The Birmingham age-herald., 1913-03-30
IRISH HISTORY IS
BROUGHT TO LIGHT
Modern Effects of 300 Year
Old Fraud
800 MEN DISPOSSESSED
Fishermen Barred From Waters OF
Lough Neagh by Owners Who Hold
Patents Secured by Forgery
and Deceit
Nv p. X. CULLEN


Dublin. March -tSpecial1-rMucf
forgotten irish history is recalled in the
book sstolen Waters" which has just
been published by t. NJ. Healy. NJ. p,
and which tells the story of the legal
theft of the Lough Neagh fisheries from
the native fishermen who live on its
banks
Lough Neagh covers an area of 100000
acres. It is the longest sheet of fresh
| water, but one, in Europe and it is bor-
dered by five Irish counties. 1t is fed by
iS rivers and drained by only one-the
Bann-and its fisheries are immensely
valuable. Nearly all the eels eaten in
the United Kingdom, for instance, are
caught at Toome Bridge. where the Bann
leaves the Lough on its way to the sea,
and in the Lough itself thousands of tons
of other edible fish are caught annually.
For many centuries the Lough has sup
ported a race of hardy fishermen, who
hshed its waters without let or hindrance.
few years ago, however, Captain
O'NeilI. who does not belong to the real
o'Nein family at all, but who is descend
ed from the infamous Chichester who
was lord deputy of Ireland in the time
of James l.. and who secured to himself
large share of the lands of the real
O'Neils, Earls of Tyrone, put in a claim
to the ownership of the fisheries of
Lough Neagh and the Banp. At that
time there were 500 fishermen, repre-
senting with their families 5000 persons,
making a living from these fisheries and
ic inf tn hot fhor
nalf of them bore the name o'Neill-and
had right to bear it. They banded to-
gether to defend their right to fish, but
after a litigation lasting several years
were finally defeated in the house of
lords, the highest legal tribunal of the
kingdom. Seven law lords heard the
case and decided against the fishermen
by 4 TO 3. The four, it may be noted,
were tories. and the three liberals.
The case, as it dragged through the
courts, developed into a dry legal argu-
ment over tho validity of various patents
and documents and an effort to link up
one with another. AT the time of the
trial several important links were miss
ing, but since then Mr.. Healy has de-
voted much time to research and. he has
produced a fascinating story of how one
mans roguery in the time of James re-
suited 300 years later in robbing 500 poor
men of their livelihood.
When Chicester was lord deputy of
Ireland James | was busy driving the
Irish lords from their soil and supplant-
ing them by his own English and Scot
tish favorites. That was legal enough in
those days and no one would think of at
tacking now title founded on any gem
uine patents issued by this canny Scot
tish king. The claim to Lough Neagh,
however. Mr.. Healy declares, is founded
on what were practically forged patents
In the disturbed state of the country
in 1904 and the following years there
were naturally many disputes about
title Irish lords who were deprived of
their lands afterwards made submission
and received new grants. Patents were
made out to Englishmen and Scotsmen
containing conditions the non-fulflment
OF which made them void. Sometimes
two patents covered the same lands and
often one over-lapped another. To settle
these disputes a committee was set up in
Dublin which examined the claims made
a recommendation to another committee
in London. and passed it on to the King,
who then issued a fresh patent and sent
il to Dublin where 1t was stamped by
the lord deputy with the great seal The
story of Lough Neagh. as told by Mr..
Healy, is that Chicester issued a patent
bearing the great seal, but which had
never been passed by the London COM
mittee, to one James Hamilton, convey
ing to him the ownership of Lough Neagh
and the Bann Hamilton transferred
this patent to man named Bassett,
Chlcester's nephew. A few years later
there was a scandal over the issue of
defective patents and the King instructed
Chicester to set up n commission on de-
fectve titles. This commission, COM
posed of Chicesters creatures, passed.
Bassett's title as good and Bassett then
conveyed it to Chicester, whose descend
ants later became Marquises of Donegal
and Lords ,O'Neil
In spite of all these proceedings no ef-
fort ever was made Ito enforce the fish-
ing rights until a few years ago. Chi
chester's successor his brother, even se-
cured from Charles I, in 1925. a license
to fish Loush Neagh and The Bann.
Surely If he We're the owner it was not
necessary to obtain permission TO use his
own property.
Tie case Is made still stronger by
what happened in 1910, when Lord Straf-
ford became lord deputy and finding the
flaw i'm the title forced the Chicesters to
surrender the Lough and river and gave
them a new patent for the rest of their
estates. but in 1861 the Chcester of the
day having become Marquis of Donegal,
VINO, pN the way, nau not enrOleu tne
new patent which would have shown
! clearly the fraud perpetrated, induced
CHARLES II to regrant to him the fisheries
by representing that he had turned them
over to raise money for Charles !. 1t
was on this last document, obtained by
fraud, that the house OF lords decided
against the fishermen.
! The first attempt to oust the fishermen
was made in 1874, when the house of
al fdad fbat I, .fa afx,lo
! lakes were not vested in the King,
Charles lis grant was void. Now, how
ever. the same tribunal has taken an
other view and decided against the fish
ermen on the validity of the documents
which Mr.. Healy has proved to be based