Category Archives: Politics

Down the Nore from Castletown

Seventeenth-century transport on the Nore from Castletown to Ross and Waterford.

Buckets

And be it Enacted, That all potatoes sold in cities, towns corporate and market towns and elsewhere, shall be sold and delivered by weight, and not by measure or in any other way whatsoever, and that such weight shall be according to the avoirdupois pound, fourteen pounds whereof shall make a stone, and eight stone one hundred weight, and that such potatoes shall be weighed, without fee or reward, at the beams and scales of the several places erected and kept pursuant to law;

and if any master or owner of any ship, vessel or boat, coming into any port, harbour or town in Ireland, with potatoes, or any market man, herbman, herbwoman, huckster, or any other person selling potatoes, shall sell the same by measure or otherwise than by weight, and shall be lawfully convicted thereof, every person so offending shall for every such offence forfeit the value of all such potatoes sold otherwise than by weight, and the sum of Sixpence for every stone of such potatoes, and the sum of Sixpence for any quantity under one stone;

and every person who shall demand or take any fee or reward for weighing any such potatoes, shall forfeit the sum of Twenty shillings, provided complaint be made within Three days after any such offence shall be committed.

Bill to consolidate and amend Laws respecting Customs, Tolls and Duties in Markets and Fairs in Ireland HC 183 HMSO 1830

Buckets

Buckets

If the clause for enforcing the weighing of potatoes shall be passed into a Law and strictly enforced I apprehend it may be productive of much public inconvenience here where the use of Buckets as a measure for sale of potato’s is so general, and I can hardly conceive how such a number of Scales could be got up or attended to as would be necessary to accommodate the population of this City frequenting the Potatoe market.

John Carroll, Secretary to Limerick Chamber of Commerce, to Thomas Spring Rice MP, 2 April 1830, in Letter book 19 January 1826–15 September 1840 [P1/26 p120] [DjVu]

 

 

Tories on the Barrow and the Shannon

I read here that Olivia O’Leary, who chairs a Save the Barrow Line committee, says that the Barrow Line (trackway or towing-path)

[…] is a natural amenity and should be maintained as it is.

It isn’t. It is an entirely artificial creation, built to enable the use of horses to tow boats. Any geraniums, beetles, butterflies or tweetie-birds using it are interlopers, squatters and trespassers and should be paying rent; at the very least they should take second place to humans.

The Grand Canal Company often complained about the poor quality of the Barrow trackway: the surface was not up to the job. If it is to cater for more users, it may well need to be improved. That is an engineering decision on which I am not competent to pronounce but, as the Barrow is pretty well a dead loss for long-distance cruising by larger boats, it needs to be redesigned for walkers, cyclists and canoeists.

But at least the Barrow NIMBYs are prepared to accept more boats. Dr William O’Connor of the Old River Shannon Research Group writes about the Shannon here, complaining about the small number of “garish canoes” that occasionally travel downstream from Castleconnell to Clareville. Dr O’Connor asks

[…] why has it become a free-for-all for canoeists?

The answer is that there is a right to navigate, as I pointed out here (with an addendum here): I have had no response from the ESB so, while being open to correction, I maintain my position. Anglers may believe that their interests are paramount on that stretch of the Shannon: I disagree. Of course I would be all in favour of discussions between anglers, kayakers, dog-walkers and other users (even environmentalists), but such discussions cannot be based on a presumption that one group has all the rights, or that one activity is of supreme importance, and that the rest are secondary.

For some reason, canoes operated by commercial providers are particularly to be condemned, although it is not clear how salmon and lampreys can distinguish between public-sector, private-sector and voluntary-sector canoes — or whether they would be bothered anyway: Dr William O’Connor says

It is noted that there has been little scientific research on the ecological impact of canoeing.

In other words, there is no reason to believe that there is any basis for the concerns expressed by Dr O’Connor or by various anglers.

More broadly, though, the common factor on the Shannon and the Barrow is that existing users of public facilities are resisting new or expanded uses and seeking to protect their privileges. Irish Toryism is alive and well.

Addendum: this is probably the solution to the salmon problem.

Alice is at it again

Learned readers are no doubt familiar with Dame Felicity Lott‘s interpretation of the song Alice is at it again, wherein the nature of what Alice was actually at is left to the imagination of the listeners.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh [SF, Dublin South Central] and the Minister for Fairytales [FG, Drumlins/Stony Fields] have been performing a duet to something the same effect:

[AOS] To ask the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht the steps she is taking in conjunction with Waterways Ireland to bring to an end an issue that is occurring with increasing frequency (details supplied).

[MfF] I have been informed that Waterways Ireland technical staff recently visited the location in question to assess the situation referred to by the Deputy and to determine the options available to try to make the location referred to by the Deputy less attractive to such activities. Waterways Ireland is currently assessing these options and, subject to available funding, hope to be in a position to implement measures to improve matters, while ensuring that any changes do not negatively impact on the general public.

With regard to an immediate response to dealing with the specific issue raised by the Deputy, Waterways Ireland staff do not have enforcement powers to restrict this activity.

I and Waterways Ireland would encourage anyone who witnesses such activity to report the matter to An Garda Siochána.

So unspecified persons have been engaging in unspecified activities at an unspecified location.

And if we see them at it we should tell the police.

 

Seasteading

Update here from Alex Tabarrok.

Presumably the USA will be sending guided-missile destroyers to deter occupation.

Limerick gammon

Thanks to AOD for alerting me to an article by Morgan McCloskey “O’Maras of Limerick and their overseas business” [PDF] from the Old Limerick Journal summer 2001. O’Maras were bacon and ham curers: according to Frank Prendergast “The Decline of Traditional Limerick Industries” in David Lee & Debbie Jacobs, eds Made in Limerick: History of industries, trade and commerce Volume 1 [Limerick Civic Trust, Limerick 2003]

James O’Mara of Toomevara in County Tipperary had established the business in a small house on Mungret Street in 1839. He started bacon curing in the basement but it became so successful that he had to move shortly afterwards to the premises in Roches Street, which they occupied until its closure in 1987.

The waterways interest arises from McCloskey’s having drawn on Patricia Lavelle James O’Mara: a staunch Sinn Féiner Dublin 1961, republished in 2011 under a slightly different title. Lavelle’s O’Mara, her father, was also covered here and was the grandson of the original James who set up the business in 1839. We are concerned with neither of the Jameses: Stephen, son of the first and father of the second, is the man of the moment. McCloskey says that Lavelle says that Stephen preferred to go to Dublin by boat rather than by rail and that she gives this description of one such trip:

Then the boat went through the heart of Ireland; and the country, with its hills and green fields, was spread before him in all its changing beauty for the best part of a couple of days. The steamer left Limerick and made its way up the Shannon, avoiding the rapids by various canals and locks.

After Killaloe it reached the wide waters of Lough Derg. The passengers had the run of the boat and could get a snack meal if they wished. Once, when grandfather was travelling this way, terrible squalls sprang up and the lake was very rough, but usually they could stop for a moment at Holy Island and see the ancient ruins there, and pass on by the wooded heights of the Tipperary shore, past Dromineer to Portumna, crossing and re-crossing the lake until they found anchorage in Shannon Harbour, as far north as Offaly.

There was a big hotel there owned by the Grand Canal Company, where they all stayed for the night and got to know one another; and feasted on chicken and bacon and cabbage followed by apple pie, and then sat round huge turf fires swopping stories or playing cards.

Next morning the canal boat awaited them, gay with its overhead canopy to protect passengers from the heat of the sun or from inclement weather. The passengers sat in two long rows, back to back, and gazed out across the fields as the paddle lazily churned up the turbid waters and the boat made leisurely progress along the canal. The monotony was broken once in a while by the excitement of passing through a lock.

The problem with this romantic account is that, as presented, it’s rubbish.

Stephen O’Mara was born in 1844 and began work in the family business in 1860. The passenger boat service between Limerick and Killaloe ceased in 1848, when the railway reached Limerick (though there were occasional special excursions after that).

The service was by horse-drawn boat, not by steamer; though there had been some attempts at running steamers, the Limerick boats did not go beyond Killaloe, whence larger steamers ran to Portumna or, later, to Shannon Harbour and places further north.

Scheduled passenger services did not “stop for a moment” at Holy Island, which was off the main route to Portumna.

The canal hotel at Shannon Harbour effectively ceased operating as such in 1847, according to Ruth Delany The Grand Canal of Ireland David and Charles, Newton Abbot 1973.

The canal passage boats did not have canopies, the passengers sat facing each other rather than back to back and the boats were horse-drawn rather than paddle-driven. Furthermore, the service ceased in 1852.

I cannot explain the extent of the inaccuracies, but perhaps Lavelle’s account should have been attributed to the elder James rather than to his son Stephen. I would be glad to hear from anyone who can cast light on this; please leave a Comment below.

 

 

 

Speaking of nitwits …

this might explain why so many of them get elected in Ireland.

The Patowmack Canal Company …

… and George Washington. And wars. And wealth.

Nitwitted navigation proposals

The tradition of lobbying for ridiculous, uneconomic, unnecessary and expensive navigations has a long history in Ireland. Here is another nineteenth-century example, which also features local government in its usual role as a forum for lunatics (a role which could now be delegated to Twitter).

Navigation of the Liffey from Dublin to Leixlip

At the last meeting of the Town Council of Dublin, the Lord Mayor in the chair, the following proceedings took place on the subject of opening the navigation of the Liffey, through the Valley, on the engineering plan of our friend, Mr Steele.

Alderman Keshan moved the following resolution:

“Resolved: That the Lord Mayor be respectfully requested to write to the Chief Secretary, soliciting that his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant will be pleased to order a section and some transverse sections of the Valley of the Liffey, from Dublin to Leixlip, to be made by the Board of Public Works for the guidance of this Corporation, in a matter of deep public interest to the inhabitants of the metropolis of Ireland (hear, hear).”

He trusted that this motion would not encounter any opposition. He made it with a view to promote Mr Steele’s project for the improvement of the Valley of the Liffey (hear). Large sums of money had been taken out of this country for the improvement of London (hear, hear), and he did not see why a portion of the national revenues should not be devoted to the improvement of Ireland (hear, hear).

The citizens of London had their water trip to Richmond (hear). Why should not the citizens of Dublin have theirs to Leixlip? This would be accomplished if the Valley of the Liffey were made navigable (hear).

Alderman O’Brien seconded the motion, which was carried.

Dublin Evening Post 14 June 1845, from the British Newspaper Archive.

From the BNA

 

A one-act history of a bridge

The Limerick Harbour (Bridge) Act 1963 No 1/1963 (Private), in its preamble, gives the history of the swivelling section of the Wellesley (now Sarsfield) Bridge in Limerick.

THE LIMERICK HARBOUR (BRIDGE) ACT, 1963

Skipping some of the formalities …

WHEREAS by a local and personal Act of 1823 entitled “An Act for the erection of a bridge across the River Shannon and of a floating dock to accommodate sharp vessels frequenting the port of Limerick” the Limerick Bridge Commissioners were incorporated for the purpose of erecting such bridge and floating dock;

A swivel bridge was required …

AND WHEREAS to the intent that the navigation of the River Shannon might receive no prejudice it was provided by the said Act of 1823 that the bridge so to be erected or built under the authority of the said Act should be so constructed and built as that there should remain a free and open passage for ships and vessels to pass up and down the said river on the south side or end of the said bridge through, at, or near the said bridge; and that for such purpose there should be on the said bridge so to be built or on the bank immediately adjoining the south end thereof one or more swivel bridge or drawbridge or bridges so as to admit of vessels passing up and down the said river near the south bank thereof from the parts thereof above the said bridge to the parts thereof below the said bridge and the contrary;

Wellesley Bridge (OSI ~1840)

Wellesley Bridge (OSI ~1840)

AND WHEREAS the said bridge (then known by the name of “the Wellesley Bridge” and now known as “Sarsfield Bridge”) and a swivel bridge in connection therewith were in pursuance of the said Act erected in or about the year 1825;

Control passed to the Harbour Commissioners in 1883

AND WHEREAS by virtue of an order of the Commissioners of Public Works bearing the date the 22nd day of March 1883 and made in pursuance of the provisions of the Wellesley Bridge (Limerick) Act, 1882 and of such provisions the said swivel bridge and the approaches thereto by water were vested in the Limerick Harbour Commissioners (in this Act called the Commissioners) for the use of the public and it was the duty of the Commissioners to maintain the same in good repair and condition and to work the same in such manner as to afford adequate accommodation to shipping and persons using the said bridge;

AND WHEREAS by an Act entitled “The Limerick Harbour (Bridge) Act, 1913” the Commissioners were authorised to make and maintain a new swivel bridge and approaches for vehicular and pedestrian traffic across the River Shannon in substitution for the said swivel bridge and the said Act provided that all powers rights duties and liabilities enjoyed by or imposed on the Commissioners at the date of the passing of the Act in connection with or in anywise concerning the swivel bridge or the approaches thereto by road or by water or the works in connection therewith and all byelaws in force at said date should be deemed to apply and should apply to the new swivel bridge and the approaches thereto and the works in connection therewith;

A new swivel section was built in 1923 …

AND WHEREAS the said new swivel bridge was in pursuance of the last recited Act erected in or about the year 1923 and has been since and still is in use;

The formerly swivelling section

The formerly swivelling section

AND WHEREAS up to and including the 8th day of February 1927 the said new swivel bridge was from time to time opened by the Commissioners for the purpose of enabling ships and vessels to pass up and down the River Shannon to and from two quays on the east side of the bridge known as Honan’s Quay and McGuire’s Quay;

… but never opened after 1927

AND WHEREAS the new swivel bridge has not been opened for the passage of a ship or vessel since the month of February 1927;

AND WHEREAS Sarsfield Bridge and the new swivel bridge carry the main stream of vehicular traffic across the River Shannon to and from Shannon Airport and to and from the West of Ireland and the traffic by road over the new swivel bridge has increased greatly;

AND WHEREAS the opening of the said swivel bridge would cause a serious disruption of such traffic by road and pedestrian traffic;

Opening it would be a nuisance

AND WHEREAS it is expedient in the interests of the public travelling by road that the Commissioners should be relieved of their duty to open the said new swivel bridge for the passage of ships and vessels;

AND WHEREAS the purposes of this Act cannot be effected without the authority of the Oireachtas.

So the Commissioners don’t have to do it any more

Interpretation.

1.—In this Act unless the subject or context otherwise requires:—

the expression “the Commissioners” means the Limerick Harbour Commissioners;

the expression “the new swivel bridge” means the swivel bridge authorised by the Limerick Harbour (Bridge) Act, 1913.

Restriction of Commissioners’ liability in respect of swivel bridge.

2.—From and after the passing of this Act and notwithstanding anything contained in any other Act the Commissioners shall not be under any liability to open the new swivel bridge for the passage of ships or vessels or to maintain or repair the said swivel bridge in such a manner as to render the same capable of being opened.

Compensation.

3.—(1) Where this Act has the effect of curtailing or terminating a legal right of any person (including, in particular, a right of navigation, whether or not conferred by statute), such person may, within twelve months after the passing of this Act, make to the Commissioners a claim for compensation in respect of such curtailment or termination and he shall be entitled to be paid compensation therefor by the Commissioners and, in default of being paid such compensation when the amount thereof has been agreed upon or has been determined under this section, to recover it from the Commissioners in any court of competent jurisdiction.

(2) In default of agreement, the amount of any compensation payable by the Commissioners under this section shall be determined by arbitration under the Acquisition of Land (Assessment of Compensation) Act, 1919 (as amended by subsequent enactments) as if the compensation were the price of land compulsorily acquired and the arbitrator shall have jurisdiction to determine whether compensation is, in the circumstances, payable at all.

(3) Such compensation shall be paid by the Commissioners out of any moneys for the time being in their hands.

Expenses.

4.—All costs, charges and expenses preliminary to and of and incidental to the preparing, applying for and passing of this Act or otherwise in relation thereto shall be paid by the Commissioners out of any monies for the time being in their hands.

Short title and collective citation.

5.—(1) This Act may be cited as the Limerick Harbour (Bridge) Act, 1963.

(2) This Act, the Wellesley Bridge (Limerick) Act, 1882, the Limerick Harbour (Bridge) Act, 1913 and the Act 4 George IV Cap XCIV may be cited together as the Limerick Harbour (Bridge) Acts, 1823-1963.

I wonder whether anyone got compensation.

My OSI logo and permit number for website