62 



weir still maintained, they proceeded in a body down the river in 

 March, 1844, and destroyed not only the obnoxious weir, but several 

 others.* The great weir was re-erected in 1847, and quietly cut down 

 by large numbers of the fishermen, f The cot-men of Limerick also- 

 prostrated several weirs in the estuary of the Shannon. The statute 



* Extract of a letter from the secretary of the Board of Works to the under 

 secretary for Ireland, relating to a memorial of the Marquis of Waterford to 

 the Treasury, May, 1844, Appendix to Report, 1849, p. 59: 



" In 1842, after the passing of the new Act, the memorialist states that he 

 demised this fishery to tenants who proceeded in 1843, to re-erect the weir 

 under the assumed title conferred by old possession, and the exemption above 

 alluded to. 



"The cot-men, a very numerous and poor class of fishermen of the higher part 

 of the river, felt themselves much aggrieved by this re-occupation, more par- 

 ticularly, as by the recent Act it was decided to be an injurious possession as 

 against the public, and only to be justified by such established usage as was 

 considered reasonably to confer the right of property, and it was notorious that 

 threats were held out of a determination to proceed in a body on the part of the 

 cot-men, and endeavour to prostrate this and other weirs by force ; under these 

 circumstances the Irish government was induced to make an exception to the 

 usual course, and to proceed to try the question as one of public right, in order 

 to prevent such violent breaches of the peace as might have occurred, one of 

 the parties being a numerous body, but in a station quite unable to try the 

 question by ordinary legal forms. An information was laid consequently by 

 rule of government, before a bench of magistrates, against the weir in May, 

 1843, and dismissed, as stated by the memorialist. And on an appeal to the 

 general quarter session in July, 1843, again dismissed ; but it is not stated that 

 in this last case the decision of the magistrates was in direct opposition to the 

 charge of the presiding assistant barrister, who gave, at considerable length, his 

 opinion decidedly against the legality of the weir : a printed copy of his charge 

 is enclosed. It appears by the memorial, that proceedings were then taken 

 against the weir, as injurious to navigation, without success. This board is not 

 aware under what advice, as the commissioners do not perceive that objections 

 can be taken to it, on that account. The decisions of the magistrates do not 

 appear to be by any means satisfactory, being contrary to the decided opinion 

 of the legal authority appointed with them. 



"Hitherto the cot-men remained quiescent, and felt grateful to the government 

 for its protection, and this proof of the error of a prevailing popular feeling 

 among the lower orders in Ireland, that the effect of the laws were usually for 

 the protection of the rich, and against the poor, made much impression ; find- 

 ing, however, that the weir was still maintained, and that others on the county 

 Wexford side (with rather strong claims to the title) but which had been con- 

 victed, both at petty sessions and quarter sessions in that county, were not- 

 withstanding again erected by Lord Templemore, and about to obtain the full 

 benefits of the coming fishing season, to their great injury, they proceeded in a 

 body, as stated, in March last, and destroyed the weirs again, since when Lord 

 Waterford's weir has been re-established, or is about to be, under the protection 

 of a man-of-war and the police. 



" The memorialist very fairly professes a willingness to submit his claim and 

 title to any proper investigation, and the board are of opinion that such would 

 be a very proper course if it can be brought fairly before a competent tribunal ; 

 but they are not prepared to say whether the manner suggested by memorialist 

 of an action to be brought by an individual proprietor of a fishery higher up the 

 river would be a fair way of trying this question of public right ; but that is a 

 matter for the consideration of the legal authorities." 



f Extract from Mr. Barry's Keport, 31 May, 1847 : 



"The great spit-weir at Passage, which has been pronounced illegal, and 

 removed by the owner, Mr. Dobbyn, was re-erected by that gentleman at the 

 commencement of this season, but it was not allowed to remain long ; the cot- 

 men came down in large numbers from the Suir and Barrow, and verv quietly 

 cut it, and another decidedly illegal weir, belonging to Mr. Meade, down. This 



