Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T09:11:39.712Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The trials of James Cotter and Henry, Baron Barry of Santry: two case studies in the administration of criminal justice in early eighteenth-century Ireland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

Neal Garnham
Neal Garnham*
Affiliation:
School of Modern History, Queen’s University of Belfast
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

At least twice during the first half of the eighteenth century criminal prosecutions were undertaken in Ireland which gripped the public imagination. The first of these celebrated cases, involving the trial for rape, conviction and subsequent execution of the Cork Jacobite James Cotter in 1720, has also come to hold an extraordinary fascination for historians of eighteenth-century Ireland. Few writers concerned with early Georgian Ireland have been able to avoid its allure. For the most part, however, the incident has been referred to only fleetingly, employed variously as a motif of religious or political conflict or ethnic alienation. For Kevin Whelan, it is illustrative of the ‘conflict between old and new families’ in Munster, and indicative of a ‘partisan popish paranoia’ on the part of the province’s Protestant rulers. For Louis Cullen, it was ‘part of the legacy of the 1690s’, yet an event which would provide ‘the spark which set alight the sectarian tensions in Munster in the 1760s’. Other commentators have seen the case as one in which ‘a trumped-up charge’ was laid, for political purposes, against a man ‘generally believed’ to be innocent. A few have offered more guarded conclusions. Thomas Bartlett ventures only that this was ‘certainly a sensational event’. James Kelly both recognises the unique circumstances of Cotter’s case and suggests that it is ‘unlikely that he was the victim of judicial assassination’. S. J. Connolly goes further, stressing that Cotter had ‘quite clearly been guilty of rape’. However, the fullest and most recent examination of the case, in an essay written by Breandán Ó Buachalla in an ‘attempt to correlate a specific literary text to the career of a specific political activist’, returns us firmly to the recurrent context of Catholic Jacobite resistance and Protestant collusion.

Type
Research Article
Information
Irish Historical Studies , Volume 31 , Issue 123 , May 1999 , pp. 328 - 342
Copyright
Copyright © Irish Historical Studies Publications Ltd 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Whelan, Kevin, ‘An underground gentry? Catholic middlemen in eighteenth-century Ireland’ in Eighteenth-Century Ireland, x (1995), pp 43-1Google Scholar; idem, The Tree of Liberty: radicalism, Catholicism and the construction of Irish identity, 1760–1830 (Cork, 1995), p. 135; Cullen, L.M., The emergence of modern Ireland (London, 1981), pp 33-4Google Scholar,200.

2 Hogan, William and Buachalla, Liam Ó (eds), ‘The letters and papers of James Cotter junior, 1689–1720’ in Cork Hist. Soc. Jn., lxviii (1963), p. 66Google Scholar; Fagan, Patrick, The second city: a portrait of Dublin, 1700–1760 (Dublin, 1986), p. 154Google Scholar.

3 Bartlett, Thomas, The fall and rise of the Irish nation: the Catholic question, 1690–1830 (Dublin, 1992), p. 49Google Scholar; Kelly, James, ‘ “A most inhuman and barbarous piece of villainy”: an exploration of rape in eighteenth-century Ireland’ in Eighteenth-Century Ireland, x (1995), pp 84-5Google Scholar; idem, ‘The abduction of women of fortune in eighteenth-century Ireland’ in Eighteenth-Century Ireland, ix (1994), p. 15.

4 Connolly, S.J., Religion, law, and power: the making of Protestant Ireland, 1660–1760 (Oxford, 1992), p. 229Google Scholar. For the broadly similar conclusions of two very different earlier historians see Froude, J.A., The English in Ireland in the eighteenth century (3 vols, London, 1895), i, 479-80Google Scholar, and Lecky, W.E.H., A history of Ireland in the eighteenth century (5 vols, London, 1892), i, 376-8Google Scholar.

5 Buachalla, Breandán Ó, ‘The making of a Cork Jacobite’ in O’Flanagan, Patrick and Buttimer, Cornelius (eds), Cork: history and society (Dublin, 1993), pp 469-97Google Scholar.

6 For recent brief citings of the Santry case see Connolly, Religion, law, & power, p. 232, and Garnham, Neal, The courts, crime and the criminal law in Ireland, 1692–1760 (Dublin, 1996), pp 180-81, 262Google Scholar.

7 A concise summary of the development of the historiography of the period is contained in S.J. Connolly, ‘Eighteenth-century Ireland: colony or ancien régime?’ in Boyce, D. George and O’Day, Alan (eds), The making of modern Irish history: revisionism and the revisionist controversy (London, 1996), pp 15–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Hogan & Ó Buachalla (eds), ‘Letters & papers’, pp 74–82.

9 Account of the trial of James Cotter (N.L.I., Cotter papers, MS 711, pp 135–6); Midleton to Thomas Brodrick, 20 Mar. 1720 (Surrey Record Office, Midleton MSS, 1248/4, ff 441–2); see also Froude, English in Ireland, i, 431–3.

10 Gilbert, J.T., A history of the city of Dublin (3 vols, Dublin, 1854-9), iii, 88Google Scholar; lords justices to lord lieutenant, 10 Nov. 1738 (P.R.O. SP 63/401, f. 194); certificate of the clerk of the crown of the Court of King’s Bench, 10 Nov. 1738 (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/197); lords justices to lord lieutenant, 20 Nov. 1738 (ibid., T/3019/183); Lord Chief Justice Rogerson to sheriffs of Dublin, 18 Nov. 1738 (P.R.O., SP 63/401, f. 174).

11 Santry to lords justices, [20 Nov. 1738] (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/181); lords justices to lord lieutenant, 22 Dec. 1738 (P.R.O., SP 63/401, f. 196).

12 Lords justices to lord lieutenant, 20 Nov. 1738 (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/183); lords justices to prime serjeant, attorney general and solicitor general, 20 Nov. 1738 (ibid.); Hardwicke to Devonshire, 25 Nov. 1738 (Chatsworth, Devonshire MSS, 253.0); Edward Walpole to Devonshire, 25 Nov. 1738 (ibid., 245.7).

13 Lords justices to lord lieutenant, 27 Nov. 1738 (P.R.O., SP 63/401, f. 180); lords justices to lord lieutenant, 22 Dec. 1738 (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/189); John Potter to Devonshire, 9 Dec. 1738 (Chatsworth, Devonshire MSS, 252.0).

14 Devonshire to Boulter, 2 Dec. 1738 (Chatsworth, Devonshire MSS, 163.1); lords justices to lord lieutenant, 4 Dec. 1738 (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/188).

15 Lords justices to lord lieutenant, 12 Jan. 1739 (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/190); lords justices to lord lieutenant, 12 Feb. 1739 (ibid., T/3019/191).

16 Henry Cavendish to Devonshire, 28 Apr. 1739 (Chatsworth, Devonshire MSS, 261.1); Gilbert, Dublin, iii, 89–92.

17 ‘The trial of Henry Baron Barry of Santry … on 27 April 1739’ (King’s Inns Archives, P/1.2); Gilbert, Dublin, iii, 91–5; [Bowes] to Potter, [Dec. 1738] (Chatsworth, Devonshire MSS, 261.2); Tickell to Walpole, 28 Apr. 1739 (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/193); draft warrant for the execution of Lord Santry, 27 Apr. 1739, in Calendar of miscellaneous letters and papers prior to 1760 (N.A.I.).

18 Philip Perceval to Lord Perceval, 31 Mar. 1720 (B.L., Add. MS 47029, f. 28); Midleton to Thomas Brodrick, 20 Apr. 1720 (Surrey Record Office, Midleton MSS, 1248/4, f. 247); Arthur St Leger to Lord Londonderry, 18 Mar. 1720 (P.R.O.N.I., Chancery papers: Ridgeway-Pitt estate, T/3425/2/18); Midleton to Henry Boyle, 24 Mar. 1720 (ibid., Shannon papers, D/2707/A1/2/8A).

19 Dublin Courant, 9 May 1720; Lunham, T.A., ‘Some historical notices of Cork in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries’ in R.S.A.I. Jn., xxxiv (1904), p. 66Google Scholar. The suggestion that Cotter was ever under threat of being drawn and quartered is wholly incorrect. This form of punishment was confined to convicted traitors. Rape was defined as a felony, not treason. See Ó Buachalla, ‘Cork Jacobite’, p. 480; Kelly, ‘Rape in eighteenth-century Ireland’, pp 81–2.

20 Whalley’s Newsletter, 19 May 1720; Cullen, Emergence of modern Ireland, pp 33–4, 199, 212; idem, ‘The 1798 rebellion in its eighteenth-century context’ in Corish, P.J. (ed.), Radicals, rebels and establishments: Historical Studies XV (Belfast, 1985), p. 100Google Scholar; idem, ‘Catholics under the penal laws’ in Eighteenth-Century Ireland, i (1986), p. 32; Fagan, Second city, p. 154.

21 Tickell to Walpole, 28 Apr. 1739 (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/193); representation to the lord lieutenant, [28 Apr. 1739?] (ibid., T/3019/196); petition of Henry Barry, late Lord Baron Barry of Santry, [Apr. 1739?] (ibid., T/3019/195); lords justices to lord lieutenant, 30 Apr. 1739 (ibid., T/3019/194); Boulter to Devonshire, 28 Apr. 1739 (Chatsworth, Devonshire MSS, 242.4); lords justices to lord lieutenant, 25 May 1739 (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, 173019/198).

22 Faulkner’s Dublin Journal, 21–24 June 1740.

23 Edward Madden to Sir Compton Domvile, 17 Jan. 1740 (N.L.I., MS 11793/11); Mr Campbell’s account of Lord Santry’s rental, 1702 (ibid., MS 9397/2); Lords’ jn. Ire., iii, 381; Madden to Domvile, 19 Dec. 1740 (N.L.I., MS 11793/3).

24 Madden to Domvile, 25 Nov. 1740 (N.L.I., MS 11793/8); Domvile to Wilmot, 2 May 1741 (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/284-5); petition of Lord Barry of Santry, 14 July 1741 (P.R.O., SP 63/404, f. 53); Domvile and Wingfield to ———, 1 Dec. 1741 (N.L.I., MS 11793/2); Lords’ jn. Ire., iii, 524–5, 532.

25 Madden to William Chappel, 8 Sept. 1744 (N.L.I., MS 11793/1); Santry to Madden, 26 Sept. 1744 (ibid., MS 11973/20); Madden to Santry, July 1747 (ibid., MS 9397/10).

26 Adams, B.W., The history and description of Santry and Cloghan parishes, County Dublin (London, 1883), p. 109Google Scholar.

27 Lavalin Nugent to Margaret Savage, 26 Apr. 1739 (P.R.O.N.I., Savage papers, D/552/A/2/10/1).

28 John Potter to Robert Legge, 12 Feb. 1740 (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/230); [Domvile] to Wilmot, 4 July 1741 (ibid., T/3019/307); Wilmot to Potter, 15 Aug. 1741, in Calendar of departmental correspondence, 1741–59 (N.A.I.).

29 Santry to Madden, 22 Dec. 1746, [June 1747], 23 Nov. 1747, 11 Feb. 1749 (N.L.I., MS 11973/20); Santry to Lady Domvile, 24 July 1743 (ibid.).

30 Madden to Domvile, 17 Mar. 1751 (N.L.I., MS 11793/15); Dublin Journal, 2 Apr. 1751; G.E.C., Peerage, i, 449.

31 Cotter to ———, 3 Feb. 1718 (N.L.I., MS 711, pp 138–9); Lunham, T.A., ‘Early Quakers in Cork’ in Cork Hist. Soc. Jn., x (1904), pp 107-10Google Scholar; Froude, , English in Ireland, i, 433Google Scholar; Whalley’s Newsletter, 19 May 1720.

32 Dublin Courant, 18 May 1720. It should also be noted that the surviving records of the Religious Society of Friends in Ireland contain no mention of an Elizabeth Squibb.

33 Rumours also circulated suggesting that the local Quakers had attempted to suborn witnesses, and a war of words ensued between them and Cotter. See Cotter to Richard Bourke, 17 Feb. 1719 (N.L.I., MS 711, p. 140); Dublin Courant, 9 Mar. 1719.

34 Hogan & Ó Buchalla (eds), ‘Letters & papers’, p. 94; Evans to Abp Wake, 22 Mar. 1723 (Christ Church, Oxford, Wake MSS, xiv, f. 61).

35 Ó Buachalla, ‘Cork Jacobite’, pp 478–97; Cullen, Emergence of modern Ireland, p. 199; Foghludha, Risteárd Ó, Cois na cora: Liarn Ruadh Mac Coitir agus a shaothar fileata (Dublin, 1937), p. 13Google Scholar.

36 On Mr Cotter By George Bate’ in Hyde, Douglas and O’Donoghue, D.J. (eds), Catalogue of the books and manuscripts comprising the library of the late Sir John T. Gilbert (Dublin, 1918), p. 933Google Scholar; Perceval to Berkeley Taylor, 5 Apr. 1720 (B.L., Egmont papers, Add. MS 46971, f. 35); Midleton to Brodrick, 20 Mar. 1720 (Surrey Record Office, Midleton MSS, 1248/4, f. 441); Cotter jury panel (N.L.I., MS 711, p. 154); Berry, H.F., ‘Justices of the peace for the county of Cork’ in Cork Hist. Soc. Jn., iii (1897), pp 58–65Google Scholar; [Robert, , Molesworth, Viscount], Some considerations for the promoting of agriculture, and employing the poor (Dublin, 1723), pp 6–7Google Scholar; [Skelton, Philip], A dissertation on the constitution and effects of a petty jury (Dublin, 1737), p. 18Google Scholar.

37 Cullen, ‘Catholics under the penal laws’, p. 32; Simms, J.G., ‘The Irish parliament of 1713’ in Hayes-McCoy, G.A. (ed.), Historical Studies IV (London, 1963), pp 82–92Google Scholar; Commons’ jn. Ire., ii, 767.

38 Dublin Courant, 21 Apr. 1719; Berkeley Taylor to Perceval, 14 May 1719 (B.L., Egmont papers, Add. MS 46970, f. 52); Evans to Wake, 11 Apr. 1719 (Christ Church, Oxford, Wake MSS, xiii, f. 50); Dublin Courant, 25 Apr. 1719.

39 Arthur St Leger to Lord Londonderry, 17 Jun. 1720 (P.R.O.N.I., Chancery papers: Ridgeway-Pitt estate, T/3425/2/22); Midleton to Brodrick, 20 Mar. 1720 (Surrey Record Office, Midleton MSS, 1248/4, f. 442); Cullen, Emergence of modern Ireland, p. 199.

40 See, for example, Fiannachta, Pádraig Ó, Lámhscríbhinní Gaeilge Choláiste Phádraig Má Nuad (Maynooth, 1966), p. 25Google Scholar;, Midleton to Brodrick, 8 Apr. 1719 (Surrey Record Office, Midleton MSS, 1248/4, f. 121); Midleton to Boyle, 24 Mar. 1720 (P.R.O.N.I., Shannon papers, D/2707/A1/2/8A).

41 Carswell, John, The South Sea Bubble (London, 1960), pp 229–315Google Scholar; Griffin, Joseph, ‘Parliamentary politics in Ireland during the reign of George I’ (unpublished M.A. thesis, University College, Dublin, 1977), pp. 15–19Google Scholar; Midleton to Brodrick, 20 Apr. 1720 (Surrey Record Office, Midleton MSS, 1248/4, f. 247).

42 Marshall, Alan, Intelligence and espionage in the reign of Charles II, 1660–1685 (Cambridge, 1994), pp 298–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cuív, Breandán Ó, ‘James Cotter, a seventeenth-century agent of the crown’ in R.S.A.I. Jn., lxxxix (1959), pp 135-59Google Scholar; Ludlow, Edmund, Memoirs (3 vols, Vevay, 1699), iii, 235Google Scholar; A long history of a short session of a certain parliament in a certain kingdom (Dublin, 1714), p. 41; A new journey to France (Dublin, 1715), pp 111–15.

43 Arthur St Leger to ———, 27 June 1720 (P.R.O.N.I., Chancery papers: Ridgeway-Pitt estate, T/3425/2/23); Midleton to Brodrick, 20 Apr. 1720 (Surrey Record Office, Midleton MSS, 1248/4, f. 247).

44 Bishop Burnet’s history of his own time, ed. R[outh], M.J (6 vols, Oxford, 1823), iv, 403Google Scholar; Remarks and recollections of Thomas Hearne (11 vols, Oxford, 1885–1921), vii, 322; The prose works of Jonathan Swift, ed. Davis, Herbert (14 vols, Oxford, 1939-68), v, 274Google Scholar; The diary of Dudley Ryder, 1715–16, ed. Matthews, William (London, 1939), p. 86Google Scholar; The diary of Mary, Countess Cowper, lady of the bedchamber to the princess of Wales (London, 1864), pp 12–13, 80–81.

45 Midleton to Brodrick, 29 Apr. 1720 (Surrey Record Office, Midleton MSS, 1248/4, f. 256); Brodrick to Midleton, 29 Apr. 1720 (ibid., 1248/4, f. 257).

46 The correspondence of Jonathan Swift, ed. Ball, F.E (6 vols, London, 1910-14) v, 437-8Google Scholar; Boulter to Devonshire, 28 Apr. 1739 (Chatsworth, Devonshire MSS, 242.4).

47 Craig, Maurice, The Volunteer earl (London, 1948), p. 191Google Scholar; idem, Dublin, 1660–1860 (London, 1952), pp 153–4.

48 Petition of Henry Barry, [Apr. 1739?] (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/195); Law quibbles; or a treatise of the evasions, tricks, turns, and quibbles commonly used in the profession of the law (Dublin, 1724), pp 61–2.

49 The petition of Henry Barry, Baron Barry of Santry, to James, duke of Ormonde, lord lieutenant of Ireland (Dublin, 1711); Abp King to Jonathan Swift, 27 Oct. 1711, in The correspondence of Jonathan Swift, ed. Williams, Harold (5 vols, Oxford, 1963-5), i, 264Google Scholar; warrant of Henry Barry, third Baron Barry of Santry (N.L.I., MS 9402); Josiah Hort to duke of Wharton, 8 Oct. 1719 (Bodl., Carte MS 244, ff 313–14); Gilbert, Dublin, iii, 95.

50 Boulter to Devonshire, 3 May 1739 (Chatsworth, Devonshire MSS, 242.5); petition to the lord lieutenant, May 1741 (P.R.O.N.I., Wilmot papers, T/3019/285). The fact that Santry bequeathed his estates to Domvile, despite having remarried after the death of his first wife, and despite being totally ostracised by his uncle after his pardon, might be seen as indicative of Santry’s acknowledgement of his debt to Domvile. It should also be noted that the solicitor who managed Santry’s bill in England was experienced in handling such semi-official legislation, having been responsible for several Irish turnpike bills; this lawyer was also a relative of Robert Jocelyn, one of the prosecuting council. (I owe this information to Dr T. C. Barnard.)

51 Garnham, Courts, crime & the criminal law, pp 104–18, 210–26.

52 Howell, T.B. and Howell, T.J. (eds), A complete collection of state trials and proceedings for high treason and other crimes and misdemeanours from the earliest period to the year 1783 (34 vols, London, 1811-26), xix, 885–980Google Scholar; Furneaux, Robert, Tried by their peers (London, 1959), p. 85Google Scholar. For the subsequent trial and acquittal of another Irish peer for murder see Garnham, Courts, crime & the criminal law, pp 253, 265.

53 For permission to consult and to refer to manuscript sources in their care I am extremely grateful to: the Deputy Keeper of the Records, Public Record Office of Northern Ireland; the Council of King’s Inns, Dublin; the British Library Board; the Archivist in Charge, Guildford Muniment Room, Surrey Record Office; the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, the Public Record Office, London; the Director, National Archives, Dublin; the Governing Body, Christ Church, Oxford; the Director, the National Library of Ireland; and the Keeper of Collections, Chatsworth. For access to particular collections I would like to thank Derbyshire County Council and Mr D. W. H. Neilson (Wilmot papers); the earl of Shannon (Shannon papers); and the late Sir Roland Nugent, the late Lady Nugent, and the late Mrs Elizabeth Cooke (Savage papers). For their comments on earlier drafts of this paper I am extremely grateful to Dr T. C. Barnard and Professor S. J. Connolly.