Old Bridge, Bridge Street, Gormond's Gate, New Row, Mullinahac.

Chapter IX.

The Old Bridge - The Bridge-street - Gormond’s Gate - The New-Row - Mullinahac.

No record has hitherto been discovered to determine the period at which the first bridge was erected across the Liffey at Dublin. The native Irish chroniclers state that King Melaghlin or Malachy, in the year 1001, built a causeway at *Ath Cliath *or Dublin till it reached half the river (Tochar Atha Cliath do denamh La Maolsechlainn, go ruige leth na h-abhunn); and the ancient historical narrative of the wars of the Irish with the Northmen, in describing the last combat which took place on the battle-field of Clontarf A. D. 1014, says: “Then the men of Connacht and the foreigners of *Ath Cliath *(Dublin) commenced to slaughter each other, and but few escaped on either side. This was the last general fight on Cluain *Tarbh, *and of the two battalions of the foreigners of *Ath Cliath *who had come thither, there survived but nine men, who were pursued by the household troops of Tadhg O’Kelly (King of Hy Many), and slain at the head of the bridge of *Ath Cliath *that is the Bridge of Dubhghall. These details are narrated as follows in the original work:

“Iomthusa Connacht: Do gabadar féin acas goill Atha Cliath ar chomhmargad a cheile, acus ba suaill nar bo comtuitim diobh uile leth as leth, acus is é sin imbualadh déidenach boi ar Chluain tarbh. Acas ni deachaidh don dara cath do cuatar goill Atha cliath ann ar aen rian acht nonbar amhain, acus ro leansat lucht tighe Taidhg í Ceallaigh iad, gur marbhsat a-ccinn droichit Atha cliath iad .i. droichet Dubhghaill.” [I have transcribed this as accurately as I can from the old Irish characters. KF]

A pedigree in the “Book of Leinster” mentions that Maelmordha Mac Murchadha was slain after the same battle by Gilla Barrini at the “Bridge of Dubhghall;” and the native annals record that in 1112 the great northern clan of Cineal Eoghain ravaged Fingal as far as the “Bridge of Dubhghall.”

Of the personage from whom the Bridge of Dublin acquired the title of *Droicheat Dubhghaill, *no account is now extant. The name *Dubh- Gall *signifies literally a black or dark-complexioned foreigner; the appellation of *Gall *or stranger having been indiscriminately used by old Irish writers to designate the inhabitants of distant countries. The Tuatha de Danann tribes who settled in Ireland at a very remote period have been always described as a dark-complexioned people, highly skilled in arts and mechanism; we find, however, that the name of Dubhghall existed among the northern Irish clans in the 10th century, and Dubhghall, son of Amhlaeibh, one of the ” Tanists,” or heirs apparent, of the Northmen, is recorded to have fallen at the battle of Clontarf, A. D. 1014.

From being the medium of communication with the Scandinavian colonists on the northern side of the Liffey, the bridge was occasionally styled, in early Anglo-Irish documents, “Pons Ostmannorum,” or the Bridge of the Ostmans, whence its erection was conjecturally ascribed to the Danes, styled *Dubh-ghaill *by Irish chroniclers. This supposition, however, was mainly supported by a misinterpretation of the phrase *Droiciteat Dubhghaill, *meaning literally the bridge of a certain person named Dubhghal, Dugald, or Doyle - whereas, had it been designed to convey the idea of the bridge of the Danes, the correct construction of the phrase would have been *Droicheat na-nDubhghall. *We have, moreover, no notice of any bridge having been built in Ireland by the Scandinavians, while various bridges are stated to have been erected by the native Irish at an early era. Fiachna, King of Uladh, or Ulster, in the eighth century, is recorded to have been styled “Black Fiachna, the Bridge-builder,” from the edifices erected by him: “as lais,” writes Mac Firbis, “do ronadh droicheatt na feirsi agus droicheatt Mona Daimh et alios, gona Fiachna dubh droithcheach a ainm sidhen.” The name of Drogheda, Latinized into *Vadi-pontum, *or *Pontana, *was originally formed from the Gaelic *Droicheat atha, *the Bridge of the Ford. King Cormac’s *Sanasan *or Glossary, compiled in the ninth century, tells us that the word *Droichet, *then and still used by the native Irish to designate a bridge, was derived either from the verb *Doroichet, *to pass, or from the word *Drochshet, *a strait or bad passage: “Droichet .i. doroichet cach taris ón ur co araile do’n uisce no na fede: drochshet din i sét direch, ar is droch cach n-direc .i. ni talla nemdirghe do ar nab tusledach. No droch-shet ar a olcás.”

The old Brehon Laws required that the *Ollamh Saor *or chief builders should be proficient in the art of erecting bridges, the payment for which was minutely regulated, and the art displayed in the construction of various ancient stone edifices in Ireland confirms the accounts transmitted to us of the skill of the early Irish architects, one of the most eminent of whom was *Goban, *whose father Tuirbhi possessed the locality a few miles from Dublin, now styled Turvey, and formerly called *Traigh Tuirthi, *or the strand of Tuirbhi, “the affectionate keen father of Goban.” Goban, who flourished in the seventh century, is still commemorated in the traditions of the peasantry as “*Goban Saer,” *or Goban the artificer, thus confirming the ancient prediction that his fame as a builder both in wood and stone would exist in Erin to the end of time; “famossisimus,” says the old writer, “in omni arte lignorum et lapidum erat in Hibernia nomine Gobbanus, cujus artis fama usque in finem saeculi erit in ea.”

One of the public city officers, cursed by Lorcan O’Tuathal, Archbishop in 1162, is recorded to have died from the effects of a fall upon the Bridge of Dublin; various grants of land in the vicinity of which are still extant. King John, in 1200, exempted the citizens from the impost of pontage, a tax levied for building and repairing bridges; and in a despatch dated 23rd August, 1214, the same monarch informed the Archbishop, Henri de Loundres, that he had given the citizens permission to erect a new bridge across the Liffey, and to take down the former one, should they so desire - “quod,” says the record, “fieri faciant unu~ ponte~ uta aquao de Avenlith ubi poci9 viðint expedire ad utilitateo civitatis n’re, et qð aliuo ponteo ulta aquam illam pri’ factuo diriu faciaot, si hoc expediens fuerit iodempnitati eoro, et ideo vob’ mandam’ qð hoe ita fieri permittatis.” [The Latin is littered with symbols I have never come across before. I have done my best to transcribe them. KF] The existence of the ancient bridge here referred to is further confirmed by the following statement:

“In sinking for a foundation for the south abutment of Whitworth Bridge, in 1816, it was found that the foundation of the Old Bridge, which occupied the site, stood upon the ruins of another still more ancient. The stones of which it was formed rather resembled Portland stone than any of the sorts found in Ireland. These were regularly laid, connected by iron cramps, on a platform of oak timber, supported by small piles, shod with iron, which was completely oxidated, and being incrusted with sandy matter, the lower ends of the piles were as hard as stone, as if entirely petrified. It is supposed,” adds our authority, “that the Old Bridge was first constructed as early as the reign of King John, but these ruins indicate that a bridge of a better and more artificial construction had, at a more remote period, preoccupied the situation.”

On the 3rd of July, 1215, King John formally granted his charter to the citizens of Dublin, authorising them to erect a bridge across the Liffey, in such a situation as they deemed most expedient: “Quod faciant unum pontem ultra aquam de Avenlith, ubi p[?]viðint si t [?] civitati nre pdce mag’ expedire.”

The old Anglo-Irish tradition relative to Little John’s visit to Ireland is narrated as follows by a local chronicler in the 16th century: “There standeth in Ostmantowne Greene an hillocke, named Little John his shot. The occasion proceeded of this. In the yeare one thousand one hundred foure score and nine, there ranged three robbers and outlaws in England, among which Robert Hood and Little John were cheefeteins, of all theeves doubtlesse the most courteous. Robert Hood being betraied at a nunrie in Scotland called Bricklies, the remnant of the crue was scattered, and everie man forced to shift for himselfe. Whereupon Little John was faine to flee the realme by sailing into Ireland, where he sojourned for a few daies at Dublin. The citizens being done to understand the wandering outcast to be an excellent archer, requested him hartilie to trie how far he could shoot at random: who yeelding to their behest, stood on the Bridge of Dublin, and shot to that mole hill, leaving behind him a monument, rather by his posteritie to be wondered, than possiblie by anie man living to be counter-scored. But as the repaire of so notorious a champion to anie countrie would soone be published, so his abode could not be long concealed: and therefore to eschew the danger of lawes, he fled into Scotland, where he died at a towne or village called Moravie.”

A deed of 1307 mentions shops with certain other buildings upon the Bridge; and Edward II., in 1310, licensed Geoffroi de Mortagne, citizen of Dublin, to erect a well fortified and embattled tower on the southern end of the bridge, and a second tower at the corner of the wall from the aforesaid bridge towards the west, permission being granted to De Mortagne to build his own houses between those erections.

The citizens having complained that De Mortagne had encroached upon the city wall, Edward II., in 1313, directed John Wogan, then justiciary, with the Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, to examine those buildings, and restore the wall to its former condition, by the removal of all obstructions.

Letters Patent were granted on the 24th of October, 1348, to John De Graunstete to found and construct a chapel on the stone bridge of Dublin, in honour of the Virgin Mary, with an endowment of one hundred shillings annually for the support of two chaplains to celebrate divine service therein daily for Edward III., Queen Philippa, their ancestors and successors, also for the welfare of the founder, the Mayor, and commonalty of the city, and for the souls of all the faithful departed. Richard II., in 1385, in consideration of the damages and inconveniences which ensued to himself, the citizens, and other subjects of Ireland, by the fall of the great bridge of Dublin, and desiring to provide for its repair, granted to the Mayor, bailiffs, and citizens, his ferry beyond the river Liffey, with all the profits and customs for four years; empowering them to take for every passenger a farthing; for every cow, horse, &c., of twelve pence value and above, and every carcase of beef; a halfpenny; for every sheep, hog, or carcase of the same, a farthing; and in reasonable proportion for all other things at discretion, according to their quantity and value; the same, above the reasonable costs of the ferry, to be expended in rebuilding the Bridge, under the inspection of the Abbot of St Mary, Edmund Serle, Nicholas Sergeant, Robert Burnell, Nicholas, twelfth Baron of Howth, John Birmingham, and Thomas Maurewarde, to be faithfully expended by them annually during the said term.

During the viceroyalty of Richard Duke of York, 1478-9, a corporation styled the Guild of English Merchants trading in Ireland or the Fraternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, was established in the building called the Chapel del Marie du Grace, on the “Brygge end,” Dublin. A Parliament held at Dublin in 1481 enacted a Statute incorporating this body at the petition of its master and wardens, James Welles, Thomas Whelbred, and Richard Pylkynton, authorizing the admission of honest and skilful men and women into the Fraternity, and prohibiting all English merchants, except members or agents of the Guild, from trading in those parts of Ireland where the writ of the King of England was obeyed. The Fraternity was authorized to elect masters and wardens, to enact laws for their own government, to appoint beadles, use a common seal, to hold a court, and adjudicate upon all disputes and differences arising amongst the English merchants trading in Ireland, and to commit all transgressors to the city gaol or to the Castle, the constable of which was directed to receive prisoners upon the warrant of the master and wardens of the Guild. The Fraternity was also licensed to acquire property to the annual value of forty pounds for the support of their institution, and the maintenance of a priest to celebrate divine service daily for the welfare of the King, the Lord Deputy, and all members of the Society. The chantry of the Guild of Merchants, having fallen into disuse at the Reformation, was leased to Ralph Grimesditch, who in 1592 paid an annual rent of 13s. 4d. as “farmer of a chapel called Out Lady’s Chapel, on the north side of the Bridge.” Dr. Thomas Burke, Roman Catholic Bishop of Ossory, who erroneously ascribes the construction of the Bridge to the Dominican order, tells us that he remembered having seen in his youth an ancient vase on the Bridge, which, according to tradition, had been used for holding holy water to sprinkle the passengers. The Bridge-gate is described, in the reign of Elizabeth, as “a square tower, two stone hie, the loer storie is a vawte with two lowps, the upper storie is a timber lofte and no lowpe. The towre is square, eighteene foote one waye, and fourteene foote another waye, the wall seven foote thicke, and thirty foote hie from the pavement.” A public clock was, in 1573, set up on the southern side of this gate, on the northern end of which were subsequently erected the royal arms with an inscription, dated 1593, in which year the edifice was repaired, having become decayed through age.

After the execution of Sir Felim O’Neil, in 1652, his head was “set upon the gate that stood at the foot of the Bridge,” his body having been cut into quarters, which were sent to different parts of the kingdom.

The “Old Bridge,” popularly so called, continued to be the only edifice of that nature connecting the northern and southern sides of the city of Dublin, until the erection of the “Bloody Bridge” in 1670. A Statute passed in 1697 enacted that lamps should be erected for “sufficiently enlightening the Old Bridge,” the feat of leaping off which into the Liffey became, at the commencement of the 18th century, much in fashion among the apprentices and youths of Dublin. With reference to the performance of this exploit the biographer of Charles Macklin, the actor and dramatist, observes that: “While at school he was celebrated for feats of prowess and valour. He was more than a match at boxing and cudgel-playing for any boy of his age - and excelled in swimming, even there, where that art has always been carried to a degree of perfection so great as to surprise all foreigners who have occasion to visit Dublin. The practice of leaping off the bridges of Dublin, and off the masts of ships into the river, was not then so common as it has since become. It was at that time (1705) deemed an act of heroism, and Macklin was among the first, if not the very first, who undertook that seemingly hazardous feat of leaping from the Old Bridge into the Liffey.”

Among the notorieties of Dublin for half a century, from the year 1720, was a poor paralyzed cripple, popularly styled “Hackball,” who stationed himself on the Old Bridge, whence he occasionally drove through the city in a small car drawn by a young mule or by two large dogs. Various attempts made to restrain him from begging having proved ineffectual, he became generally recognised as King of the Dublin Mendicants, and many *jeux d’esprit *in prose and verse were published relative to “His Lowness, Prince Hackball.”

The Old Bridge, built upon four arches, “remained a long time mouldering in decay; a blemish amidst so many fine pontal edifices;” and Dr. John Rutty, the Quaker naturalist, was so strongly impressed with the belief that the structure would fall while he was crossing it, that for thirty years he made a detour to avoid that danger. The Old Bridge was at length replaced by Whitworth Bridge, so styled from its foundation having been laid on the 16th of October, 1816, by Charles Earl of Whitworth, then Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.

The passage from the southern end of the Bridge to Cook-street was anciently known as “Vicus Pontis,” and still retains the name of Bridge-street. Portion of Bridge-street was destroyed in 1393 by a fire, which also consumed various rolls of particulars (“Rotuli particularum”) in the custody of John le Sargeaunt, then resident in this locality.

Mr. Plunket’s house in the Bridge-street is mentioned as one of the places frequented by Roman Catholic priests in the reign of James I., and the order of Capuchins, established for the first time in Ireland in 1623, under the presidency of Father Edmund Ling, founded a convent about that period in this street, where they celebrated Mass and preached in “a pretty little chapel or chamber.” A Dublin writer in 1634 comments as follows on the costumes of the Capuchins and Franciscans:-

“The Capuchin hath a large frise coat to the foot, with a piece of course canvas square, one halfe yard upon the back, girded unto him with a rude massie rope, with a great knot before, and unto this coat sewed a steepled hood, or capuch, from whence they have the name of Capuchins, of wellneere two foot long, from the basis to the conus, and over this coat they have a cloake of the same frise, comming a little below the waste. When as the Cordelier professing the same order of S. Francis, and the same rule, hath a coat of much better frise, without that square canvas on the back, with a hood or a capuch not steepled at all, but round, and fitted unto his head, a girdle of a cord, from whence he bath his name of Cordelier, the same handsomely wrought with many artificiall knobs, orderly placed by equall distances, asleeve, O, heavenly wide, which, besides the arme, will well containe a couple of cheeses quartered, or a gamon of bacon a-piece, or as many puddings as would well neere serve a whole convent of friars for their breakfast, and over all this they have a cloak of the same frise descending almost unto the foot. Observe then how different these habits be, and yet these Franciscans againe which are of the reformation of S. Diego, they have a distinct habit both from the Capuchin and Cordelier.”

In 1630, the Capuchin Convent, with another Roman Catholic chapel in Bridge-street, was seized by the Government, and, with the Jesuits’ College in Back-lane, conferred on the University of Dublin, from the records of which it appears, that “two Bachelors were appointed Masters in Bridge-street, and their place to be annually elective. And, some time after, there is an entry that a Bachelor was appointed Lecturer of all the Undergraduates in Bridge-street, to receive a quarterly tuition, and also the same quarterly rent for their chambers as were paid in Trinity College, viz., 3s. 4d. from a Fellow Commoner, and 1s. 8d. from a Pensioner. How long these houses remained in the possession of the College cannot be ascertained. They were certainly occupied by them in 1637. The enemies of Lord Strafford laid to his charge at his trial, that he had restored to the Papists two Mass-houses which had been assigned to the use of the University; but he defended himself by alleging that they had been restored in consequence of suits at the Council Board; and that he had endeavoured to maintain their seizure.” The University located about 18 scholars in this convent, which was styled “St. Stephen’s Hall,” prayers being read there twice a day, and it continued to be known as “the College in Bridge-street,” down to the year 1647.

Roger O’More of Ballynagh, the originator of the Irish movement in 1641, is stated to have escaped apprehension on the 22nd of October in that year, by removing from his lodgings at the house of Moor, an inhabitant of Bridge-street. “Next morning he heard of the seizure of Maguire and Mac Mahon, that a diligent search was made for him, and a large reward offered for apprehending him. Some friends got a boat, put themselves in sailors’ clothes, and he, in the same garb, got into it, was rowed to Island Bridge, from whence in time of the night, he got to his daughter, Sarsfield’s, at Lucan, rested a few hours, and went to Ballynagh, where he had hopes of being able to conceal himself, as the country was then all wooded, and that he had some dependence on the people.”

The host of Roger O’More appears to have been Patrick Moor, merchant, father of Dr. Michael Moor, who was born in Bridge-street in 1640, and after having completed his studies abroad, was appointed Vicar-General of Dublin by Patrick Russell, Roman Catholic Archbishop of that See. Moor was the chaplain and confessor of the Duke of Tyrconnell, on whose recommendation James II. appointed him Provost of Trinity College, the library of which he preserved during the Williamite wars, after which he retired to Paris, and was there “highly caressed on the score of his learning and integrity.” He was subsequently appointed Censor of books at Rome, and appointed Rector of, and Professor of Philosophy and Greek in, Cardinal Barberini’s newly erected College of Montefiascone, which, in consequence of its progress under his government, was presented by Innocent XII. with an annual donation of 2,000 crowns. Moor returned to France after the death of James II., was twice appointed Rector of the University of Paris, Principal of the College of Navarre, and was nominated Royal Professor of Greek and Hebrew by Louis XIV., who was directed by him in restoring and new-modelling the University of Paris, until then ” perplexed by the quiddities and entities of the Peripatetic School.” Moor established a Chair for Experimental Philosophy; and principally on his account Louis XIV. founded the College of Cambrai. He was so distinguished for pulpit eloquence, even in the era of Burdaloue, Bossuet, and Massillon, that the city of Paris selected him in 1702 to deliver the annual éloge upon Louis XIV.: “le Sieur Morus,” says a French contemporary, ” Recteur de l’Université de Paris, et cy-devant President du College de Dublin, prononça, avec beaucoup d’éloquence, le panégyrique du Roy, fondé par la Ville, qui s’y trouva en corps, avec un grand nombre de persones de qualité.”

Dr Moor joined with one Dr. John Farrelly in purchasing a house contiguous to the Irish College for the reception of such poor young men of Ireland who came there to study. He was blind for some years before his death, and obliged to keep a person to read to him, who made him pay dear for his trouble by embezzling and selling many hundred volumes of his choice library, the remainder of which he bequeathed to the Irish College, as he did his plate to the Leinster Provisor. He died, aged 85, in his apartments of the College of Navarre, on the 22nd of August, 1726, and was buried in the vault under the chapel of the Irish College, as he had requested in his lifetime.”

Moor’s published works are principally Latin philosophical treatises, deprecatory of the system of Descartes. Among his pupils, who, we are told, became the most celebrated in Europe, he numbered Boileau, Fontenelle, Montesquieu, Fleury, Languet, Porée, and, with many others, the famous Rollin, his immediate successor.

A place called “The Cucull or Coockolds Post,” noticed in the 16th century as “hard by Gormond’s Gate,” was subsequently built upon, and in 1669 Alderman Peter Wybrant held “a corner house, called Cuckold’s Post, at the end of Bridge-street, half standing in Pipe-street, and halt in Bridge-street.”

Among the residents in Bridge-street were Sir Paul Davis, Principal Secretary of State, 1661-1665; John Cheevers, whose son Edward was created Viscount of Mount Leinster and Baron of Bannow by James II.; Simon Luttrell of Luttrellstown, ancestor of the Carhampton family; Sir Erasmus Borrowes of Grange-Mellon, county of Kildare; and Sir John Read, racked in 1641 by the Lords Justices, who endeavoured to extort information from him concerning the relations of Charles I. with the Confederate Irish.

Here also resided Patrick Darcy, seventh son of Séamus or James O’Dorchaidhe, surnamed *Riabhach, *or the Swarthy, head of the Galway sept of that name, although modern pedigrees have been constructed to prove that this family was descended from the D’Arcys of France.

Patrick Darcy, born in 1598, was one of the most eminent Irish Roman Catholic lawyers of his time, and took an active part in the Parliamentary proceedings in 1640-41, having been selected in June of the latter year to deliver an argument at a conference of the House of Commons with a Committee of the Lords, on certain questions propounded by the Judges. His oration on this occasion was printed at Waterford in 1643, and republished at Dublin in 1764. Darcy became a member of the Supreme Council of the Confederate Irish, by whom he and his nephew Geoffrey Browne were appointed to draw up the articles of peace with the Marquis of Ormond in 1646; and he was subsequently nominated one of their commissioners to raise an army of 10,000 men, and to tax the kingdom for their pay to aid Charles I. against the Parliament. In 1660 Darcy acted as second to Sir Jerome Alexander, second Justice of the Common Pleas in his quarrel relative to precedency with his brother Judge, Sir William Aston. Darcy died in 1668, and was buried in the old Abbey of Kilconnel, county of Galway, leaving an only son, James. His house in Bridge-street, after 1641, became occupied by Derrick Westenra, a Dutch merchant, who, with his brother Warner, was naturalized in 1661. Warner Westenra purchased considerable tracts of land in the King’s County from Colonel Grace, and by marriage with Eizabeth Wybrants, became ancestor of the present Lord Rossmore. Copper tokens are still extant, issued in 1665 by Warner Westenra, whose name was for some time preserved in a lane off Bridge-street, called ” Westenra’s-alley.” On the eastern side of Bridge-street was the residence of Sir George Gilbert, Coroner of the city, and Mayor in 1661, who in 1675 was appointed Keeper of his Majesty’s great beam and common balance, with license of setting up the same in all ports, cities, and boroughs in Ireland for 61 years.

Among the residents in Bridge-street at the Restoration were the Marquis of Antrim; the Duke of Marlborough’s father, Sir Winston Churchill, one of the Commissioners of the Court of Claims; and Sir Hercules Langford, whose estates passed to the Rowleys by the marriage of his daughter Mary to Sir John Rowley in 1671.

Of the merchants who resided here about the same period may be noticed Marks Wolfe, whose name was preserved in Wolfe’s Alley; John Desminier, “at the Sugar Loaf,” Lord Mayor in 1666; Walter Motley, Lord Mayor in 1689; Sir Michael Creagh; and Alderman Luke Hore. The latter was appointed by James II. in 1689 to receive the money subscribed for the relief of his sick and wounded soldiers:-

“Whereas,” says the King, in a Proclamation dated 5th August, 1689, ” an address bath been made to us by several good and pious persons, for our license to make a collection, for the better assistance of such of the souldiers of our army, as now are, or shall be, sick and wounded in our service, - We could not but very well approve of so charitable and Christian-like a proposal, and have therefore thought fit hereby, not only to license, but also earnestly to recommend the same to all the nobility, gentry, and others throughout this kingdom, to contribute towards so good a work, in such proportion as they shall think fit. And for the further promoting and effecting thereof, We do hereby likewise recommend it to the several Archbishops and Bishops, as well Roman Catholicks as Protestants, to appoint in their respective diocesses and parishes, some fit persons to demand and receive the benevolence and charity of all good Christians for the use of the said sick and wounded souldiers; and that they do also take care) that the names of the persons who shall so contribute, together with what money stall be so collected upon that occasion, be returned and paid into the hands of Luke Hore of Dublin, merchant, who is hereby authorized to receive the same. And we shall take care that the same (over and above our allowance to such sick and wounded souldiers) be applied and issued from time to time, for the use and purpose aforesaid.”

Sir Michael Creagh sat as Member for Dublin in the Jacobite Parliament, was elected Lord Mayor in 1689, and appointed Paymaster-General by James II., for whom he levied an infantry corps styled Creagh’s Regiment. After the Williamites had obtained possession of the metropolis, Creagh’s house, together with his plate and goods, stated to have been of very great value, was seized and embezzled by Coningsby, one of the Lords Justices. Creagh subsequently solicited either a restitution of portion of his property, or a pension upon the establishment of Ireland; and in a memorial to Lord Carteret, dated 23rd of November, 1725, he speaks of the “vast losses and innocent sufferings” of himself and his three sons; adding that he had been ” reduced to the utmost want and indigency, whilst serving His Majesty or the Crown, it being now two years and a half ago since the petitioner and family parted from London:’ Creagh’s name is appended to a broadside, styled “A Poem to his Excellency the Lord Carteret, Lieutenant-General and General Governor of his Majesty’s Kingdom of Ireland, upon his safe arrival in said Kingdom.” Addressing the citizens of Dublin in 1727, Creagh alludes to his having resided for seven years in Amsterdam, and speaks as follows of himself:- “I have once been elected and sworn chief magistrate of this city, and served the usual time thereunto, though I have paid dear for it, and that but little regard is now had for my sufferings upon that account, though it were but reasonable that some consideration were had for what is justly due to me upon said account, and what all those, who preceded, and succeeded me in said station, have had to this time, I mean the £500 out of the Exchequer, besides the rest, and the more than ordinary expenses, charge, and trouble, I have been at, to save and preserve this city, and its inhabitants, when crowded and overcharged with French and other foreign Popish troops, who aimed at nothing more than the plunder and ruin, chiefly of the Protestant inhabitants; and but myself and regiment the chief protectors, and opposers to said mischief (as the worthy prelate, his Grace my Lord Archbishop of Dublin, has solemnly certified, since my coming last for Dublin), that I am, in some measure, intitled to wish and desire its welfare, and consequently may without offence to any body, give my advice and opinion to promote the publick welfare, both spiritual and temporal of its inhabitants.”

In Bridge-street, in one building, were held the Marshalseas of the city and the Four Courts, until the removal of the farmer in 1704; the latter prison was subsequently transferred to Molesworth’s Court, an Act of Parliament having been passed in 1698, directing the separation of these two gaols.

A Dominican convent was established on the eastern side of Bridge-street about the year 1708, mainly through the exertions of the Rev. Stephen Mac Egan. Nine clergymen resided in this convent, in which a sermon was preached in the Irish language at 7 o’clock on every Sunday morning. The most eminent divine connected with this convent was Dr. Thomas Burke, Roman Catholic Bishop of Ossory from 1759 to 1786, and author of the history of the Irish Dominicans, published in 1762, under the title of “Hibernia Dominicana.” Dr. Burke compiled the offices of the Irish saints appended to the Roman Catholic Missal and Breviary, and also issued, in 1772, a supplement to his “Hibernia Dominicana.” The Dominicans removed from Bridge-street about 1770, from which period their establishment there, to which theyc was also an entrance from Cook-street, became the Roman Catholic chapel of St. Audöens parish, for which purpose it was used till the completion of the new edifice in High-street, within the last few years.

In Bridge-street resided Dr. Walter Skelton, Roman Catholic Dean of Leighlin, and Rector of the parish of St. Peter, Dublin. Skelton, who was educated at the Irish College at Paris, and ordained in 1688 at Kilkenny, by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Ossory, acquired great reputation as a mathematician, and became the instructor of Charles O’Conor of Balenagar, who was sent to Dublin in 1727 to study mathematics, and make a further progress in the dead languages. The Rev. Charles O’Conor has left us the fdlowing notice of his grandfather’s instructor: “A Mr. Walter Skelton, a Roman Catholic priest, to whose care Mr. O’Conor was consigned in Dublin, and whose many acts of friendship he often mentioned to me with grateful remembrance, was well aware of the many inconveniencies brought upon youth by confining them too long to Greek and Latin. He was satisfied that his pupil should perceive the beauties of Virgil and Horace, Homer and Demosthenes; and instead of the eternal pedantry which prevailed at this time, not only among the poor vulgar Irish, but even at College, he showed him the cause of the variety of the seasons, of the inequality of days and nights, the wonders of vision, the nature of fluids, and the order of the universe. ‘Mr. Skelton,’ says he, in a letter to his friend Dr. Carpenter, ‘was the first who gave me a relish for these entertaining, edifying, and sublime studies; my mind was enlightened, and my heart, contracted hitherto by the narrowness of such selfish and bigoted times, began to dilate and to expand itself by contemplation. - What is the reason, said Skelton to me one day after dinner, that you see the light of the sun after sunset? I made some ridiculous answer, upon which he smiled, and taking the punch bowl, observe, said be, the sprig at the bottom of this bowl; withdraw from it just to such a distance as merely to lose sight of the sprig, and no more. When I had done so, he took the kettle, poured in some water, and without his moving the bowl, or my moving from my place, I again saw the sprig. There, said he, is one of the wonders of vision, and you will not tell why or how you see the light of the sun after sunset, until you can explain the cause of this other phenomenon, no less extraordinary. Here,’ adds O’Conor, ‘I called to him eagerly for an explanation, which he gave, on condition that I would apply to natural philosophy.”’

Skelton died in Bridge-street on the 31st of October, 1737, and was buried in the church of St. Fiech, at Sletty, in the Queen’s County, which had been the ancient inheritance of his ancestors.

In Bridge-street in 1739, died John Dowdal or Dorrell, Provincial of the order of Augustinian hermits, and author of a Life of St. Augustin, and of a Treatise on the Infallibility of the Roman Catholic Church. Having studied in the great Augustinian Convent at Paris, he was appointed, on his return to Ireland, preacher to James II., after whose dethronement he was intrusted by several English noblemen with the education of their children, whom he accompanied in their travels. Dowdal revisited Ireland in 1727, and in the succeeding year was appointed Provincial of his order, which office he held till the period of his death.

At the sign of the “Crown” in Bridge-street a masonic lodge used to assemble in 1751, on every second Thursday. David Gibson (1755) and Bartholomew Gorman (1763-1771) publishers, also resided in this street, which in the middle of the last century was chiefly occupied by merchants of wealth and eminence, amongst whom was Thomas Braughall, afterwards distinguished as an active advocate of the removal of the disabilities of the Irish Roman Catholics. Braughall’s house, No. 13, Bridge-street, came in 1785 into the possession of another merchant named Oliver Bond, a native of the north of Ireland, who, from the year 1782, had traded in Pill-lane as a wholesale woollen draper. Bond became a prominent member of the original Society of United Irishmen of Dublin, and on the 1st of March, 1793, he, together with the Hon. Simon Butler, were committed to Newgate by the House of Lords, and condemned to pay each a fine of £500, for having, as chairman and secretary of a meeting of the Society, authorized the publication of a document condemning the inquisitorial proceedings of Parliament, and setting forth the limits of the powers of the House of Peers. At a full meeting of the Society held on the same day, Beauchamp Bagenal Harvey, chairman, and Thomas Russell, secretary, a resolution was passed that “a deputation of five do wait, as early as possible, on the Hon. Simon Butler and Mr. Oliver Bond, to express the feelings of this Society as men, as citizens, and as United Irishmen, on the events of this day; to testify our warmest sense of gratitude for their dignified and magnanimous avowal of the resolutions of this Society before the House of Lords; and to pledge to them our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honour, that we will never forsake our officers, nor abandon the post of legal and constitutional principle which we and our officers have hitherto maintained, unshaken, unseduced, and unterrified.” Bond and Butler were obliged to discharge the fines imposed upon them, and excluded from making any appeal by the payment having been enforced at the Treasury without passing through the ordinary medium of the Revenue side of the Exchequer. On their egress from gaol, on the 16th of August, 1793, after the expiration of the term of their imprisonment, the Society presented them with a congratulatory address on the sacrifices which they had made in support of the objects of their institution. Bond, who became “prosperous in a very extensive trade, and by that tie connected with every part of the kingdom,” was described as “a man of strong mind and body, and of talents which, if perverted to the purpose of mischief, would become formidable indeed.” In 1797 he was exceedingly active in administering the oath of the United Irishmen, and in arming and embodying men for the promotion of the objects of the Association, whose meetings were generally held at 10 a. m., at his house, where Thomas Reynolds, the informer, was sworn in early in the year 1797. On the 19th of February, 1798, a provincial meeting, held at Bond’s, passed a resolution: “That we will pay no attention to any measure which the Parliament of this kingdom may adopt, to divert the public mind from the grand object we have in view, as nothing short of the entire and complete regeneration of our country can satisfy us.” This meeting was adjourned to Monday, the 12th of March, which was appointed for the general assembly of the Delegates from the province of Leinster. Information relative to those movements having been conveyed to Government by Thomas Reynolds, a warrant was issued against the suspected members of the Society, and committed for execution to William Swan, justice of the peace, who having on the night of the 11th of January privately reconnoitred Bond’s house, proceeded thither at 11 on the following morning, accompanied by 12 sergeants in coloured clothes. Sergeant-Major Galloguely was the first who entered the house, and finding Bond standing in the middle of his office, on the left side of the door, talking to two ladies and gentlemen, repeated to him the pass-words, “Where’s Mac Cann? Is Ivers from Carlow come?” Before Bond had time to make any reply, Swan entered and stated he had a warrant against him for high treason, and that he and all his inmates were the King’s prisoners. Bond was secured without any resistance; and Swan gives the following account of his subsequent proceedings:

“I then bounced up stairs; the sergeant had got into the lower part, but I bounced immediately after, and proceeded to the room - a back room - that appeared to be an addition to the house, where I received positive information they were to meet. Upon entering the room, I saw a number of persons about the room in small groups, and one man sitting at the table, with pen, ink, and paper, and a prayer-book. I snapped at the paper directly; my anxiety to seize the paper was so great that the man sitting at the table took advantage of it, and went among the groups, so that I could not identify him. The paper was fresh written - the ink hardly dry. I then, after seizing the paper, directed the several persons to hold up their hands, to prevent their destroying their papers, as I had previously directed the serjeants to be particularly attentive to watch the hands of the people, and if they saw any papers to bring them immediately to me.” Under the table was found a shamrock made of green ribbons, inscribed in gold letters, “Erin go bragh,” underneath which was a harp without a crown; and Sergeant Mac Dougall of the Dumbarton Fencibles raked with his bayonet from under the borate a small account or memorandum-book, with some other papers. The prayer-book found on the table had been used by the Delegates in swearing that they had been duly elected to attend the Council; and among the documents seized, which consisted of various letters, provincial returns, and accounts, was a list of printed toasts and sentiments, including the following: “The green flag of Ireland-May her sons unite and support it.” “Ireland a republic and the world free.” “A speedy and radical reform.” “May revolution never cease till liberty is established.” “The United Irishmen - success to their efforts.” “Mother Erin dressed in green ribbons by a French millner, if she can’t be dressed without her.” The Delegates arrested at Bond’s were - Peter Ivers, Laurence Kelly, George Cummins, John Lynch, Laurence Griffin, Thomas Reynolds, John Mac Cann, executed on 28th July, Patrick Devine, Thomas Traynor, William Michael Byrne, hanged on 19th July, Christopher Martin, Peter Bannan, James Rose, and Moore’s friend, young Edward Hudson, who was said to have fainted when Swan entered the room. Bond was brought to trial for high treason on the 23rd and 24th of July, 1798, and although defended by Curran and Ponsonby, the jury, after a deliberation of seven minutes, returned a verdict of guilty. When asked what he had to say why sentence should not be passed upon him, Bond made no reply, and Justice Day, addressing him, remarked: “It is a melancholy subject of reflection that a gentleman of your condition and figure in life, - who, under the existing laws and constitution, which you would have subverted, have flourished and accumulated great property - in the prime of life and vigour of health - endued by nature with rare accomplishments of mind and person, should have unfortunately, not only for yourself and afflicted family, but for that country to which you might have been an ornament, perverted those precious gifts of Providence, and have made so unhappy and calamitous a use of them.” At the conclusion of his address, Judge Day pronounced the following sentence upon the prisoner: “You, Oliver Bond, are to be taken from the place in which you stand to the gaol from whence you came, and thence to the common place of execution, there to be hanged by the neck, but not until you are dead, for while you are yet living, your bowels are to be taken out and thrown in your face, and your head is to be cut off, and your head and limbs to be at the King’s disposal.” Bond subsequently received a conditional pardon, but died of an apoplectic attack in Newgate; his house is now known as No. 9, Lower Bridge-street.

Various meetings of the United Irishmen were held in the “Brazen Head,” an inn located, from the year 1668, in a recess at the rere of the western side of Bridge-street, where it still exists. At one of those assemblies, in February, 1797, Oliver Bond laid before the Society a plan for obtaining possession of the metropolis; and some days after the arrest of the Delegates, another meeting held here was attended by “one Michael Reynolds of Naas, who was said to be a distant relative of Mr. Thomas Reynolds, and who had been particularly active in the Society, and useful to it. This young man addressed the meeting at some length; he said that circumstances had lately transpired in the country, and steps, with regard to individuals, had been taken by Government which made it evident that a traitor was in their camp, who must belong to one of the country committees, and one who held a high rank in their Society: that traitor, he said, was Thomas Reynolds of Kilkea Castle, and if he were allowed to proceed in his career, they and their friends would soon be the victims of his treachery. In a tone and manner which left an indelible impression on the minds of his hearers, and produced an extraordinary effect, he asked if the Society were to be permitted to be destroyed, or if Reynolds were to be allowed to live; in short, he demanded of the meeting their sanction for his removal, and undertook that it should be promptly effected. The proposal was unanimously and very properly rejected by the meeting.” Michael Reynolds, who later in the same year led the peasantry in their attack upon the barracks of Naas, was a “young man of great muscular strength and activity, of a short stature and dark complexion, and somewhat celebrated in the country for his horsemanship.”

Until late in the last century the only passage from the upper part of Bridge-street to the western side of the town was through “Gormond’s-gate,” at the south-western extremity of the street; the site of the present upper Bridge-street being occupied by the “Black Dog” Gaol, and New Hall Market, the latter containing upwards of 80 butchers’ stalls, for which the city received an annual rent of £239 15s.

Gormond’s Gate, or “Porta Gormundi,” in the city wall, appears to have been so styled from the personage whose name is preserved in “Grange Gorman,” on the northern side of the city, and who, according to legendary chroniclers, was an African prince, who subdued Ireland, and subsequently with his Irish troops, aided by Hengist and Horsa, conquered the kingdom of England. These legends were resorted to by the lawyers employed to compile the Statute declaring Elizabeth’s title to the kingdom of Ireland in 1569, which document sets forth that “afore the comming of Irishmen into Ireland they were dwelling in a province of Spain, called Biscan, whereof Bayon was a member, and chief citie; and that at the said Irishmen’s comming into Ireland, one King Gurmonde, sonne to the noble King Belan, King of Great Britaine, which nowe is called England, was Lord of Bayon, as many of his successors were to the time of King Henry the Second, first conqueror of this realm, and therefore the Irishmen should be the King of England his people, and Ireland his land.”

Thady Dowling, Chancellor of Leighlin, mentions a tradition that Gurmund, or O’Gormagheyn, founded the cathedral of that town, in which he was said to have been interred, and tells us that in 1589, “Karolus Rowac, alias Makeyigan, clerk, Donagh M’Gilpatrick, and Gilleranoy, carpenters, saw the tumbe with their eyes, and Thady Dowling cancellar ecclesiae found his epitaph in simple verse as followeth:

“Hic jacet humatus dux fundator Leniae, ici *id est Leghleniae.

*En Gorindi Burchardus vir gratus ecclesiae.’”

Dowling also adds that further vestiges of this personage were extant in the names of Gormond’s Grove and Gormond’s Ford, in the vicinity of Leighlin.

My own decided opinion,” says Gratianus Lucius, “is that those names are derived from some of the family of the O’Gormans, who were once famous for their heroic achievements. For even at the present day (1662), Gormanstown is wratten in Irish baile Ghormaín, that is, the town of Gorman; and Gorman’s Wood and Ford are called in Irish Coill and Ath Uí Ghormaín. It is highly probable, also, that Leighlin was built by an O’Gorman, and not by a foreigner called Gurmund. No person named Burchard is found in the genealogical tables of the O’Gorman family. But there is a Murchard in that line, the fifth in descent from the founder of the family; and Murchard, by a slight change of one letter, might become Burchard. He was called the son of Gorman, according to the usual custom of the Irish, who generally gave the name of some illustrious man to all his descendants, by prefixing the word Mac, that is son. But the Gorman who founded that family and name, was neither a Norwegian, as Cambrensis will have it, nor a Dane, as Ware says, but a thorough Irish-man, descended from Daire Barrach, son of Cathaeir Mor, King of Ireland, as Keating proves from the old annals. His descendants were called Mac Gormain, and, according -to O’Dubhagain, were Lords of Leinster and Kings of Ui Mairche, a tract of country lying near Sliabh Mairge.” The importance subsequently acquired by this clan in Leinster is recorded to have been predicted in the testament of Cathacir *mor, *King of Erin, in the second century, in which document that monarch is represented to have addressed as follows his second son Daire, the progenitor of the Mac Gormans.

My valor, my martial impetuosity,

I bequeath to my fierce, vigorous Daire;

The darling of the assembly

Shall every steadfast son of the tribes of thy loins be;

O, Daire, with boldness,

Sit on the frontier of North Leinster;

Thou shalt harass the lands of South Leinster.

Receive not price for thy protection;

Thy daughters shall be blest with fruitfulness

If they wed; thy old father

Cathaeir, the head of this province,

Gives thee his benediction,

That thou shouldst be a powerful champion

Over the green Gailians (men of Leinster).”

Cambrensis, who, in the twelfth century, resided for some time in Dublin, observed that no vestiges of Gurmundus were then extant, whence the legend of his having erected one of the city gates would appear to be of comparatively recent origin. Harris controverts the supposed foundation of this gate either by “Gormundus” or the Danes, and assigns its erection to a period after 1316. The latter conjecture is nevertheless erroneous, as among the manuscripts of Trinity College is preserved a deed executed about 1280, whereby Jean Le Gros granted to Roger d’Esseburn a certain piece of ground, with the buildings thereon, under Gormond’s Gate, paying 11 shillings annually to the Commonalty of Dublin: witnesses, Elyas Burel and Richard Olof; and the building appears to have been the stone gate, near the Bridge of Dublin, alluded to in a document of the year 1200. Gormond’s Gate is subsequently described as “a square tower, two stories high, whereof one room is upon a vault, with three loop-holes, the other room is a timber loft with three loop-holes, and a slate roof. The tower is square, 18 feet one way and 15 feet another way; the wall five feet thick, and 30 feet high, with a portcullis for the same gate.” In the 16th century the name of Gormond’s Gate became converted into Ormond’s Gate, which, although a mere corruption, gave rise to a legend that “the Irish assaulting the citie were discomfited by the Earle of Ormond, then by good hap sojourning at Dublin; and because he issued out at that gate, to the end the valiant exploit and famous conquest of so worthie a potentate should be ingrailed in perpetual memorie, the gate bare the name of Ormond his gate.”

The name of Gormond’s Gate, thus converted into “Ormond’s-gate,” was still further corrupted by the native Irish, who styled it *Geata na n-Iarla, *or the Earl’s Gate, from its supposed connexion win’ the Earls of Ormond ; and finally, by another change, the name of “Ormond Gate” was transformed into “Wormwood Gate:” “Haec,” observes a Latin writer, “Ormondia dicitur, Hibernicis Orwown, id est Frons Momoniae, Anglis Ormond, et plurimis corruptissime Wormewood.” A house near Gormond’s Gate was fitted up in 1678 by the Dublin Quakers for a place of worship, where “a meeting was usually held in the time of the half-year’s meeting, and Dublin Friends kept their meeting here upon the first days in the morning.”

“About the middle of the summer of 1683,” says the Quaker chronicler, “the Government gave orders to the several sorts of Dissenters in Dublin, that they should forbear meeting publicly together in their worship-houses as formerly; the Archbishop of Dublin (Francis Marsh) also sent for Anthony Sharp, and told him it was the mind and desire of the Government that Friends should also forbear meeting in their public meeting-houses; but Friends returned answer, that they believed it was their indispensable duty to meet together to worship the great God of heaven and earth, from whom we receive all our mercies, and not to forbear assembling ourselves together for fear of punishment from men, for that we met purely to worship the Lord, and not upon any other account. So, according to the desire of the Government, other professors generally left their meeting-houses, but Friends met together to worship the Lord as formerly, as they were persuaded it was their duty to do. So upon a first day in the sixth month this year came the Marshal and several of the Mayor’s officers to the meeting at Wormwood Gate, where John Burnyeat being speaking, the Marshal commanded him to go with him, which after some discourse he did. He commanded the meeting to disperse, but Friends kept quiet in their places. John was carried before the Mayor, with whom he had some discourse to this effect: he asked him, ‘Why they did act contrary to the Government, having been commanded not to meet?’ John answered, ‘We do nothing in contempt of the Government.’ But, said he, ‘Why do you not obey them?’ John replied, ‘Because it is matter of conscience to us, and that which we believe to be our indispensable duty, to meet together to worship God.’ To which he answered, ‘You may be misled.’ John told him, ‘If we are misled, we are willing to be informed, if any can do it.’ Then it was urged, ‘other Dissenters had submitted, and why would not we?’ John said, ‘What they dowill be no plea for us before the Judgement-seat of the great God. So after some other discourse the Marshal committed John to the Marshalsea Prison, to which also were taken afterwards Alexander Seaton, Anthony Sharp, and others. Now,” adds the Quaker historian, “several sober persons observing other professors to shrink in this time of persecution, whilst Friends kept their meetings as usual, came to our meetings and became faithful Friends.” In 1686 the Quakers relinquished the house at Wormwood Gate, which was found to be too small and not sufficiently commodious. In the last century Elizabeth Salmon held from the Corporation, at an annual rent of five pounds, a part of the old town ditch near “Gorman’s Gate;” and although no vestiges of the portal now exist, the name of” Wormwood Gate” is still applied to 11 houses erected on portion of its site.

Extending towards Newgate from the southern side of Gormond’s Gate stood a range of buildings styled the “New Row,” erected about the middle of the 16th century. In this locality was the residence of Samuel Molyneux, third son and heir to Daniel Molyneux, Ulster King-at-Arms, and father of Thomas and William Molyneux. Samuel Molyneux, although originally educated for the Church, entered the army, and served through the wars of 1641, in which he distinguished himself as a proficient in engineering and gunnery; and it is recorded that, at the battle of Ross, he so disposed the small cannon, that one discharge of two pieces destroyed 80 men and horses. After the termination of the civil wars, Molyneux declined the appointment of Recorder of Dublin, as well as an offer of a portion of the Down Survey, preferring to occupy the office of Master-Gunner of Ireland. “He had a gun-yard enclosed in the field belonging to the Soldiers’ Hospital, with a butt and culverin mounted, and about half a mile of ground worked out for the random shot of the mortar; he was eminently skilled and curious in the art, and kept the place of Mortar Gunner merely for the delight he had in making experiments in that way; he used to say, it was his friend in time of need, when he had no other support; that he loved it, and would stick to it for old friendship’s sake. He wrote a book of gunnery according to the principles of Gallieo and Torricelli, ‘de motu projectuum,’ after he was 70 years of age;” and William Molyneux in a letter in 1684 says:- “My father is now employed in casting a mortar piece for the King, of 14 inches’ diameter, which carries a ball of 200 lbs. We shall so fortify it, that I question not but to shoot two miles, as the French do at Genoa.”

Captain Samuel Molyneux, who died in 1693, was a “man of excellent judgment, and, at the same time, of a lively and vivacious disposition - tolerably well read in natural philosophy, and a nice and curious observer of nature - an excellent mathematician, and particularly remarkable for pleasantry in conversation, and aptness in story-telling-and so much was he admired by all who knew him that he bore the soubriquet of ‘Honest Sam Molyneux.’ So smoothly did this good man glide through the vale, that he never had a contest or a law-suit with any one. His filial piety was the theme of admiration, and the poor weekly partook of his bounty at his door. He has declared that he was never guilty of intemperance but once in his life, and that by accident; and this is more astonishing in the life of a soldier of his time. He was a constant reader of the Sacred Scriptures, and so attached to the Church of England, that even in Cromwell’s time he always found some private meeting where the Liturgy formed part of the service - and for fifty years he had never laid down on a bed of sickness.”

His son William, after having passed through the University of Dublin, studied for three years in the Middle Temple, and through his interest with the Duke of Ormond, was appointed in 1684, joint Surveyor of the King’s Buildings and Works in Ireland, having in the preceding year originated the Philosophical Society of Dublin, to which he was elected Secretary. Molyneux was sent by Government in 1685 to survey the most important fortresses in the Netherlands, and in 1690 constituted Commissioner for stating the accounts of the army, elected Member of Parliament for the University in 1692, and appointed Master in Chancery in 1695.

William Molyneux distinguished himself by various writings on philosophy, natural history, and astronomy, the two principal of whch were the following:-

Sciothericum Telescopicum, or a new contrivance of adapting a telescope to an horizontal dial for observing the moment of time by day or night; useful in all astronomical observations, and for regulating and adjusting curious pendulum watches, and other time-keepers, with proper tables requisite thereunto.” 4to, Dublin, 1686: and - “Dioptrica Nova: a treatise of Dioptricks, in two parts; wherein the various effects and appearances of spherick glasses, both convex and concave, single and combined, in telescopes and microscopes, together with their usefulness in many concerns of human life, are explained.” 4to, London, 1692.

Writing to his brother Thomas, in 1694, William Molyneux says: “My library consists of but a few volumes (I think at present not much above one thousand), but they are such as are choice and curious on those subjects wherein I delighted, chiefly mathematical and philosophical; there are also many volumes, philological and miscellanys. I have likewise a good collection of common law-books, and amongst each kind of these there are some volumes scarcely to be met with. As to my instruments, I had formerly some large astronomical ones, but these I parted with, intending to procure better; but the distractions of the times, and now, an infirm constitution in my health coming on me, I have desisted from prosecuting celestial observations, as exposing me too much to nocturnal colds, and other inconveniencys. The instruments therefore which I yet retain (besides the mechanick tools left by my father, and a few mathematical trifles I myself purchased) are chiefly dioptrical, such as glasses for telescopes of all lengths, from one foot to thirty feet, microscopes of all kinds, prismes, magick lantern, micrometers, pendulum clocks, &c.” After recapitulating the names of his literary friends, William Molyneux adds: “An ostentatious man would perhaps have preferred and mentioned, before all these learned acquaintances, a visit from a person of quality, or a title, but to me there seems no comparison, or else I might have told you of visits I have received from the Duke of Wirtenberg, General Ginckel, and Scravemoer, when in this kingdom, but this deserves but just naming, if so much itself.” One of Molyneux’s most intimate acquaintances was Robert Molesworth, author of the celebrated work on Denmark, to whom he alludes as follows in a letter to his friend John Locke in April, 1698: “I am here very happy in the friendship of an honour-able person, Mr. Molesworth, who is an hearty admirer, and acquaintance, of yours. We never meet but we remember you; he sometimes comes into my house, and tells me, it is not to pay a visit to me, but to pay his devotion to your image that is in my dining room.” Molyneux’s last and most celebrated work - the “Case of Ireland being bound by acts of Parliament in England stated” - was published in 1698, with the object of arresting the English Parliament in their proceedings for the destruction of the Irish woollen manufacture. Writing to Locke, at the period of the publication of the book, the author observes: “This you’ll say is a nice subject, but I think I have treated it with that caution and submission that it cannot justly give any offence, insomuch that I scruple not to put my name to it; and, by advice of some good friends here, have presumed to dedicate it to his Majesty. - I cannot pretend this to be an accomplished performance; it was done in haste, and intended to overtake the proceedings at Westminster, but it comes too late for that: what effect it may possibly have in time to come, God and the wise Council of England only know; but were it again under my hands I could considerably amend and add to it. But, till I either see how the Parliament of Westminster is pleased to take it, or till I see them risen, I do not think it adviseable for me to go on t’other side the water. Though I am not apprehensive of any mischief from them, yet God only knows what resentments captions men may take on such occasions.” The preface of this work is dated February 8, 1697-8, and its author’s death, occasioned by the rupture of a blood-vessel, took place on the 11th of the following October. He was buried, as before noticed, in St. Audöen’s Church, and his portrait, painted by Kneller, is to be seen in the Examination Hall of Trinity College, Dublin. His son Samuel, born in 1689, was appointed Secretary to George II. when Prince of Wales, constituted Lord of the Admiralty and member of the Privy Council, and married Elizabeth Diana, eldest daughter of Algernon Capel, Earl of Essex. Samuel Molyneux, who was highly skilled in optics and astronomy, died without issue in 1727-8. His estates, after his relict’s death, devolved upon his uncle, Dr. Thomas Molyneux, who continued to reside in the family mansion in New Row till the year 1711.

In the reign of Charles II. a meeting-house was erected in New Row by a congregation of Dissenters, formed by Dr. Samuel Winter, Ex-Provost of Trinity College, and the Rev. Samuel Mather, who, on the passing of the Act of Uniformity, resigned the offices which they held in the Established Church. “The accession of these excellent men to the system of conformity was much courted. Had they subscribed to its tests, professed its creeds, and complied with its ritual, they might have attained to the highest ecclesiastical dignities in the land.” Dr. Winter, who possessed a considerable private estate, which descended to his heirs, “was a man of great zeal, rich in good works, and his faith and patience were very signal both in his life and death.” The Rev. Samuel Mather, “a member of one of the most remarkable families of Nonconformists in England, and Puritans in the American colony at Boston,” came to Ireland with Henry Cromwell, was appointed Senior Fellow of Trinity College, and ordained in 1656 co-pastor of St. Nicholas’ parish, a portion of the congregation of which, adhering to his tenets, used to assemble at his house till their building in New Row was completed. After having suffered various persecutions for his Nonconformist principles, Mather died on the 29th of October, 1671, and was interred in his former church of St. Nicholas. He was succeeded by his brother, the Rev. Nathaniel Mather, who continued minister in New Row till 1689, having had as co-pastor, till 1681, the Rev. Timothy Taylor, appointed colleague to the Rev. Samuel Mather in 1668. The New Row congregation removed to Eustace-street in 1728, during the ministry of the Rev. Nathaniel Weld, who had been ordained co-pastor of the Society in February, 1682.

The “Ram Inn,” kept by Mr. Matthews, was located at the lower end of New Row, in 1730; and at No. 32 here resided Thomas M’Donnell, bookseller and publisher from 1781 to 1788.

At the northern extremity of New Row stood “Mullinahac,” a name which appears to have been formed from the Irish *Muilenn-a’-chaca, *signifying the foul or unclean mill. So early as the close of the 12th century a mill near the Bridge was bestowed upon the convent of the Holy Trinity, by a native Irishman named *Gilla Muire, *and the mills of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem appear also to have stood in this vicinity. The first person of any importance who settled here was John Allen, “sent over as a factor for the Dutch in the latter end of Queen Elizabeth’s reign; who being very handsome in his person, and of great skill in architecture, was much esteemed, and consulted by the most eminent of the nobility and gentry in their buildings, particularly by the Earl of Strafford, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, in his large intended edifice near Naas; and laid out the plan of his own house at Mullinahac near Dublin, leaving it to be finished by his son, Sir Joshua, for whom he acquired a considerable fortune, and who made very large additions thereto by purchase, and an extensive trade, being a merchant of the first rank. In 1664 he was Sheriff of the City of Dublin, and in 1673 served the office of Lord Mayor; was knighted and appointed 8th June, 1679, one of the Commissioners for administering the oaths of supremacy and allegiance to such as should be entered into the artillery garden; but was involved in the general Act of Attainder, passed by King James’ Parliament in 1689; and had his estate of £2,720 a year in Ireland, and £200 a year in England, sequestered.”

His son, John Allen, created, in 1717, Baron Allen of Stillorgan, and Viscount Allen, was succeeded by Joshua Allen, a weak and dissipated man, who was trepanned by Lionel Duke of Dorset into a marriage with Margaret, daughter of Samuel Du Pass, first clerk in the Secretary of State’s Office, whom he subsequently refused to acknowledge as his wife. “But the lady, after living some time in close retirement, caused an advertisement to be inserted in the papers, stating the death of a brother in the East Indies, by which Miss Margaret Du Pass had succeeded to a large fortune. Accordingly, she put on mourning, and assumed an equipage conforming to her supposed change of fortune. Lord Allen’s affairs being very much deranged, he became now as anxious to prove the marriage with the wealthy heiress as he had formerly been to disown the unportioned damsel; and succeeded, after such opposition as the lady judged necessary to give colour to the farce. Before the deceit was discovered, Lady Allen, by her good sense and talents, had obtained such ascendance over her husband, that they ever afterwards lived in great harmony.”

Lord Allen was satirized as follows under the name of “Traulus,” by Swift, whom he had offended by some observations made in 1730, relative to the presentation of the freedom of the city of Dublin to the Dean:-

“Let me now the vices trace,

From the father’s scoundrel race

Who could give the looby such airs?

Were they masons, were they butchers?

Herald, lend the Muse an answer

From his atavus and grandsire:

This was dext’rous at his trowel,

That was bred to kill a cow well

Hence the greasy clumsy mien

In his dress and figure seen;

Hence the mean and sordid soul,

Like his body, rank and foul;

Hence that wild suspicious peep,

Like a rogue that steals a sheep;

Hence he learnt the butcher’s guile,

How to cut your throat and smile;

Like a butcher, doom’d for life

In his mouth to wear a knife:

Hence he draws his daily food

From his tenants’ vital blood.

In him tell me which prevail

Female vices most or male?

What produced him, can you tell?

Human race, or imps of hell?”

Another satire describes John Allen, Member for Carysfort, and Robert Allen, representative of Wicklow, as:-

”--- Allens Jack and Bob,

First in every wicked job,

Son and brother to a queer,

Brain-sick brute, they call a peer.

We must give them better quarter,

For their ancestor trod mortar,

And at Howth, to boast his fame,

On a chimney cut his name.”

Till about the year 1735 Mullinahac continued to be the town residence of the Allen family, whose country seat was at Stillorgan, where is still to be seen an obelisk erected by John, third Viscount Allen, with the object of clearing his park of stones, and giving employment to the poor during the hard frost of 1739. The Allen peerage became extinct in 1816, by the death of the sixth Viscount, Joshua William Allen, who had served through the Peninsular campaigns.

In the middle of the last century an extensive nunnery stood on the northern side of Mullinahac, surrounded on the north and west by fields planted with large trees. At the same period a* *Roman Catholic chapel was located at the rere of the southern side of Mullinahac, and the “Corn Premium Office” was held here till 1780.

“Allen’s Court,” Lord Allen’s former residence in Mullinahac, came in 1770 into the occupation of Edward and John Byrne, sugar bakers and distillers. Edward Byrne had been apprenticed to an eminent Roman Catholic trader named Toole, who, becoming a convert to the Protestant religion, endeavoured to induce his children and apprentice to follow his example. Byrne, however, declined to renounce the Roman Catholic faith, and exhorted Toole’s daughter not to conform to the Established Church. Miss Toole, as before noticed, sought refuge with Lawrence Saul, and her father obtained possession of her correspondence with Byrne, against whom he instituted legal proceedings; which, after a tedious protraction, terminated in favour of his apprentice, who, after trading for some years, acquired the reputation of being the wealthiest Roman Catholic merchant in Ireland, and was consequently induced to enter into co-operation with the advocates of the repeal of the Penal Laws. On the rejection of the petition of 1791, the claims of the Roman Catholics were regarded as hopeless, owing to the discountenance which they experienced from the nobility and gentry of their own religion; the Committee was consequently about to dissolve, when John Keogh, at a meeting of the “Select Committee,” held in Allen’s Court in 1791, proposed that a member of that body should be delegated to lay their case before the English Minister. “Every man, says Keogh, “refused to go upon so hopeless an errand, and the meeting was actually breaking up, and about to disperse for ever, when I, and I alone, offered to go to London, and at my own expense to solicit an audience from ministers. All I required was the authority of their permission; which I obtained; and I accordingly set out for the British capital, where I remained for three months, and whence I returned to this kingdom in January, 1792, accompanied, at my own desire, by the son of that illustrious Irishman, Edmund Burke.”

The duties paid annually by Byrne to the Revenue *at *this period were calculated to amount to £100,000, and in recognition of his wealth and mercantile importance, he was elected Chairman of the Roman Catholic Committee, to the various publications of which his name was officially appended. Byrne appears, however, not to have taken any prominent part in politics after the partial relaxation of the Penal Laws in 1793, and at the period of his death, in the early part of the present century, his property was estimated at £400,000.