace officer; John Magee, horse stealing. There are forty-one civil bill appeals for Lurgan, Armagh, Ballybot, and Markethill Quarter Sessions, and will be heard by Chief Baron Palles in the Record Court.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A MYSTERTOUS OUTRAGE
11 July 1884
Our Correspondent writes of an outrage which was committed near Lurgan on Tuesday night. The affair he says, is involved in the greatest mystery, but the trial of the accused will take place on the 15th inst., when there is little doubt that the truth will be elicited.
Mr. Liddell is a co justice of the peace for the Counties of Down and Armagh. He is a large landed proprietor, the owner of a gas works, and also of large warehouses in London and Belfast. He is a large employer of labour, and nine-tenths of his employees are Orangemen. He is a most amiable gentleman, while Mrs. Liddell is beloved for her gentleness and affability. Yesterday, the County Inspector at Armagh and Sub-Inspector Hogben were investigating the matter, and a large number of constables visited the scene of the outrage, and thoroughly searched the adjoining ditches and fences for firearrms, but failed to make any discovery.
Our Lurgan correspondent writes: The following are the fullest particulars that can be obtained:- It appears that Mr. Liddell, Mrs. Liddell, and Miss Liddell were driving home to their residence in Donacloney, which is about four miles from Lurgan, about half past two o'clock. When about one mile from Lurgan they passed two persons who were in a cart. Soon after a shot was fired, and the carriage stopped. It was found that one pellet had lodged in Mrs. Liddell's face and several others in different parts of the carriage. Mr. Liddell at once proceeded to the two persons in the cart, and found that one of them was Mr. Robert Mathers, son of Mr. R . Mathers, one of the largest merchants in Lurgan, and the other a servant in Mr. Mathers's employment named Maxwell. These two young men were conveying some oilcloth to a house in Waringstown. Mr. Liddell at once searched the cart after the shot was fired, and also the surrounding fields, but no arms or ammunition of any kind were found. The two young men then followed Mr. Liddell to Waringstown, where they were searched by the police, but no weapon or firearm of any sort whatever was found on them. No arrests were made until a private magisterial investigation was held on Wednesday evening before Mr. James Malcolm, Esq., D.L., J.P., and Dr. Adamson. Evidence was there given by Mr. Liddell, Mrs. Liddell, and the coachman, and the magistrates then decided to send the case forward to the next Armagh assizes, bail being accepted for each of the accused in £50, and two sureties in £25 each. The place at which the occurrence took place has always borne a good character, and the whole affair is generally attributed to an accident. Mr. Mathers is greatly respected throughout the town and neighbourhood.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MEDICAL OFFICER WANTED
12 September 1884
The COMMITTEE of MANAGEMENT of the AGHALEE Dispensary District will at their meeting to be held on MONDAY, the 22nd September, 1884, at the hour of TWO o'clock p m., proceed to appoint a properly qualified MEDICAL OFFICER, at a salary of One Hundred Pounds per annum, exclusive of fees under the Public Health, Vaccination, Registration Act. Candidates must posses the qualifications required by the Local Government Board, and the gentleman appointed will have to reside in the district. Sealed applications, with testimonials. &co. to be addressed to the Hon. Sec., LANCELOT TURTLE, Esq., J.P., Aghalee, Lurgan, on or before the 20th inst. Personal attendance indispensably necessary.
By order of, JAMES DONALDSON. Clerk of Union. Boardroom, Workhouse, 2nd Sept, 1884.
|
|
UNFURLING THE 'ORANGE' FLAG
7 October 1880
Dublin, Oct. 6, 1880. - Colonel Waring made a speech at Lurgan this week, in which he said: 'I do not wish to be a prophet of evil, but it is useless to conceal from ourselves that we are on the eve of a crisis such as has not occurred for three-quarters of a century. The state of a large part of this island at present is not creditable to the Government nor satisfactory to its peaceable inhabitants. It behoves all organizations of Protestants, in face of the difficulties and dangers that threaten us, to close their ranks, and, sinking all minor differences, to stand shoulder to shoulder in front of the common foe. In all civilized communities the duty of protecting life and property is delegated to the State; and to the Stale, while that duty is duly and effectually performed, all loyal men are bound to leave it. But, should the State fail to afford that protection which it is its duty to do, and should anarchy and rebellion be permitted to stalk unchecked throughout the land, then, indeed, more primitive methods of self-protection may have to be resorted to, and the great cause of civil and religious liberty, for which our fathers fought and fell on many bloody fields at home and abroad, may again call for the support of the strong arms and stout hearts of their children. God forbid that such a position should be forced upon us; but, if it is, I am sure that the young men of Lurgan whom I see before me will not be wanting either in will or power to do their duty to their God, their Queen, and their country.' The speech has excited much attention.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LURGAN QUARTER SESSIONS
5 April 1881
Lurgan, Saturday. His Worship, Mr. R. W. Gamble, Q.C., took his seat in the Courthouse at ten o'clock this morning and continued the business of these sessions. The undefended civil bills and undefended ejectments having been disposed of, His Worship took up the hearing of DEFENDED CIVIL BILLS.
WILLIAM D. BRAY v JAMES FALLOON
This was a process for £3. 1s. 6d for goods sold and delivered and for work done. Mr. Ussher appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Haslett for the defendant. The only disputed item in the account was £1.10s for commission on the sale of two horses in Moy fair. The plaintiff alleged that he stipulated before the sale to get 5 per cent. commission. The defendant denied that any commission was agreed to. His Worship gave a decree for £1. 11s. 6d.
HUGH CRANEY v WILLIAM SEALEY
This was a process for £8. 9s. for the value of a loom and for loom hire. At the last sessions the registrar made an order that the loom should be returned to the plaintiff. Mr. Haslett appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. John B. Atkinson for the defendant. From the evidence it appeared that the registrar's order had not been complied with: In 1877 the plaintiff alleged that he let the Diaper Loom to the defendant at 2s a week, £8 to be the price of it if he wished to buy it. The loom, it is alleged, is useless to the plaintiff now in consequence of alterations made to it. The defence was that the value of the loom was less than £8. His Worship gave a decree for £8.
OLIVER DOWEY v GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY.
This was an action to recover £10 damages for illegal imprisonment. Mr. J. B. Atkinson appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Haslett for the defendants. - Evidence was given to the effect that on the 6th January last the plaintiff traveled to Belfast from Lurgan by the 8.20 train. When he got into the train at Lurgan the ticket office was closed, and he got a pass from the head porter, for which he paid 1s 6d. On the arrival of the train at the Central Railway Junction the ticket collector entered the carriage, and asked the plaintiff for his ticket. Plaintiff replied that be had a pass, and on searching all his pockets he could not find it. The ticket collector then, as alleged dragged him out of the carriage, but afterwards told him to go into it again till the train got to Belfast. He then came to the carriage door again and gave the plaintiff (Dowey) into custody for traveling without a ticket, and for having assaulted him. He would not listen to the plaintiff's statement. Plaintiff was then taken to the Police Office and put into one of the cells, where he remained all night. On the following morning he was fined 20s for traveling without a ticket, and 10s for the assault of the ticket collector. He was also ordered to pay 11s 6d, the full fare from Dublin. The head porter produced the block of the pass which he issued, but could not identify who he had given it to. In cross-examination by Mr. Atkinson, he admitted that since the action had been brought he had received orders to discontinue the issue of passes on the down trains. He was not telegraphed to as to the correctness of the plaintiff's statement either to the ticket collector or in the Police Court. His Worship asked was not the conviction for traveling without a ticket in accordance with the by-laws of the company? Mr. Atkinson contended that the by-law was unreasonable. His Worship thought the very fact of his having been found in the carriage without a ticket was an offense according to the by-law. Mr. Atkinson said the defendants might have telegraphed to Lurgan before having the plaintiff arrested. Mr. Haslett said the telegraph office was closed. His Worship said he could not go back on the decision of the magistrates at Belfast. He thought, however, that the company should have returned the 11s 6d when they ascertained how matters stood, and they might have made some little . compensation to the plaintiff for his imprisonment. He would give a decree for £1. 11s. 6d. with 3s expenses.
EDAWARD DOWNEY v JANE SHEALS
This was an action for £16, for the trover of certain articles of wearing apparel. Mr. Haslett appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. W. H. D. Moore for the defendant. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had detained articles, to the amount of process, belonging to his wife after her death. It appeared that the plaintiff's wife had lived with the defendant for twelve months before she died, and that the plaintiff had seldom visited her. The defence showed that the plaintiff's wife, previous to her death, had given the articles to the defendant, in return for her kindness, and there was a set-off of £3. 12s. 6d. for lodging and funeral expenses. d His Worship considered the set-off fully proven, and dismissed the ease on the merits.
NATHANIEL BRIDGES v WILLIAM M'KEOWN AND OTHERS
This was an ejectment for non-payment of rent, the arrears being £19 10s 7d. Mr. Carleton and Mr. J. B. Atkinson appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Haslett for William M'Keown. In consequence of a dispute between the tenants, an order had been made for the sale and division of the farm at the last equity sessions. That order, it was now contended, would leave William M'Keown responsible for the whole of the rent, instead of only a portion of it. He was willing to pay his share. His Worship said the landlord must get his rent in any case. It could not be helped if the occupiers of the farm disputed amongst themselves. M'Keown would have to pay the full amount, and sue against the other holders for their proportion. By and by a tenant farmer would be splitting up his holding into half a dozen portions, and letting it to as many different parties, who would fight about it, and expect the landlord to wait for his rent till they came to terms. He would give a decree for possession.
NATHANIEL BRIDGES v JAS. SHIEKEY AND OTHERS
This was an ejectment for over holding. Mr. Haslett appeared for John M'Conville, a, defendant in the action. Shiekey, it appeared, had given up possession of the farm, which occupied nine acres and thirty perches at the yearly rent of £9. 2s, to John M'Conville, who held a mortgage on it for £130. He had then gone to America, but had since returned. Before he went, however, he went to the agent's (Mr. Atkinson) office, and asked him to accept M'Conville as a tenant. He refused, and served a notice to quit on Sheikey, and also a notice stating that the notice to quit was not for the purpose of ejecting him, but to compel him to reside on and cultivate his farm himself. The notice also stated that there was no objection to his selling the farm according to the usages on the estate, namely that the adjoining tenant should get the preference.
His Worship recommended Shiekey to try and sell the farm to the adjoining tenant, as he could not compel the landlord to accept any man for a tenant. M'Conville demanded an explanation as to why he was not accepted.
His Worship said that from M'Conville's talks he was not at all a desirable tenant and threatened to have him removed by the police if he did not stop talking. A decree for possession was accordingly given, with a stay of execution for a month, to enable Shiekey to sell. The Court adjourned at five o'clock.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WANTED
14 April 1882
Small Accounts Collected on Commission in Lisburn, Magheralin, Lurgan. Armagh, Newry, Bessbrook, Tandragee, Dungannon, Coalisland, Cookstown. Address box 3674, Belfast Telegraph.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LOOMS FOR SALE
17 October 1882
5O Looms, by Harrison; 54 inch reed space.
Apply to the Lurgan Weaving Company Limited, Lurgan.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE ESTATE OF LORD LURGAN
9 October 1882
On Saturday the sub commission for County Armagh. Messrs: J.O. Wylie, B.L. And R. Sproule sat in the Courthouse in Armagh and proceeded to deliver judgements in the cases heard since the recess at Lurgan and Portadown. Mr. Commissioner Wylie in delivering judgement said: The rents I am about to announce are the first we have fixed under the new procedure. After hearing the evidence in each case, a note of the improvements alleged on each side, and of any fact proved affecting the valuation of the holding, is given to the official valuer, who inspects the holding and improvements along with my colleague who heard the case, and if, after a conference together, we all agree on the fair rent, the judicial rent and the rent fixed by the valuers report, will of course be identical. If however, my colleague and the valuer do not agree on a valuation, then my other colleague will inspect the property and any improvements and a consensus will be agreed upon.
We have heard twenty-nine cases from Lord Lurgan’s property. In some of the eases the holdings are in the immediate vicinity of Lurgan, and the rest are either close to Lurgan or Portadown. This circumstance, in our opinion, in most of the cases considerably enhances the value of the holding. In several of the cases, where the evidence reached as far back 1840, very substantial increases of rent were proved, and in many, if not in all, of these cases the additions were made on the fall of leases. In most of the other cases small increases of recent date were shown, but these again were somewhat diminished by the allowance some cases of half the county cess. We, however, have fixed the judicial rents on the assumption that this allowance will not continue. In some cases drainage charge was added to the rent, which has now expired, and in such cases we consider the drainage so paid for by the tenant as an improvement effected by him, and deal with it on fixing the rent in the same manner as with other similar improvements made by him.
There is only one case which I think it necessary to refer to specially, and that is the case of Thomas Ruddell. On conferring with my colleague and the court valuer in that case, I found such a substantial difference between their valuations that, having regard to the extent of the holdings and the nature and magnitude of the tenants improvements, I could not see my way to a decision without the aid of my other colleague, who has also inspected the holdings, and have fixed the rent on these two holdings in the same manner as under our former system, with the additional aid, of course, of the valuer’s report.
Click HERE for Rental Chart
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SALE OF VALUABLE PROPERTY IN LURGAN
10 February 1883
To be Sold by AUCTION, on WEDNESDAY, the 14th day of February, 1883, at the MECHANICS INSTITUTE, Lurgan, at the hour of TWELVE o'clock, The Undermentioned VALUABLE PROPERTY, in One Lot.
THREE HOUSES in Castle Lane, in the Town of Lurgan, with a Court in the rear, entering from Gallagher’s passage, and Four small Houses entering off said Court, let to weekly tenants at the annual rental of ... £19.10s.0d.
TWO HOUSES in Castle Lane, with one House in rear, and Garden attached, at present occupied by Neil M'Kenna, Cooper, let to weekly tenants at the annual rental of … £11.14s.0d.
TWO HOUSES in Castle Lane (adjoining last-mentioned Houses), and Eight Houses in the rear thereof, entering from Totten’s Court and situate on the south-west side of said Court, let to weekly tenants at the annual rent of ... £34.17s.8d.
N.B. The above are held under Three several Fee-farm Grants at the total rental of £18.7s.1d.
TWO HOUSES in Castle Lane, with Gateway entrance and Court in rear, called Totton’s Court, with Seven Houses on the north-east side of said Court, let to weekly tenants the annual rental of ... £33.7s.4d.
GROSS ANNUAL RENTAL ... £99.9s.0d.
N.B. The last-mentioned portion of the Property is held under Lease for 91 years, from 1st November, 1868, subject to the yearly rent of £10.0s.0d.
Deduct Total fee-farm rents … £18.7s.1d.
Rent of leasehold portion... £10.0s.0d.
Poor-rate and county cess estimated at £7.0s.0d.
Comes to a Gross annual rental of … £64.1s.11d.
The Property is situate In a part of Lurgan which there is constant demand for small houses. It Is at present well Let, and is in good order and condition.
For further particulars apply to WILLIAM BEATTIE & SON. Rent Agents, Rosemary Street Place, Belfast;
And as to Title to CRONHELM & SON. Solicitors for Vendors 22, Lombard Street, Belfast.
ANDREW CHEERY, Auctioneer, Lurgan.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE FOOT AND MOUTH OUTBREAK
28 December 1883
Lurgan, Tuesday, The weekly meeting of the Lurgan Board of Guardians was held in the Union Workhouse at 11 o'clock, John Macoun Esq, DVP presiding.
Mr. Atkinson said that he thought it right to draw the attention of the Board again to the cattle regulations. This was a question which was most important. He held in his hand an order from the Privy Council prohibiting fairs in districts in Ireland, including Armagh from 5th January 1884 to 29th February 1884. They all knew the importance of the Portadown monthly fair, he might say it was the best in Ulster. Lurgan fair would also be stopped. As there was no Foot-and-Mouth Disease in this district, and as the Lurgan Guardians had established a cordon, he thought they should ask the Lord Lieutenant to permit these fairs to be held. Mr. Atkinson then read the 7th clause of the order, which stated that: “A public or private sale of animals may be held with a licence of the Lord Lieutenant and of the privy council, and the explanation of the term 'Public Sale' which includes a market or fair or any sale whether condoned by anetion or not, which is opened to the public, whether on payment of entrance money or other payment, or not, and whether animals of different owners are exposed, threat or not, and includes also an exhibition.” Mt. Atkinson then moved that the board adopt a memorial to the Lord Lieutenant on this subject. Mr. John Sinnamon seconded this resolution, which was passed unanimously. The following is the memorial adopted by the board:
"To the Right Hon. John Poyntz, Earl Spencer K.G., Lord Lieutenant General and General Governor of Ireland. The memorial of the Board of Guardians of Lurgan Union showeth, that memorialists being the local authority of the Lurgan Union, under the provisions of the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act 1870, are surprised to find that in the order, recently issued by the Privy Council entitled, 'The Markets and Fairs (Foot-and-Mouth Disease) Temporary Order of 1883, the holding of fairs in the County Armagh portion of Lurgan Union has been prohibited. That as no case of Foot-and-Mouth Disease has occurred in the Union for years, memorialists can not conceive what reason could possibly have influenced the Privy Council to have caused them to include Lurgan Union in the order. That great inconvenience, hardship and loss on the farmers and others engaged in the cattle trade should the important market towns of Lurgan and Portadown be not exempt. Memorialists therefore pray your Excellency to take this matter into your favourable consideration and either include the Lurgan Union in the schedule attached to the order, or issue a licence for the holding of fairs as usual in the towns of Lurgan and Portadown."
John Macoun, Presiding Officer
James Donaldson, Clerk of Union.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SUICIDE IN LURGAN
5 July 1884
A sad case of suicide occurred in Derrytrasna, Moyntaghs, near Lurgan, on Saturday. It appears that a young man named Robert M'Known, aged 19 years, bad been out fishing, and having returned home he took out a gun. He tied a string to the trigger, so as to enable him to move it easily with his foot, and, having adjusted the mouth of the gun to his forehead, discharged it, blowing out his brains, and died instantaneously. No cause has as yet been found out for his action.
|
|
A MELANCHOLY ACCIDENT
7 September 1880
A melancholy accident occurred on Saturday evening at Portadown, Mr. Morrison, head Bookkeeper to Messrs. Watson, Armstrong, and Co., Portadown, on Saturday was out fowling on a boat on the Bann with one of the partners, when the contents of a gun accidentally exploded and lodged in his body, causing instantaneous death.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LORD LURGAN'S TENANTRY
7 December 1880
At a meeting of the tenants of Lord Lurgan's estates in the County Armagh, held the 4th day of December, 1880, it was unanimously resolved:-
1st. That the tenants of Lord Lurgan hereby express their resolute determination to act together in mutual support in the present differences that have arisen between them and their landlord, and each for himself resolves to be guided by the advice and decision of the majority, so far as that advice and decision is legal.
2nd. That, having considered the reply of Lord Lurgan to their application for an abatement of rent, and while acknowledging their obligation to pay a fair and just rent, yet finding his proposal totally inadequate to meet necessities of their case, they unanimously resolve, pending further negotiations, to withhold their rent for the present.
3rd. That a reply be immediately sent to Lord Lurgan, expressing their regret and astonishment that he should ignore the plain facts which tenantry respectfully laid before him, and treat them as though they had no existence; and express their confidence that had his Lordship been personally able to inquire into their case, and had he not been dependent upon sources of information which they believe to be antagonistic to their interests, his reply would have been different.
In these circumstances they would respectfully suggest to his Lordship the propriety of his seeking the mediation between himself and his tenants of some independent person friendly to them both, and thereby prevent a state of things which must prove injurious to both landlord and tenant.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LURGAN QUARTER SESSIONS RESUMED
8 April 1881
LURGAN, MONDAY. HiS Worship, R. W. Gamble, Esq., QC., County Court Judge for Armagh, sat v in the Courthouse here this morning, at ten o'clock, and resumed the civil business of the quarter sessions for the Lurgan division. Mr. G. G. Tyrrell, Clerk of the Crown and Peace, and Mr. R. Blair White, registrar, were present.
CAIRNS v MACRORY
This was a process brought for £10, the value of a cow, and was brought under the following circumstances. The plaintiff was brother of the defendant, and sold her a cow, which the defendant alleged was given in exchange. There had been some dispute between the parties in reference to a farm of land, on which there was a lien (a right to keep possession of property belonging to another person until a debt owed by that person is discharged), in consequence of which it was sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. After hearing the evidence, His Worship gave a decree for £8. 10s. Mr. Hazlett appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Harris for the defendant.
McGURR v CAMERON
In this case James M'Gurr, of Derryadd, processed Alexander Cameron for £5 for interfering or with a watercourse which passed through the lands of the parties. Mr. Hazlett appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Moore for the defendant. It appeared that the stream passed through the plaintiff's land before entering that of the defendant. Cameron entered M'Gurr's land, and stopped the watercourse, and so prevented the water from entering a large drain made for the drainage of the bogs of Derryadd into Lough Neagh. As it appeared that since the proceedings were instituted the obstruction had been removed, a decree for 5s was given.
MURPHY v. CASTLES
Patrick Murphy, of Derriad, sued Jas. Castles for £20 for damages to a dwelling-house in i Derriad. Mr, Hazlett appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Moore for the defendant. It appeared that a moss bank, on which the plaintiff's house was built, bad been cut away, and this, as alleged, had caused the house to fall. His Worship did not consider that there was any injury caused by the action of the defendant, and dismissed the case.
ACTION AGAINST AN ASSURANCE COMPANY
Two men, named John Thompson and Arthur Ennis brought a process against the United Kingdom Assurance Corporation for £8 10s, the sum alleged to be due on foot of a policy of assurance effected on the life of the wife of Ennis. Mr. J. B. Atkinson appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Moore for the defendants. The payment of the sum was refused by the Corporation on the grounds that the policy was a speculative policy, and that payment on it were made by Thompson, who was at the time the agent of the Corporation. Thompson admitted that he had made some payments, but stated that he did so to secure the repayment of some money which he had advanced to Mrs. Ennis and it was shown that the proposal for the assurance had no witness to the signature of the deceased. His Worship dismissed the Case.
There were no land claims entered for hearing, but a large number of unimportant equity suits were disposed of. These were wanting in any features of general interest.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FEMALE NURSE WANTED
22 October 1881
ON THURSDAY, 27th OCTOBER, 1881, the Board of Guardians of Lurgan Union will proceed to Appoint a Person competent to discharge the duties of Nurse of the Female Idiot and infirm Wards, at a salary £18 per annum, with Rations and Apartments. Applications, accompanied with testimonials as to character and qualifications, will be received up to the hour of Eleven o'clock on the above date. The personal attendance of candidates indispensable.
(By order.) JAMES DONALDSON, Clerk of Union. Poor Law Office, Lurrgan, 13th October, 1881.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DEATH OF LORD LURGAN
17 January 1882
The death is announced of Lord Lurgan, on Sunday evening, at his residence at Brighton, after a lingering and painful illness, which some years ago caused his withdrawal from all personal connection with coursing circles with which his name has been so closely associated The deceased peer was the second Baron Lurgan, and was born on April 10, 1831, being thus only in his fifty-second year. He was educated at Eton,' and succeeded his father in 1847. He served as ensign in the 43rd Foot from 1849 to 1852, and was a Lord-in-Waiting to Her Majesty from 1839 to 1874. He was married in 1853 to the Hon. Emiiy Anne, fourth daughter of Baron Kilmain, and leaves three sons and six daughters, the eldest son being the Hon. William Brownlow, who was born in 1858, and entered the Grenadier Guards 1878.
Lord Lurgan was well known as the owner of Master M'Grath, the winner of the Waterloo Cup in 1868, 1869, and 1871; and was the originator of the famous Lurgan Coursing Meeting, which was held on his estate until a few seasons ago, when, in consequence of his ill-health, it was discontinued. Lord Lurgan was a member of the Grand National Coursing Committee, and held a nomination in the forthcoming Waterloo Cup, which will become void in consequence of his death. So recently this week, at the Altcar Club meeting, several of his Lordship's dogs were in the field.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LURGAN BOARD OF GUARDIANS
20 January 1882
The weekly meeting of this Board was held yesterday - Mr. John Johnston, J.P., presiding.
THE DEATH OF LORD LURGAN
The Chairman, in suggesting the nomination of a committee to draw up a letter of condolence to Lady Lurgan and family, alluded to the death of his Lordship in most affecting terms. He said he had been chairman of that Board for many years, and those who had the pleasure of meeting with him there from time to time would not soon forget his courteous disposition and kind attention to the members of the Board, as well as the readiness with which he grasped and mastered every detail of the business of the union. Hie had always manifested the deepest interest in the welfare and comfort of the poor, and if he had been spared he would have been a great advantage to society. Lord Lurgan was called away at an age when many men are only in the prime of life, and it only remained for them to express their deep regret at his loss. The Board appointed the committee.
On the motion of Messrs. Gorman and Barry the Guardians decided to mark their respect for the memory of the late Mr. William Mulligan by addressing a letter of sympathy to his wife and family.
THE SMALLPOX EPIDEMIC.
Some conversation took place in relation to the alarming spread of smallpox in Belfast, and the danger of a communication of the dreaded malady to this district. Mr. C. WADDELL pointed out that already some apprehension had been entertained for the safety of the villagers of Maralin and Dollingstown owing to the sojourn in some of the houses of people from Belfast who were suspected of having contagion about them. The Chairman then pointed out that it was the duty of the sanitary officers of the union to use every means in their power in order to secure the safety of their respective districts. The remaining business was unimportant.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SALE OF PROPERTY IN LURGAN
25 January 1883
Yesterday, at twelve o'clock, Mr. Andrew Cherry, auctioneer, Lurgan, put up for sale in the Mechanics Institute Lurgan, a valuable freehold property, consisting of a large and commodious private residence, situated in No. 11 High Street, with yard, out offices, and garden attached thereto. These premises are in one of the most central places in Lurgan, and are held for lives renewable for ever by virtue of a conveyance from one of the land judges of the Chancery Division in the High Court of Justice, dated February 13th, 1880. They are at present held by a tenant under lease at the rent of £45.
The following were the biddings:- James Malcolm, Esq., J.P., D.L., £800, £850; Mr. Hugh Hayes, solicitor, £825, £85O. A reserve bid was here put on of £895, and the premises were unsold. Messrs. Ussher & Mahaffy were the solicitor having carriage of the sale.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE SANITARY CONDITION OF LURGAN
2 August 1883
To the Editor of the Belfast Newsletter. Sir - I see that Dr. Agnew has undertaken to attack my report to you with reference to the sanitary condition of Lurgan, and to defend the actions of the sanitary authorities in that matter. . With this end in view, he makes a number of assertions which are partly absurd, partly unfounded. In his very first sentence he tries to prove that Lurgan occupies an 'exceptional position' with regard to deaths through preventable diseases. Now, out of 421 deaths in the last year, 49 were of preventable diseases, in other words, 12 per cent of the total number of deaths occurred through preventable diseases. This is rather high, especially in a town which, from its situation, one would expect to rank among the lowest with regard to death-rate. Further, what amount of sickness among the people do these 49 deaths represent? In his next statement, Dr. Agnew tries to mislead your readers. He challenges me to show a single death, save two, from typhus fever in the year beginning 1st July, 1882, and ending 30th June, 1883. Now, he knows very well that typhus is not the form of disease prevalent in this district. He knows further, or ought to know, that it is typhoid, and not typhus fever, which usually arises from defective sanitary arrangements. Taking, therefore, fever generally, I can point out two deaths even in Lurgan workhouse during that period he lays down, of patients who entered the house with that disease from Lurgan Urban Sanitary District. I can, further, point out three other cases, in my own knowledge, of persons outside the workhouse who died of fever during that period. These are only a few out of numerous instances of the disease and of deaths there from. It is true that the period selected by Dr. Agnew has been exceptionally free from fever epidemics. However, in that very period there were admitted into Lurgan Workhouse from the Lurgan urban sanitary district alone twelve cases, and one of these two died. These are not all the Lurgan cases, for many who, having resided less than four years in this town, entered the workhouse in fever, were put down, as is the rule, to the union at large. There were also a number of private cases; so that the year has not been so free of fever as Dr. Agnew would lead us to suppose. Besides, just before the period there was a great epidemic of fever. Forty-eight persons from Lurgan alone entered the workhouse, and numerous other cases occurred outside. Would Dr. Agnew say that this epidemic had no connection with the unsanitary condition of the town?
But if the sanitary defects did not show themselves in a fever epidemic during the period Dr. Agnew sets out, we had an epidemic of measles at the beginning of this year, when upwards of a thousand children were sick, and numerous deaths occurred. The measles were chiefly owing to the defects of the sanitary arrangements. Dr. Agnew would blind us by talking about 'chest-complications', but is it not that the children would not have had the chest complications had they not first had the measles? The deaths, therefore, must be set down primarily to the unsanitary state of the town. We have now an epidemic of scarlatina, which is still very serious, though Dr. Agnew would lead us to believe it had entirely died out. In contradiction of this I can mention one small street in Lurgan where there are nine scarlatina patients at present. Another plausible argument of Dr. Agnew's is that in which he complains about the deaths in Lurgan Workhouse being made use of to exaggerate the death-rate of the town. If Dr. Agnew cares to look at page 8 of the quarterly return of the Registrar-General for the first quarter of 1883, he will observe the death-rates of several towns where there are also workhouses, and the death-rate is commuted in the same manner as Lurgan. I extract the following: Belfast, 31.8 in every 1,000; Banbridge, 29.2; Armagh 29; Ballymena, 28.8; Newtownards, 31.8; Coleraine, 25.8; Lisburn, 35.8. Lurgan exceeds all these, being 41 in every 1,000. Would Dr. Agnew say that the workhouses in these towns have not the same effect as in Lurgan?
Dr. Agnew makes light of the epidemics we have had for many years back. ' The smallpox epidemic,' he says, was got under in a few weeks. Any inhabitant of the town will remember that that 'slight epidemic' of smallpox was sufficient to cause the deaths of a large number of persons in the town. I challenge Dr. Agnew to mention a single year for the last four or five years in which we have not had an epidermic. We are told with reference to zymotic diseases that the sanitary authority has always proved itself energetic and successful in its efforts to stamp out the invader. It may, perhaps, interest your readers to hear the way in which the energy of the sanitary authority spends itself. After an epidemic occurs the ratepayers get alarmed, the sanitary authorities wake up from their sleep and order all the persons infected with the disease off to the workhouse. No precautionary measures are taken to prevent, a further epidemic. The old nuisances are allowed to exist, the dirt and, filth which have been collected for ages, and which are scattering the germs of disease every day are not removed; the epidemic is Stamped out through the agency of the Lurgan Infirmary and private medical treatment, and the Sanitary Authorities are content. "The sanitary imperfections" Dr. Agnew states, "are such as exist in every town which had an existence before the passing of the Public Health Act". This is absurd. Does Dr. Agnew really mean to say that because these nuisances existed before the passing of the act they are still to be allowed to destroy our fellow citizens? What was the use of the act if it could not abate the nuisances then existing?
In fact, the Commissioners and their servants have shown themselves and, still do show themselves, very much to blame in this matter. The public voice confirms this charge. The indignation of the people at the conduct of the sanitary authorities is very great. The Commissioners are constantly laying out money on drainage, and very seldom do anything to abate a nuisance. Dr. Agnew himself some time ago swore at Lurgan quarter sessions that a house in Ulster Street was in a most filthy and unsanitary state, and that an epidemic of fever had arisen in that very house. Will Dr. Agnew tell us what effort the Commissioners have made to abate this nuisance? Dr. Agnew some time ago complained of the water of two public wells which he recommended to be analysed. Will he tell us has ever any action been taken to ascertain whether the water of those wells (and the inhabitants have only public wells to depend upon) was poisonous or not or is it the fact that the people are still compelled to use the water, the purity of which he as sanitary officer has questioned In the last place would Dr. Agnew state whether, along with Dr. Scott, he found in a partial survey of the town, 681 houses in a most imperfect sanitary condition, and visited some places where the sights and smells were absolutely abominable?
I am yours truly, Your Lurgan Correspondent.
|
