Houses With Traditions

**Belvedere House. - Lady Belvedere’s Story. - Kenmare House. – Major Swan. - Lord Edward FitzGerald and Dagger. - Henrietta Street.

Mountjoy House. - Lord Blessington. - Lady Blessington. – Thomas Carter. - Earls of Farnham. - Cantillon’s Story.**

In 1768 new streets were opened from Rutland Square (or the New Gardens) in the direction of Mountjoy Square (not built until 1820); one, of these was named Great Denmark Street, and here, in 1775, Thomas, second Earl of Belvedere, erected

Belvedere House

which was probably the first house built in the street, as it stands alone in a commanding position, overlooking the wide thoroughfare of North Great George’s Street, which in its day was a fashionable street. It is a magnificent mansion, well designed, probably by Cassels. The grand staircase is richly ornamented in the florid stucco ornamentation then practised by the Italian artists resident in Dublin.

The ceilings of the reception-rooms on the drawing-room floor present appropriate subjects, all most richly ornamented, one being dedicated to Diana, another to Venus, and the third (the music.-room) to Apollo. Here too stands the grand organ of fine Domingo mahogany.

In the year 1843 Belvedere House was sold for a sum under £1,800 to the Order of Jesuits, whose Church of St. Francis Xavier is close by in Upper Gardiner Street. It is now a junior college for youth.

In Belvedere House died Mary Molesworth, first Countess of Belvedere, whose romantic story must always excite interest. This unfortunate lady had the ill-fortune to attract, when quite in her early youth, the handsome and somewhat dissipated Colonel Rochfort, a man of fashion, in great favour with the Court at St. James’s.

Miss Molesworth, however, did not respond to his suit; the ardour of his love frightened her, for she was of a timid, nervous nature, and she besought her parents not, to press her to marry a man she did not like.

Her entreaties were of no avail; it was not the order of the day for young girls to have a will of their own; and Lord Molesworth, a stern, uncompromising soldier, would listen to no nonsense. The preparations for the marriage went on and Mary was married, *nolsens volens, *to her .handsome. lover on August 1, 1736.

From the first the marriage was not a happy one. Rochfort was disappointed that no tenderness on” his part could conquer the shrinking fear his bride seemed to entertain for him. His disappointment showed itself in violent outbursts of rage, which so alarmed the poor girl that she escaped to her father’s house, to be sent back next morning under the care of a trusty servant.

Years went on, several children were born, and still matters grew no better. Rochfort spent most of his time in London, where the King, Gedrge II., raised him to the rank of an Earl. He was amusing himself at the Court when a packet of letters was sent him. These were written under a feigned name, but were proved to be a passionate love correspondence between his wife and his brother, Arthur Rochfort:, a married man with a large family.

Lord Belvedere accused his wife, who found some means to inform her lover, who fled precipitately without making any defence. Lady Belvedere remained in the power of her offended husband, her father making no effort to interfere between them. The Earl’s vengeance was of so peculiar a nature as to have earned him the name of a cruel tyrant.

At the tithe of his discovery he had just completed building a new and handsome mansion which was to supersede Gaulstown, the old family seat in Westmeath. At Belvedere, which was the name of the new mansion, the Earl, his children and household resided, while at Gaulstown he kept his wife shut up, deprived of all intercourse with the outer world, and carefully watched by a staff of trusty servants. The unfortunate lady was barely 26 years of age when she was thus cut off’ from all the enjoyments of life. For seventeen years she remained thus imprisoned, never seeing her children, although they lived so close to ‘her, and receiving no visits from her own family.

The death of her husband released her in 1772. During these years her father had died and her son had married. She herself although only in the prime of life, had become a perfect wreck, her features haggard, her hair white, while her face wore a wild, scared look, and her voice had sunk almost to a whisper.

The latter portion of her life was spent at Belvedere House, but she had lived too long in solitary confinement to be able to take up the threads of a broken life. She shrank from notice of any kind, while to her dying hour she protested her innocence.

A curious relic of this tragic story is to be seen between Belvedere (now the seat of Charles, Marley, Esq.) and Rochfort House, which had been the residence of Arthur Rochfort. It appears to be the ruin of an old abbey. The tradition told is that the ruin was built by one brother to exclude from his sight the residence of the other.

Not every one is aware that the design originated with Lord Belvedere, who went to enormous expense in its erection, bringing over Italian artists for the purpose.

North Great George’s Street exactly faces Belvedere House, a wide and handsome street, where many of the nobility had houses, one or two of which were decorated by Angelica Kauffmann during her visit to Dublin in 1771.

Kenmare House, now No. 34, was one of these; it is the residence of Dr. Mahaffy, the well-known writer on Greek art. In 1798 Lady Kenmare left Great George’s Street, as she could not bear to have as her opposite neighbour’ Major William Swan, who had assisted in the capture of Lord Edward FitzGerald.

In connection with Major Swan a curious story is told by Sir Bernard Burke in his interesting volume “The Rise of Great Families.”

“Moore,” says Sir Bernard, “gives a description of the dagger Lord Edward used in his death struggle, and at the Dublin Exhibition of 1872 a dagger was exhibited purporting to be the weapon in question. The annexed, letter, however, sets the matter at rest, and gives a curious and authentic account of the custody of the real dagger from the day it was wrested from Lord Edward. It is now (1876) in, the possession of William R. Le Fanu, Esq., Commissioner of Public Works in Ireland, together with this (the following) letter from his mother, the late Mrs. Le Fanu

‘I was almost a child when I possessed myself of the dagger with which Lord Edward FitzGerald had defended himself so desperately at the time of his arrest. The circumstances connected with it are these. Mrs. Swan, wife of Major Swan (Deputy Town Major), was a relative of my mother; my family constantly visited at her house in North Great George’s Street. My mother frequently took my younger sister and me there. I often heard Major Swan describe the dreadful struggle in which he had himself received a severe wound from the dagger which he had succeeded in wresting from Lord Edward, and which he took a pleasure in showing as a trophy. The dreadful conflict is described in the *Annual Register, *and in the journals of the day. The death wound which Lord Edward received, and the death of Captain Ryan, are known to every one. The character of Lord Edward, the position which he occupied, and his tragical death, the domestic happiness which he had enjoyed, and the affection in which he held those near him, I need not describe. When I saw the dagger in the hands with which Lord Edward had striven in the last fatal struggle for life or death, I felt that it was not rightfully his who held it, and wished it were in other hands. Wishes soon changed into plans, and I determined, if possible, to get it. I knew the spot in the front .drawing-room where it was laid, and, while Major Swan and the company were engaged in conversation one evening, after tea, in the back drawing-room, I walked into the front drawing-room to the spot where it was; I seized it and thrust it into my bosom, inside my stays. I returned to the company, where I had to sit for an hour and then drove home, a distance of three miles As soon as we left the house, I told my sister who was beside me, what I had done. As soon as we got home, I rushed up to the room which my sister and I occupied, and having secured the door, I opened one: of the seams in the feather bed, took out the dagger, and plunged it among the feathers; for upwards of twelve years I lay. every night upon the bed which contained my treasure. When I left home, I took it with me, and it has been my companion in all the vicissitudes of life When he missed it Major Swan was greatly incensed, and not without apprehensions that it had been taken to inflict a deadly revenge upon him. Had he taken harsh measures against the servants, whom he might have suspected, I had resolved to confess that I had taken it; but after a time his anger and uneasiness subsided. I have often. seen and heard this dagger described as a most extraordinary weapon, and have been ready to laugh. Moore mentions it, in his Life of Lord Edward FitzGerald, as being in the possession of some other family. He was quite mistaken. This is the very dagger, which had not been, many months in Major Swan’s hands, when it became mine in the manner above detailed.

“‘Emma Le Fanu.

*“‘April, *1847.’”

A short walk will now bring us to Henrietta street by way of Great Britain Street (where, by the way; it is said the beautiful Miss Gunnings made their *debut *in Dublin society in. 1750). Henrietta Street,” or Primate’s’ Hill, as’ it was originally called (from the fact of four primates having their residence on Boulter’s Hill; in its immediate. vicinity), is one of the most interesting haunts of old Dublin. Changed as it is now, in the last century its fine mansions were inhabited by men of the highest’ rank and position.

The last house, in the street has, perhaps, the most claim to be mentioned first. Blessington House, indeed, teems with memories of the golden period of Dublin society; for here were wont to. assemble the fairest and the wittiest, the highest and the most fashionable belles and beaux of the day.

[The ground on which the houses in Henrietta Street now stand, together with the. Site of that street and portion of the site on which the King’s Inns Buildings are erected, belonged to the monks of St. Mary’s. Abbey, and was the private garden of the abbots or priors of that. monastery. Hence we find it described in old records as the “Anchorite’s”Garden,”’ “Ankerster’s Park,” *“Ancaster’s *Park,” etc. The Anchorite’s Garden contained about seven acres, and was pleasantly situated on a gentle slope on the banks of the little Bradoge River, which watered it on its western boundary.]

It was originally built by the Right Hon. Luke Gardiner, who had purchased from Sir Thomas Reynell a large area of property on the north side of Dublin. The names of the streets in this now unfashionable quarter are suggestive of the Mountjoy family: Mountjoy Square, Mountjoy Place, Gardiner Street, Gardiner Place, and Blessington Street. When Luke Gardiner built his family mansion, it was then called The Manor House, for the reason that it stood almost alone, on the opposite side from the Primate’s House, having large gardens and park attached to it.

This fine old house is so well described in the *Irish Builder *of July, 1893, that I annex the following:

“The reception-rooms are seven in number, and the cornices and ceilings are finished in a rich and antique style. The ball-room is a noble apartment; the architraves of the doors are .adorned with Corinthian columns, fluted and surmounted by pediments. The drawing-room to the left of the ante-room on the first floor possesses a beautifully carved oak cornice, the effect of which is peculiarly striking. The front staircase is spacious and lofty. The walls are panelled and the ceiling handsomely decorated. The principal dining room, looking into the garden, is square, with fine stuccoed ceiling and walls in square panels stuccoed; the square broken off at the angles by curves. The architraves of the parlour doors are as rich as carving could make them. There is a mock key-stone or block of wood that for elegant and elaborate carving in relief cannot be surpassed. The stuccoed ceilings are in panels with enriched fillets, quite palatial; and only in the ball-room are seen arabesques in the centre. The window of the ball-room, which is over the *porte-cochère, *has three opes, the centre one being arched; this is the only architectural adornment externally.”

Mountjoy House had originally a fine *porte-cochère, *or covered carriage entry, arched with cut stone, on the park side. The park or ornamental ground attached to this mansion was purchased by Luke Gardiner, first Lord Mountjoy, from the Dean and Chapter of Christ Church, and was known as Plover Park.

The great interest which attaches to Mountjoy House is its association with its last owner, the first Earl of Blessington; The career of this nobleman presents an extraordinary instance of the misuse of all the good things of life that were so lavishly bestowed upon him. Born in 1782, he had early lost his parents, and became his own master at an age when most young men are still under control.

[His father was Luke Gardiner, second viscount Mountjoy, a well-known figure in the time in which he lived. .A politician and a soldier, he joined to these pursuits a refined taste for music and the stage. He was a good amateur actor, and had a private theatre at his residence, the Ranger’s Cottage in the park, where lie entertained the Viceroy and his circle. His beautiful wife, one of the three lovely Montgomerys immortalized by Sir Joshua’s brush, died young, leaving several daughters and one son, who succeeded his father as Lord Mountjoy when only ten years old, and was created Earl of ‘Blessington when he was still a youth.]

To this fact his friend and biographer Dr. Madden attributes the ruin Lord Blessington brought on himself and his family; and it may be said that with him extravagance amounted to madness. He spent money so recklessly that not twice his noble fortune could suffice to supply his imaginary wants. From the very first his career was a downward one. In 1808, being then 26, he eloped with the beautiful Mary Campbell, wife to Major Browne. As the lady was a Catholic, no divorce could be obtained, and it was not until the death of her husband in 1812 that the guilty pair were legally married. Two years later Lady Blessington died at St. Germain, near Paris.

Her death was made the occasion of an, extravagant display by the widower. Her body was brought from France to London, and from London to Dublin, accompanied by an army of undertakers, mutes, and watchers.

It lay in state at Blessington House, [The Earl changed the name from Mountjoy to Blessington House] where a *chapelle ardente *had been fitted up with every emblem of the faith she professed. Here censers swung and candles burned night and day for eight days, while all of Dublin streamed in to see the sight. The block of carriages, cabs and chairs in Henrietta Street was equal to a “Drawing-room night.”

The body lay in a sumptuous coffin under a magnificent pall of black velvet embroidered in gold, which had been made for Marshal Duroc’s funeral. On each side of the bier sat the watchers, six female mourners who had accompanied the corpse from London. As each visitor left the room, a gentlemanly man, clothed in deepest mourning, accosted them with a hope that “everything had been satisfactorily done.”

“This great exhibition of extravagant grief and the enormous outlay made for its manifestation” (it cost £4,000), was,” says Dr. Madden, “in the bright and palmy days of Irish landlordism, when potatoes flourished, and people who had land in Ireland lived like princes.”

Lord Blessington’s grief speedily found solace in another frail lady’s smiles. A year later we find the disconsolate widower entertaining at dinner in Blessington House a select party of ladies and gentlemen, including the beautiful Mrs. Farmer and her sister Mrs. Purvis.

Next year we read of Mrs, Farmer and her sister being his Lordship’s guests at Rath, a cottage on the Mountjoy Forest estate in Tyrone. The friendship between them was continued in London; and in 1818, her husband, Captain Farmer, having died meantime, Mrs. Farmer became Countess of Blessington.

It does not seem that after her marriage she was much at Blessington House, although on two occasions she accompanied her husband to Mountjoy Forest, which was fitted up in the most sumptuous manner for her reception, her boudoir being hung with Genoa velvet and gold bullion fringe.

For some reason (probably social) Lady Blessington never again visited her native country. Blessington House fell into the sear and yellow of a neglected old age. The whole of the Mountjoy estate was sold to Charles Spencer Cowper in the Encumbered Estates Court of 1874, Blessington House being included in the sale.

It was resold to Mr. Tristram Kennedy, who turned it into chambers for the accommodation of the barristers attending the King’s Inns, a handsome building erected by Gandon (not that much of its beauty can be seen in Henrietta Street, as’ the Inns are awkwardly placed, and, as Mr. Prendergast remarked, they should have been called Tanderagee, the Irish for “his back to the wind”). Mr. Kennedy closed tip the porte-cochère and made the present hall door in the middle of the mansion, thus spoiling one of the finest dining-rooms ever designed.

No. 9, the next house to Blessington House, is also worthy of notice, its architectural merit being far beyond that of its neighbour. It was designed by Cassels, who in all probability designed Blessington House also, although this point is open to doubt, as there is no positive certainty. The entrance and hall are remarkable for their size and the elegance of the design, but there is a total absence of ornamental work upon the ceilings and doors.

No. 10 was built for the Right Hon. Thomas Carter, Master of the Rolls.

On the other side of the street the residence .of the Earl of Shannon is now in possession of the Benchers of King’s Inns. The reception-rooms here are very fine; but the entrance hall and staircase are inferior to either Blessington House or No. 10, which suggests that Cassels, who excelled in interiors, was not the designer at all events of this house. There are, however, some good ovals, and the chimney-pieces are of Vienna marble. The owner of this mansion, Henry Boyle, first Earl of Shannon, was Speaker of the Irish House of Commons.

His Lordship was not a patriot of the purest quality. We hear of his compounding some clerical appropriation for the sum of £3,000 yearly, and his son and successor figures in “Baratariana” for similar peccadilloes. The morality of the Irish House of Commons was, however, by no means above suspicion, and Lord Shannon was not the only peer who was accessible to bribery.

Another interesting house is the one occupied in the last century by the Maxwells, Earls of Farnham. It had come to them through the marriage between Robert Maxwell, second Lord Farnham, and Henrietta, widow of the third Earl of Stafford. This Henrietta, or rather Henriette, was the daughter of one Cantillon, a French wine merchant and banker, who had managed to realize his capital before Law’s Mississippi scheme went smash. He came to London, where he was murdered by his own servants, who conspired to set the house on fire, and in the confusion escaped with a large sum of money.

Cantillon left an only daughter, a beautiful girl, who is mentioned by Horace Walpole as having married the Earl of Stafford in 1743.** **On his death she married Lord Farnham, who brought her to the family mansion in Henrietta Street. It was from this house that their daughter, Lady Harriet Maxwell, was married to the Right John Denis Daly.

Lady Harriet Daly was a well-known character in the pre-Union times, when ladies of quality were distinguished by their freedom of speech and love of high play. Many years after her death, when the house was deserted, a gentleman going in to look at it, saw in an empty closet a number of little scarlet leather, gilt-edged memorandum books: these had been Lady Harriet Daly’s records of her card-playing in the days of her wickedness - dusty, dirty records, but instinct with the life she had led. “Last night won £5 from Lord Ormonde. Engaged to dine with Lord Shannon, Thursday. Lost £5 to Lady Glandore.” It was just as well she lost, for she would have gained nothing by winning from her adversary, who was so well known for cheating or “bilking” her creditors, that the Dublin wits called her *Owen *(owing) Glandore.

After Lord Farnham removed to No. 8, Palace Row, his house in Blessington Street was occupied by Lord O’Neill.

At No. 13 the Right Hon. John Ponsonby resided. He was the son of the first Earl of Bessborough, and was Speaker of the Irish House of Commons from 1756 to 1771-a** **troublous time, through which he had to steer his course, and ever took the straight and upright path. It would, indeed, have been well if all Irishmen had been so true to their country as was John Ponsonby; nor did he lose his popularity with the unruly members, over whom he exerted such an influence that he was elected three times to the office of Speaker.

He was likewise sworn in six times as one of the Lords Justices, which meant being virtually ruler of the country, as at that time the Viceroy only came to Ireland every second year, and in the interregnum the Lord Justice exercised almost viceregal authority. Mr. Ponsonby’s eldest son was created Baron and Lord Ponsonby of Imakilly, which title, however, became extinct in 1866; and his second son, George, was Lord Chancellor of Ireland.

No. 14 was occupied by Sir Edward Crofton, of Mote Park, Roscommon, ancestor of the present Peer.

To Chapter 8. To Picturesque Index. Home.