DARK TIMES
SIR HENRY DECLARED AN OUTLAW
Sir Henry was declared an outlaw which meant that he could be shot on sight. A government reward of £200 was offered for his capture and ₤50 for each of his accomplices.[i] He was described in the reward notice printed in the “Hibernian Chronicle” of 24th July, 1797,” as “ The said Sir Henry Browne Hayes was lately a Lieutenant in His Majesty’s Regiment Of Militia, commanded by Lord Doneraile, is straight-made, rather fresh coloured, a little pock marked, and brown hair, with remarkable whiskers, about 5’7” high, and about forty years old”
Richard Pike, Mary’s uncle and executor of her fathers will, determined to catch Sir Henry, issued his own reward notice[ii] offering an extra 500 guineas to any person “that shall lodge the said Sir Henry Browne Hayes, within six calendar months, in any of his Majesty’s gaols, in this kingdom, .........one hundred guineas for each and every of his accomplices....... “
[i] The Lord Lieutenant and Council of Ireland ‘A Proclamation’ Cornwallis Cork, 31st July 1800 ( notice supplied by Michael O’Leary)
[ii] Richard Pike was Mary’s uncle and executor of her father’s will. Richard Pike’s “5oo Guineas Reward” notice July 22, 1797 . Photocopy supplied by Michael O’Leary.
Sir Henry was declared an outlaw which meant that he could be shot on sight. A government reward of £200 was offered for his capture and ₤50 for each of his accomplices.[i] He was described in the reward notice printed in the “Hibernian Chronicle” of 24th July, 1797,” as “ The said Sir Henry Browne Hayes was lately a Lieutenant in His Majesty’s Regiment Of Militia, commanded by Lord Doneraile, is straight-made, rather fresh coloured, a little pock marked, and brown hair, with remarkable whiskers, about 5’7” high, and about forty years old”
Richard Pike, Mary’s uncle and executor of her fathers will, determined to catch Sir Henry, issued his own reward notice[ii] offering an extra 500 guineas to any person “that shall lodge the said Sir Henry Browne Hayes, within six calendar months, in any of his Majesty’s gaols, in this kingdom, .........one hundred guineas for each and every of his accomplices....... “
[i] The Lord Lieutenant and Council of Ireland ‘A Proclamation’ Cornwallis Cork, 31st July 1800 ( notice supplied by Michael O’Leary)
[ii] Richard Pike was Mary’s uncle and executor of her father’s will. Richard Pike’s “5oo Guineas Reward” notice July 22, 1797 . Photocopy supplied by Michael O’Leary.
Richard Pike's reward notice
s
Sir Henry and Charles Coghlan's signatures
SIR HENRY AND CHARLES COGHLAN'S SIGNATURES IN THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER, AT A LODGE MEETING IN DUBLIN.
Note that Coghlan's signature is just below Sir Henry's
document sent by Michael O’Leary.
Note that Coghlan's signature is just below Sir Henry's
document sent by Michael O’Leary.
Three bow faced houses opposite the Martyr's Memorial
THE TRIAL
. After two years as an outlaw Sir Henry decided to surrender himself and face trial. He chose Charles Coghlan's place of business (his barber and perfumer) to turn himself in to the authorities because Charles Coghlan was a fellow Freemason and secretary of his Lodge No. 71.. Sir Henry wanted someone of his choosing to claim Richard Pike’s five hundred guineas reward. It was his gift to his friend who helped him during the last two years. Sir Henry's loyalty to his friend was noted by other Freemasons and that probably helped to save his life.
.
. After two years as an outlaw Sir Henry decided to surrender himself and face trial. He chose Charles Coghlan's place of business (his barber and perfumer) to turn himself in to the authorities because Charles Coghlan was a fellow Freemason and secretary of his Lodge No. 71.. Sir Henry wanted someone of his choosing to claim Richard Pike’s five hundred guineas reward. It was his gift to his friend who helped him during the last two years. Sir Henry's loyalty to his friend was noted by other Freemasons and that probably helped to save his life.
.
A close up of the three bow faced houses purchased by Charles Coghlan
The North Gate Jail where debtors were imprisoned and not criminals sentenced to death like Sir Henry.
THE NORTH GATE JAIL WHERE SIR HENRY WAS IMPRISONED
The front page of the Trial transcript
Sir Henry’s trial opened at the Cork Assizes on the 13th of April 1801, four years after the abduction; the presiding judge was Mr. Justice Day and John Phillpot Curran the prosecutor. The case created an enormous amount of interest and as Curran made his way to the Courthouse, a flower seller in the crowd wished him luck and “hoped he would win the day (Mr. Justice Day)”. Unable to resist with another pun Curran answered, “If I, do you may lose the (k)night”.
The court trial lasted three days and on the 10th of August 1801 it concluded and after only one hour’s deliberation the jury found Sir Henry guilty and sentenced him to death, to be hanged at Gallows’s Green.
|
|
Sir Henry sentenced to be executed by hanging.
(With Brian Ahearn's permission.)
(With Brian Ahearn's permission.)
[1] [ In 1803 after Sir Henry’s trial, the Penrose family befriended Sarah Curran, J.P Curran’s daughter and cared for her. She had been betrothed to the Irish patriot[1] Robert Emmet who had risked his life just to see her briefly again. He was caught and executed for sedition. Her father in the meantime drove her out of his home in Rathfarham, Co. Dublin. Sarah left “Woodhill” two years later to marry Captain Sturgeon of the Royal Corps. It is likely that the Penrose family became acquainted with Sarah through Sir Henry’s case.]
[i] Australia's Rebel Convict Rolf Grunseit p160
Mabel T and Rolf Grunseit
One question asked and never resolved was did Sir Henry consummate the 'marriage'.
It was stated in court that Mary remained a 'maid', that is a virgin but recently a lady Mrs. Mabel Teese… in Melbourne traced her lineage back to the 'union' of Mary Pike and Sir Henry.[i]
Sir Henry counsel at the trial appealed against the verdic,t claiming there was insufficient evidence that Sir Henry had held up the coach; the twelve judges however upheld the verdict that he was to be hung. Powerful Masons helped overturn the death sentence delivered by Justice Day.on the basis of the stated doubt and commuted it to transportation for life.
Sir Henry was subsequently locked up in the North Gate Jail which was the Debtors’ Prison, from where he wrote a letter dated the 24th Sept 1801, pleading with the judges to imprison him in Ireland or somewhere close, so that he could be near his six children
But the judges refused his plea and sentenced him to life imprisonment in New South Wales.
The Masons in Cork from Lodge 71, showed their support for Sir Henry in a memorial, instead of expelling him for his crime.
It was stated in court that Mary remained a 'maid', that is a virgin but recently a lady Mrs. Mabel Teese… in Melbourne traced her lineage back to the 'union' of Mary Pike and Sir Henry.[i]
Sir Henry counsel at the trial appealed against the verdic,t claiming there was insufficient evidence that Sir Henry had held up the coach; the twelve judges however upheld the verdict that he was to be hung. Powerful Masons helped overturn the death sentence delivered by Justice Day.on the basis of the stated doubt and commuted it to transportation for life.
Sir Henry was subsequently locked up in the North Gate Jail which was the Debtors’ Prison, from where he wrote a letter dated the 24th Sept 1801, pleading with the judges to imprison him in Ireland or somewhere close, so that he could be near his six children
But the judges refused his plea and sentenced him to life imprisonment in New South Wales.
The Masons in Cork from Lodge 71, showed their support for Sir Henry in a memorial, instead of expelling him for his crime.
Sir Henry's Stay of Execution
For the next year or so Sir Henry languished in “The North Gate” or
debtors’ jail with other felons waiting to be transported to New South Wales.
The memory of how he sent the 150 convicts to New South Wales and the conditions
they were forced to endure, locked below the decks and crammed into dark holds,
horrified him so he organized his own travel arrangements to New South Wales.
debtors’ jail with other felons waiting to be transported to New South Wales.
The memory of how he sent the 150 convicts to New South Wales and the conditions
they were forced to endure, locked below the decks and crammed into dark holds,
horrified him so he organized his own travel arrangements to New South Wales.
From Cork to Sydney
A 2 square rigged, 2 deck 437 ton ship, similar to the 'Atlas'.
Atlas log from Sunday, October 18 to Monday, October 26th !801
Sunday 18th October, Embarked 1 sergeant, 2 corporals and 20 privates.
On the 22nd October the cooper, Samuel Breakwell built a cabin on the 'Atlas' presumably for Surgeon Jamison. When Sir Henry boarded the 'Atlas' on the 31st October and realised what it meant to be locked up in chains down in the hold with the other male convicts he probably then asked Richard Brooks how much it would cost him to make the journey in a private cabin. Sir Henry it was rumoured paid Brooks around £300-400 for Jamison's cabin. Brooks then ordered a second cabin to be constructed for Jamison which Elizabeth Atkins seized and occupied while Brooks was attending matters elsewhere. Mrs Elizabeth Atkins,was the 'crusty' wife of the New South Wales judge advocate whom she hadn't seen for almost ten years and now decided to join him.. He had fled to New South Wales ten years earlier to avoid debtors prison. Now ten years later she had decided to join him. ('Richard Brooks' From Convict Ship Captain to Pillar of Early Colonial Australia Christine Maher)
Sunday 25th October embarked 40 convicts. Received 40 pairs of chains, 25 pairs of handcuffs, 3 lengths of chains , 40 padlocks, 2 dozen staples and 200 rivets and putting 25 prisoners in irons.
1 convict died on the 28th October.
On the 22nd October the cooper, Samuel Breakwell built a cabin on the 'Atlas' presumably for Surgeon Jamison. When Sir Henry boarded the 'Atlas' on the 31st October and realised what it meant to be locked up in chains down in the hold with the other male convicts he probably then asked Richard Brooks how much it would cost him to make the journey in a private cabin. Sir Henry it was rumoured paid Brooks around £300-400 for Jamison's cabin. Brooks then ordered a second cabin to be constructed for Jamison which Elizabeth Atkins seized and occupied while Brooks was attending matters elsewhere. Mrs Elizabeth Atkins,was the 'crusty' wife of the New South Wales judge advocate whom she hadn't seen for almost ten years and now decided to join him.. He had fled to New South Wales ten years earlier to avoid debtors prison. Now ten years later she had decided to join him. ('Richard Brooks' From Convict Ship Captain to Pillar of Early Colonial Australia Christine Maher)
Sunday 25th October embarked 40 convicts. Received 40 pairs of chains, 25 pairs of handcuffs, 3 lengths of chains , 40 padlocks, 2 dozen staples and 200 rivets and putting 25 prisoners in irons.
1 convict died on the 28th October.
The 31st October 1801 entry in the 'Atlas' log by Captain Richard Brooks
mentioned by name 'Sir Henry Browne Hayes'
On the 31st of October 1801 Sir Henry boarded the transport sip, the 'Atlas'.
He was the only convict Captain Richard Brooks mentioned by name to have boarded the 'Atlas'.
The Derby Mercury reported on the 12th November 1801 that,
"On Saturday night, Sir Henry Browne Hayes was conveyed to the Cove of Cork, and put on board on the Convict chips destined to Botany Bay. He was taken from prison in a boat, attended by Mr. Sheriff Newsom, and a guard"
He was the only convict Captain Richard Brooks mentioned by name to have boarded the 'Atlas'.
The Derby Mercury reported on the 12th November 1801 that,
"On Saturday night, Sir Henry Browne Hayes was conveyed to the Cove of Cork, and put on board on the Convict chips destined to Botany Bay. He was taken from prison in a boat, attended by Mr. Sheriff Newsom, and a guard"
Captain Richard Brooks of the 'Atlas'
TRANSPORT TO N.S.W
Captain Richard Brooks of the 'Atlas' Richard Brooks was a young and very money hungry man who treated his convicts as just more perishable cargo. To maximise his returns he had crammed trade goods into every conceivable space on board the ship, to be sold in Sydney. He had even loaded casks of sugar under Surgeon Jamison’s bunk, forcing him to store his personal belongings out on deck. So heavily laden was the ‘Atlas’ when it sailed that the deadlights had to be shut and the air scuttles kept closed whenever the sea was rough, this was meant to keep the waves from crashing in and spoiling the cargo. Because of this precaution to protect the cargo, no fresh air reached the prisoners locked below in the cramped hold.
The ship left Cork on the high tide on the 29th November 1801. The Caledonian Mercury of the 21st December 1801 read that ,“A few days ago, the two vessels which were on purpose prepared to carry the transports from Cork, sailed from thence with their precious cargo for Botany Bay. Much sickness had been expected among them, and about 15, we understand, have died.
Captain Richard Brooks of the 'Atlas' Richard Brooks was a young and very money hungry man who treated his convicts as just more perishable cargo. To maximise his returns he had crammed trade goods into every conceivable space on board the ship, to be sold in Sydney. He had even loaded casks of sugar under Surgeon Jamison’s bunk, forcing him to store his personal belongings out on deck. So heavily laden was the ‘Atlas’ when it sailed that the deadlights had to be shut and the air scuttles kept closed whenever the sea was rough, this was meant to keep the waves from crashing in and spoiling the cargo. Because of this precaution to protect the cargo, no fresh air reached the prisoners locked below in the cramped hold.
The ship left Cork on the high tide on the 29th November 1801. The Caledonian Mercury of the 21st December 1801 read that ,“A few days ago, the two vessels which were on purpose prepared to carry the transports from Cork, sailed from thence with their precious cargo for Botany Bay. Much sickness had been expected among them, and about 15, we understand, have died.
Friday 27 Nov 1801. Anchors hoisted.
Sunday 29th Nov 1801 suicide of steward.
Small mishap before sailing.
Discharged the pilot. Pistol shot reported down in lower cabin. Found that the steward Isaac Self had shot himself. He was found in a pool of blood and that he had shot himself with a nail which protruded through the other side of his body.
Discharged the pilot. Pistol shot reported down in lower cabin. Found that the steward Isaac Self had shot himself. He was found in a pool of blood and that he had shot himself with a nail which protruded through the other side of his body.
Wednesday February 1 1802 in Rio
Died buried 1 male convict.
Ann Collins one of the convicts had to bed twins, boy and girl-died buriued the same
Mr Jamison
Wednesday 22 Feb 1802
Cleaning decks and doing sundry jobs. Mr Jamison a passenger arrived on board at the port and going down to his berth, the passage way being blocked up with sundry things, he thought proper to store them six of a casein convicts- a great disturbance and shouting on board. He also abused Captain Brooks, being in bed and unwell. Said he was a dam swindler and a damned liar and caused a great disturbance.
Wednesday 24th February 1802 Mr Jamison a passenger went on board the 'Hercules' with part of his baggage.
Cleaning decks and doing sundry jobs. Mr Jamison a passenger arrived on board at the port and going down to his berth, the passage way being blocked up with sundry things, he thought proper to store them six of a casein convicts- a great disturbance and shouting on board. He also abused Captain Brooks, being in bed and unwell. Said he was a dam swindler and a damned liar and caused a great disturbance.
Wednesday 24th February 1802 Mr Jamison a passenger went on board the 'Hercules' with part of his baggage.
Four entries in the 'Atlas' log book, dated the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th October 1802
Two entries for the 5th and 6th October 1802 in the 'Atlas' log book made by Captain.Richard Brooks. He records that the ship's cooper Samuel Breakwell was seen a day or so before in Sydney. The next day, on the 6th October just before the 'Atlas' was to sail to China, Brooks noted in the log book that Samuel Breakwell and two other sailors had not returned to the ship and so were to be left behind.
Thomas Jamison is assaulted on board the 'Atlas'
21. Sir Henry’s cabin had originally been reserved for Thomas Jamison the new Surgeon General for New South Wales but as Jamison discovered to his dismay that it was now occupied by a convict Sir Henry Browne Hayes. Jamison was outraged and more so when Captain Brooks offered him a smaller cabin with casks of sugar stored under his bunk while his luggage was left on deck, exposed to the wind, sun and sea. When he protested, the Captain’s answer infuriated Jamison who lost all self control and in an exchange of insults and blows with Captain Brooks and the first mate, was also set upon by
Sir Henry. HRA Vol 111 Surgeon Jamison to Lord Hobart Sydney 8th November, 1802 p 703
Sir Henry. HRA Vol 111 Surgeon Jamison to Lord Hobart Sydney 8th November, 1802 p 703
’Sir Henry described the altercation with Surgeon Jamison in this letter to Earl Hardwicke,
The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, dated the 26TH Oct 1802.
“Captain Brookes of the Atlas transport” the letter began, ”received on board, according to his Instructions a man called Jamieson, who was looked upon by reason of the manner in which he was named in the Order, as a person of insignificance and received consequently treatment. In Rio Janeiro this man was generally inebriated and during this temporary privation of his senses was unremittingly asserting his importance in the Scale of Society, he being a New South Wales assistant surgeon. In one of those frantic sallies he abused Captain Brookes, who was then exceedingly ill and hardly able to walk, in the grossest manner. Blows consequently ensued to prevent which I exerted myself assisted by two strange Gentlemen, who happened to be on Board, in separating the combatants he then issued forth a torrent of the most vile abuse against me, and made use of many improper expressions to excite me to quarrel with him likewise.’ At this point Sir Henry admitted that his temper snapped. He continued that; “Having met him the next day on shore at a Coffee Room, I sent one of the above mentioned Gentlemen to him to know if he recollected any part of the language he made use of the preceding day, he being then likewise drunk with all the arrogance and self sufficiency of a New South Wales task master returned as answers ’that he would grant no audience to a Convict’. I came up to him and called him a coward and a Poltroon and expecting a suitable chastisement he exclaimed “O Sir Henry, I am beneath your notice” which effectively disarmed me of Resentment. The Captain not being able to endure further repetition of his Insolence had him removed to the Hercules.
The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, dated the 26TH Oct 1802.
“Captain Brookes of the Atlas transport” the letter began, ”received on board, according to his Instructions a man called Jamieson, who was looked upon by reason of the manner in which he was named in the Order, as a person of insignificance and received consequently treatment. In Rio Janeiro this man was generally inebriated and during this temporary privation of his senses was unremittingly asserting his importance in the Scale of Society, he being a New South Wales assistant surgeon. In one of those frantic sallies he abused Captain Brookes, who was then exceedingly ill and hardly able to walk, in the grossest manner. Blows consequently ensued to prevent which I exerted myself assisted by two strange Gentlemen, who happened to be on Board, in separating the combatants he then issued forth a torrent of the most vile abuse against me, and made use of many improper expressions to excite me to quarrel with him likewise.’ At this point Sir Henry admitted that his temper snapped. He continued that; “Having met him the next day on shore at a Coffee Room, I sent one of the above mentioned Gentlemen to him to know if he recollected any part of the language he made use of the preceding day, he being then likewise drunk with all the arrogance and self sufficiency of a New South Wales task master returned as answers ’that he would grant no audience to a Convict’. I came up to him and called him a coward and a Poltroon and expecting a suitable chastisement he exclaimed “O Sir Henry, I am beneath your notice” which effectively disarmed me of Resentment. The Captain not being able to endure further repetition of his Insolence had him removed to the Hercules.
Jamison posted his complaint to Earl Hardwicke, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland on October 26, 1802, and outlined the shameful treatment he received from Captain Brooks on board the “Atlas”[i] .
He wrote;
“Any respect or attention by Mr. Brookes (captain of the Atlas) to the accommodation of the official servants of the Crown was entirely out of the question. A prisoner on board, and from whom he had extorted three or four hundred guineas, was the only person who had any pre-eminence with Mr. Brookes. This person messed with him, enjoyed a part of the round house, and the cabin allotted to the passengers was in part stowed with his baggage. The striking contrast in Mr. Brook’s’ conduct in relation to the prisoner alluded to above and his deportment towards me was so singular and unprecedented that I cannot pass over it unnoticed. My bed-place where I slept was rather on a contracted scale, and underneath were stowed four casks of sugar which were usually required on deck twice a week. My cases were as constantly cast loose and in danger of being broke to pieces.”
For reasons best known to him, Jamison neglected to mention to the Lord Lieutenant of his fight with Captain Brooks and Sir Henry. Perhaps he was too embarrassed to report that he had been assaulted by the ship’s captain and a convict.
The prisoner he referred to was of course Sir Henry. The editor of the London Chronicle published a letter on May 6, 1802, from the wife of Captain Brooks. It took the form of a testimonial for Sir Henry Browne Hayes and preempted Jamison’s damning accusations of Sir Henry and her husband. The letter extolled the exemplary care that her husband and Sir Henry provided the convicts. She described how after leaving Cork the ‘Atlas’ sailed into a monsterous gale that battered the ship so severely that it killed all the live stock in the hold next to where the convicts were shackled and that to save the ship, all the hatches had to be battened down to stop the waves from flooding the ship and sinking it. The effect of battening down the hatches was to start a dreadful, contagious fever that spread among the convicts, affecting more than eighty. And that Sir Henry, selflessly put himself at mortal risk during that severe storm and that “he had left the comfort of his cabin to comfort the sick and dying convicts… and administered their medicines…’” How selfless and noble! But Mrs. Brooks neglected to explain in her letter why Sir Henry was not in the hold shackled like the rest of the convicts but allowed to move freely about and why Sir Henry had a private cabin; the very same cabin reserved for Thomas Jamison by the Admiralty. Mrs Brooks further lauded Sir Henry, stating that ‘When mutiny threatened to erupt among the soldiers and female prisoners,” Sir Henry’s ‘determined exertion and good conduct assisted in the restoration of good conduct’. This was dismissed as a complete fabrication, as was later proved during an official inquiry into the deaths of the convicts, as was also ‘that during the storm Captain Brooks and Sir Henry gave spiritual comfort to the unfortunate the prisoners locked up and shackled in the airless in the hold.’
That last piece of ‘information’ proved to be the most preposterous lie of the lot; the very idea of the privileged convict Sir Henry, lording it on the decks of the ‘Atlas’, then reading from a Protestant prayer book to comfort the wretched United Irish prisoners, most of whom were Catholics, some gasping out their last breath, was as grotesque a fabrication about this man as one could concoct. In reality Sir Henry dined with Captain and Mrs Brooks every evening, enjoyed his meal, had a drink and a chat and hardly gave the unfortunate convicts a thought as they huddled together like sardines, gasping for air in the ship’s foetid hold.
Fortunately for the convicts, the “Atlas” had been badly damaged during the storm and required extensive repairs. This meant that the convicts had to be off loaded onto a nearby island while the empty ship was repaired. The convicts once they were on land were still imprisoned but were now in open air and sunlight, eating fresh fruit, vegetables and meat and slowly recovering in health.
Sir Henry unlike the other convicts, left the ship to sight see; he had given Captain Brooks his word as a gentleman, to return to the ‘Atlas’ before it resumed its journey to New South Wales and that was good enough. And like any tourist visiting Rio he enjoyed the food and sights of the city. In the meantime as the ship was being repaired, Surgeon Walker attempted to fumigate the ‘Atlas’ prison holds to the best of his ability. He was hampered from carrying out his task successfully by the tightly stacked trade goods in the hold, making thorough fumigation almost impossible. So when the repairs on the ship were completed and the journey to New South Wales resumed, the holds were still dirty and crawling with vermin.
The ‘’Atlas’’ left Rio de Janeiro on February 26, 1802 and headed for the Cape of Good Hope, arriving there on April 12, 1802.
The weather for this part of the journey remained consistently bad and in order to keep the prisoners subdued in the holds, Captain Brooks forced them to wear heavy leg irons”[i] while locked together in the putrid, stinking hold, crawling with vermin and devoid of ventilation, just a few more details which Mrs. Brooks neglected to mention in her May 6, 1802 letter to the “London Chronicle. And still more prisoners died from scurvy because of the lack of anti-scorbutics (vitamin C found in fresh fruit and vegetables). Surgeon Walker, the ship’s surgeon tried hard to save them but there was little he could do to check the disease. Captain Brooks had criminally neglected every sensible precaution, to ensure the safety of his prisoners. Brooks even resented the half space he allotted the convicts, half of what they were entitled to for the journey and fully paid for by the Government.
The fact that only two women had lost their lives on that crowded voyage could suggest that they were spared because, belonging to ‘the gentler’ sex, they were entitled to a modicum of gallantry. The truth was that many of the women were ‘motts’ –prostitutes – and were probably chosen for transport, to be virtual sex slaves for the crew and as probable wives in the colony. Far from protesting, many of these women were grateful for the privileges granted to them for their service. Two of the women Winefred Dowling and her sister, Elizabeth, had both come from Cork and were transported because of their United Irish associations. Winefred would come to see more of Sir Henry when she was being courted by the convict poet, John Grant.
[i] “The convict Ships 1787-1868”. By Charles Bateson Glasgow Brown, Son, & Ferguson Ltd Publishers. P 182-184
[i] (The Australian Historical Society Journal and Proceedings, Vol 111 1917 Part X1 The Story of Vaucluse house, By Charles H. Bertie Sept 28 1915. p 514)
He wrote;
“Any respect or attention by Mr. Brookes (captain of the Atlas) to the accommodation of the official servants of the Crown was entirely out of the question. A prisoner on board, and from whom he had extorted three or four hundred guineas, was the only person who had any pre-eminence with Mr. Brookes. This person messed with him, enjoyed a part of the round house, and the cabin allotted to the passengers was in part stowed with his baggage. The striking contrast in Mr. Brook’s’ conduct in relation to the prisoner alluded to above and his deportment towards me was so singular and unprecedented that I cannot pass over it unnoticed. My bed-place where I slept was rather on a contracted scale, and underneath were stowed four casks of sugar which were usually required on deck twice a week. My cases were as constantly cast loose and in danger of being broke to pieces.”
For reasons best known to him, Jamison neglected to mention to the Lord Lieutenant of his fight with Captain Brooks and Sir Henry. Perhaps he was too embarrassed to report that he had been assaulted by the ship’s captain and a convict.
The prisoner he referred to was of course Sir Henry. The editor of the London Chronicle published a letter on May 6, 1802, from the wife of Captain Brooks. It took the form of a testimonial for Sir Henry Browne Hayes and preempted Jamison’s damning accusations of Sir Henry and her husband. The letter extolled the exemplary care that her husband and Sir Henry provided the convicts. She described how after leaving Cork the ‘Atlas’ sailed into a monsterous gale that battered the ship so severely that it killed all the live stock in the hold next to where the convicts were shackled and that to save the ship, all the hatches had to be battened down to stop the waves from flooding the ship and sinking it. The effect of battening down the hatches was to start a dreadful, contagious fever that spread among the convicts, affecting more than eighty. And that Sir Henry, selflessly put himself at mortal risk during that severe storm and that “he had left the comfort of his cabin to comfort the sick and dying convicts… and administered their medicines…’” How selfless and noble! But Mrs. Brooks neglected to explain in her letter why Sir Henry was not in the hold shackled like the rest of the convicts but allowed to move freely about and why Sir Henry had a private cabin; the very same cabin reserved for Thomas Jamison by the Admiralty. Mrs Brooks further lauded Sir Henry, stating that ‘When mutiny threatened to erupt among the soldiers and female prisoners,” Sir Henry’s ‘determined exertion and good conduct assisted in the restoration of good conduct’. This was dismissed as a complete fabrication, as was later proved during an official inquiry into the deaths of the convicts, as was also ‘that during the storm Captain Brooks and Sir Henry gave spiritual comfort to the unfortunate the prisoners locked up and shackled in the airless in the hold.’
That last piece of ‘information’ proved to be the most preposterous lie of the lot; the very idea of the privileged convict Sir Henry, lording it on the decks of the ‘Atlas’, then reading from a Protestant prayer book to comfort the wretched United Irish prisoners, most of whom were Catholics, some gasping out their last breath, was as grotesque a fabrication about this man as one could concoct. In reality Sir Henry dined with Captain and Mrs Brooks every evening, enjoyed his meal, had a drink and a chat and hardly gave the unfortunate convicts a thought as they huddled together like sardines, gasping for air in the ship’s foetid hold.
Fortunately for the convicts, the “Atlas” had been badly damaged during the storm and required extensive repairs. This meant that the convicts had to be off loaded onto a nearby island while the empty ship was repaired. The convicts once they were on land were still imprisoned but were now in open air and sunlight, eating fresh fruit, vegetables and meat and slowly recovering in health.
Sir Henry unlike the other convicts, left the ship to sight see; he had given Captain Brooks his word as a gentleman, to return to the ‘Atlas’ before it resumed its journey to New South Wales and that was good enough. And like any tourist visiting Rio he enjoyed the food and sights of the city. In the meantime as the ship was being repaired, Surgeon Walker attempted to fumigate the ‘Atlas’ prison holds to the best of his ability. He was hampered from carrying out his task successfully by the tightly stacked trade goods in the hold, making thorough fumigation almost impossible. So when the repairs on the ship were completed and the journey to New South Wales resumed, the holds were still dirty and crawling with vermin.
The ‘’Atlas’’ left Rio de Janeiro on February 26, 1802 and headed for the Cape of Good Hope, arriving there on April 12, 1802.
The weather for this part of the journey remained consistently bad and in order to keep the prisoners subdued in the holds, Captain Brooks forced them to wear heavy leg irons”[i] while locked together in the putrid, stinking hold, crawling with vermin and devoid of ventilation, just a few more details which Mrs. Brooks neglected to mention in her May 6, 1802 letter to the “London Chronicle. And still more prisoners died from scurvy because of the lack of anti-scorbutics (vitamin C found in fresh fruit and vegetables). Surgeon Walker, the ship’s surgeon tried hard to save them but there was little he could do to check the disease. Captain Brooks had criminally neglected every sensible precaution, to ensure the safety of his prisoners. Brooks even resented the half space he allotted the convicts, half of what they were entitled to for the journey and fully paid for by the Government.
The fact that only two women had lost their lives on that crowded voyage could suggest that they were spared because, belonging to ‘the gentler’ sex, they were entitled to a modicum of gallantry. The truth was that many of the women were ‘motts’ –prostitutes – and were probably chosen for transport, to be virtual sex slaves for the crew and as probable wives in the colony. Far from protesting, many of these women were grateful for the privileges granted to them for their service. Two of the women Winefred Dowling and her sister, Elizabeth, had both come from Cork and were transported because of their United Irish associations. Winefred would come to see more of Sir Henry when she was being courted by the convict poet, John Grant.
[i] “The convict Ships 1787-1868”. By Charles Bateson Glasgow Brown, Son, & Ferguson Ltd Publishers. P 182-184
[i] (The Australian Historical Society Journal and Proceedings, Vol 111 1917 Part X1 The Story of Vaucluse house, By Charles H. Bertie Sept 28 1915. p 514)
ARRIVAL AT SYDNEY
. Once the 'Atlas' reached Sydney, Sir Henry was sentenced to six months jail for insulting and striking Surgeon Jamison. Then after having served only a month of his sentence in Sydney, he was sent to Parramatta for the remaining five months.
During his five months imprisonment at Paramatta, Sir Henry befriended three Irish convicts who had arrived in Sydney on the 'Minerva' some time earlier. The “Minerva” had sailed from the Cove in Cork with a complement of Irish prisoners bound for New South Wales on the 24th August 1799, and arrived at Port Jackson on the 11th January 1800, after a journey lasting 140 days.
It was in Paramatta that Sir Henry first met “General” Joseph Holt, the Wicklow rebel leader. Holt was a political prisoner.who had led a guerilla force in Wicklow during the uprising against the British forces in 1798.After battling those forces for over a year he accepted an amnesty for himself and his army. He was then exiled to New South Wales. There he befriended the brothers Maurice and Michael Fitzgerald, who were transported to New South Wales on the ‘Minerva’ for their ‘United Irish’ activities.
The young officer in charge of the convicts on the ‘Minerva’ was the newly promoted Captain William Cox; he had volunteered in England to serve in the New South Wales Corps who was board. Cox had accepted the promotion because like every officer who had signed to serve in New South Wales, a promotion from lieutenant to captain and a 100 acre land grant came with it. And as an added incentive to join, he was entitled free convict labour to work his land. The only problem with his 100 acres of land was that he lacked any farming experience, nor how to exploit it, so he needed to employ someone with farming experience to develop his land. On board the ‘Minerva’ was ‘General’ Joseph Holt, who before he took up arms against the British managed several farming properties for his employer. Captain Cox grew to like the straight talking Joseph Holt and the two soon became friends. Cox then offered Joseph Holt the job to develop his one hundred acre grant which he accepted.
However not everyone welcomed the ‘Minerva’ with its complement of ‘United Irish’ rebels the small Hawkesbury farming community became alarmed. They worried that some of the Irish, like the leader ’General’ Joseph Holt could lead many of the rebels captured at the battle of Vinegar Hill, at Enniscorthy, and that fueled their fear of an Irish uprising.[i] Alarmed the landholders pressured the administration to disperse the Irish all over the colony and as thinly as possible. The New South Wales Corps at the time, was very undermanned, down to 500 or so men, half the required number of troopers needed to guard the colony,
Consequently as the “Minerva’s” convicts were dispersed and allocated duties around Sydney and the Hawkesbury, the brothers Maurice and Michael Fitzgerald were assigned to work together on a government farm fronting the Paramatta River, some forty kilometers distant from Sydney.
It was there two years later while Sir Henry was still imprisoned in Paramatta gaol, that he met Joseph Holt and the Fitzgerald brothers.
Sir Henry, a Protestant had once had served in Lord Doneraille’s South Cork Militia, to protect both King and Country saw no conflict of loyalty in befriending the three convicted, Catholic ‘United Irish’ rebels. The battle lines between the Crown and the ‘United Irish’ existed only in Ireland and not in convict New South Wales. Here these convicts were no longer his enemy; they were now replaced in Sir Henry’s eyes, by a hated authority, in the disguise of an inferior Governor and his venal, corrupt and despicable officers and soldiers. And he had no qualms about reporting their corrupt dealings and their numerous scandals to Westminster. And neither was he concerned about the repercussions once Governor King discovered that it was Sir Henry’s letters that caused the trouble. The effect of Sir Henry's reports on the administration of the colony, was such that Governor King labelled Sir Henry as a “A restless, troublesome character” and had him frequently punished for real and imagined transgressions.
As soon as Sir Henry returned to Sydney from Paramatta, Maurice Margarot, the ‘Scottish Martyr ‘and political agitator’ invited him to his Castlereagh Street house. Sir Henry accepted the invitation as had General Holt when a similar invitation was extended to him earlier in January, 1800. Informants working for Governor King tracked and reported such potentially dangerous meetings in Sydney; Sir Henry’s meeting with Margarot was similarly reported. King’s worst fears were soon realised as Sir Henry and Margarot found that they had one thing in common, abhorrence for authority. Margarot a Scottish republican had been exiled here to New South Wales for his political views, principles and activities while Sir Henry was transported to New South Wales for nothing more than abducting a young woman and marrying her under duress. He was moreover a very lucky man to have escaped hanging. Margarot’s 1790 charter, published that year in London, reads as follows;
(1)That every individual has a right to share in the government of that Society of which he is a member, unless incapacitated.
(2)That it is no less the right than the duty of every citizen, to keep a watchful eye on the government; that the laws, by being multiplied, do not degenerate into oppression; and that those who are entrusted with the Government; do not substitute private interest for public advantage.
(3)That in consequence of a partial, unequal, and therefore inadequate representation, together with the corrupt method in which representatives are elected; oppressive laws, unjust laws, restrictions of liberty, and wasting of the public money, have ensued.
Margarot’s principles were nothing less than a declaration of human rights but which the government in London declared subversive. These ‘subversive’ principles consequently earned him transportation to New South Wales in 1793, where he continued to espouse them, grumble, agitate and write polemics, directed at the colony’s administration. By the time the two men met, Sir Henry had already established his presence in the colony, clashed with the new Surgeon General and been punished by the administration. Now angry and confused he found a soul mate in Margarot. That’s not to say he agreed with Margarot’s political philosophy but he empathized with Margarot’s anger. Governor King soon discovered that he had another unpredictable troublemaker on his hands, one who was articulate and a literate letter writer who kept the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, constantly informed about the dysfunctional scandals that wracked the colony.
Sir Henry returned to Sydney after completing his Paramatta prison sentence, determined to make his life as pleasant as possible. On the 18th of April 1803 he purchased a cottage in Chapel Row (now Castlereagh Street)from Elizabeth Bradshaw for twenty seven guineas(₤27/7/-).[i]
A sailing boat was included in the purchase and Sir Henry sailed around the harbour in it.Sydney at the time was a dreary place where besides work there was little else to do.
When part of the late Captain Thomas Dennet’s estate fronting the harbour shoreline, some 11 km by land from Sydney, came up for auction on the 22nd August 1803, Sir Henry’s bid of ₤100 [ii] was the highest and the land was sold to him.[iii]
He had purchased two well timbered land grants amounting to one hundred and five acres.
Work was not a problem for Sir Henry because he did not have to work at all. For relaxation he sailed around Sydney Harbour in his sailboat. He was an experienced sailor from his Cork days, where nearly all the wealthy young men enjoyed sailing and racing their boats. Soon he was familiar with all the shoreline and sandy foreshores of the harbour. So when in July 1803, Elizabeth Rafferty, an emancepist, advertised that she would auction both her Laycock’s Farm of 100 acres and Cardell’s Farm of 25 acres, fronting the harbour Sir Henry decided to bid for them.
The Laycock and Cardell farms had once belonged to Captain Thomas Dennett, a sea captain who in 1797 was the master of the ‘Britannia’. She had the doubtful honour of having sailed one of the worst journeys in the history of transportation. The 'Britannia's' unfortunate convicts were brutally mistreated, 10 men and one woman dying out of a complement of 144. Their deaths according to Captain Dennett was that some convicts had conspired to capture the ship and failed. The aftermath was sickening; the convicts were shackled in irons and unmercifully and flogged. The troublesome women were caned on their backs, often to four dozen cuts with a cane for the most trivial of offences.
Elizabeth Rafferty was both young and pretty when she was sentenced for theft in Dublin, to seven years transportation to New South Wales.
Captain Dennett the ’Britannia’ noticed her as she was brought on board. That sighting was enough for him to single her out and make her his mistress for the duration of the journey. Elizabeth was fortunate because it saved her from the Captain's cruel and degrading treatment that he meted out to many unfortunate convict.
The liaison between the two lasted for years and the grateful Captain left her the 'Cardell' and 'Laycock' farms in his will.. Dennett undoubtedly loved Mary Rafferty and left her the two properties as a token of his deep feelings. He neglected however to leave her the title deeds for the properties. So when Sir Henry purchased those two properties at auction for £100, he instructed his agent in London to pay the £93 which was the balance of the sale after deducting the £7 commission. Unfortunately for Elizabeth, she never saw any money from the sale because the transaction was never completed; Sir Henry never received the title deeds for the properties and so he never paid for them. The worst part about the failed transaction was that no one seemed to care, least of all Sir Henry. In the meantime, the paper work for the sale had been completed and according to the Law and the auctioneer Simeon Lord gave Sir Henry permission to formally occupy the land on the 22nd August 1803. All in all Sir Henry had only spent £7 for ‘Vaucluse’ which was probably the reason why he leased the property to his friend and Valet Samuel Breakwell for 99 years at a yearly peppercorn rent. He had also renamed the two farms on his new estate, ‘Vaucluse’ and built on it a Masonic inspired H shaped sandstone house.. The curious thing about the house was that it was not built on ‘his’ land, but on Crown land. It was an error caused by poor surveying; because either the marker pegs had been moved when the house was built or they just couldn’t be found when the foundations were laid.
The boundaries of the Vaucluse estate were situated between the boundaries of Rose Bay (named after George Rose, Under Secretary of the Treasury in London) and Parsley Bay (named after Private Parsley of the Sydney Loyal Association Company of Volunteers. [i] Parsley in his later years chose to live as a hermit in a cave that overlooks the bay now named after him); the bill of sale made out to Sir Henry read;
“This is to certify that at the sale by auction of the Estate, Farms and Houses of the late Captain THOMAS DENNETT, authorised by Edward Hanmer PALMER, Esq., Captain of the Honourable East India Company’s extra ship Bridgewater, by letter of Attorney from Messrs. Prinseps and Saunders, the executors of the will of the said captain THOMAS DENNETT, deceased, certain farms situate near South Head, in this territory, were purchased by Sir HENRY BROWNE HAYES who was duly declared the best bidder at the price or sum of one hundred pounds, and the said Sir HENRY BROWNE HAYES having given a set of Bills on his agent for the sum of £93 stg., being the net balance, after deducting the charge for commission, etc., on condition of his said agent receiving from the said Messrs. Prinseps and Saunders a regular and due conveyance of the said Farms according to Law. The interest of the said Farms is therefore vested in the said Sir HENRY BROWNE HAYES, and by virtue thereof he is entitled to remain in quiet and undisturbed possession of the same. Given under my hand this
22nd day of August, 1803.
S. LORD,
Signed in the presence of Licensed Auctioneer.
Robt. Rhodes.
Saml. Breakwell.
[i] Parsley in his later years became a hermit and lived in a cave overlooking the bay that was named after him.)
Sir Henry named his property “Vaucluse” after the Vaucluse in France. He used the name 'Vaucluse' officially for the first time in a reward notice which was posted in the Sydney Gazette on January 23, 1804.
His friendship with John Grant.
Grant was a young, romantic convict who was jailed for having shot at a lawyer who had offended him. It is from John Grant’s journals and letters to his mother and sister in England that we get a description of what colonial life was like in New South Wales between 1805 to1810 and in particular what it was like to be friends with Sir Henry.
It was the appreciation of Alexander Pope’s poetry, that brought Sir Henry and Grant together. Grant described their initial meeting in a letter to his mother, dated the 27th of January 1805. In the letter he included the following copy of the letter he had sent to Sir Henry.
To Sir H.B.Hayes Sydney! Sir! I am sensible of your polite attention the other day to me.
In return for the perusal of your Manuscript of poetry, accept the enclosed; tis versified by me from a prose letter written to by his friend the celebrated poet Alexander Pope. (Versified some time in 1804 at Parramatta)………
Sir Henry replied by letter dated the 12th February 1805; which read as follows. (Grant had copied this letter into his journal)
“To John Grant Esquire, Parramatta
Sir! I have to acknowledge the receipt of your Letter of the 27th instant and to return you thanks for the contents, which in my humble opinion would do honour even to Pope’s Muse. Misfortune is our common Lot, why should we repine? Let us look but around. The higher Powers hourly committing acts that would disgrace the vilest Felon; the lower classes degraded even below the brute creation: comparatively speaking, our Misfortunes are nothing. We have in our Breasts what the united Powers of the Universe can’t rob us of the Conscia Mens Recti ; or “a mind conscious of what is right”: I enclose the verses you have required, excuse their faults: ‘‘‘tis but seldom I take up my Pen on those occasions. ..... H.B.Hayes [iv]
And there was Grant’s description of how Sir Henry commuted between Vaucluse and Sydney. It was quicker to travel by a sailing boat than by walking or riding a horse through the bush.
“Himself and Breakwell are gone down the Cove in his Boat, as they do every Sunday, to dine at his Farm 5 miles hence, beautifully situated and a most romantic spot at the Mouth of the Harbour.”[v] This beauteous Wicked Place Yvonne Cramer
What started as a chance meeting in a Sydney coffee house, in the summer of 1805 where Sir Henry and John Grant discussed their own poetry and those of Alexander Pope’s, developed into a friendship.. Both men had a lot in common; both had been at one time sentenced to death, which was then commuted to life served in New South Wales.
Both men were convicts now because like in Alexander Pope’s ‘The Rape of the Lock’, they took unwanted liberties on a young woman. Sir Henry in abducting Mary Pike, trivialised to that of the stealing of Belinda’s lock of hair, in the opening lines in Canto 1 of the ‘Rape of the Lock’ .
“Say what strange motive, goddess! Could compel
A well-bred lord to assault a gentle belle?
O say what stranger cause, yet unexplored,
Could make a gentle belle reject a lord?”
And then in Grant’s case, he was convicted of the attempted murder of Lord Dudley’s solicitor, Spencer Townsend, mocked by the lines from Canto V ;
“Then cease bright nymph! To mourn thy ravished hair,
Which adds new glory to the ravaged sphere!
Not all the tresses that fair hair can boast
Shall draw such envy as the lock you lost.
For, after all the murders of your eye,
When, after millions slain, yourself shall die;
When those fair suns shall set, as set they must,
And all those tresses shall be laid in dust:
This lock, the Muse shall consecrate to fame
,And midst the stars inscribe Belinda’s (Mary’ Pike’s or Anna Ward’s) name.”[i]
[i] Alexander Pope Collected Poems. London J.M.Dent &Sons 1949. pp77, 96
. John Grant referred to the origin of the name “Vaucluse” in a letter to his mother dated Sunday, April 28, 1805 when he wrote
”Sir Henry calls his farm Vaucluse (after Petrarch) and is there building a handsome stone house, where he intends to reside at the close of this year...” This Beauteous Wicked Place Yvonne Cramer.
The property consisted of 130 acres, 100 acres that once belonged to Thomas Laycock and thirty acres that once belonged to James Cardel a private of the New South Wales Corps.)[ii]
[vi] 'Vaucluse House' the First Nine Years. Google
. Once the 'Atlas' reached Sydney, Sir Henry was sentenced to six months jail for insulting and striking Surgeon Jamison. Then after having served only a month of his sentence in Sydney, he was sent to Parramatta for the remaining five months.
During his five months imprisonment at Paramatta, Sir Henry befriended three Irish convicts who had arrived in Sydney on the 'Minerva' some time earlier. The “Minerva” had sailed from the Cove in Cork with a complement of Irish prisoners bound for New South Wales on the 24th August 1799, and arrived at Port Jackson on the 11th January 1800, after a journey lasting 140 days.
It was in Paramatta that Sir Henry first met “General” Joseph Holt, the Wicklow rebel leader. Holt was a political prisoner.who had led a guerilla force in Wicklow during the uprising against the British forces in 1798.After battling those forces for over a year he accepted an amnesty for himself and his army. He was then exiled to New South Wales. There he befriended the brothers Maurice and Michael Fitzgerald, who were transported to New South Wales on the ‘Minerva’ for their ‘United Irish’ activities.
The young officer in charge of the convicts on the ‘Minerva’ was the newly promoted Captain William Cox; he had volunteered in England to serve in the New South Wales Corps who was board. Cox had accepted the promotion because like every officer who had signed to serve in New South Wales, a promotion from lieutenant to captain and a 100 acre land grant came with it. And as an added incentive to join, he was entitled free convict labour to work his land. The only problem with his 100 acres of land was that he lacked any farming experience, nor how to exploit it, so he needed to employ someone with farming experience to develop his land. On board the ‘Minerva’ was ‘General’ Joseph Holt, who before he took up arms against the British managed several farming properties for his employer. Captain Cox grew to like the straight talking Joseph Holt and the two soon became friends. Cox then offered Joseph Holt the job to develop his one hundred acre grant which he accepted.
However not everyone welcomed the ‘Minerva’ with its complement of ‘United Irish’ rebels the small Hawkesbury farming community became alarmed. They worried that some of the Irish, like the leader ’General’ Joseph Holt could lead many of the rebels captured at the battle of Vinegar Hill, at Enniscorthy, and that fueled their fear of an Irish uprising.[i] Alarmed the landholders pressured the administration to disperse the Irish all over the colony and as thinly as possible. The New South Wales Corps at the time, was very undermanned, down to 500 or so men, half the required number of troopers needed to guard the colony,
Consequently as the “Minerva’s” convicts were dispersed and allocated duties around Sydney and the Hawkesbury, the brothers Maurice and Michael Fitzgerald were assigned to work together on a government farm fronting the Paramatta River, some forty kilometers distant from Sydney.
It was there two years later while Sir Henry was still imprisoned in Paramatta gaol, that he met Joseph Holt and the Fitzgerald brothers.
Sir Henry, a Protestant had once had served in Lord Doneraille’s South Cork Militia, to protect both King and Country saw no conflict of loyalty in befriending the three convicted, Catholic ‘United Irish’ rebels. The battle lines between the Crown and the ‘United Irish’ existed only in Ireland and not in convict New South Wales. Here these convicts were no longer his enemy; they were now replaced in Sir Henry’s eyes, by a hated authority, in the disguise of an inferior Governor and his venal, corrupt and despicable officers and soldiers. And he had no qualms about reporting their corrupt dealings and their numerous scandals to Westminster. And neither was he concerned about the repercussions once Governor King discovered that it was Sir Henry’s letters that caused the trouble. The effect of Sir Henry's reports on the administration of the colony, was such that Governor King labelled Sir Henry as a “A restless, troublesome character” and had him frequently punished for real and imagined transgressions.
As soon as Sir Henry returned to Sydney from Paramatta, Maurice Margarot, the ‘Scottish Martyr ‘and political agitator’ invited him to his Castlereagh Street house. Sir Henry accepted the invitation as had General Holt when a similar invitation was extended to him earlier in January, 1800. Informants working for Governor King tracked and reported such potentially dangerous meetings in Sydney; Sir Henry’s meeting with Margarot was similarly reported. King’s worst fears were soon realised as Sir Henry and Margarot found that they had one thing in common, abhorrence for authority. Margarot a Scottish republican had been exiled here to New South Wales for his political views, principles and activities while Sir Henry was transported to New South Wales for nothing more than abducting a young woman and marrying her under duress. He was moreover a very lucky man to have escaped hanging. Margarot’s 1790 charter, published that year in London, reads as follows;
(1)That every individual has a right to share in the government of that Society of which he is a member, unless incapacitated.
(2)That it is no less the right than the duty of every citizen, to keep a watchful eye on the government; that the laws, by being multiplied, do not degenerate into oppression; and that those who are entrusted with the Government; do not substitute private interest for public advantage.
(3)That in consequence of a partial, unequal, and therefore inadequate representation, together with the corrupt method in which representatives are elected; oppressive laws, unjust laws, restrictions of liberty, and wasting of the public money, have ensued.
Margarot’s principles were nothing less than a declaration of human rights but which the government in London declared subversive. These ‘subversive’ principles consequently earned him transportation to New South Wales in 1793, where he continued to espouse them, grumble, agitate and write polemics, directed at the colony’s administration. By the time the two men met, Sir Henry had already established his presence in the colony, clashed with the new Surgeon General and been punished by the administration. Now angry and confused he found a soul mate in Margarot. That’s not to say he agreed with Margarot’s political philosophy but he empathized with Margarot’s anger. Governor King soon discovered that he had another unpredictable troublemaker on his hands, one who was articulate and a literate letter writer who kept the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, constantly informed about the dysfunctional scandals that wracked the colony.
Sir Henry returned to Sydney after completing his Paramatta prison sentence, determined to make his life as pleasant as possible. On the 18th of April 1803 he purchased a cottage in Chapel Row (now Castlereagh Street)from Elizabeth Bradshaw for twenty seven guineas(₤27/7/-).[i]
A sailing boat was included in the purchase and Sir Henry sailed around the harbour in it.Sydney at the time was a dreary place where besides work there was little else to do.
When part of the late Captain Thomas Dennet’s estate fronting the harbour shoreline, some 11 km by land from Sydney, came up for auction on the 22nd August 1803, Sir Henry’s bid of ₤100 [ii] was the highest and the land was sold to him.[iii]
He had purchased two well timbered land grants amounting to one hundred and five acres.
Work was not a problem for Sir Henry because he did not have to work at all. For relaxation he sailed around Sydney Harbour in his sailboat. He was an experienced sailor from his Cork days, where nearly all the wealthy young men enjoyed sailing and racing their boats. Soon he was familiar with all the shoreline and sandy foreshores of the harbour. So when in July 1803, Elizabeth Rafferty, an emancepist, advertised that she would auction both her Laycock’s Farm of 100 acres and Cardell’s Farm of 25 acres, fronting the harbour Sir Henry decided to bid for them.
The Laycock and Cardell farms had once belonged to Captain Thomas Dennett, a sea captain who in 1797 was the master of the ‘Britannia’. She had the doubtful honour of having sailed one of the worst journeys in the history of transportation. The 'Britannia's' unfortunate convicts were brutally mistreated, 10 men and one woman dying out of a complement of 144. Their deaths according to Captain Dennett was that some convicts had conspired to capture the ship and failed. The aftermath was sickening; the convicts were shackled in irons and unmercifully and flogged. The troublesome women were caned on their backs, often to four dozen cuts with a cane for the most trivial of offences.
Elizabeth Rafferty was both young and pretty when she was sentenced for theft in Dublin, to seven years transportation to New South Wales.
Captain Dennett the ’Britannia’ noticed her as she was brought on board. That sighting was enough for him to single her out and make her his mistress for the duration of the journey. Elizabeth was fortunate because it saved her from the Captain's cruel and degrading treatment that he meted out to many unfortunate convict.
The liaison between the two lasted for years and the grateful Captain left her the 'Cardell' and 'Laycock' farms in his will.. Dennett undoubtedly loved Mary Rafferty and left her the two properties as a token of his deep feelings. He neglected however to leave her the title deeds for the properties. So when Sir Henry purchased those two properties at auction for £100, he instructed his agent in London to pay the £93 which was the balance of the sale after deducting the £7 commission. Unfortunately for Elizabeth, she never saw any money from the sale because the transaction was never completed; Sir Henry never received the title deeds for the properties and so he never paid for them. The worst part about the failed transaction was that no one seemed to care, least of all Sir Henry. In the meantime, the paper work for the sale had been completed and according to the Law and the auctioneer Simeon Lord gave Sir Henry permission to formally occupy the land on the 22nd August 1803. All in all Sir Henry had only spent £7 for ‘Vaucluse’ which was probably the reason why he leased the property to his friend and Valet Samuel Breakwell for 99 years at a yearly peppercorn rent. He had also renamed the two farms on his new estate, ‘Vaucluse’ and built on it a Masonic inspired H shaped sandstone house.. The curious thing about the house was that it was not built on ‘his’ land, but on Crown land. It was an error caused by poor surveying; because either the marker pegs had been moved when the house was built or they just couldn’t be found when the foundations were laid.
The boundaries of the Vaucluse estate were situated between the boundaries of Rose Bay (named after George Rose, Under Secretary of the Treasury in London) and Parsley Bay (named after Private Parsley of the Sydney Loyal Association Company of Volunteers. [i] Parsley in his later years chose to live as a hermit in a cave that overlooks the bay now named after him); the bill of sale made out to Sir Henry read;
“This is to certify that at the sale by auction of the Estate, Farms and Houses of the late Captain THOMAS DENNETT, authorised by Edward Hanmer PALMER, Esq., Captain of the Honourable East India Company’s extra ship Bridgewater, by letter of Attorney from Messrs. Prinseps and Saunders, the executors of the will of the said captain THOMAS DENNETT, deceased, certain farms situate near South Head, in this territory, were purchased by Sir HENRY BROWNE HAYES who was duly declared the best bidder at the price or sum of one hundred pounds, and the said Sir HENRY BROWNE HAYES having given a set of Bills on his agent for the sum of £93 stg., being the net balance, after deducting the charge for commission, etc., on condition of his said agent receiving from the said Messrs. Prinseps and Saunders a regular and due conveyance of the said Farms according to Law. The interest of the said Farms is therefore vested in the said Sir HENRY BROWNE HAYES, and by virtue thereof he is entitled to remain in quiet and undisturbed possession of the same. Given under my hand this
22nd day of August, 1803.
S. LORD,
Signed in the presence of Licensed Auctioneer.
Robt. Rhodes.
Saml. Breakwell.
[i] Parsley in his later years became a hermit and lived in a cave overlooking the bay that was named after him.)
Sir Henry named his property “Vaucluse” after the Vaucluse in France. He used the name 'Vaucluse' officially for the first time in a reward notice which was posted in the Sydney Gazette on January 23, 1804.
His friendship with John Grant.
Grant was a young, romantic convict who was jailed for having shot at a lawyer who had offended him. It is from John Grant’s journals and letters to his mother and sister in England that we get a description of what colonial life was like in New South Wales between 1805 to1810 and in particular what it was like to be friends with Sir Henry.
It was the appreciation of Alexander Pope’s poetry, that brought Sir Henry and Grant together. Grant described their initial meeting in a letter to his mother, dated the 27th of January 1805. In the letter he included the following copy of the letter he had sent to Sir Henry.
To Sir H.B.Hayes Sydney! Sir! I am sensible of your polite attention the other day to me.
In return for the perusal of your Manuscript of poetry, accept the enclosed; tis versified by me from a prose letter written to by his friend the celebrated poet Alexander Pope. (Versified some time in 1804 at Parramatta)………
Sir Henry replied by letter dated the 12th February 1805; which read as follows. (Grant had copied this letter into his journal)
“To John Grant Esquire, Parramatta
Sir! I have to acknowledge the receipt of your Letter of the 27th instant and to return you thanks for the contents, which in my humble opinion would do honour even to Pope’s Muse. Misfortune is our common Lot, why should we repine? Let us look but around. The higher Powers hourly committing acts that would disgrace the vilest Felon; the lower classes degraded even below the brute creation: comparatively speaking, our Misfortunes are nothing. We have in our Breasts what the united Powers of the Universe can’t rob us of the Conscia Mens Recti ; or “a mind conscious of what is right”: I enclose the verses you have required, excuse their faults: ‘‘‘tis but seldom I take up my Pen on those occasions. ..... H.B.Hayes [iv]
And there was Grant’s description of how Sir Henry commuted between Vaucluse and Sydney. It was quicker to travel by a sailing boat than by walking or riding a horse through the bush.
“Himself and Breakwell are gone down the Cove in his Boat, as they do every Sunday, to dine at his Farm 5 miles hence, beautifully situated and a most romantic spot at the Mouth of the Harbour.”[v] This beauteous Wicked Place Yvonne Cramer
What started as a chance meeting in a Sydney coffee house, in the summer of 1805 where Sir Henry and John Grant discussed their own poetry and those of Alexander Pope’s, developed into a friendship.. Both men had a lot in common; both had been at one time sentenced to death, which was then commuted to life served in New South Wales.
Both men were convicts now because like in Alexander Pope’s ‘The Rape of the Lock’, they took unwanted liberties on a young woman. Sir Henry in abducting Mary Pike, trivialised to that of the stealing of Belinda’s lock of hair, in the opening lines in Canto 1 of the ‘Rape of the Lock’ .
“Say what strange motive, goddess! Could compel
A well-bred lord to assault a gentle belle?
O say what stranger cause, yet unexplored,
Could make a gentle belle reject a lord?”
And then in Grant’s case, he was convicted of the attempted murder of Lord Dudley’s solicitor, Spencer Townsend, mocked by the lines from Canto V ;
“Then cease bright nymph! To mourn thy ravished hair,
Which adds new glory to the ravaged sphere!
Not all the tresses that fair hair can boast
Shall draw such envy as the lock you lost.
For, after all the murders of your eye,
When, after millions slain, yourself shall die;
When those fair suns shall set, as set they must,
And all those tresses shall be laid in dust:
This lock, the Muse shall consecrate to fame
,And midst the stars inscribe Belinda’s (Mary’ Pike’s or Anna Ward’s) name.”[i]
[i] Alexander Pope Collected Poems. London J.M.Dent &Sons 1949. pp77, 96
. John Grant referred to the origin of the name “Vaucluse” in a letter to his mother dated Sunday, April 28, 1805 when he wrote
”Sir Henry calls his farm Vaucluse (after Petrarch) and is there building a handsome stone house, where he intends to reside at the close of this year...” This Beauteous Wicked Place Yvonne Cramer.
The property consisted of 130 acres, 100 acres that once belonged to Thomas Laycock and thirty acres that once belonged to James Cardel a private of the New South Wales Corps.)[ii]
[vi] 'Vaucluse House' the First Nine Years. Google
The Masonic facade of the first Vaucluse House
Additions to Sir Henry's Vaucluse House by Captain Piper. Not the Freemason façade of Vaucluse house[i]
. John Grant referred to the origin of the name “Vaucluse” in a letter to his mother dated Sunday, April 28, 1805 when he wrote
”Sir Henry calls his farm Vaucluse (after Petrarch) and is there building a handsome stone house, where he intends to reside at the close of this year...”
[i] 'Vaucluse House' the First Nine Years. Google
. John Grant referred to the origin of the name “Vaucluse” in a letter to his mother dated Sunday, April 28, 1805 when he wrote
”Sir Henry calls his farm Vaucluse (after Petrarch) and is there building a handsome stone house, where he intends to reside at the close of this year...”
[i] 'Vaucluse House' the First Nine Years. Google
Application to form a Freemason Lodge.
The official record of Sir Henry's request and Governor King's refusal
Sir Henry as the most senior Freemason in the colony applied for permission from Governor King to form a Freemason Lodge. In the Minute Book of the First Lodge of Ireland, there is an entry dated the 31st October 1791,[i] with Sir Henry’s signature and after his name, his Freemason title was entered as, “Provincial Grand Secretary and Treasurer” and during that meeting he had proposed the affiliation of a member. From this we may surmise that he was a member of the 1st Lodge of Ireland, and since he was a Provincial Grand Officer, he must have been a Past Master of that Lodge. He was certainly thought of highly in the Masonic Order, in order to hold both the Secretary and Treasurer’s Offices at the young age of 30[ii] But what was so different about his plan in Sydney, was that Sir Henry a convict, wanted to create a secret organization inside a penal colony with himself as the most senior member, whilst his jailers, the officers, soldiers and administrators were all ranked below him. So when it was reported in the Sydney Gazette of May 22nd of 1803 that Sir Henry had applied to Governor King for permission to hold a Freemasons meeting at the home of Sergeant Whittle, it came as no surprise that Governor King flatly refused the request. To make his refusal perfectly clear, he also threatened to send Sir Henry to prison, either to Castle Hill or to Norfolk Island if he dared to proceed with a meeting.
Neither Sir Henry nor Sergeant Whittle nor any of the other Masons paid any attention to Governor King’s threat and held the meeting at Sergeant Whittle’s house on Saturday May the 14th. The meeting was dully raided by a party of soldiers led by Surgeon Thomas Jamison who placed all under arrest. Swords were drawn and many Freemasons escaped. Those that remained were charged att the subsequent court hearing but were released except for Sir Henry who was sentenced to a term of hard labour in the “New Settlement” in Van Diemen’s Land, a sentence which was later commuted.
[ii] (The Lodge of Research No. CC., Ireland Transactions for the years 1969-1975 Vol XV1 1977 p147 Sir Henry Brown Hayes by W.BRO. C.V.Morris)
Application and Response to Sir Henry's attempt to open a Freemason Lodge, May 18, 1803
Neither Sir Henry nor Sergeant Whittle nor any of the other Masons paid any attention to Governor King’s threat and held the meeting at Sergeant Whittle’s house on Saturday May the 14th. The meeting was dully raided by a party of soldiers led by Surgeon Thomas Jamison who placed all under arrest. Swords were drawn and many Freemasons escaped. Those that remained were charged att the subsequent court hearing but were released except for Sir Henry who was sentenced to a term of hard labour in the “New Settlement” in Van Diemen’s Land, a sentence which was later commuted.
[ii] (The Lodge of Research No. CC., Ireland Transactions for the years 1969-1975 Vol XV1 1977 p147 Sir Henry Brown Hayes by W.BRO. C.V.Morris)
Application and Response to Sir Henry's attempt to open a Freemason Lodge, May 18, 1803
Governor King's response.
Governor Philip Gidley King
Copy of Sir Henry's application and response
The First Vaucluse Garden and its Gardener
Sir Henry had employed a convict and fellow Corkonian, Maurice Fitzgerald to plant, 25 acres of his Vaucluse land with fruit trees and to establish a viable garden to supply him with vegetables.
Maurice Fitzgerald had been transported to New South Wales for fighting the British in the 1798 rebellion.
Maurice had worked for several months at Vaucluse before he was ordered back to Sydney for government labour.
The order came from the Chief Constable, John Redmond which Sir Henry thought was high handed. Enraged, he lodged a formal complaint
against the Chief Constable
Convict Discontent
VINEGAR HILL MEMORIAL near Castle Hill
. THE CONVICT UPRISING and VINEGAR HILL
. The Administration fearing an Irish uprising in the colony attempted to flog confessions out of some suspects, including Maurice Fitzgerald who had worked as a gardener for Sir Henry.
Joseph Holt in his autobiography described Maurice's flogging as follows;
“I was to leeward of the floggers and I protest, though I was two perches from them, the flesh and skin blew in my face as they shook off of the cats.
Fitzgerald received his three hundred lashes. Doctor Mason’—I never will forget him—he use to go to feel his pulse and he smiled and said ‘This man will tire you before he will fail. Go on.’ It is against the law to flog a man past 50 lashes without a doctor and, during the time he was getting his punishment, he never gave as much as a word, only one and that was saying ‘Don’t strike me on the neck. Flog me fair.’ When he was let down two of the constables went and took hold of him by the arms to help him in the cart, I was standing by. He said to them ‘Let my arms go’, struck both of them with his elbows in the pit of the stomach and knock them both down and then step in the cart.
I heard Doctor Mason say ‘That man had strength enough to bear two hundred more.’
Next was tied up was Paddy Galvin, a young boy about twenty years of age, he was ordered to get three hundred lashes. He got one hundred on the back and you could see his back bone between his shoulder blades. Then the doctor ordered him to get another hundred on his bottom. He got it and then his haunches was in such a jelly the doctor order him to be flog on the calves of his legs. He got one hundred there and as much as a whimper he never gave. They asked him if he would tell where the pikes was hid. He said he did not know and if, he would not tell: ‘You may as well hang me now’ he says ‘for you never will get my music from me’.
So they put him in the cart and sent him to hospital.
There was two more got one hundred each and they sung out from first to last. One of their names—Mick Fitzgerald shoemaker by trade. Them three men was County Cork men, live near Sir Henry Browne Hayes*. A Rum Story Edited by Peter O'Shaughnessy
. The Administration fearing an Irish uprising in the colony attempted to flog confessions out of some suspects, including Maurice Fitzgerald who had worked as a gardener for Sir Henry.
Joseph Holt in his autobiography described Maurice's flogging as follows;
“I was to leeward of the floggers and I protest, though I was two perches from them, the flesh and skin blew in my face as they shook off of the cats.
Fitzgerald received his three hundred lashes. Doctor Mason’—I never will forget him—he use to go to feel his pulse and he smiled and said ‘This man will tire you before he will fail. Go on.’ It is against the law to flog a man past 50 lashes without a doctor and, during the time he was getting his punishment, he never gave as much as a word, only one and that was saying ‘Don’t strike me on the neck. Flog me fair.’ When he was let down two of the constables went and took hold of him by the arms to help him in the cart, I was standing by. He said to them ‘Let my arms go’, struck both of them with his elbows in the pit of the stomach and knock them both down and then step in the cart.
I heard Doctor Mason say ‘That man had strength enough to bear two hundred more.’
Next was tied up was Paddy Galvin, a young boy about twenty years of age, he was ordered to get three hundred lashes. He got one hundred on the back and you could see his back bone between his shoulder blades. Then the doctor ordered him to get another hundred on his bottom. He got it and then his haunches was in such a jelly the doctor order him to be flog on the calves of his legs. He got one hundred there and as much as a whimper he never gave. They asked him if he would tell where the pikes was hid. He said he did not know and if, he would not tell: ‘You may as well hang me now’ he says ‘for you never will get my music from me’.
So they put him in the cart and sent him to hospital.
There was two more got one hundred each and they sung out from first to last. One of their names—Mick Fitzgerald shoemaker by trade. Them three men was County Cork men, live near Sir Henry Browne Hayes*. A Rum Story Edited by Peter O'Shaughnessy
The flogging that fueled the insurrection.
A state of insurrection.
When the story of the flogging became known, convict anger erupted into rebellion.
The convict uprising began at 8 pm on Sunday March 4th, 1804 with the tolling of the barracks bell at Castle Hill, the signal the convicts waited for; they attacked and overpowered their military guards and seized their weapons.
. The insurrection was quickly quelled with many convicts killed. The site of the battle near Castle Hill was later named 'Vinegar Hill'.
In a letter to the Colonial Office written in August 1805, Governor King shifted the blame for the insurrection onto “ characters who are well known who would, lose no means of stirring those deluded up to any act of atrocity. Among others are Maurice Margarot and Henry Browne Hayes.....” And then with Sir Henry firmly in his sights, the Governor attacked Sir Henry’s integrity as, “This person has been a principal in every infamous attack that he and his colleagues have made on the reputation of those who cannot sufficiently despise their wickedness, nor is there any doubt of his having been much concerned in the insurrection of the United Irish at this place in March 1804.” .
The convict uprising began at 8 pm on Sunday March 4th, 1804 with the tolling of the barracks bell at Castle Hill, the signal the convicts waited for; they attacked and overpowered their military guards and seized their weapons.
. The insurrection was quickly quelled with many convicts killed. The site of the battle near Castle Hill was later named 'Vinegar Hill'.
In a letter to the Colonial Office written in August 1805, Governor King shifted the blame for the insurrection onto “ characters who are well known who would, lose no means of stirring those deluded up to any act of atrocity. Among others are Maurice Margarot and Henry Browne Hayes.....” And then with Sir Henry firmly in his sights, the Governor attacked Sir Henry’s integrity as, “This person has been a principal in every infamous attack that he and his colleagues have made on the reputation of those who cannot sufficiently despise their wickedness, nor is there any doubt of his having been much concerned in the insurrection of the United Irish at this place in March 1804.” .
Sir Henry in Trouble
Norfolk Island coastline
SIR HENRY TRANSPORTED TO NORFOLK ISLAND
Governor King convinced that no poorly educated Irish convict could plan and execute such a rebellion, accused Sir Henry of inciting and probably on of the mastermind behind the rebellion and so expelled him with other trouble makers to Norfolk Island, a small island in the Pacific.
And so to John Grant’s surprise and delight, Sir Henry joined him on Norfolk Island. Sir Henry’s exile to Norfolk Island lasted however for only a month. Governor King still fearful that Sir Henry and Maurice Margarot’s rebel rousing influences could lead to further trouble on the island, ordered the immediate removal of the two on the first available ship, to Van Diemens Land.. His official reason was, ”that it was not his intention to ‘ encumber the island with …such pests in one Settlement”.
Governor King convinced that no poorly educated Irish convict could plan and execute such a rebellion, accused Sir Henry of inciting and probably on of the mastermind behind the rebellion and so expelled him with other trouble makers to Norfolk Island, a small island in the Pacific.
And so to John Grant’s surprise and delight, Sir Henry joined him on Norfolk Island. Sir Henry’s exile to Norfolk Island lasted however for only a month. Governor King still fearful that Sir Henry and Maurice Margarot’s rebel rousing influences could lead to further trouble on the island, ordered the immediate removal of the two on the first available ship, to Van Diemens Land.. His official reason was, ”that it was not his intention to ‘ encumber the island with …such pests in one Settlement”.
Jail Entrance Norfolk Island
But as luck would have it, Sir Henry and Maurice Margarot who were meant to be delivered to Lieutenant Governor Paterson at Port Dalrymple, in Van Diemen’s Land, only sailed as far as Port Jackson, because of the stormy conditions further south.
Sir Henry was once again back in Sydney and ordered to remain at Vaucluse.
And John Grant convinced that Sir Henry was cruelly victimized again by the Governor noted in a letter that “Governor King has disgraced himself by a cruel proceeding towards this much injured and amiable Gentleman (Sir Henry) ever since his arrival in the Colony, offering him shameful indignities, putting him in Jail 3 times, sending him to the Hoe, and by every means endeavouring to break his Noble Spirit and increase his suffering”
[i] “This Beauteous Wicked Place” in a letter to his mother dated the 28th April 1805,
By the end of 1805 Sir Henry Hayes learnt to his relief, that Governor King was to be replaced by the strict disciplinarian, Captain William Bligh.
On the 13th August 1806 Captain William Bligh succeeded Philip Gidley King as Governor.
. Bligh chose George Crossley to advise him in legal matters. Crossley was a very shrewd and knowledgeable convict lawyer who was well versed in every trick in the profession. Bligh also encouraged Sir Henry’s to keep him informed on what was happening within the colony and how the colony reacted to his changes.
Crossley was a brilliant, crooked lawyer, charged and convicted of perjury and sentenced to seven years in NSW.
He was charged in 1796 with forging the Will of Rev. Henry Lewin for the benefit of Lady Briggs. See “Proceeds of the Old Bailey Ref:t17960217-70 “ An apocryphal story about Crossley was that he had placed a living fly in the dead Reverend’s mouth and with the dead man’s hand traced his signature on the Will. He did that, so that there could be no denial of 'there was life in the body' or 'that the dead man signed the document with his own hand'.
The Court’s verdict was “not guilty”
Major George Johnston
Once Bligh was installed as Governor, it didn’t take him long to realize that the agressive entrepreneurs in the colony were his own New South Wales Corps army officers. And that the colony’s endemic coin shortage, was partly due to the hoarding of all coins because that constituted as “real” money. A barter system had evolved in the colony to pay for services and goods with rum; it became the most popular ‘currency’ in the colony. The officer entrepreneurs from the New South Wales Corps, failed to see any conflict of interest in their carrying out both their official government duties while simultaneously running their so called “Rum Trade” trade. Their activities seriously undermined Governor Bligh’s efforts to return New South Wales to its prison colony status again and to stamp out all administrative corruption in his administration. Bligh needed a very sharp legal advisor to help him so he turned and employed the sharpest legal brain in the colony, the convict lawyer George Crossley[1]. Crossley was not only well versed in every legal maneuver known to the legal profession but also in the most crooked tricks known in the legal profession, to help him win his case. Sir Henry had also contacted Governor Bligh to help him defeat the corrupt, officer led authority. He also recognized in Governor Bligh a fellow naval Mason[i] and offered to keep him informed on what was being done and said in the community. Governor Bligh at the time was also and the good friend of another notable Mason, the Duke of Clarence, later William IV.
Now Bligh had to face and defeat the institutionalized corruption that evolved in the colony following Governor Arthur Phillip’s departure in December 1792, His immediate replacement was the interim Lieutenant Governor, Major Francis Grose who faced with the departure of many of his seasoned officers and administrators, handed out generous land grants in order to entice them to remain and use their expertise in the colony. Grose knew that he could ill afford to lose their most valuable skills acquired while in administration. And if it meant that he had to bribe them with land grants to stay on, that was well and good.
It brought about a change in the colony’s character, where before it was a place of punishment but now it had become a place of opportunity, where fortunes could be made. And so Grose’s policy proved to be successful and popular with all the officers and administrators under him.
Neither his replacement Governor John Hunter (1795-1800), nor his successor Governor Philip Gidley King, could curb the flourishing entrepreneurial zeal that motivated those who saw the colony’s potential.
A Test of Wills and the 'Rum Rebellion.
Governor Bligh recognized the conflict that the existing policy posed especially among the administrators, and he set about to put an end it. But when he interfered with the distribution of rum, his intervention angered the traders involved and in particular John Macarthur, the retired army captain. Macarthur had become exceedingly wealthy from the land grants he received and from the rum trade. So when Bligh ordered an end to the excesses of the rum trade and the distribution of land grants to favoured people, the loudest cry of protest came from John Macarthur. He was determined to continue his lucrative business activities which had been tolerated by the two previous Governors but which were now threatened by Bligh’s plan to govern effectively. Both men had everything to lose and both were strong willed; Bligh’s courage had been tested many times in battle such as when commanded a battle ship in the battle of Camperdown and again when he captained the HMS 'Glatton' in the battle of Copenhagen under Nelson’s command. His steely determination and sense of duty were legendary such as the time when the crew of his ship the ‘Bounty’ mutinied and set him adrift with several others in an open long boat, which he navigated to safety over eight thousand km of sea. Macarthur was equally obdurate; he also displayed a steely determination to succeed, often resorting to dueling with his detractors in order to achieve his goal.
His most notable or notorious duel took place in Sydney in 1801, when he deliberately goaded his commanding officer Colonel William Paterson to challenge him a duel. Because Macarthur was of a lower military rank, he could not challenge his commanding officer to a duel so Macarthur grossly insulted Paterson who was then left with two options, either to send Macarthur an “invitation” to settle the matter ‘like a gentleman’ or to ignore the insult and be branded a coward. Paterson chose to duel and so disobeyed the “Articles of War” which banned them. Macarthur accepted the challenge and nominated Captain John Piper as his second, while Paterson nominated Captain Neil Mackellar to be his.
The pistol duel took place on the 14th September 1801 on a field somewhere in Parramatta. A distance of twelve paces was stepped out by each second and the two antagonists took their positions. The dueling guns belonged to Macarthur who had to load both of them because they were faulty. A coin was then tossed up, the winner nominating his right to take the first shot. This tested the courage of both men because the loser had to stand still while the winner took the first shot. Macarthur won the toss and chose to fire first; his shot struck Paterson’s right shoulder wounding him so severely that he was unable to return fire. Paterson was hospitalized and Governor King when he heard of the duel, sent Macarthur back to Britain to face a court- martial[ii]. Macarthur had made his point and that was ,that he was not a man to be trifled with. But Bligh however was a man very different to Paterson and Macarthur realized that he could not intimidate him with the threat of a duel so instead he chose to enlist the help of the colony’s business entrepreneurs. He convinced them that Bligh would be their financial ruin unless he was stopped and so began the demonization of Bligh. The entrepreneurs agreed with Macarthur that if Bligh’s restructured the government and regularized the use of promissory notes, it would interfere with the barter system, curtail land grants and clampe down on the importation and distillation of spirits and soon they would be out of business.
On January 25 1808, Macarthur appeared before a court consisting of six officers and Judge Advocate Atkins ,a drunkard who owed Macarthur money. The officers refused to try Macarthur and Bligh responded by throwing Macarthur into gaol on January 26, possibly the first time a gentleman and ex officer had been so treated in NSW. The six officers then petitioned Bligh to release Macarthur, a request that smacked of disloyalty and infuriated Bligh. He promptly summonsed them to appear before him the next morning, to answer the charge that they were guilty of “a usurpation of His Majesty’s Government and of inciting treason”[iii]. He also informed Major George Johnston of his intentions;. Johnston was at the time convalescing at his Annandale home, badly bruised and with a broken wrist, the result of his overturning his coach while drunk. The six officers, when they heard that Bligh would charge them with treason, which was a hanging offence, realized that they had to arrest him before he arrested them and try them for treason which was punishable by death but by doing that they were at once guilty of an act of mutiny which again was a hanging offence. They quickly communicated with Johnston who after some soul searching decided that the best course of action for them all was to immediately arrest Bligh. It was the only conclusion Johnston could come to because he assumed that Bligh was impossible to reason with or to be trusted to keep his word.
Johnston was an experienced army officer with years of service in the colony; he saved it in 1804 when the convicts rebelled at Castle Hill and threatened to overrun it and was not prepared to risk its safety on the actions of an ‘unstable’ Governor who if he remained unchecked would probably be assassinated or trigger off another insurrection and massacre. Convinced that this was a likely outcome, Johnston released Macarthurl from gaol on the evening of January 26 1808. The army in an act of self preservation took the first steps to depose Bligh in the bloodless coup, later called the “Rum Rebellion”.
Major George Johnston, his arm in a sling, his face still bruised, led his regiment flying the regimental flag, along High Street and then down Bridge Street to Government House, to the sound of fifes and drums playing “The British Grenadiers”.
Now Bligh had to face and defeat the institutionalized corruption that evolved in the colony following Governor Arthur Phillip’s departure in December 1792, His immediate replacement was the interim Lieutenant Governor, Major Francis Grose who faced with the departure of many of his seasoned officers and administrators, handed out generous land grants in order to entice them to remain and use their expertise in the colony. Grose knew that he could ill afford to lose their most valuable skills acquired while in administration. And if it meant that he had to bribe them with land grants to stay on, that was well and good.
It brought about a change in the colony’s character, where before it was a place of punishment but now it had become a place of opportunity, where fortunes could be made. And so Grose’s policy proved to be successful and popular with all the officers and administrators under him.
Neither his replacement Governor John Hunter (1795-1800), nor his successor Governor Philip Gidley King, could curb the flourishing entrepreneurial zeal that motivated those who saw the colony’s potential.
A Test of Wills and the 'Rum Rebellion.
Governor Bligh recognized the conflict that the existing policy posed especially among the administrators, and he set about to put an end it. But when he interfered with the distribution of rum, his intervention angered the traders involved and in particular John Macarthur, the retired army captain. Macarthur had become exceedingly wealthy from the land grants he received and from the rum trade. So when Bligh ordered an end to the excesses of the rum trade and the distribution of land grants to favoured people, the loudest cry of protest came from John Macarthur. He was determined to continue his lucrative business activities which had been tolerated by the two previous Governors but which were now threatened by Bligh’s plan to govern effectively. Both men had everything to lose and both were strong willed; Bligh’s courage had been tested many times in battle such as when commanded a battle ship in the battle of Camperdown and again when he captained the HMS 'Glatton' in the battle of Copenhagen under Nelson’s command. His steely determination and sense of duty were legendary such as the time when the crew of his ship the ‘Bounty’ mutinied and set him adrift with several others in an open long boat, which he navigated to safety over eight thousand km of sea. Macarthur was equally obdurate; he also displayed a steely determination to succeed, often resorting to dueling with his detractors in order to achieve his goal.
His most notable or notorious duel took place in Sydney in 1801, when he deliberately goaded his commanding officer Colonel William Paterson to challenge him a duel. Because Macarthur was of a lower military rank, he could not challenge his commanding officer to a duel so Macarthur grossly insulted Paterson who was then left with two options, either to send Macarthur an “invitation” to settle the matter ‘like a gentleman’ or to ignore the insult and be branded a coward. Paterson chose to duel and so disobeyed the “Articles of War” which banned them. Macarthur accepted the challenge and nominated Captain John Piper as his second, while Paterson nominated Captain Neil Mackellar to be his.
The pistol duel took place on the 14th September 1801 on a field somewhere in Parramatta. A distance of twelve paces was stepped out by each second and the two antagonists took their positions. The dueling guns belonged to Macarthur who had to load both of them because they were faulty. A coin was then tossed up, the winner nominating his right to take the first shot. This tested the courage of both men because the loser had to stand still while the winner took the first shot. Macarthur won the toss and chose to fire first; his shot struck Paterson’s right shoulder wounding him so severely that he was unable to return fire. Paterson was hospitalized and Governor King when he heard of the duel, sent Macarthur back to Britain to face a court- martial[ii]. Macarthur had made his point and that was ,that he was not a man to be trifled with. But Bligh however was a man very different to Paterson and Macarthur realized that he could not intimidate him with the threat of a duel so instead he chose to enlist the help of the colony’s business entrepreneurs. He convinced them that Bligh would be their financial ruin unless he was stopped and so began the demonization of Bligh. The entrepreneurs agreed with Macarthur that if Bligh’s restructured the government and regularized the use of promissory notes, it would interfere with the barter system, curtail land grants and clampe down on the importation and distillation of spirits and soon they would be out of business.
On January 25 1808, Macarthur appeared before a court consisting of six officers and Judge Advocate Atkins ,a drunkard who owed Macarthur money. The officers refused to try Macarthur and Bligh responded by throwing Macarthur into gaol on January 26, possibly the first time a gentleman and ex officer had been so treated in NSW. The six officers then petitioned Bligh to release Macarthur, a request that smacked of disloyalty and infuriated Bligh. He promptly summonsed them to appear before him the next morning, to answer the charge that they were guilty of “a usurpation of His Majesty’s Government and of inciting treason”[iii]. He also informed Major George Johnston of his intentions;. Johnston was at the time convalescing at his Annandale home, badly bruised and with a broken wrist, the result of his overturning his coach while drunk. The six officers, when they heard that Bligh would charge them with treason, which was a hanging offence, realized that they had to arrest him before he arrested them and try them for treason which was punishable by death but by doing that they were at once guilty of an act of mutiny which again was a hanging offence. They quickly communicated with Johnston who after some soul searching decided that the best course of action for them all was to immediately arrest Bligh. It was the only conclusion Johnston could come to because he assumed that Bligh was impossible to reason with or to be trusted to keep his word.
Johnston was an experienced army officer with years of service in the colony; he saved it in 1804 when the convicts rebelled at Castle Hill and threatened to overrun it and was not prepared to risk its safety on the actions of an ‘unstable’ Governor who if he remained unchecked would probably be assassinated or trigger off another insurrection and massacre. Convinced that this was a likely outcome, Johnston released Macarthurl from gaol on the evening of January 26 1808. The army in an act of self preservation took the first steps to depose Bligh in the bloodless coup, later called the “Rum Rebellion”.
Major George Johnston, his arm in a sling, his face still bruised, led his regiment flying the regimental flag, along High Street and then down Bridge Street to Government House, to the sound of fifes and drums playing “The British Grenadiers”.
The March on Government House
Colonel Johnston led the troops to Government House
By 6.30 pm they reached Government House where they were joined by the rest of their comrades from the governor’s own guard. But blocking their way outside the gates of Government House was the furious and defiant Mrs. Mary Putland, Governor Bligh’s recently widowed daughter, who attempted to fend off the marching soldiers with her parasol, screaming “Traitors, rebels, you have just walked over my husband’s grave. Now you have come to murder my father.” Johnston took little notice of her and quickly brushed her aside. On entering Government House, Johnson, his officers and a small detachment of soldiers began the search for Bligh[iv]. Governor Bligh as soon as he realized what was happening rushed upstairs to destroy some secret papers but was quickly discovered by Lieutenant William Moore who for reasons of his own shouted to his troops that the Governor wasn’t inside. The search for Bligh continued for an hour and a half and then just after 8 pm, in Bligh’s own words “there was a haloo-balloo and a man cried out (the one and only Serjeant Whittltle,) ‘damn my eyes, I will find him,- soldiers came upstairs again, I will have another search ‘ or words to that effect. Sergeant Whittle in command of the search ordered eight of his men, armed with muskets and fixed bayonets to commence the search of Government House.
The Arrest of Governor Bligh
Sergeant Whittle claimed to have found Governor Bligh hiding under the bed
And so it was Sergeant Whittle[v] who accompanied by two soldiers burst into a bed room and found Bligh, who according to Sergeant Whittle, was hiding under his steward’s bed in an upstairs “skillion”.[vi]
[1] A successful and crooked lawyer Crossley was charged and convicted of perjury and sentenced to seven years . Transported to NSW.
In 1796 he was charged with forging the Will of Rev. Henry Lewin for the benefit of Lady Briggs. See “Proceeds of the Old Bailey Ref:t17960217-70 “ An apochryphal story told was that Crossley had placed a living fly in the dead Reverend’s mouth and with the dead man’s hand traced his signature on the Will. He did that so that there could be no denial of life in the body or that the dead man signed the document with his own hand. The Court’s verdict was “not guilty”
[i] ‘Freemasons in London and Sydney.’ Dan Byrnes Lost Worlds Freemason Page.
[ii] Historical Records of Australia p646 Governor King to Lord Hobart Sydney New South Wales, 9th November 1802
[iii] Michael Duffy ‘Man of Honour John Macarthur Macmillan Australia 2003 Pp286
[iv] William Joy ‘The Exiles” Shakespear Head Press Sydney 1972 p81
[v] “A Charge of Mutiny” The Court Martial of Lieutenant Colonel George Johnston National Library of Australia p 26
[vi] This Beauteous Wicked Place Tuesday 31ast January 1809 p176
Bligh was then brought before Johnston who assured him of his personal safety if he resigned his authority and submitted to arrest. Bligh agreed and the two men shook hands. Martial law was then proclaimed and Johnson assumed the title of lieutenant governor with the control of the settlement.
Sir Henry protests.
Once Bligh had been deposed as Governor, Colonel George Johnston became the temporary Governor of New South Wales and Esther Abrahams or Julian his convict mistress, the mother of his children, became the ‘first lady’ of the colony. Sir Henry, who had been severely punished by the two previous Governors, for his misdemeanors, now sided with the illegally imprisoned Bligh. Sir Henry was so outraged by the new administration's perceived treachery and disregard for legal authority that he mounted his one man protest in the streets of Sydney, accosting and accusing any officer who took part in the mutiny, of high treason, an accusation which if proven carried with it the death penalty. One such raucous foray by Sir Henry on a group of amazed officers who had immediately arrested and reported him for verbally demonizing the “Interim Administration” and in particular the role played by Colonel Foveaux, in Governor Bligh's removal from office. The charge brought up against Sir Henry ended in a Court trial before Judge Advocate Ellis Bent who documented the proceedings in his Letterbook, dated the 9th May 1809. ‘The first person I tried was Sir H.Browne Hayes for speaking insolently of Colonel Foveaux ( about his role in the overthrow of Governor Bligh) and endeavouring (sic) to raise a riot. I reprimanded him and discharged him- since which he has sent me two water melons every week of uncommon size and goodness. He is a gentlemanly man in his manners, tho’ odd in dress and appearance. He has made a vow never to Cut the Hair on his Upper Lip, which is very long and gives him a formidable and grotesque appearance”.
In an a further effort to silence Sir Henry, the ‘Interim Government’, a euphemism for the rebel administration, arrested him on the flimsy charge of ‘incitement’, took him off the streets of Sydney and sent him to the distant mosquito infested Coal River (Newcastle) prison settlement, where he was made to dig coal, like the other convicts. And on the following day after his arrest, George Crossley, the convicted perjurer and Bligh’s legal advisor was arrested as well and charged with[i] 'practicing law' after he was barred from doing so and he too was sent to the Coal River settlement. (When legality was restored to the colony on 28 December 1809, Crossley gained substantial damages against the rebels for false imprisonment)
The indignity of working in the coal mines and then be forced to rent primitive accommodation at an exhorbitant price, only increased Sir Henry’s sense of outrage. The commandant was Lieutenant William Lawson who had taken a huge dislike to both Crossley and Sir Henry because as he put it, they were part of' Bligh's mob'[ii]made certain that they were worked as hard as the other convicts. Eventually dissatisfied with his prison accommodation in Newcastle, Sir Henry was allowed to purchase a comfortable stone cottage to live in. The cottage was eventually purchased from Sir Henry after he left the colony for Ireland and it became the first Newcastle Hospital.
Sir Henry at Vaucluse.
After serving eight months of hard labour in Newcastle, the Interim Administration relented because of his failing health and allowed Sir Henry to return to Sydney on the condition that he remained at Vaucluse and refrained from any form of protest. John Grant who at the time was a guest at Vaucluse described Sir Henry's mental disposition in one journal entry, dated January 1809, as “At Vaucluse, Hayes is more Christian-like than I, giving a great example of humility [in his behaviour] saying in reply to my remark, ‘‘‘the affliction of Lord God is on us, ‘‘ that he does not grieve nor consider himself afflicted, nor will he complain’’
In another journal entry dated 10th February 1809 Grant described the simple life at Vaucluse; “Yesterday I assisted Sir H.Hayes to make bread, fetch water etc and on returning home from the woods I always pass through the garden, having permission to gather peaches- in great profusion! There are besides apples, grapes, strawberries, raspberries, cucumbers, melons(ripe!) and multitudes of pomegranates will be ready in a few days- Sir Henry would jest last night of my propensity to fall asleep after meals, called me very beast like.”
In another journal entry dated Saturday, 25 March 1809, Grant described Sir Henry’s self deprecating sense of humour; “Sir H.Hayes washed for me this day a shirt of work cloth and remarked ‘Now you can tell your mother, you have had a Knight to wash for you!.........My occupation yesterday----I perused the Roman History from Sir Henry’s fine educational encyclopedia, while he washed my shirt and neck cloth-which much amused him.”
And what social life there was in the colony, some of it was very pleasant; as Grant described one Easter Sunday; “I passed breakfast with Lord, dinner with Lewin and Lord, Church at Sydney and then rode down to Sir H.Hayes to stay in his house! Thus I have a town and country house! Breakwell and Hayes had breakfasted before my return- I took my bread and coffee. Have had a pleasant week with Hayes and perhaps may now seek cattle for them.”
In an entry dated April 1809, Grant a very devout man despaired of Sir Henry's deriding religious observance at Vaucluse;” I am presently occupied chopping wood at Vaucluse, and this morning resumed devotional exercises with pleasure. My accompanying Violin is a great spur to devotion, but I fell into sloth thereafter. Hayes’ fine encyclopedia is amazing, and this day I have the whole of ‘Duty of man’ to peruse from him…I draw water from the well each day now for Breakwell in the morning and then retire to prayer in the wilderness and I do hope the effect of religion will make me more Godlike! I must rebuke Hayes, who calls me regularly mad! These are two worthy people and, with (Simeon) Lord at Sydney, make me pass my time very agreeably; notwithstanding my exertions by bringing newspapers to Hayes from Lord.”
Sir Henry tolerated religious people so long as they left him alone.
Grant recorded that ,“I was ready to ride to Sydney this day when behold, such violent showers of rain fell that it deterred me till too late to go for church, so in lieu thereof I read prayers, prayed in the bush and endeavoured to induce Hayes to read the church service but he refused, tho Sam told me that on the passage from England Sir Harry would read prayers to the convicts every Sunday regularly- pretty behaviour this, in his position”. This sounded very odd; why would Sir Henry pray with Catholic convicts on board the ‘Atlas’ when he didn’t have to, but now at Vaucluse with his friend refuse to do so? In another entry dated
Wednesday, 1st March 1809 Grant offers a further insight of Sir Henry ; “yesterday week I returned to Vaucluse, where I have passed the last 4 days therefore, employed in religious expressions, in doing little offices for Sir H.Hayes- such as sifting wheat and fetching water”
It was now apparent from Grant's journal entries, that colonial life could be pleasant for those who could afford the luxuries availabe; in Sir Henry’s case he owned a house in Sydney Town, and a stone house at Vaucluse, a prime harbour estate surrounded by a beautiful garden and another stone house at Coal River.
It was Sir Henry’s lack of religious devotion that constantly irritated the devout Grant because he wrote the following entry into his journal on the 18th February 1809, “I went to Sydney yesterday on Sir H.Hayes’ nag and taking peaches, delivered a dozen to Breakwell’s girl (Rosie?), a dozen to Bishop, got the bridle mended and heard from various quarters that Bligh goes not home yet- ‘Porpoise’ not being in a proper state to take him.”
Bligh had already commandeered the ship and the circulating rumour was that the ship required repairs.
Governor Bligh had also become aware from his various Sydney contacts of how Sir Henry had stood up for him and been punished for his temerity. Bligh consequently prepared a pardon for him which he sent to London. His letter read, “Sir Henry Brown Hayes, a person under sentence of transportation who had been living a retired manner on a little estate about seven miles from Sydney, and who seldom came into town, being in the habit of conversing with the officers, and having expressed his loyalty and disapprobation of their measures, asserting they would be capitally punished for their traitorous acts, was likewise sent to the coal-mines. Thus, in terrorem the usurpers held up punishment to those who dared to speak in favor of my administration against, their treasonable practices; and notwithstanding the illegality of for their Courts, they have condemned many persons and executed “[iii]
Michael O’Leary, the prominent Mason and historian in Cork believed that Bligh was a Mason and once the captain of H.M.S Glatton, a Masonic ship. The painting of Midshipman Bligh with a Masonic insignia on his coat points to that conclusion That would explain why Sir Henry’s efforts to have Bligh released earned him Bligh's gratitude and a pardon. But Sargeant Whittle who was also a Mason and known to Sir Henry hated Bligh. It wasWhittle’s vengeful testimony that he found Bligh cowering under the bed that so damaged Bligh's reputation. Bligh had in the previous year forced Whittle to move his butcher's business from the edge of Parramatta Road, one hundred metres back and consequently ruined his business and now it was payback time
[i] H.V.Evatt “The Rum Rebellion p. 242 Angus and Robertson Ltd. Sydney London 1947
[ii] Letter of Roger Farrell to William Bligh Jan 29 1810 Collonial Secretary's Correspondence Reel6066: 4/1804 p 6a.
[iii] Historical Recordsof NSW Vol V1 p673 111 Bligh’s Account of the Rebellion.
Midshipman William Bligh Note Freemason insignia around his neck and open dividors in his right hand.
LieutenantLawson ordered his soldiers to arrest Sir Henry
After his five months exile at Vaucluse, illness forced Sir Henry to seek medical help in Sydney in effect breaking his word not to leave Vaucluse. As it was he was seen by Lieutenant Lawson, while entering his Chapel Row house, recognized and violently seized by soldiers and arrested for breaking his parole. On the orders of the rebel government he was gaoled again; his Chapel Row house forcibly entered and his private papers searched for subversive writings. During that search some of his papers were irrreperably damaged, while others were destroyed, among them was his irreplaceable “poetry manuscript”.[i] This act of vandalism on top of his being sent to the Newcastle coalmines again for punishment added to Sir Henry’s misery.
[i] ”.(ibid p153)
[i] ”.(ibid p153)
William Lawson
A much older Lieutenant William Lawson, Commandant at Newcastle
In a letter to Sam Breakwell a chastened Sir Henry described his boat trip to Newcastle;
My dr Sam,
I landed Sunday evening from an open Boat, having left the vessel at sea, her not being able to weather has prevented her being able to make the port till Tuesday evening, when she got in with difficulty, after experiencing many risks, I was uncomfortable till her arrival having nothing with me but the cloths on my back. I am now living in the old mansion where I suppose I shall remain for three or four weeks, take care of all letters that may arrive Lawson is civil and I have no doubt will continue so as our objects are of a very different nature, upon the whole he seems to be well inclined, my disposition is not to hurt the feelings of any man, particularly when I know they have run their glass out. You know from my late letters what they are to expect, if I have any influence at a future day I will save the life of poor Jim Laycock. Pack up all the books left in the parlour, and destroy the white ants that I perceived committing depradations in the China closet, go as little into the town as you can possibly avoid, a dying horse kicks hard, let me hear from you by every possible opportunity, and don’t be uneasy if I don’t write by every vessel for reasons I will explain to you hereafter. Provisions are not as plentiful here as I was thought to believe send me what you judge most necessary (some Spirits). Pay Crump order to Parsley[1] on the rocks, as he tells me it is them, ……………. …. preserve your health and spirits.
God bless you. affectionately yours,
H. B. HAYES.
Batchelor ‘s Hall,
The subdued tone of the letter alarmed Sam Breakwell because it was so uncharacteristic Sir Henry. He feared Sir Henry’s health was failing. And so in reply, Breakwell scolded Sir Henry for once again provoking the rebel administration, and pleaded with him to consider his failing health[i] before he savaged them again.
My Dear Sir Harry,
Yesterday I saw the young man to whom you referred, he told me you sent a second protest which vext me so much I carnt believe it, you would hardly be so mad after what you wrote me, I am making all the Interest I can to get you recalled wishing you to be on the spot when the change takes place, but must give up all hopes if you gall them any more, there is no use in it, what did you write me in your first letter (a dying horse kicks hard) you will drive them to desperation. What will be the consequence you may loose your life which is of more value to your family than all their generation, for heavens sake keep quiet it won’t be long; if I am wrong informed you must excuse me taking this liberty of dictating to you I do it from good motives, enough of this.
Sargt Champion is in jail for debt to Mr. Blaxcell he told the Court, McArthur gave him the property for secret services which he would explain to another Court when necessary so I am informed.
Yours affectly
SAML BREAKWELL
This is a Scotch Iland [ Highland] Regiment that is coming.I think it very likely you may have some friends amongst them ( Masons?)I shall get a sight of the army list and will tell you the officers’ names by the next.”
. Sir Henry apparently heeded Sam’s advice because in his next defamatory letter to Viscount Castlereagh, he used the pseudonym T.Brown[2] to sign it instead of his own name.. It was vintage Sir Henry describing the widespread corruption that now flourished since the rebel administration took charge of the colony.
T. BROWN TO VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGH.
New South Wales, 13th October, 1809.
My Lord,
It is high time that some fresh Governor should have corruption arrived here before this as such doings was never known—pardons to the worst of characters, Croppeys, and thieves. Here a man or woman robs, next day turns King’s evidence, transports those that he sold the things for fourteen years, and saves himself. Land—three thousand acres given to Mr. Riley, four thousand acres to another favorite, as well as eight hundred Government sheep and 70 bullocks; not a Government’s hutt (save six or seven) but is given away to favorites. Forty thousand gallons of spirits besides were given away to the civil and military officers since Bligh has been deposed, and not anything to the peaceable, industrious individual. The officers and favorites have been finely enriched by this republican Government. Johnston and the rest of the military squad were not satisfied because he (Governor Bligh) would not let them have as much spirits to trade as old King did, so that made them determine to depose him.
............drunk at Government House at Parramatta, and Foveaux is left at Sydney to do as he likes, and he gives pardons, grants, and leases to the whores and greatest thieves, ‘till there is nothing left for any other Governor (when he arrives) to give. ………………and so on and so on. "
And the letter ended with the following suggestion, " Hang half this worthy set and it will be justice, for they have been the greatest robbers These are proper peculations, and I hope such delinquents will be brought to condign punishment.
I have, &c.,
T. BROWN. 10th May, 1809
The letter was typical Sir Henry 'speak', ' Hang half this worthy set and it will be justice', both in his style and language. The letter pinpointed the corrupt officials and officers in the colony by name and held them up to ridicule. It was a widely circulated letter in the colony and the 'Rebel Administration never charged Sir Henry for having written it.
And as Sir Henry’s troubles with the rebel administration continued, Bligh set in motion Sir Henry's eventual pardon. He wrote to London lauding Sir Henry's fearless and high principled behaviour in the face of constant adversity, “I do not hesitate to declare that, from his general conduct in this colony, being loyal and meritorious, I should have given him his freedom had I held the Government”.
Sir Henry's pardon Bligh explained would have been given on April 19th 1809, except that he lacked the Great Seal to make it official.
Bligh’s continued confinement at Government House continued to embarrass and threaten the rebels who feared a loyalist backlash. They furthermore feared the presence of the ‘Porpoise’ in the harbour and that its officers would come to Bligh’s rescue, because he remained the Commander of the King’s ships in the South Pacific. Paterson next ordered Captain Porteus to sail to Norfolk Island and relocate its inhabitants to Port Dalrymple on the Derwent River. Bligh learnt of this maneuver and countermanded it. A concerned and worried Paterson then forbad Bligh to communicate with Captain Porteus except to order him to sail directly to Norfolk Island. Bligh refused to do so and was then forcibly removed to the barracks. Finally Bligh came to an agreement with Paterson to be put on board the ‘Porpoise’ and sail forthwith back to England in her. Bligh also agreed not to touch any part of the colony or interfere with it in any or to discredit the rebel administration before specific instruction from England was received. In return he was taken back to Government House, allowed to take to England all his personal papers and any witness he needed..[ii] Paterson then reneged on hi agreement to allow Bligh to select his witnesses. In the meantime Paterson attempted to corrupt the captain and officers of the ‘Porpoise’ with bribes of 1000 acre land grants to ensure that they took Bligh directly back to England. Bligh was still kept a prisoner on land until the 20th February 1809 when he was allowed to board the ‘Porpoise’ anchored in the harbour. Once on board the ship, Bligh seized control, arrested her commander Lieutenant William Kent and considered shelling Sydney Town with the ship’s guns but common sense prevailed and he eventually calmed down. After some deliberation Bligh decided to sail to Van Diemen’s Land instead of to England, and there he remained. However all these obstruction were swept aside when on the 28th December 1809, the colony’s rebel administration came to a sudden halt with the arrival of the new Governor, Lieutenant Colonel Lachlan Macquarie who took up his commission on the 1st January 1810. He had been sent to ‘liberate Bligh from arrest and replace him in the government’. Macquarie carried out this directive on the 1st January 1810 and Bligh returned to Sydney, on the 17th January 1810.
[1] Parsley Bay (named after Private Parsley of the Sydney Loyal Association Company of Volunteers, for service to the Gun Batteries.)
[2] ( historians such as Dr.H.V.Evatt believed that the letter was written by Sir Henry ) (Historical Records of New South Wales, Vol &, p216., 217.
[i] (RAHS The Vaucluse Estate from 1793 to 1829 and those connected with it Phillip.H.Morton p376
[ii] H.R. of N.S.W, volvii pp 16-17
Lachlan Macquarie
Governor Lachlan Macquarie
The revolt was over and a new Governor installed; Lieutenant William Lawson was then ordered to release all Bligh supporters whom the rebel Administration banished to the Coal River settlement. Colonel George Johnston was recalled to England to face a Court Martial on a charge of mutiny. Sergeant Whittle persisted with his version of Bligh’s arrest, of how he found him cowering under a bed. Sergeant Whittle never forgave the Governor for having forced him to relocate his house and butcher shop well awat from the edge of Parramatta Road to a less prominent position, a move that cost him money and loss in business and now he had his chance for revenge. His account of the arrest cast doubt on Bligh’s heroic reputation as a man of moral and physical courage. Bligh’s enemies loved it.
Soon afterwards Lieutenant William Lawson, Commandant at Newcastle, was instructed by Governor Macquarie to liberate all such persons who had been banished to the Coal River settlement subsequent to the removal of Governor Bligh, the late Commander- in-Chief of the Colony. George Crossley, Thomas Tate, Sir Henry Browne Hayes and all other persons known by Lieutenant Lawson to be under false arrest were to be returned to Head Quarters.
Sir Henry returned to Sydney where he penned another memorial to Governor Macquarie[i] about his wrongful arrest and ill treatment at the orders of Lieutenant Lawson, a supporter of the Rebel Administration. In his memorial Sir Henry[ii], described the sequence of events that led to his wrongful arrest and imprisonment and the destruction of his property.
“ That in the month of May last, your memorialist had occasion to come
to Sydney to consult a physician on the state of his health, which was much impaired, and was walking peaceably in the town, when he was suddenly set upon by a party of armed men, who said they were constables and who proceeded with unheard of violence to drag your memorialist to the common jail, in committing which outrage on the person of your memorialist, they tore your memorialist’s cloaths, wounded and bruised him, and at length, without any warrant, a pretended authority bore off your memorialist, whom they had thus overpowered, to prison, where your memorialist was that night confined, and early the next morning, in like forcible illegal manner, was sent off again to the Coal River, where, unfortunately for your memorialist, Lieutenant Lawson, 102nd Regiment, had got into the command.
That on the 14th day of July, 1809, your memorialist was sent for by Lieutenant Lawson, and whilst your memorialist, unconscious of having done any wrong, or offended Lieutenant Lawson, I was proceeding to Government House there, he was suddenly interrupted by Lieutenant Lawson, who vociferously called out to some of his people, and made use of the following words: “Seize the villain by the scruff of the neck and drag him to the guard house.” That your memorialist endeavoured by remonstrance to learn the cause of this fresh outrage, but was prevented by the constant vociferation of Lieutenant Lawson, who loudly called out that he would. flay your memorialist, and put him to work on the shell boat. That memorialist was dragged, in strict obedience to Lieutenant Lawson’s commands, which it seems no one there then dared to hesitate in performing, and kept closely confined till night, and in the course of the afternoon a messenger came from Lieutenant Lawson to demand the key of memorialist’s house, which memorialist refused to deliver, and the consequence was, the house was broke open, the contents rifled, scattered, wrecked, and exposed to general plunder, your memorialist’s papers taken away, furnishing amusement to the lower orders of people assembled in their huts in the evening, whilst other papers were returned to your memorialist. Those which related to your memorialist’s private and domestic concerns were withheld, and memorialist has not been able to regain possession of them, nor of his private letter-book. That Lieutenant Lawson, by way of pursuing the system of oppression which he had thus wantonly commenced, seized every opportunity to halt and distress your memorialist, regardless of his extreme ill-health and infirmities, which required attendance and nourishment and with a view to cut off your memorialist from every resource of this kind, Lieutenant Lawson published an order threatening to punish any man with 200 lashes who should do anything for your memorialist, or even to seen to hold converse with him.”
Governor Macquarie passed on this letter to Lieutenant Lawson and asked him to respond. Lieutenant Lawson was very mindful that his career was at stake, protested his innocence and claimed that he was only following orders issued by the Rebel Administration.
LIEUTENANT LAWSON TO SECRETARY CAMPBELL.
(Colonial Secretary’s Papers.)
Sydney, 4th April, 181O.
Sir,
I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 3rd instant, wherein you mention that His Excellency the Governor had received a memorial from Sir Henry Brown Hayes, stating his having sustained a variety of personal violence from me, both here and at Newcastle, and that I had seized upon his papers on a certain day.
In reply thereto, I beg you will assure His Excellency that the first charge is false and groundless; and with regard to the second charge I beg to observe that Sir Henry Brown Hayes having been under my command at Newcastle, where I found he was using every means in his power, by certain writings, to bring those under whose command I was, as well [ the then existing Government, into ridicule and contempt, I therefore considered it my duty to possess myself of such writings; and having found a certain book containing remarks against my superiors and ridiculing the then existing Government, which book I transmitted to Lieu’t-Governor Foveaux, and also three letters which were addressed to a person , at Sydney, his servant and companion. The letters are now much at his service, but as they contained certain insinuations against the Government I thought it my duty to detain them until now. If, however, His Excellency may not be satisfied with this declaration, I am ready to meet any investigation he may be pleased to direct, having such evidence as I doubt not will wipe away any impressions, if any may have been made on the mind of His Excellency.
I have, &c.,
W.LAWSON.
And even if Lawson did find letters in Sir Henry’s correspondence which were critical of and contained outrageous comments about the rebel administration, they were private. Lawson’s reasons for his actions were therefore inexcusable and furthermore Sir Henry had made those disparaging comments about the “usurping Government” and not against the legal representatives of His Majesty’s Government. And this of course meant that Sir Henry been illegally punished, made to suffer physically and robbed of his irreplaceable letter book that contained his collected poems, a cruel injustice compounded with imprisonment.
Later that February Lieutenant Lawson was informed that Lieutenant John Purcell of the 73rd regiment was to take Command of the settlement and a detachment of the 73rd was arriving on the 'Sally' would relieve the 102nd stationed there,. Lawson was to return immediately to headquarters on the 'Sally' as soon as she was loaded with timber, coal and lime.
Now free and in London, Bligh set about obtaining a pardon for Sir Henry. On the16th August 1811, he wrote to the Secretary for the Colonies, the Earl of Liverpool enclosing a copy of his proposed pardon for Sir Henry and the request that it be put into effect as quickly as possible. The next day on August 17th, the Earl of Liverpool sent a directive to Lachlan Macquarie, now installed as the Governor of New South Wales with a copy of Bligh’s letter, requesting the he remit the punishment, which meant that Sir Henry still had to wait for the pardon and directive from London to reach Macquarie in Sydney. Once Macquarie received that directive he pardoned Sir Henry who again was a free man.
[i] [i] Sir Henry B. Hayes Memorial. (Colonial Secretary’s Papers Vaucluse 18th March 1810 Historical Records of new South Wales Vol V11 p316
[ii] Sir Henry B. Hayes Memorial. (Colonial Secretary’s Papers Vaucluse 18th March 1810 Historical Records of new South Wales Vol V11 p316
Soon afterwards Lieutenant William Lawson, Commandant at Newcastle, was instructed by Governor Macquarie to liberate all such persons who had been banished to the Coal River settlement subsequent to the removal of Governor Bligh, the late Commander- in-Chief of the Colony. George Crossley, Thomas Tate, Sir Henry Browne Hayes and all other persons known by Lieutenant Lawson to be under false arrest were to be returned to Head Quarters.
Sir Henry returned to Sydney where he penned another memorial to Governor Macquarie[i] about his wrongful arrest and ill treatment at the orders of Lieutenant Lawson, a supporter of the Rebel Administration. In his memorial Sir Henry[ii], described the sequence of events that led to his wrongful arrest and imprisonment and the destruction of his property.
“ That in the month of May last, your memorialist had occasion to come
to Sydney to consult a physician on the state of his health, which was much impaired, and was walking peaceably in the town, when he was suddenly set upon by a party of armed men, who said they were constables and who proceeded with unheard of violence to drag your memorialist to the common jail, in committing which outrage on the person of your memorialist, they tore your memorialist’s cloaths, wounded and bruised him, and at length, without any warrant, a pretended authority bore off your memorialist, whom they had thus overpowered, to prison, where your memorialist was that night confined, and early the next morning, in like forcible illegal manner, was sent off again to the Coal River, where, unfortunately for your memorialist, Lieutenant Lawson, 102nd Regiment, had got into the command.
That on the 14th day of July, 1809, your memorialist was sent for by Lieutenant Lawson, and whilst your memorialist, unconscious of having done any wrong, or offended Lieutenant Lawson, I was proceeding to Government House there, he was suddenly interrupted by Lieutenant Lawson, who vociferously called out to some of his people, and made use of the following words: “Seize the villain by the scruff of the neck and drag him to the guard house.” That your memorialist endeavoured by remonstrance to learn the cause of this fresh outrage, but was prevented by the constant vociferation of Lieutenant Lawson, who loudly called out that he would. flay your memorialist, and put him to work on the shell boat. That memorialist was dragged, in strict obedience to Lieutenant Lawson’s commands, which it seems no one there then dared to hesitate in performing, and kept closely confined till night, and in the course of the afternoon a messenger came from Lieutenant Lawson to demand the key of memorialist’s house, which memorialist refused to deliver, and the consequence was, the house was broke open, the contents rifled, scattered, wrecked, and exposed to general plunder, your memorialist’s papers taken away, furnishing amusement to the lower orders of people assembled in their huts in the evening, whilst other papers were returned to your memorialist. Those which related to your memorialist’s private and domestic concerns were withheld, and memorialist has not been able to regain possession of them, nor of his private letter-book. That Lieutenant Lawson, by way of pursuing the system of oppression which he had thus wantonly commenced, seized every opportunity to halt and distress your memorialist, regardless of his extreme ill-health and infirmities, which required attendance and nourishment and with a view to cut off your memorialist from every resource of this kind, Lieutenant Lawson published an order threatening to punish any man with 200 lashes who should do anything for your memorialist, or even to seen to hold converse with him.”
Governor Macquarie passed on this letter to Lieutenant Lawson and asked him to respond. Lieutenant Lawson was very mindful that his career was at stake, protested his innocence and claimed that he was only following orders issued by the Rebel Administration.
LIEUTENANT LAWSON TO SECRETARY CAMPBELL.
(Colonial Secretary’s Papers.)
Sydney, 4th April, 181O.
Sir,
I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 3rd instant, wherein you mention that His Excellency the Governor had received a memorial from Sir Henry Brown Hayes, stating his having sustained a variety of personal violence from me, both here and at Newcastle, and that I had seized upon his papers on a certain day.
In reply thereto, I beg you will assure His Excellency that the first charge is false and groundless; and with regard to the second charge I beg to observe that Sir Henry Brown Hayes having been under my command at Newcastle, where I found he was using every means in his power, by certain writings, to bring those under whose command I was, as well [ the then existing Government, into ridicule and contempt, I therefore considered it my duty to possess myself of such writings; and having found a certain book containing remarks against my superiors and ridiculing the then existing Government, which book I transmitted to Lieu’t-Governor Foveaux, and also three letters which were addressed to a person , at Sydney, his servant and companion. The letters are now much at his service, but as they contained certain insinuations against the Government I thought it my duty to detain them until now. If, however, His Excellency may not be satisfied with this declaration, I am ready to meet any investigation he may be pleased to direct, having such evidence as I doubt not will wipe away any impressions, if any may have been made on the mind of His Excellency.
I have, &c.,
W.LAWSON.
And even if Lawson did find letters in Sir Henry’s correspondence which were critical of and contained outrageous comments about the rebel administration, they were private. Lawson’s reasons for his actions were therefore inexcusable and furthermore Sir Henry had made those disparaging comments about the “usurping Government” and not against the legal representatives of His Majesty’s Government. And this of course meant that Sir Henry been illegally punished, made to suffer physically and robbed of his irreplaceable letter book that contained his collected poems, a cruel injustice compounded with imprisonment.
Later that February Lieutenant Lawson was informed that Lieutenant John Purcell of the 73rd regiment was to take Command of the settlement and a detachment of the 73rd was arriving on the 'Sally' would relieve the 102nd stationed there,. Lawson was to return immediately to headquarters on the 'Sally' as soon as she was loaded with timber, coal and lime.
Now free and in London, Bligh set about obtaining a pardon for Sir Henry. On the16th August 1811, he wrote to the Secretary for the Colonies, the Earl of Liverpool enclosing a copy of his proposed pardon for Sir Henry and the request that it be put into effect as quickly as possible. The next day on August 17th, the Earl of Liverpool sent a directive to Lachlan Macquarie, now installed as the Governor of New South Wales with a copy of Bligh’s letter, requesting the he remit the punishment, which meant that Sir Henry still had to wait for the pardon and directive from London to reach Macquarie in Sydney. Once Macquarie received that directive he pardoned Sir Henry who again was a free man.
[i] [i] Sir Henry B. Hayes Memorial. (Colonial Secretary’s Papers Vaucluse 18th March 1810 Historical Records of new South Wales Vol V11 p316
[ii] Sir Henry B. Hayes Memorial. (Colonial Secretary’s Papers Vaucluse 18th March 1810 Historical Records of new South Wales Vol V11 p316
The three different versions of Sir Henry's pardon.
Governor Bligh's pardon for Sir Henry
The first and official version of Sir Henry's pardon was this letter form William Bligh.
Mary Jude Sir Henry's daughter
The second and more romantic version of how Sir Henry gained his pardon.
The first version by Justin McCarthy, (quoted in Morton’ The Vaucluse Estate’ p 361 from Irish Recollections.. Vol 1 16 Dec 1875) was that the pardon was granted sometime in 1812, (note the date).It came about when The Viceroy of Ireland, the Duke of Rutland, attended a ball at which he was introduced to Mary, Sir Henry's eldest daughter, now grown-up. He was immediately smitten by her personality and beauty and asked her for and obtained, more than one dance with her. Mary aware of the effect she had on the Viceroy acquainted him with her father’s story and imprisonment in New South Wales and tearfully appealed to his humanity and compassion to grant Sir Henry a pardon. The Duke of course could not refuse and so Sir Henry was granted his pardon.
The third and more fanciful variant of the same story came from ‘J.M.’ of Melboume: “Notes and Queries” 24 Feb 1877, and quoted by Hugh Anderson in “The Hard Case of Sir Henry)
This version also involved Mary, Sir Henry’s eldest daughters who went to live with some relatives in England, where she grew up into a beautiful and accomplished young lady (She later married Henry Jude) One day at a garden fete given at Canton House, she met the Prince Regent (later George 1V) a notorious womanizer. Mary attracted the Prince Regent’s attention with her beauty and bearing and when she realized the effect that she had on him, she demurely asked for his permission to ask him for a favour. Unable to resist her charm, the Prince Regent graciously granted her request and when she later presented him with a formal petition to pardon Sir Henry, he granted it.
Allen Crosbie noted that both version were almost identical. He drew on his family’s oral history, to explain that it was widely believed in Cork that both accounts could well be true. There had to be an explanation for the interval between the date of Bligh’s letter and the pardon. If Bligh could have granted it (the pardon) himself, which he (couldn’t) for the fact that he no longer possessed the great seal of his office, then Governor Macquarie couldn’t either. The sequence could have been as follows Sir Henry applied for a pardon with Governor Bligh’s support. When nothing happened, Mary in England feared that her father had been forgotten. Then when she had the chance to explain this to the Prince Regent, she pleaded with him to intervene and grant Sir Henry a pardon. He did so, and because of the timing, Governor Macquarie found that he had both the Earl of Liverpool's directive to pardon Sir Henry and also the Viceroy and Prince Regent's similar directive, which he then granted, Interestingly Governor Macquarie apologised to Sir Henry for the delay. Royalty expects that their requests receive the very highest priority.”[i]
In 2006 I suggested to an administrator of the Historic Houses Trust that Vaucluse House could commemorate the 200th anniversary of the ‘Rum Rebellion’ and the overthrow of Governor Bligh. The connection between the two was Sir Henry’s imprisonment at the Coal River settlement for siding with Governor Bligh. My suggestion may have been considered but in the end it was ignored. Australian history was again the loser. A letter in the weekend ‘Australian’ January 26 ,2008 complained “ Reading through the list of Australia Day activities, I’m astonished by the almost total lack of commemoration of the Rum Rebellion , Australia’s first –and only-military coup, which deposed Governor Bligh on January 26, 1808 . Apart from a couple of minor museums exhibitions, this landmark event in our history was completely overlooked by the Sydney County Council, the Australia day Committee, the Festival of Sydney and the NSW Government.
Imagine what the spectacle of a full scale re-enactment of the Rum Corps march up Bridge Street to First Government House Place , drums beating and colours flying, to” arrest” Captain Bligh would make. What a great tourist attraction that would have been especially if it were to become a regular Australia Day event.” The letter was signed Cam Ford.
[i] Allen Crosbie pers.comm email April 2, 2004
The Wreck of the 'Isabella'
Governor Macquarie,a Freemason granted Sir Henry his pardon on the 6th January 1812 and together with Samuel Breakwell he booked their passage back to Ireland on the merchant brig the “Isabella”. Samuel Breakwell was at the time the owner of two properties, a sixty acre land grant (the present Rose Bay) which he named Tivoli (after a stately home in Cork overlooking the River Lee) and the ‘Vaucluse’ estate which Sir Henry generously gave to him. Breakwell was probably at the time a father as well.[1]
The ship the “Isabella” which was to take them back to England arrived in Sydney from London on the 23rd August 1812. It was a square rigged, two-mast brig of 193 ton burthen, designed to carry passengers and cargo. She was booked to carry back to England 34 passengers and a cargo of “18 983 salted fur and hair sealskins, 91 casks of sperm and black oil, 17 tons of pearl shell, 72 sealskins and 24 oxhides. In addition she carried five pipes of Madeira wine. A pipe was equivalent to 478 litres.[i]
Also on board the “Isabella” returning to Ireland was “General” Joseph Holt and his family. Holt had received his free pardon on the 1st January 1811 and had consequently sold his New South Wales properties of Glen Bride and Mount Hester, together with all his cattle and horses. Then in Sydney, with his wife and son and three servants he booked his passage on the ‘Isabella’ at a cost of ₤30 per person for a total of ₤180. Holt also brought on board his own supplies for the long journey home, which included 720 gallons of water in water casks that is 120 gallons of water per person. He also paid for a space of eight foot by ten foot in the steerage of the ship, large enough to erect a comfortable cabin for himself and his wife and a place outside his cabin for his son’s cot and still enough space nearby for his three servants to hang their hammocks to sleep in. He also took on board a large quantity of biscuits, three salted down fat hogs and one bullock from his farm, a cask of raisins for the journey (some of which was to be used in a plum pudding), forty pounds of tea, one hundred and sixty pounds of sugar, twelve dozen bottles of wine and twenty gallons of rum.[ii]
Returning also to England on the “Isabella” were Richard Brooks and his wife; the same Captain Brooks of the convict transport ship the “Atlas” that brought Sir Henry to New South Wales[2].
Also traveling back were 14 Royal Marines under the command of Captain Robert Durie of His Majesty’s 73rd Regiment of Foot and Lieutenant Richard Ludlin also of the 73rd Regiment who had been ordered to New South Wales with the first battalion to oversee a peaceful transition of Government from the rebel administration to that of Governor Macquarie’s, returning to England. And other passengers of special note were Samuell Ansell, a quarrelsome sailor who when drunk lost all self control and turned violent and there was William Mattison, a free man described by a magistrate in Sydney as an “evil menace’. His background according to Mattison was that he had once served in the Royal Navy but was court-martialed in India and discharged from the service for persistent drunkenness. He then signed on in Bombay as a crewman, on board a merchant ship, disliked the work and jumped ship in Port Jackson. For the next six months he enjoyed his Sydney life, was involved in numerous fights when drunk; ran up huge bills with merchants who trustingly gave him credit and with publicans who sold him enough liquor to keep him drunk for most of his six months. He also lost heavily at gambling and fearing retribution from those he owed money to, stowed away on the “Isabella” in attempt to flee the colony. Shortly before the “Isabella” sailed, the ship was searched for convict stowaways by a special officer and Mattison was found hiding in the hold among some bales of wool. Mattison was taken off and once on shore it was revealed that he owed a great deal of money to numerous creditors and since there was a law that forbade any debtor to leave the colony, Mattison was held in custody. When Mattison’s creditors heard that he had attempted to flee the colony and was apprehended, they turned on the arresting officer and unanimously declared that they would annul Mattison’s debts conditional to his leaving the colony. Captain Higton of the “Isabella” when told that Mattison was to be put on board his ship, made it clear to all that under no circumstance would he allow that scoundrel to come on board. The “Isabella” sailed from Port Jackson for England on the 3rd of December 1812 and after the ship was well out to sea Mattison was discovered hiding amongst the bales in the hold. Somehow or other he had managed to stow away again. By then the ship was too far out to sea to return to Port Jackson.[iii]
On February the 8th 1813, the “Isabella” was wrecked on a reef when it sailed too close to Eagle Island, one of the many small islands in the Falkland’s. Her wreck was due to the gross negligence of its Master George Higton[iv]; who at the time was drunk and in bed with Mrs. Mary Bindell an ageing, Port Jackson prostitute, when he should have been on deck and in command of his ship during a difficult and stormy passage.
[1] Fragment from John Grant’s Journal.
[2] The captain of “Atlas” 1, the ship that brought Sir Henry to Australia in 1802.
[i] (David Miller, The Wreck of the Isabella) P8 Naval Institute Press Annapolis, Maryland 1995
[ii] Joseph Holt “A Rum Story”Edited by Peter O”Shaughnessy Kangaroo Press
1988 p 113
[iii] [iii] (David Miller, The Wreck of the Isabella) P20 Naval Institute Press Annapolis, Maryland 1995
[iv] (David Miller, The Wreck of the Isabella) P115-116 Naval Institute Press Annapolis, Maryland 1995
The ship the “Isabella” which was to take them back to England arrived in Sydney from London on the 23rd August 1812. It was a square rigged, two-mast brig of 193 ton burthen, designed to carry passengers and cargo. She was booked to carry back to England 34 passengers and a cargo of “18 983 salted fur and hair sealskins, 91 casks of sperm and black oil, 17 tons of pearl shell, 72 sealskins and 24 oxhides. In addition she carried five pipes of Madeira wine. A pipe was equivalent to 478 litres.[i]
Also on board the “Isabella” returning to Ireland was “General” Joseph Holt and his family. Holt had received his free pardon on the 1st January 1811 and had consequently sold his New South Wales properties of Glen Bride and Mount Hester, together with all his cattle and horses. Then in Sydney, with his wife and son and three servants he booked his passage on the ‘Isabella’ at a cost of ₤30 per person for a total of ₤180. Holt also brought on board his own supplies for the long journey home, which included 720 gallons of water in water casks that is 120 gallons of water per person. He also paid for a space of eight foot by ten foot in the steerage of the ship, large enough to erect a comfortable cabin for himself and his wife and a place outside his cabin for his son’s cot and still enough space nearby for his three servants to hang their hammocks to sleep in. He also took on board a large quantity of biscuits, three salted down fat hogs and one bullock from his farm, a cask of raisins for the journey (some of which was to be used in a plum pudding), forty pounds of tea, one hundred and sixty pounds of sugar, twelve dozen bottles of wine and twenty gallons of rum.[ii]
Returning also to England on the “Isabella” were Richard Brooks and his wife; the same Captain Brooks of the convict transport ship the “Atlas” that brought Sir Henry to New South Wales[2].
Also traveling back were 14 Royal Marines under the command of Captain Robert Durie of His Majesty’s 73rd Regiment of Foot and Lieutenant Richard Ludlin also of the 73rd Regiment who had been ordered to New South Wales with the first battalion to oversee a peaceful transition of Government from the rebel administration to that of Governor Macquarie’s, returning to England. And other passengers of special note were Samuell Ansell, a quarrelsome sailor who when drunk lost all self control and turned violent and there was William Mattison, a free man described by a magistrate in Sydney as an “evil menace’. His background according to Mattison was that he had once served in the Royal Navy but was court-martialed in India and discharged from the service for persistent drunkenness. He then signed on in Bombay as a crewman, on board a merchant ship, disliked the work and jumped ship in Port Jackson. For the next six months he enjoyed his Sydney life, was involved in numerous fights when drunk; ran up huge bills with merchants who trustingly gave him credit and with publicans who sold him enough liquor to keep him drunk for most of his six months. He also lost heavily at gambling and fearing retribution from those he owed money to, stowed away on the “Isabella” in attempt to flee the colony. Shortly before the “Isabella” sailed, the ship was searched for convict stowaways by a special officer and Mattison was found hiding in the hold among some bales of wool. Mattison was taken off and once on shore it was revealed that he owed a great deal of money to numerous creditors and since there was a law that forbade any debtor to leave the colony, Mattison was held in custody. When Mattison’s creditors heard that he had attempted to flee the colony and was apprehended, they turned on the arresting officer and unanimously declared that they would annul Mattison’s debts conditional to his leaving the colony. Captain Higton of the “Isabella” when told that Mattison was to be put on board his ship, made it clear to all that under no circumstance would he allow that scoundrel to come on board. The “Isabella” sailed from Port Jackson for England on the 3rd of December 1812 and after the ship was well out to sea Mattison was discovered hiding amongst the bales in the hold. Somehow or other he had managed to stow away again. By then the ship was too far out to sea to return to Port Jackson.[iii]
On February the 8th 1813, the “Isabella” was wrecked on a reef when it sailed too close to Eagle Island, one of the many small islands in the Falkland’s. Her wreck was due to the gross negligence of its Master George Higton[iv]; who at the time was drunk and in bed with Mrs. Mary Bindell an ageing, Port Jackson prostitute, when he should have been on deck and in command of his ship during a difficult and stormy passage.
[1] Fragment from John Grant’s Journal.
[2] The captain of “Atlas” 1, the ship that brought Sir Henry to Australia in 1802.
[i] (David Miller, The Wreck of the Isabella) P8 Naval Institute Press Annapolis, Maryland 1995
[ii] Joseph Holt “A Rum Story”Edited by Peter O”Shaughnessy Kangaroo Press
1988 p 113
[iii] [iii] (David Miller, The Wreck of the Isabella) P20 Naval Institute Press Annapolis, Maryland 1995
[iv] (David Miller, The Wreck of the Isabella) P115-116 Naval Institute Press Annapolis, Maryland 1995
Those who sailed on the 'Isabella'
Joseph Holt in his autobiography “A Rum Story” (p 115-116) described wreck of the “Isabela” on the rocks near Eagle Island and of Sir Henry’s behaviour following the shipwreck
“ On the seventh of February we came in sight of Falklands Islands. Hicton thought to have passed the north side of the islands, leaving the mainland on our left hand and the islands on our right. He found he could not weather the north cape and were obliged to tack about and had a fair wind going—eight knots a hour.
He got drunk and came in my cabin, sat down. Mrs Holt put a bottle of rum on the table, and he and I took a glass of grog and began to speak about our next harbour. Hicton said he would not let any man know where he was going till he would come to anchor, and further said if the ship would be sunk and all the souls perish who was to be responsible only him? I looked at him very earnest and said there would be no occasion for any responsibility if all perished as there would be no one to prosecute. He went out of my cabin into Mrs Bindal’s cabin and went to bed and, about two oclock in the morning, he went on deck and altered our course four points and led us in between New Island and Sybil Jason and straight for Eagle.Island.”
About three o’clock the alarm was given on deck: ‘Rocks on one side and land on the other.’ Breakers mountains high, that is the waves breaking on the rocks. 1 bounced out of my cot, and Mrs Holt. We dressed ourselves and I was going on deck but my wife would not let me go, she made me to rise our son and then we went to our knees imploring God for his mercy and assistance. In a few minutes the ship gave a great jolt on rock and, in a moment after, she lost her rudder. My poor wife got the child between us both and said: ‘Let us all link in each other’s arms and go to our watery graves.’ Tears of sorrow ran down our cheeks. We submitted to our fate, thought of nothing but our great Creator. I believe that me and family was all that went to prayers in the ship, for the sailors were ‘damning their bloody eyes’ and cursing the ship all the time.
Captain Brooks was on deck all the time and God and him was our protectors.
When she lost her rudder he made them square the yards and run for the land and, as it was the will of God, she run in between two rocks and her bowsprit was over dry land. I heard Brooks say: ‘There is no danger now.’ He ordered the carpenter to stand by, with his broad axe in his hand. The moment she struck the shore the rigging was cut to windward, and two blows of the axe brought the main mast down and the top struck on the rock and the butt lay on her gunwale and kept her steady.
It was daylight by this time and if you was to see and hear the sailors bidding every one of the passengers to hand out the spirits and wine, it took the lead of every thing that I ever saw. There was a small boat lowered down in order to put the females ashore, and Sir Henry Hayes and his fancy man, with Matheson and Bellingham. They got in the boat and rowed off, but they had a narrow escape for their lives. Captain Brooks stayed on deck and sent down our kedge anchor and hawser and slung the accommodation chair, put a messenger to each side and we soon got down all the females. Mrs. Dune was the first, as she was within a few days of lying in, Mrs. Holt next, and son, till they were all safe landed. Then I put my old sick man and son down, then my care was the less.”
It was a damning account of the shipwreck; the drunkenness, greed, incompetence, negligence and lack of communication between Captain Higton and his crew caused the shipwreck. And on a personal note Holt’s account of Sir Henry’s cowardly behaviour, seizing and rowing off to save himself in the only lifeboat, abandoning weeping women and children was damming; it branded him a coward. Holt wrote; “There was a small boat lowered down in order to put the females ashore, and Sir Henry Hayes and his fancy man, with Matheson and Bellingham. They got in and rowed off, but they had a narrow escape for their lives.”[1] And while this was happening the crew of the ship had broken into the liquor supplies and got drunk."
But another account written at the time of the shipwreck, was by Captain Charles H Barnard of the American brig, the 'Nanina', a two masted ship, that had come to the rescue of the 'Isabella's' crew and passengers, and from their eyewitness accounts he collated the sequence of events that led to the shipwreck and complete destruction of the 'Isabella'.
His expert description of the wreck now stranded on the reef, with its mast resting on the shore together with the survivors accounts of what took on that fateful night, was first published in 1827 in America and it differed markedly to Holt's account. Like Holt, Barnard found Sir Henry’s actions in commandeering the lifeboat reprehensible but not in the way that Holt’s readers were led to believe that only one life boat was on board the ship; there were two and the larger lifeboat stood waiting to be launched.
The differences in Holt’s and Barnard’s account of the wreck was that Barnard a sailor, understood how and why the ‘Isabella’ was wrecked, whilst Holt’s inexpert account, demonstrated his lack of sailing knowledge and seamanship.
According to Barnard the night of the shipwreck was moonless, overcast, dark and blustery; with the ship blown off course and the sound of breakers very close. The first mate attempted to alert Captain Higton locked in his cabin, without success. The captain was when needed, drunk in bed with one of the five prostitutes returning to England. Fortunately Captain Brooks who was also travelling to England came on deck to see what was happening and immediately took command of the inexperienced crew. Because he was cold and wet he went below to his cabin to change of clothes just when the ship collided with a submerged rock. She had struck the outer part of the reef and tilted sharply over on the rock, snapped a mast, without the ship being holed. She was wedged there as panicked passengers rushed up on deck adding to the confusion as the 'Isabella' then slid slowly off and into deep water. The ship then drifted drifted towards the rocky shore. The confusion on board increased, Sir Henry however quickly lowered the small jolly boat into the sea and with Sam Breakwell, Mattison and two marines scrambled in and rowed to shore, leaving behind clamouring women and children. The ship in the meantime continued its drift to the rocky shore, struck another submerged reef, heeled over and remained on its side, firmly stuck as the tide went out, its unbroken mast almost touching the shore. On board the ship a drunken Ansell led several of his drunken mates on a rampage from cabin to cabin in search of liquor which they consumed on the spot. Early the next morning at low tide, with the ship lying almost dry on its side, the long boat was launched by the rest of the crew and the women and children were taken off together with stores and luggage, Maturing in the ship's hold were five pipes or casks of Madeira wine. Mattison the stowaway and his new friends found that the pipes were too large to haul up on deck, so he smashed a hole through the ship's bottom before any one could stop him and extract the pipes from there, effectively ruining the ship. For the next six days the weather remained calm during which time had the ship not been holed it could have been repaired and refloated. But Captain Higton, Mattison and the crew remained drunk for as long as the Madeira lasted. On the seventh day following the shipwreck, a gale blew up and and the sea flooded the hull and the ship was destroyed on the rocks. All the crew and passengers were now on the island. Sir Henry, Mattison and Captain Higton had joined forces and attempted to make the rest do their bidding. Captain Durie and his fourteen marines remained aloof from all this, while Joseph Holt disputed their assumed authority and was backed by Richard Brooks. Common sense eventually prevailed and Joseph Holt, Richard Brooks, Captain and Mrs Drurie became the natural leaders of the small community. Sir Henry remained in opposition to all they planned while Ansell and Captain Higton represented only themselves.
In defence of Sir Henry, the fact that the mast of the “Isabella” almost touched the shore and the crew were determined to get drunk, may have led him to believe that no one on board was in any danger. Sir Henry was an experienced sailor of small boats, John Grant on Sunday 28th April 1805, described in a letter to his mother how Sir Henry commuted between Sydney and Vaucluse; “Himself and Breakwell are gone down the Cove in his Boat, as they do every Sunday, to dine at his Farm 5 miles hence, beautifully situated and a most romantic spot at the Mouth of the Harbour”
Barnard also described how Sir Henry was popular with Mattison, Ansell and their drunken friends. It was something he found to understand.
The third eyewitness account of the wreck of the 'Isabella' is by Lieutenant Richard Lundin of the 73rd Regiment who was returning to England with despatches from the new Governor, Major General Lachlan Macquarrie. His version of the shipwreck is contained in his, 'Narrative of a Voyage from New South Wales in 1812-13.'
He said of the 'Isabella' that it was "exceedingly ill provided, both as to rigging and crew. The captain and mate at the same time possessing those dangerous propensities in seamen-drunkeness and laziness. The ship was very much overloaded, the passengers and crew amounted to fifty-two."
Ludlin continued with the description of the ship's first collision with a reef and how she lost her rudder and appeared to drift towards another reef. This happened between eleven and twelve o'clock at night. It was at this stage that Ludlin, Sir Henry, Matteson, Sam Breakwell and two marines lowered the small jolly boat into the sea in case the ship sank. This done, Ludlin went to help others in the darkness and confusion. It was then that he heard Sir Henry cry out in alarm and the others cry for help and found them sitting in the sinking jolly boat. Sir Henry had forgotten to plug the open plughole and water was rapidly filling the boat in spite of their frantic bailing. The ship's carpenter standing near by informed Ludlin where to find the boat's plug hole. Ludlin shouted this information down to Sir Henry who then found the hole and plugged it. As the boat was rowed to shore it was followed by angry shouts of abuse from the women and children. About two o'clock at night the drifting ship again struck rocks and remained stuck. . Captain Higton was still drunk and incapable of assessing the situation and Captain Brooks took charge again of the rescue bid. Because the tide was high the ship had fortunately floated closer to shore and Brooks ordered he remaining mast be chopped down so that it fell towards the shore. The long boat was then launched piled high with supplies and beached.
And then from Holt’s description of the wreck, no one panicked or felt that they were in grave danger of drowning and thus took their time to get off, except for Sir Henry who grew impatient and rowed off in the unattended boat.
Allen Crosbie, a retired Lieutenant Commander in the R.N, suggested that Sir Henry probably rowed to shore carrying a “messenger” or light rope attached to a heavy rope which was part of the jackstay transfer. He did this to help those still on board to transfer safely to shore. He also suspected that Captain Brooks who took charge of the rescue probably used a jackstay transfer to get everyone off.[i] Crosbie reasoned “” that Sir Henry went off in the boat, leaving the women and children onboard with good reasons for doing so. I believe that Holt misunderstood the reason why Sir Henry and the boat full of men “abandoned” the shipwreck despite the fact that there was no immediate danger of it sinking or breaking apart.. The urgent problem was to prevent the “Isabella” drifting away and that meant laying out a kedge anchor. It also provided a much safer method of getting goods and the women passengers ashore
According to Holt, the kedge anchor was put over the stern to prevent the 'Isabella' going further ashore. A possible explanation was that Brooke was frightened that the waves would turn the Isabella sideways on to the shore and pound her to pieces on the rocks. His action in bringing down the mainmast on the lee side would also have helped to prevented this. Holt also stated that Brookes used a bosun’s chair to get the women ashore dry shod. At least the bowsprit was over dry land. This would suggest that the beach was steep and therefore the area amount of hull in contact with the shore was minimal. The risk of the ship re-floating or being turned broadside on was consequently very great.
What was the point of launching the skiff? And it is difficult to see why its short trip to the shore, with the' Isabella' acting as a breakwater, should have proved to be dangerous. If there was a measure of risk involved then better to make the first attempt with a small all male crew rather than include pregnant female passengers. Lundin, who seems to have initiated the idea of launching the skiff, was the Lieutenant in charge of the soldiers, and not a seaman. There is no suggestion that Brookes approved. It may simply have been a silly idea, and Sir Henry who knew about boats, realised this.[ii]
David Miller in his the “Wreck of the Isabella” surmised that Sir Henry’s seizing the only launched lifeboat,, was the despicable act of a coward.[iii] (p 23)
“ On the seventh of February we came in sight of Falklands Islands. Hicton thought to have passed the north side of the islands, leaving the mainland on our left hand and the islands on our right. He found he could not weather the north cape and were obliged to tack about and had a fair wind going—eight knots a hour.
He got drunk and came in my cabin, sat down. Mrs Holt put a bottle of rum on the table, and he and I took a glass of grog and began to speak about our next harbour. Hicton said he would not let any man know where he was going till he would come to anchor, and further said if the ship would be sunk and all the souls perish who was to be responsible only him? I looked at him very earnest and said there would be no occasion for any responsibility if all perished as there would be no one to prosecute. He went out of my cabin into Mrs Bindal’s cabin and went to bed and, about two oclock in the morning, he went on deck and altered our course four points and led us in between New Island and Sybil Jason and straight for Eagle.Island.”
About three o’clock the alarm was given on deck: ‘Rocks on one side and land on the other.’ Breakers mountains high, that is the waves breaking on the rocks. 1 bounced out of my cot, and Mrs Holt. We dressed ourselves and I was going on deck but my wife would not let me go, she made me to rise our son and then we went to our knees imploring God for his mercy and assistance. In a few minutes the ship gave a great jolt on rock and, in a moment after, she lost her rudder. My poor wife got the child between us both and said: ‘Let us all link in each other’s arms and go to our watery graves.’ Tears of sorrow ran down our cheeks. We submitted to our fate, thought of nothing but our great Creator. I believe that me and family was all that went to prayers in the ship, for the sailors were ‘damning their bloody eyes’ and cursing the ship all the time.
Captain Brooks was on deck all the time and God and him was our protectors.
When she lost her rudder he made them square the yards and run for the land and, as it was the will of God, she run in between two rocks and her bowsprit was over dry land. I heard Brooks say: ‘There is no danger now.’ He ordered the carpenter to stand by, with his broad axe in his hand. The moment she struck the shore the rigging was cut to windward, and two blows of the axe brought the main mast down and the top struck on the rock and the butt lay on her gunwale and kept her steady.
It was daylight by this time and if you was to see and hear the sailors bidding every one of the passengers to hand out the spirits and wine, it took the lead of every thing that I ever saw. There was a small boat lowered down in order to put the females ashore, and Sir Henry Hayes and his fancy man, with Matheson and Bellingham. They got in the boat and rowed off, but they had a narrow escape for their lives. Captain Brooks stayed on deck and sent down our kedge anchor and hawser and slung the accommodation chair, put a messenger to each side and we soon got down all the females. Mrs. Dune was the first, as she was within a few days of lying in, Mrs. Holt next, and son, till they were all safe landed. Then I put my old sick man and son down, then my care was the less.”
It was a damning account of the shipwreck; the drunkenness, greed, incompetence, negligence and lack of communication between Captain Higton and his crew caused the shipwreck. And on a personal note Holt’s account of Sir Henry’s cowardly behaviour, seizing and rowing off to save himself in the only lifeboat, abandoning weeping women and children was damming; it branded him a coward. Holt wrote; “There was a small boat lowered down in order to put the females ashore, and Sir Henry Hayes and his fancy man, with Matheson and Bellingham. They got in and rowed off, but they had a narrow escape for their lives.”[1] And while this was happening the crew of the ship had broken into the liquor supplies and got drunk."
But another account written at the time of the shipwreck, was by Captain Charles H Barnard of the American brig, the 'Nanina', a two masted ship, that had come to the rescue of the 'Isabella's' crew and passengers, and from their eyewitness accounts he collated the sequence of events that led to the shipwreck and complete destruction of the 'Isabella'.
His expert description of the wreck now stranded on the reef, with its mast resting on the shore together with the survivors accounts of what took on that fateful night, was first published in 1827 in America and it differed markedly to Holt's account. Like Holt, Barnard found Sir Henry’s actions in commandeering the lifeboat reprehensible but not in the way that Holt’s readers were led to believe that only one life boat was on board the ship; there were two and the larger lifeboat stood waiting to be launched.
The differences in Holt’s and Barnard’s account of the wreck was that Barnard a sailor, understood how and why the ‘Isabella’ was wrecked, whilst Holt’s inexpert account, demonstrated his lack of sailing knowledge and seamanship.
According to Barnard the night of the shipwreck was moonless, overcast, dark and blustery; with the ship blown off course and the sound of breakers very close. The first mate attempted to alert Captain Higton locked in his cabin, without success. The captain was when needed, drunk in bed with one of the five prostitutes returning to England. Fortunately Captain Brooks who was also travelling to England came on deck to see what was happening and immediately took command of the inexperienced crew. Because he was cold and wet he went below to his cabin to change of clothes just when the ship collided with a submerged rock. She had struck the outer part of the reef and tilted sharply over on the rock, snapped a mast, without the ship being holed. She was wedged there as panicked passengers rushed up on deck adding to the confusion as the 'Isabella' then slid slowly off and into deep water. The ship then drifted drifted towards the rocky shore. The confusion on board increased, Sir Henry however quickly lowered the small jolly boat into the sea and with Sam Breakwell, Mattison and two marines scrambled in and rowed to shore, leaving behind clamouring women and children. The ship in the meantime continued its drift to the rocky shore, struck another submerged reef, heeled over and remained on its side, firmly stuck as the tide went out, its unbroken mast almost touching the shore. On board the ship a drunken Ansell led several of his drunken mates on a rampage from cabin to cabin in search of liquor which they consumed on the spot. Early the next morning at low tide, with the ship lying almost dry on its side, the long boat was launched by the rest of the crew and the women and children were taken off together with stores and luggage, Maturing in the ship's hold were five pipes or casks of Madeira wine. Mattison the stowaway and his new friends found that the pipes were too large to haul up on deck, so he smashed a hole through the ship's bottom before any one could stop him and extract the pipes from there, effectively ruining the ship. For the next six days the weather remained calm during which time had the ship not been holed it could have been repaired and refloated. But Captain Higton, Mattison and the crew remained drunk for as long as the Madeira lasted. On the seventh day following the shipwreck, a gale blew up and and the sea flooded the hull and the ship was destroyed on the rocks. All the crew and passengers were now on the island. Sir Henry, Mattison and Captain Higton had joined forces and attempted to make the rest do their bidding. Captain Durie and his fourteen marines remained aloof from all this, while Joseph Holt disputed their assumed authority and was backed by Richard Brooks. Common sense eventually prevailed and Joseph Holt, Richard Brooks, Captain and Mrs Drurie became the natural leaders of the small community. Sir Henry remained in opposition to all they planned while Ansell and Captain Higton represented only themselves.
In defence of Sir Henry, the fact that the mast of the “Isabella” almost touched the shore and the crew were determined to get drunk, may have led him to believe that no one on board was in any danger. Sir Henry was an experienced sailor of small boats, John Grant on Sunday 28th April 1805, described in a letter to his mother how Sir Henry commuted between Sydney and Vaucluse; “Himself and Breakwell are gone down the Cove in his Boat, as they do every Sunday, to dine at his Farm 5 miles hence, beautifully situated and a most romantic spot at the Mouth of the Harbour”
Barnard also described how Sir Henry was popular with Mattison, Ansell and their drunken friends. It was something he found to understand.
The third eyewitness account of the wreck of the 'Isabella' is by Lieutenant Richard Lundin of the 73rd Regiment who was returning to England with despatches from the new Governor, Major General Lachlan Macquarrie. His version of the shipwreck is contained in his, 'Narrative of a Voyage from New South Wales in 1812-13.'
He said of the 'Isabella' that it was "exceedingly ill provided, both as to rigging and crew. The captain and mate at the same time possessing those dangerous propensities in seamen-drunkeness and laziness. The ship was very much overloaded, the passengers and crew amounted to fifty-two."
Ludlin continued with the description of the ship's first collision with a reef and how she lost her rudder and appeared to drift towards another reef. This happened between eleven and twelve o'clock at night. It was at this stage that Ludlin, Sir Henry, Matteson, Sam Breakwell and two marines lowered the small jolly boat into the sea in case the ship sank. This done, Ludlin went to help others in the darkness and confusion. It was then that he heard Sir Henry cry out in alarm and the others cry for help and found them sitting in the sinking jolly boat. Sir Henry had forgotten to plug the open plughole and water was rapidly filling the boat in spite of their frantic bailing. The ship's carpenter standing near by informed Ludlin where to find the boat's plug hole. Ludlin shouted this information down to Sir Henry who then found the hole and plugged it. As the boat was rowed to shore it was followed by angry shouts of abuse from the women and children. About two o'clock at night the drifting ship again struck rocks and remained stuck. . Captain Higton was still drunk and incapable of assessing the situation and Captain Brooks took charge again of the rescue bid. Because the tide was high the ship had fortunately floated closer to shore and Brooks ordered he remaining mast be chopped down so that it fell towards the shore. The long boat was then launched piled high with supplies and beached.
And then from Holt’s description of the wreck, no one panicked or felt that they were in grave danger of drowning and thus took their time to get off, except for Sir Henry who grew impatient and rowed off in the unattended boat.
Allen Crosbie, a retired Lieutenant Commander in the R.N, suggested that Sir Henry probably rowed to shore carrying a “messenger” or light rope attached to a heavy rope which was part of the jackstay transfer. He did this to help those still on board to transfer safely to shore. He also suspected that Captain Brooks who took charge of the rescue probably used a jackstay transfer to get everyone off.[i] Crosbie reasoned “” that Sir Henry went off in the boat, leaving the women and children onboard with good reasons for doing so. I believe that Holt misunderstood the reason why Sir Henry and the boat full of men “abandoned” the shipwreck despite the fact that there was no immediate danger of it sinking or breaking apart.. The urgent problem was to prevent the “Isabella” drifting away and that meant laying out a kedge anchor. It also provided a much safer method of getting goods and the women passengers ashore
According to Holt, the kedge anchor was put over the stern to prevent the 'Isabella' going further ashore. A possible explanation was that Brooke was frightened that the waves would turn the Isabella sideways on to the shore and pound her to pieces on the rocks. His action in bringing down the mainmast on the lee side would also have helped to prevented this. Holt also stated that Brookes used a bosun’s chair to get the women ashore dry shod. At least the bowsprit was over dry land. This would suggest that the beach was steep and therefore the area amount of hull in contact with the shore was minimal. The risk of the ship re-floating or being turned broadside on was consequently very great.
What was the point of launching the skiff? And it is difficult to see why its short trip to the shore, with the' Isabella' acting as a breakwater, should have proved to be dangerous. If there was a measure of risk involved then better to make the first attempt with a small all male crew rather than include pregnant female passengers. Lundin, who seems to have initiated the idea of launching the skiff, was the Lieutenant in charge of the soldiers, and not a seaman. There is no suggestion that Brookes approved. It may simply have been a silly idea, and Sir Henry who knew about boats, realised this.[ii]
David Miller in his the “Wreck of the Isabella” surmised that Sir Henry’s seizing the only launched lifeboat,, was the despicable act of a coward.[iii] (p 23)
The position of the 'Isabella's' mast.
Captain Barnard's sketch of the 'Isabella' lying on its side
The mast of the 'Isabella' is shown as almost touching the beach.
Once the “Isabella’s” crew had sobered up from its massive drunken binge, all agreed that some form of organization had to be brought into their little community in order to maintain discipline and morale; a committee was elected which included Captain Brooks, Joseph Holt, Captain Durie, Lieutenant Durie, George Higton and Sir Henry. Responsibility was delegated for various essential tasks such as taking care of essential supplies rescued from the “Isabella”, a guard to keep watch over the stores especially of liquor A set of regulations was drawn up and presented to the castaways; it was unanimously accepted and every adult person signed the document.
Holt led by example and was soon followed by others. Durable huts were constructed with timber rescued from the “Isabella” and so community order was achieved and maintained; only Ansell and Mattison made trouble especially when drunk and so were carefully watched. Captain Brooks estimated the “Isabella’s” geographical position and concluded that they were far too far off the normal shipping routes to be found and insisted that they should find help. This was agreed to and with Captain Brooks in charge they fitted the “Isabella’s” long boat with a mast and sail and a crew to sail her. Captain Higton was deemed to be too unreliable to undertake the task. Once the “Isabella’s” crew had sobered up from its massive drunken binge, all agreed that some form of organization had to be brought into their little community in order to maintain discipline and morale; a committee was elected which included Captain Brooks, Joseph Holt, Captain Durie, Lieutenant Durie, George Higton and Sir Henry. Responsibility was delegated for various essential tasks such as taking care of essential supplies rescued from the “Isabella”, a guard to keep watch over the stores especially of liquor A set of regulations was drawn up and presented to the castaways; it was unanimously accepted and every adult person signed the document.
Sir Henry desperate to get off the island volunteered to help crew her because he had boating experience; six marines supported his nomination but he was opposed by the rest of the castaways. Sir Henry who hated to be told what to do unless he gave the orders had made himself unpopular by disagreeing on most issues and arguing with the committee and thus disqualified himself from manning the boat. Only the six marines sided with him probably because they regarded him a knight and a ‘gentleman’ and therefore a trustworthy person. In the end it was left to Captain Brooks to choose his crew and he omitted Sir Henry. Brooks plan was to sail north up the Falklands Sound and to Port Egmond but if that failed, continue in a north westerly direction to reach the mainland.
Fortunately for the castaways there was plenty of fresh water and game on the island; geese and elephant seals. The name of the island they later found out was Eagle Island.
The ever practical Holt had constructed a comfortable hut for himself and his family using timber taken from the “Isabella” and soon other groups followed suit. Sir Henry and Sam Breakwell had also constructed a shelter and once more Sir Henry discovered that his title and money were of no use to him. His worth as a person in the small community was now judged by what contribution he made to it. And because he had so little to offer in skills and expertise, his relationship with Sam Breakwell became strained. Both men were now equal in the castaway community.
Mattison in the meantime became impatient with his situation and decided that he too should try to reach civilization by fitting out and sailing the ship’s small jolly boat. He convinced four others to accompany him. Rather than talking Mattison out of his venture the castaways agreed that it was better to let him try than have him remain on the island and make a nuisance of himself.
After sixty three days on the island on the 4th April 1813 a ship was sighted, it was the American brig, the “Nanina”. Its captain was the twenty nine year old Charles Barnard who commanded a crew of thirteen seal hunters and when he saw the wrecked “Isabella” and the castaways he came to their aid. An observant man, Barnard made a pencil sketch of the “Isabella” as it lay on the rocks with its bowsprit on the beach.
Captain Barnard offered to take the castaways back to civilization on condition that they waive all claims to the wreck and cargo. Negotiations then took place with most of the castaways agreeing to his conditions anxious to be returned to civilization, with Sir Henry and Captain Higton objecting; Sir Henry suggested that Captain Durie and his marines overpower the Americans and sail their ahips to safety but decency and common sense prevailed among the castaways and his plan was rejected It was at this stage that [iv] Captain Barnard informed them that Britain was at war with America and he gave Sir Henry and Captain Higton the choice of agreeing to his salvage terms or remain on the island; Sir Henry and Higton reluctantly agreed to his conditions. Four days later they sailed from the island and on the way found Mattison and his crew in the jolly boat who by now were hungry and very much the worse for wear.
Then the armed British Gun Brig, the “Nancy” found them and seized Captain Barnard’s “Nanina” and her shallop as war prizes because, Britain and America were at war. Preparations were then made for the 'Nanina', the 'Nancy' and the shallop to sail north; the “Nancy” to the river Plate and resume her duties there with the Brazil squadron, while the “Nanina” with the remaining castaways was to sail to England. Sir Henry chose to leave on the “Nancy” without Sam Breakwell, after an apparent falling out. The ‘Nancy’ departed Eagle Island on the 27th July 1813 and arrived at Buenos Ayres on the 19th August 1813. The ‘Nanina’ now a British war prize left Eagle Island on the 27th July 1813 and arrived at Rio de Janeiro on the 23rdAugust 1813 carrying Samuel Breakwell, Joseph Holt and his family. This was the first time in nine years that Sir Henry and Sam Breakwell had separated. Their close friendship had ended on the island and one can only speculate on the reason
Once the “Isabella’s” crew had sobered up from its massive drunken binge, all agreed that some form of organization had to be brought into their little community in order to maintain discipline and morale; a committee was elected which included Captain Brooks, Joseph Holt, Captain Durie, Lieutenant Durie, George Higton and Sir Henry. Responsibility was delegated for various essential tasks such as taking care of essential supplies rescued from the “Isabella”, a guard to keep watch over the stores especially of liquor A set of regulations was drawn up and presented to the castaways; it was unanimously accepted and every adult person signed the document.
Holt led by example and was soon followed by others. Durable huts were constructed with timber rescued from the “Isabella” and so community order was achieved and maintained; only Ansell and Mattison made trouble especially when drunk and so were carefully watched. Captain Brooks estimated the “Isabella’s” geographical position and concluded that they were far too far off the normal shipping routes to be found and insisted that they should find help. This was agreed to and with Captain Brooks in charge they fitted the “Isabella’s” long boat with a mast and sail and a crew to sail her. Captain Higton was deemed to be too unreliable to undertake the task. Once the “Isabella’s” crew had sobered up from its massive drunken binge, all agreed that some form of organization had to be brought into their little community in order to maintain discipline and morale; a committee was elected which included Captain Brooks, Joseph Holt, Captain Durie, Lieutenant Durie, George Higton and Sir Henry. Responsibility was delegated for various essential tasks such as taking care of essential supplies rescued from the “Isabella”, a guard to keep watch over the stores especially of liquor A set of regulations was drawn up and presented to the castaways; it was unanimously accepted and every adult person signed the document.
Sir Henry desperate to get off the island volunteered to help crew her because he had boating experience; six marines supported his nomination but he was opposed by the rest of the castaways. Sir Henry who hated to be told what to do unless he gave the orders had made himself unpopular by disagreeing on most issues and arguing with the committee and thus disqualified himself from manning the boat. Only the six marines sided with him probably because they regarded him a knight and a ‘gentleman’ and therefore a trustworthy person. In the end it was left to Captain Brooks to choose his crew and he omitted Sir Henry. Brooks plan was to sail north up the Falklands Sound and to Port Egmond but if that failed, continue in a north westerly direction to reach the mainland.
Fortunately for the castaways there was plenty of fresh water and game on the island; geese and elephant seals. The name of the island they later found out was Eagle Island.
The ever practical Holt had constructed a comfortable hut for himself and his family using timber taken from the “Isabella” and soon other groups followed suit. Sir Henry and Sam Breakwell had also constructed a shelter and once more Sir Henry discovered that his title and money were of no use to him. His worth as a person in the small community was now judged by what contribution he made to it. And because he had so little to offer in skills and expertise, his relationship with Sam Breakwell became strained. Both men were now equal in the castaway community.
Mattison in the meantime became impatient with his situation and decided that he too should try to reach civilization by fitting out and sailing the ship’s small jolly boat. He convinced four others to accompany him. Rather than talking Mattison out of his venture the castaways agreed that it was better to let him try than have him remain on the island and make a nuisance of himself.
After sixty three days on the island on the 4th April 1813 a ship was sighted, it was the American brig, the “Nanina”. Its captain was the twenty nine year old Charles Barnard who commanded a crew of thirteen seal hunters and when he saw the wrecked “Isabella” and the castaways he came to their aid. An observant man, Barnard made a pencil sketch of the “Isabella” as it lay on the rocks with its bowsprit on the beach.
Captain Barnard offered to take the castaways back to civilization on condition that they waive all claims to the wreck and cargo. Negotiations then took place with most of the castaways agreeing to his conditions anxious to be returned to civilization, with Sir Henry and Captain Higton objecting; Sir Henry suggested that Captain Durie and his marines overpower the Americans and sail their ahips to safety but decency and common sense prevailed among the castaways and his plan was rejected It was at this stage that [iv] Captain Barnard informed them that Britain was at war with America and he gave Sir Henry and Captain Higton the choice of agreeing to his salvage terms or remain on the island; Sir Henry and Higton reluctantly agreed to his conditions. Four days later they sailed from the island and on the way found Mattison and his crew in the jolly boat who by now were hungry and very much the worse for wear.
Then the armed British Gun Brig, the “Nancy” found them and seized Captain Barnard’s “Nanina” and her shallop as war prizes because, Britain and America were at war. Preparations were then made for the 'Nanina', the 'Nancy' and the shallop to sail north; the “Nancy” to the river Plate and resume her duties there with the Brazil squadron, while the “Nanina” with the remaining castaways was to sail to England. Sir Henry chose to leave on the “Nancy” without Sam Breakwell, after an apparent falling out. The ‘Nancy’ departed Eagle Island on the 27th July 1813 and arrived at Buenos Ayres on the 19th August 1813. The ‘Nanina’ now a British war prize left Eagle Island on the 27th July 1813 and arrived at Rio de Janeiro on the 23rdAugust 1813 carrying Samuel Breakwell, Joseph Holt and his family. This was the first time in nine years that Sir Henry and Sam Breakwell had separated. Their close friendship had ended on the island and one can only speculate on the reason
Home
Christ Church Cork
where Sir Henry is buried
Sir Henry and Joseph Holt eventually reached Dublin on July 1814. Watty Cox cleverly described their homecoming thus in his magazine; “General Holt and Sir H.B.Hayes. These two eminent gentlemen have arrived from Botany Bay. The general has commenced the trade of publican in Kevin Street; the Knight lives on his money at 35 Dawson Street It is singular enough that the two were transported for the Pike business. Sir Henry was transported for stealing a Pike, and the General for bestowing Pikes.”
For a time Sir Henry remained in Dublin at No.35 Dawson Street. During his absence his oldest son Atwell had taken a degree at Trinity, and in 1810 had married the daughter of Alderman John Shaw and settled at ‘Vernon Mount’. Sir Henry according to one family version joined them there. And by 1820 Sir Henry was back in Cork at Thomas Street where he continued to live “on his money”.
He died there on the 13th April, 1832 and was buried in his father’s vault in Christ Church. At that time he was still in comfortable circumstances leaving £3,230 to his heirs, a significant amount in those days.
But there is also the sad story cited by Hugh Anderson in the Irish Book Lover of 1913, of a blind Sir Henry sitting outside his house and asking passers by to move him into the sunshine.
i] ibid., p60
91 .(A.C email 13/1/ 2004)
The obituary
Notice of Sir Henry's death.
Sir Henry’s obituary was printed in the Cork Constitution of 1832 and probably placed there by one of his children. It stated that he died at his residence in Grantham Hill after a long illness and went on to say: “The suavity and gentlemanly manner he possessed made him endeared to every person who had the honour of his acquaintance.”
His burial was recorded in the Register of Christ Church, Cork on the 16 th April 1832, and he was buried in the Hayes Vault in the Crypt of the church.
[
His burial was recorded in the Register of Christ Church, Cork on the 16 th April 1832, and he was buried in the Hayes Vault in the Crypt of the church.
[
The Coffins in the Crypt
The position of the coffins in the Hayes vault in the crypt of Christ Church.
Sketched by Michael O'Leary
The story of Maurice and Michael Fitzgerald
The Bull Run at Wexford
THE IRISH TROUBLES
Maurice and Michael Fitzgerald’s were Catholic and because of their religion, their family in Ireland had been forced by the Irish court to forfeit the ownership of their ancestral land to a member of the Protestant Ascendancy[iv] and so the boys were forced to work on their land as a tenant farmer. Maurice disgusted by this unjust law left the property when he was twenty and struck out on his own. In 1788 he took up a lease hold near Youghal in County Cork and worked it on his own and waited for Michael to join him once he turned sixteen. By 1787 both brothers had enough; they realized that working someone else’s land and paying for that privilege was senseless so when the opportunity presented itself they accepted paid work on Jon O’Briens estate. Maurice became his steward and young Michael an apprentice to a boot maker and saddler. Soon Maurice rose to become the senior estate officer, collected rents from tenants and kept the estate accounts.
With the advent of the revolution in France in 1793, and the cry of “liberte, egalite, fratarnite” a group of Irish intellectuals formed themselves into the “Society of United Irishmen” and took up the same cry. The government realized the danger and quickly set out to suppress that movement but drove it underground; it then introduced the “Insurrection Act” which made belonging to such a secret society a capital offence. The failed French invasion of Ireland caused the British administration to take swift and decisive actions. To counter the influence of the “Society of United Irishmen” they formed citizen militias who together with the army hunted down suspected United Irishmen. Sir Henry joined such a militia, Lord Doneraille’s South Cork Militia and served in it as a Lieutenant. One of their roles was to carry out house to house searches for arms and round up suspected United Irish collaborators. One such suspect was the Lord Edward Fitzgerald, the MP for County Kildare who taken the ‘United Irish Oath’ and had recently visited Paris to talk with the authorities. Now months after the aborted French invasion of Ireland, Maurice who was living a quiet life remained clear of politics but still was arrested as a suspected ‘United Irishman’, probably because his name was also Fitzgerald. Maurice was thrown into Bridwell Prison in Cork City[iv] where he waited for his trial without knowing the nature of the charge against him. When at last he faced a judge, he was charged with the murder of a Dick Morgan. After hearing the fabricated evidence of a so called ”witness” the judge dismissed the case but Maurice was kept in custody because there were still other charges against him to be heard. Several days later Maurice was back in the same courtroom, this time to face the charge of having stolen his employer’s horse and having sold it. According to Maurice the horse whilst in his care had been stolen from outside an inn whilst Maurice was having a drink inside. He was found guilty of theft and sentenced to hang. His employer Jon O’Brien made every effort to have the verdict commuted because he believed Maurice to be innocent of the charge. A very angry Michael in the meantime had joined the ‘United Irish’. Lord Edward Fitzgerald in the meantime narrowly escaped arrest when betrayed by one of his own men while on his way to join the operational leaders of the Irish rebellion. For the next months Lord Edward traveled around Ireland in disguise, organizing the revolt but was once more betrayed and caught on the 19th May. As soldiers went to arrest him, Lord Edward tried to fight them off with a dagger and was subsequently shot twice through the shoulder. His wounds festered and on the 4th June he died from septicemia.
On May 26th the feared rebellion began in Wexford and the government sent in the North Cork militia to subdue them. It proved to be a disaster for the militia for it was overwhelmed and annihilated by a much larger rebel force numbering about 130 000 leaving Wexford, Enniscorthy and Gorey in rebel hands. Michael Fitzgerald who had joined the rebels in New Ross was now engaged in defending Ross and Mid Lothian against the British. It was an inconclusive battle and Michael retreated with the remaining rebels to a new strategic position, a place called Vinegar Hill. On the morning of June 20th, the British General, Gerard Lake surrounded the 20 000 rebels on Vinegar Hill and began to shell them with canon. Soon 2000 ‘United Irish’ rebels lay dead unable to protect themselves on the exposed hill from the deadly cannonade. And every time they charged down with their pikes towards the canons they were cut down by musket fire. Fortunately for the rebels, General Lake left an open corridor which allowed some rebels to escape among whom Michael Fitzgerald was one. The escaping rebels retreated north to Wicklow to where “General” Joseph Holt’s forces were hiding in the mountains. Holt a Protestant farmer had joined the rebellion when loyalist yeomen had burnt down his house after he was accused of being a ‘United Irish’ sympathizer by a man who owed him money. Holt sought out his accuser burnt his house down. Then as an outlaw more familiar with the mountains than the loyalist enemy, he gathered around him more than ten thousand like minded men and women and organized them into an army. Over the next year Holt and his army fought the British and burned down more than 400 of their supporter’s houses. But the rebellion against the British in Ireland faltered coming soon after the failed French invasion and defeats in the field. By the end of summer more than thirty thousand rebels had been killed and the war for independence was lost. The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland then offered an amnesty to the rebels if the laid down their arms.
Joseph Holt fighting from the Wicklow Mountains realized that with winter approaching and the coming heavy snow falls, fighting a superior enemy would only result in the defeat and misery to his followers. And so he surrendered with most of his army to Lord Powerscourt on the 10th November 1798 on the understanding that he was to be shipped off to America with his family. But once in custody Holt was taken to the ‘Pidgeon House’, the fort that commanded Dublin Bay and locked up in a cell while awaiting exile. Michael Fitzgerald and others from Holt’s army who had accepted the amnesty were seized, summarily convicted of rebellion and locked up in Wexford gaol. They had to wait for months before it was decided how to deal with them. In the meantime Maurice Fitzgerald was locked up in Bridewell Prison and awaiting execution, had his hopes raised by a petition presented by his employer Jon O’Brien to Lord Lieutenant Cornwallis asking him to have the death sentence commuted. The petition was successful and at the end of January 1799 Maurice’s death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment to be served in the penal colony of New South Wales.[iv] Several days later he was transferred in chains to the 558 ton prison ship, the “Minerva” anchored at the Cove of Cork from where several months it sailed.
Joseph Holt had also been transferred from his ‘Pidgeon House’ prison to a boat; its destination the Cove of Cork. It stopped briefly at Wexford to pick up more Wicklow rebels including Michael before continuing on to the Cove of Cork where they were transferred to the “Minerva” and there Michael and Maurice were once again reunited. The “Minerva” set sail from the Cove in Cork for New South Wales on the 24th August 1799 and entered Port Jackson on the 11th January 1800, after 140 days.
The officer in charge of the prisoners for the journey was the recently promoted Captain William Cox who had volunteered to serve in New South Wales because it entitled him on arrival to a land grant of 100 acres. Also included in the land grant was the use of free convict labour to work it. All Cox needed was someone to manage his land and Joseph Holt turned out to be the person to do so.
When the colonial community discovered that many of the prisoners on the “Minerva” were Irish rebels who had fought at Vinegar Hill, efforts were made to disperse them around the colony and allay settler unease. The New South Wales Corps was undermanned, down to 500 troopers, half the force required to guard the ever increasing number of convicts, fuelling fears of an Irish rebellion.[iv]
Maurice and Michael Fitzgerald’s were Catholic and because of their religion, their family in Ireland had been forced by the Irish court to forfeit the ownership of their ancestral land to a member of the Protestant Ascendancy[iv] and so the boys were forced to work on their land as a tenant farmer. Maurice disgusted by this unjust law left the property when he was twenty and struck out on his own. In 1788 he took up a lease hold near Youghal in County Cork and worked it on his own and waited for Michael to join him once he turned sixteen. By 1787 both brothers had enough; they realized that working someone else’s land and paying for that privilege was senseless so when the opportunity presented itself they accepted paid work on Jon O’Briens estate. Maurice became his steward and young Michael an apprentice to a boot maker and saddler. Soon Maurice rose to become the senior estate officer, collected rents from tenants and kept the estate accounts.
With the advent of the revolution in France in 1793, and the cry of “liberte, egalite, fratarnite” a group of Irish intellectuals formed themselves into the “Society of United Irishmen” and took up the same cry. The government realized the danger and quickly set out to suppress that movement but drove it underground; it then introduced the “Insurrection Act” which made belonging to such a secret society a capital offence. The failed French invasion of Ireland caused the British administration to take swift and decisive actions. To counter the influence of the “Society of United Irishmen” they formed citizen militias who together with the army hunted down suspected United Irishmen. Sir Henry joined such a militia, Lord Doneraille’s South Cork Militia and served in it as a Lieutenant. One of their roles was to carry out house to house searches for arms and round up suspected United Irish collaborators. One such suspect was the Lord Edward Fitzgerald, the MP for County Kildare who taken the ‘United Irish Oath’ and had recently visited Paris to talk with the authorities. Now months after the aborted French invasion of Ireland, Maurice who was living a quiet life remained clear of politics but still was arrested as a suspected ‘United Irishman’, probably because his name was also Fitzgerald. Maurice was thrown into Bridwell Prison in Cork City[iv] where he waited for his trial without knowing the nature of the charge against him. When at last he faced a judge, he was charged with the murder of a Dick Morgan. After hearing the fabricated evidence of a so called ”witness” the judge dismissed the case but Maurice was kept in custody because there were still other charges against him to be heard. Several days later Maurice was back in the same courtroom, this time to face the charge of having stolen his employer’s horse and having sold it. According to Maurice the horse whilst in his care had been stolen from outside an inn whilst Maurice was having a drink inside. He was found guilty of theft and sentenced to hang. His employer Jon O’Brien made every effort to have the verdict commuted because he believed Maurice to be innocent of the charge. A very angry Michael in the meantime had joined the ‘United Irish’. Lord Edward Fitzgerald in the meantime narrowly escaped arrest when betrayed by one of his own men while on his way to join the operational leaders of the Irish rebellion. For the next months Lord Edward traveled around Ireland in disguise, organizing the revolt but was once more betrayed and caught on the 19th May. As soldiers went to arrest him, Lord Edward tried to fight them off with a dagger and was subsequently shot twice through the shoulder. His wounds festered and on the 4th June he died from septicemia.
On May 26th the feared rebellion began in Wexford and the government sent in the North Cork militia to subdue them. It proved to be a disaster for the militia for it was overwhelmed and annihilated by a much larger rebel force numbering about 130 000 leaving Wexford, Enniscorthy and Gorey in rebel hands. Michael Fitzgerald who had joined the rebels in New Ross was now engaged in defending Ross and Mid Lothian against the British. It was an inconclusive battle and Michael retreated with the remaining rebels to a new strategic position, a place called Vinegar Hill. On the morning of June 20th, the British General, Gerard Lake surrounded the 20 000 rebels on Vinegar Hill and began to shell them with canon. Soon 2000 ‘United Irish’ rebels lay dead unable to protect themselves on the exposed hill from the deadly cannonade. And every time they charged down with their pikes towards the canons they were cut down by musket fire. Fortunately for the rebels, General Lake left an open corridor which allowed some rebels to escape among whom Michael Fitzgerald was one. The escaping rebels retreated north to Wicklow to where “General” Joseph Holt’s forces were hiding in the mountains. Holt a Protestant farmer had joined the rebellion when loyalist yeomen had burnt down his house after he was accused of being a ‘United Irish’ sympathizer by a man who owed him money. Holt sought out his accuser burnt his house down. Then as an outlaw more familiar with the mountains than the loyalist enemy, he gathered around him more than ten thousand like minded men and women and organized them into an army. Over the next year Holt and his army fought the British and burned down more than 400 of their supporter’s houses. But the rebellion against the British in Ireland faltered coming soon after the failed French invasion and defeats in the field. By the end of summer more than thirty thousand rebels had been killed and the war for independence was lost. The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland then offered an amnesty to the rebels if the laid down their arms.
Joseph Holt fighting from the Wicklow Mountains realized that with winter approaching and the coming heavy snow falls, fighting a superior enemy would only result in the defeat and misery to his followers. And so he surrendered with most of his army to Lord Powerscourt on the 10th November 1798 on the understanding that he was to be shipped off to America with his family. But once in custody Holt was taken to the ‘Pidgeon House’, the fort that commanded Dublin Bay and locked up in a cell while awaiting exile. Michael Fitzgerald and others from Holt’s army who had accepted the amnesty were seized, summarily convicted of rebellion and locked up in Wexford gaol. They had to wait for months before it was decided how to deal with them. In the meantime Maurice Fitzgerald was locked up in Bridewell Prison and awaiting execution, had his hopes raised by a petition presented by his employer Jon O’Brien to Lord Lieutenant Cornwallis asking him to have the death sentence commuted. The petition was successful and at the end of January 1799 Maurice’s death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment to be served in the penal colony of New South Wales.[iv] Several days later he was transferred in chains to the 558 ton prison ship, the “Minerva” anchored at the Cove of Cork from where several months it sailed.
Joseph Holt had also been transferred from his ‘Pidgeon House’ prison to a boat; its destination the Cove of Cork. It stopped briefly at Wexford to pick up more Wicklow rebels including Michael before continuing on to the Cove of Cork where they were transferred to the “Minerva” and there Michael and Maurice were once again reunited. The “Minerva” set sail from the Cove in Cork for New South Wales on the 24th August 1799 and entered Port Jackson on the 11th January 1800, after 140 days.
The officer in charge of the prisoners for the journey was the recently promoted Captain William Cox who had volunteered to serve in New South Wales because it entitled him on arrival to a land grant of 100 acres. Also included in the land grant was the use of free convict labour to work it. All Cox needed was someone to manage his land and Joseph Holt turned out to be the person to do so.
When the colonial community discovered that many of the prisoners on the “Minerva” were Irish rebels who had fought at Vinegar Hill, efforts were made to disperse them around the colony and allay settler unease. The New South Wales Corps was undermanned, down to 500 troopers, half the force required to guard the ever increasing number of convicts, fuelling fears of an Irish rebellion.[iv]
The Old Windmill, ''
Vinegar Hill', Enniscorthy
The Pikeman statue in front of the'Bull Run.' in Wexford
Atwell's Will and Codicil
Front Page of Atwell's Will
The Will of Atwell Hayes and Codicil ,written before the end of Sir Henry's trial, for the abduction of Mary Pike. Atwell Hayes initially left 'Vernon Mount' to Sir Henry then he added the codicil the next day. In it he removed everything which he had left to Sir Henry and distributed it to his children. 'Vernon Mount' was left to Sir Henry's oldest child Atwell, sometimes written as Attiwell or Ottiwell. .
COPY
Will of my Grandfather
Atwell Hayes
dated 20th April 1798
And Codicil
dated 21st April 1758
The Last Will and Testament of me Atwell Hayes of the City of Cork, Esq. revoking any former or other Will or Wills by me heretofore made and as to any Worldly Substance God has been pleased to help with. I dispose thereof in the following Manner; I leave and bequeath to my son Alexander Hayes and my nephew Atwell Hayes in trust for hereafter mentioned Purposes if none other all the following Estates, Lands, Church Quay called Ivy Hill, my Leasehold Property of Browningstown, my holding in Brandon Road and joining the Barracks, my holding in Georges Street, Patrick Street and Cook Street, my Holdings on Fenns Quay or Marsh, Mallow Lane, Shannon Church lane, that part of my holdings on Bachelor Quay now tenanted by William Land of the Malt House back thereof, also my Estate and Interest in the Lands of Changetown Barony of Duhallow and County of Cork in trust to my said trustee for the following Purposes, that is to say, my said Trustees shall receive the Rents, Issues and Profits, thereof for such time or term of years and the same to put out at interest with or without consent of my son Sir Henry Browne Hayes until the Principal and Interest to the Sum of fifteen hundred Pounds, which sum was lodged with me in trust for his Younger Children. The Interest which Sum I have hitherto stopped in part of the Rent due to me out of the lands of Vernon Mount now and for some time in his Possession nor is he to be charged with rent foresaid Concerns more than the Interest Money Amounts though a large arrears is now due. I also leave him my said son Sir Henry the Lands and Estate of Vernon Mount subject to a Mortgage thereon for fifteen hundred Pounds which sum was taken up and borrowed for his sole and separate use. The said lands to be his own Property and for him to dispose thereof as he shall think Proper and immediately after the above trust is expired to my said trustees in trust that they permit and suffer my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes to take for his own use the rents , Issues and profits of all the above Concerns( except Vernon Mount which I have left solely to him) for the term of his Natural Life only and immediately after Death of the aforesaid Trust being expired but not otherwise. I leave and bequeath the above mentioned Holdings to my two Grandsons Atwell Hayes and William Hayes as nearly equal in Value as their father shall by Will or other Writing divide between them so that there shall not be more than fifty pounds a Year in Preference to either. I leave and bequeath to my Daughter Ann Catherine Hayes two thousand Pounds Sterling to be paid her by my Son Alexander and I charge all his Property with the payment thereof. I leave and bequeath to my aforesaid Trustees and the Survivors of them the Sum of Two Thousand Pounds in trust for my Daughter Charlotte Fleming which sum of Two Thousand Pounds and desire may be kept at Interest on such Security as she approves of and to permit and suffer to take and receive the interest thereof early or Half Yearly and her own receipts to pay for the same without the control of her husband as if she was not married and immediately after her Decease. I have and bequeath the said Sum of two thousand Pounds with the interest on them to be equally divided between her Children’s share and share alike, but in case she shall die without leaving Issue, then and in that Case the said sum of two thousand Pounds I appoint to be the property of my two sons Henry Browne and Alexander Hayes Share alike
I leave and bequeath to my Grandson William Allen the Lands of Clounbaneen in the Barony of Duhallow to hold to him for Life and immediately after his Death to his Eldest Son but in case he shall have no son living at his Death then to go to and be the Property of my Right Heirs. I also leave and bequeath to him at his arriving to the age of twenty one years all my Rights, Title and Interest in and to all that and those my full Share and Proportion of the Glass Houses in. the City of Cork, and all other Concerns thereto belonging except my Sums that I may have laid out or lent the Company more than my Proportion or Share ought to be which Surplus or advance than my Proportion or Share ought to be which surplus or Advance if any shall be the Property of my son Alexander. He the said Wiliam Allen paying to his sister Elizabeth Allen the sum of four hundred Pounds in five years after my Death and I charge the above Property with the payment thereof. I leave and bequeath to my Brother Henry Hayes forty Pounds per year during his life, to be paid him weekly or Quarterly as he wants it by my son Alexander. I leave and bequeath to my Grand Daughter Penelope Hayes my two shares in the Pipe Water Company in this City with the Issues and Profit thereof. I leave and bequeath to my Grand daughter Elizabeth Allen one of my two Shares in the Dublin Insurance Company, the other Share I leave to my Grand daughter Anne Fleming. I also leave to my Grand daughter Lucy Hayes my one Share in the Dublin Insurance Company. I leave to my Nephew Trustee and Executor Atwell Hayes One Hundred Pounds. I leave and bequeath to my son Alexander Hayes my Estate and my Interest in and to all that and those my Stills (?) with the Cellars. Lofts and all other Appurtenances’ thereto belonging that piece or plot or Ground where a Porter Brewery is now Erected and all the rest of the Concerns in as large and ample a Manner as I hold the same under Messrs Carleton& Cowley all my Estate and Interest in the Weirs, River and Fishery therto belonging together with the middle Island and to a Piece or Plot of Ground on which is built dwellings, House and Cellars on Hayes Island, formerly called Reily’s Marsh measured (?) and bounded as follows on the North with a Street is to be run through said Island, and marked on the Map thereof, on the west with the middle Part of a Trench or Drain that runs through the said Island above the Weir, on the South with the River Lee and on the East with the East Side of said Dwelling House with full free Liberty for him the said Alexander, his Heirs or Assignes at all times and Seasons to fish the said River and to build Slips or other convenient Landing Places to land his Nets, Cots or other Conveniences necessary for said Fishery without any Hinderance whatever making no wilful Waste. I also leave the said Alexander Hayes my Dwelling House with the Brewery and large Malt House adjoining, together with my Estate and Interest in the Lands of Drum Castle now in Possession of Savage Trench Esq. I further leave and bequeath to my said ……..part of the Island formerly called Riely’s Marsh separated from that part left to Alexander containing about thirteen Acres subject to any Rent that may be claimed thereout- Whereas in the marriage of my Daughter Elizabeth with John Hanning Esqu. I passed him a bond for five hundred Pounds payable at my Death, now to make a Provision for Said Sum. I charge the Fishery with the payment thereof. Whereas I have by letter till revoked given direction to Mr John Reardon, tenant to Choubaneen to pay my Daughter ……six pounds a year immediately after my Death revoke the said Order and desire notice may be given to his representatives as I have otherwise provided for her. Whereas I have paid of and discharged several debts and Encumbrances affecting my said Son Henry Browne Hayes to the amount of upwards of sixteen hundred pounds and have taken Assignments of some Judgments and Mortgages affecting his Chattle property on Fenns Quay or marsh & for payment of the Interest of said Sum, he assigned met the rents of said premises.
I do now by this Will discharge the said Premises from any demand either me, my heirs or Exec. May have against them, the Bond passed by him and John Hanning to Samuel Previn and about one hundred pounds due of his bond to John Walker (excepted) the interest of which two Bonds for several Years I have regularly paid and many other demands not charged himself. I leave him what Rent & Arrears of Rent due thereout at my Death. All the rest of my Estate both real and Personal together with Cash in the House, Bonds, Notes Book Debts and Stock of every Denomination. I leave to my said Son Alexander Hayes together with what arrears of Rent that shall be due out of my several Concerns ( Except Fenns Marsh) at and for the Galer (?)Rents due at my Death. Lastly I do hereby Appoint my said Son Alexander, my Nephew Atwell Hayes and my worthy and good friend Dan Lane Esq of St Finn Barry’s Executor of this Will. In Witness whereof I have here unto put my hand and Seal. Cork 20th April 1798
Signed Sealed & acknowledged by the said Atwell Hayes and as for his last Will & Testament
I have in his Presence & in the presence of each Other signed as Witnesses
Benj Hayes John Walsh Morgan Mullave
CODICIL TO THE WILL OF ATWELL HAYES
Will of my Grandfather Atwell Hayes 20th April 1798 and Codicil 21st April 1798
'Whereas I Atwell Hayes of the City of Cork did make and publish my last Will and Testament in writing bearing date the twentieth day of April Ins, all in my own hand Writing. Now I do publish and declare this as a Codicil to my said last Will and Testament. Whereas in and by my said Last Will and Testament, I did leave and bequeath to my son Alexander Hayes and my nephew Atwell Hayes the Estates and land of Curcanway called Ivy Hill, the land of Browningstown, my holding in Bandon Road and adjoining the Barracks , my holdings in George Street, Patrick Street and Cook Street, my holdings on Fens Quay or marshmallow Lane, Shandon Church lane, that part of my holdings on Batchelors Quay now tenanted by William lane and the malt House back thereof also my Estate and Interest in the lands of Changetown in the Barony of Duhallow and County Cork in trust in the first Place to raise out of the Rents, Issues and Profits of the said several lands and premises the sum of fifteen hundred pounds in trust for the Younger Children of my Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes and upon this further trust that after the said before mentioned Trust should be expired or Completed my said Trustees should permit and suffer my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes to take for his own use the Rents and Fees , Issues and Profits of all the above mentioned Concerns for the term of his natural Life only and from and immediately after his decease. I did by my said Will leave and bequeath the before mentioned Lands, Premises and Holdings to my Grandsons, Atwell Hayes and William Hayes as nearly equal in value as their father should by Will or other Writing divide between them, so that there should not be more than fifty pounds a year in preference to either. Now I hereby confirm that the said Trust and declare by my said Will so far as relates to the raising of the sum of fifteen hundred pounds for the use of my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes’s younger children out of the Rents, Issues and profits of the said herein before mentioned Lands and Premises. And I do hereby revoke and Annul and make void all and every Use and Benefit which I have by my said Will declared and given to my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes as to all and every the said herein before mentioned Lands and Premises and instead thereof I do give, devise and bequeath the said before mentioned several lands and premises save and except my Holding on Batchelor Quay tenanted by William lane and the Malt House back therof Subject to the said Charge of fifteen hundred pounds to my said grandsons Atwell Hayes and William Hayes on their respective attaining the ages of twenty one Years in Shares and Properties herein and in my said Will mentioned to take Place on the death of their father. And my Will mentioned to take Place on the Death of their father. And my Will is that if either of my said Grandsons shall happen to die before their attaining their age of Twenty One Years without benefit of Issue, that in such Case, the Share and Proportion of the one dying, shall go to the survivor of them. And whereas I did by my Said Will leave to my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes the Lands the Estate of Vernon Mount subject to a mortgage of fifteen hundred pounds to be the Property of my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes and to dispose thereof as he should think fit . Now I do hereby revoke and annul the said Devise or legacy so made to my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes and do give and devise the said Lands of Vernon Mount being a part of Subordination of the lands of Curcanway unto my said Grandson Atwell Hayes his Heirs and Assigns, but if my said Grandson Atwell Hayes happens to die before he arrives to his age of Twenty One Years without lawful issue then I devise the said lands of Vernon Mount to my said Grandson William Hayes and whereas I did in and by my said Will leave unto my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes that part of the Island formerly called Reilley’s Marsh which is separated from that part left by my said Will to my son Alexander containing about thirteen Acres subject to any Rent that may be claimed there out. Now I do hereby revoke the said ledger or Devise and I do devise and bequeath the said par of the said Land called Reiley’s Marsh so separated as aforesaid and Containing about thirteen acres as aforesaid subject to any Rent that may be claimed there out use to my said Grandson Atwell Hayes his heirs and Assigns; but if my said Grandson Atwell Hayes shall happen to die before he arrives to his age of twenty one Years lawful Issue then I devise the said part of the said island called Reilly’s Marsh to my said Grandson William Hayes his heirs and Assigns, and if it shall happen that both my said Grandsons Atwell Hayes and William Hayes shall happen to die without issue then I do hereby give, dev ise and bequeath the Overall and respective lands and Premises and herein before devised and bequeathed to them to my Son Alexander Hayes , his Heirs Exec Administration and premises herein before devised to give bequeathed unto my nephew Atwell Hayes my interest in that part of the Holding now held by William lane and the Malt House behind the Lane subject to the rent payable there out in Lieu of the tenure of one hundred pounds left him in my Will. I leave and bequeath unto Catherine ....ray who has lived in my family for some years past the sum of one hundred and forty pounds.
Wittnessed whereof
I have here unto put my hand and Seal the twenty first day of April 1798.
Signed in the Presence of Benj Hayes, B Hayes Jun, Sam Walsh
COPY
Will of my Grandfather
Atwell Hayes
dated 20th April 1798
And Codicil
dated 21st April 1758
The Last Will and Testament of me Atwell Hayes of the City of Cork, Esq. revoking any former or other Will or Wills by me heretofore made and as to any Worldly Substance God has been pleased to help with. I dispose thereof in the following Manner; I leave and bequeath to my son Alexander Hayes and my nephew Atwell Hayes in trust for hereafter mentioned Purposes if none other all the following Estates, Lands, Church Quay called Ivy Hill, my Leasehold Property of Browningstown, my holding in Brandon Road and joining the Barracks, my holding in Georges Street, Patrick Street and Cook Street, my Holdings on Fenns Quay or Marsh, Mallow Lane, Shannon Church lane, that part of my holdings on Bachelor Quay now tenanted by William Land of the Malt House back thereof, also my Estate and Interest in the Lands of Changetown Barony of Duhallow and County of Cork in trust to my said trustee for the following Purposes, that is to say, my said Trustees shall receive the Rents, Issues and Profits, thereof for such time or term of years and the same to put out at interest with or without consent of my son Sir Henry Browne Hayes until the Principal and Interest to the Sum of fifteen hundred Pounds, which sum was lodged with me in trust for his Younger Children. The Interest which Sum I have hitherto stopped in part of the Rent due to me out of the lands of Vernon Mount now and for some time in his Possession nor is he to be charged with rent foresaid Concerns more than the Interest Money Amounts though a large arrears is now due. I also leave him my said son Sir Henry the Lands and Estate of Vernon Mount subject to a Mortgage thereon for fifteen hundred Pounds which sum was taken up and borrowed for his sole and separate use. The said lands to be his own Property and for him to dispose thereof as he shall think Proper and immediately after the above trust is expired to my said trustees in trust that they permit and suffer my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes to take for his own use the rents , Issues and profits of all the above Concerns( except Vernon Mount which I have left solely to him) for the term of his Natural Life only and immediately after Death of the aforesaid Trust being expired but not otherwise. I leave and bequeath the above mentioned Holdings to my two Grandsons Atwell Hayes and William Hayes as nearly equal in Value as their father shall by Will or other Writing divide between them so that there shall not be more than fifty pounds a Year in Preference to either. I leave and bequeath to my Daughter Ann Catherine Hayes two thousand Pounds Sterling to be paid her by my Son Alexander and I charge all his Property with the payment thereof. I leave and bequeath to my aforesaid Trustees and the Survivors of them the Sum of Two Thousand Pounds in trust for my Daughter Charlotte Fleming which sum of Two Thousand Pounds and desire may be kept at Interest on such Security as she approves of and to permit and suffer to take and receive the interest thereof early or Half Yearly and her own receipts to pay for the same without the control of her husband as if she was not married and immediately after her Decease. I have and bequeath the said Sum of two thousand Pounds with the interest on them to be equally divided between her Children’s share and share alike, but in case she shall die without leaving Issue, then and in that Case the said sum of two thousand Pounds I appoint to be the property of my two sons Henry Browne and Alexander Hayes Share alike
I leave and bequeath to my Grandson William Allen the Lands of Clounbaneen in the Barony of Duhallow to hold to him for Life and immediately after his Death to his Eldest Son but in case he shall have no son living at his Death then to go to and be the Property of my Right Heirs. I also leave and bequeath to him at his arriving to the age of twenty one years all my Rights, Title and Interest in and to all that and those my full Share and Proportion of the Glass Houses in. the City of Cork, and all other Concerns thereto belonging except my Sums that I may have laid out or lent the Company more than my Proportion or Share ought to be which Surplus or advance than my Proportion or Share ought to be which surplus or Advance if any shall be the Property of my son Alexander. He the said Wiliam Allen paying to his sister Elizabeth Allen the sum of four hundred Pounds in five years after my Death and I charge the above Property with the payment thereof. I leave and bequeath to my Brother Henry Hayes forty Pounds per year during his life, to be paid him weekly or Quarterly as he wants it by my son Alexander. I leave and bequeath to my Grand Daughter Penelope Hayes my two shares in the Pipe Water Company in this City with the Issues and Profit thereof. I leave and bequeath to my Grand daughter Elizabeth Allen one of my two Shares in the Dublin Insurance Company, the other Share I leave to my Grand daughter Anne Fleming. I also leave to my Grand daughter Lucy Hayes my one Share in the Dublin Insurance Company. I leave to my Nephew Trustee and Executor Atwell Hayes One Hundred Pounds. I leave and bequeath to my son Alexander Hayes my Estate and my Interest in and to all that and those my Stills (?) with the Cellars. Lofts and all other Appurtenances’ thereto belonging that piece or plot or Ground where a Porter Brewery is now Erected and all the rest of the Concerns in as large and ample a Manner as I hold the same under Messrs Carleton& Cowley all my Estate and Interest in the Weirs, River and Fishery therto belonging together with the middle Island and to a Piece or Plot of Ground on which is built dwellings, House and Cellars on Hayes Island, formerly called Reily’s Marsh measured (?) and bounded as follows on the North with a Street is to be run through said Island, and marked on the Map thereof, on the west with the middle Part of a Trench or Drain that runs through the said Island above the Weir, on the South with the River Lee and on the East with the East Side of said Dwelling House with full free Liberty for him the said Alexander, his Heirs or Assignes at all times and Seasons to fish the said River and to build Slips or other convenient Landing Places to land his Nets, Cots or other Conveniences necessary for said Fishery without any Hinderance whatever making no wilful Waste. I also leave the said Alexander Hayes my Dwelling House with the Brewery and large Malt House adjoining, together with my Estate and Interest in the Lands of Drum Castle now in Possession of Savage Trench Esq. I further leave and bequeath to my said ……..part of the Island formerly called Riely’s Marsh separated from that part left to Alexander containing about thirteen Acres subject to any Rent that may be claimed thereout- Whereas in the marriage of my Daughter Elizabeth with John Hanning Esqu. I passed him a bond for five hundred Pounds payable at my Death, now to make a Provision for Said Sum. I charge the Fishery with the payment thereof. Whereas I have by letter till revoked given direction to Mr John Reardon, tenant to Choubaneen to pay my Daughter ……six pounds a year immediately after my Death revoke the said Order and desire notice may be given to his representatives as I have otherwise provided for her. Whereas I have paid of and discharged several debts and Encumbrances affecting my said Son Henry Browne Hayes to the amount of upwards of sixteen hundred pounds and have taken Assignments of some Judgments and Mortgages affecting his Chattle property on Fenns Quay or marsh & for payment of the Interest of said Sum, he assigned met the rents of said premises.
I do now by this Will discharge the said Premises from any demand either me, my heirs or Exec. May have against them, the Bond passed by him and John Hanning to Samuel Previn and about one hundred pounds due of his bond to John Walker (excepted) the interest of which two Bonds for several Years I have regularly paid and many other demands not charged himself. I leave him what Rent & Arrears of Rent due thereout at my Death. All the rest of my Estate both real and Personal together with Cash in the House, Bonds, Notes Book Debts and Stock of every Denomination. I leave to my said Son Alexander Hayes together with what arrears of Rent that shall be due out of my several Concerns ( Except Fenns Marsh) at and for the Galer (?)Rents due at my Death. Lastly I do hereby Appoint my said Son Alexander, my Nephew Atwell Hayes and my worthy and good friend Dan Lane Esq of St Finn Barry’s Executor of this Will. In Witness whereof I have here unto put my hand and Seal. Cork 20th April 1798
Signed Sealed & acknowledged by the said Atwell Hayes and as for his last Will & Testament
I have in his Presence & in the presence of each Other signed as Witnesses
Benj Hayes John Walsh Morgan Mullave
CODICIL TO THE WILL OF ATWELL HAYES
Will of my Grandfather Atwell Hayes 20th April 1798 and Codicil 21st April 1798
'Whereas I Atwell Hayes of the City of Cork did make and publish my last Will and Testament in writing bearing date the twentieth day of April Ins, all in my own hand Writing. Now I do publish and declare this as a Codicil to my said last Will and Testament. Whereas in and by my said Last Will and Testament, I did leave and bequeath to my son Alexander Hayes and my nephew Atwell Hayes the Estates and land of Curcanway called Ivy Hill, the land of Browningstown, my holding in Bandon Road and adjoining the Barracks , my holdings in George Street, Patrick Street and Cook Street, my holdings on Fens Quay or marshmallow Lane, Shandon Church lane, that part of my holdings on Batchelors Quay now tenanted by William lane and the malt House back thereof also my Estate and Interest in the lands of Changetown in the Barony of Duhallow and County Cork in trust in the first Place to raise out of the Rents, Issues and Profits of the said several lands and premises the sum of fifteen hundred pounds in trust for the Younger Children of my Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes and upon this further trust that after the said before mentioned Trust should be expired or Completed my said Trustees should permit and suffer my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes to take for his own use the Rents and Fees , Issues and Profits of all the above mentioned Concerns for the term of his natural Life only and from and immediately after his decease. I did by my said Will leave and bequeath the before mentioned Lands, Premises and Holdings to my Grandsons, Atwell Hayes and William Hayes as nearly equal in value as their father should by Will or other Writing divide between them, so that there should not be more than fifty pounds a year in preference to either. Now I hereby confirm that the said Trust and declare by my said Will so far as relates to the raising of the sum of fifteen hundred pounds for the use of my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes’s younger children out of the Rents, Issues and profits of the said herein before mentioned Lands and Premises. And I do hereby revoke and Annul and make void all and every Use and Benefit which I have by my said Will declared and given to my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes as to all and every the said herein before mentioned Lands and Premises and instead thereof I do give, devise and bequeath the said before mentioned several lands and premises save and except my Holding on Batchelor Quay tenanted by William lane and the Malt House back therof Subject to the said Charge of fifteen hundred pounds to my said grandsons Atwell Hayes and William Hayes on their respective attaining the ages of twenty one Years in Shares and Properties herein and in my said Will mentioned to take Place on the death of their father. And my Will mentioned to take Place on the Death of their father. And my Will is that if either of my said Grandsons shall happen to die before their attaining their age of Twenty One Years without benefit of Issue, that in such Case, the Share and Proportion of the one dying, shall go to the survivor of them. And whereas I did by my Said Will leave to my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes the Lands the Estate of Vernon Mount subject to a mortgage of fifteen hundred pounds to be the Property of my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes and to dispose thereof as he should think fit . Now I do hereby revoke and annul the said Devise or legacy so made to my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes and do give and devise the said Lands of Vernon Mount being a part of Subordination of the lands of Curcanway unto my said Grandson Atwell Hayes his Heirs and Assigns, but if my said Grandson Atwell Hayes happens to die before he arrives to his age of Twenty One Years without lawful issue then I devise the said lands of Vernon Mount to my said Grandson William Hayes and whereas I did in and by my said Will leave unto my said Son Sir Henry Browne Hayes that part of the Island formerly called Reilley’s Marsh which is separated from that part left by my said Will to my son Alexander containing about thirteen Acres subject to any Rent that may be claimed there out. Now I do hereby revoke the said ledger or Devise and I do devise and bequeath the said par of the said Land called Reiley’s Marsh so separated as aforesaid and Containing about thirteen acres as aforesaid subject to any Rent that may be claimed there out use to my said Grandson Atwell Hayes his heirs and Assigns; but if my said Grandson Atwell Hayes shall happen to die before he arrives to his age of twenty one Years lawful Issue then I devise the said part of the said island called Reilly’s Marsh to my said Grandson William Hayes his heirs and Assigns, and if it shall happen that both my said Grandsons Atwell Hayes and William Hayes shall happen to die without issue then I do hereby give, dev ise and bequeath the Overall and respective lands and Premises and herein before devised and bequeathed to them to my Son Alexander Hayes , his Heirs Exec Administration and premises herein before devised to give bequeathed unto my nephew Atwell Hayes my interest in that part of the Holding now held by William lane and the Malt House behind the Lane subject to the rent payable there out in Lieu of the tenure of one hundred pounds left him in my Will. I leave and bequeath unto Catherine ....ray who has lived in my family for some years past the sum of one hundred and forty pounds.
Wittnessed whereof
I have here unto put my hand and Seal the twenty first day of April 1798.
Signed in the Presence of Benj Hayes, B Hayes Jun, Sam Walsh
Email Correspondence
Corroboration from Professor James Stevens Curl that 'Vernon Mount' has Freemason ties.
Dear Professor Curl.
While enlarging this photograph of 'Vernon Mount's ceiling 200 times, I focused on the young boy paying homage to the goddess Athena/Minerva and saw in his left hand he was holding out to her a pair of open dividers which is a Freemason symbol. I also know that the house was built for Atwell Hayes in 1784, a prominent Freemason and the father of Sir Henry Browne Hayes. Sir Henry at the time was 24 and already the father of four children, two or possibly three of whom were illegitimate. On further examination of the ceiling I realized that the goddess symbolized the third Masonic degree or the Minerval and that there were many more Masonic symbols in the painting, such as Medusa's head on the shield or aegis, the Zodiac, the rainbow, Pegasus, the colour blue and so on. I eventually contacted Donough Cahill of the Georgian Society who together with The Knight of Glin had written for the internet the elegant, descriptive article, 'Vernon Mount', Co. Cork. A Neo-Classical Gem in Jeopardy' and asked him for the mentioned floor plans of 'Vernon Mount' which he promptly sent. I counted the steps on the ground floor and those leading to the first floor.
The steps numbered 3, 4, 5, 8 and 14 I realised were all significant Masonic numbers. The first floor plan also shows 8 columns and 7 doors, again symbolic Masonic numbers.
The Masonic symbolism in the house is very subtle for how else could it remain unnoticed to all, for the last 230 years; the key to understanding the whole building is the boy holding forward the open dividers to Minerva. I also believe that the original 160 surrounding acres were also Mason inspired but that is conjecture.
When I made Donough aware of my understanding of 'Vernon Mount', he notified the Knight Of Glin who then suggested that I contact you to confirm my understanding of the house.
I believe that 'Vernon Mount' could be one of the oldest existing Masonic villas in Cork, if not in Ireland and should be rescued from deliberate neglect; it is after all part of Ireland's history.
I'm not Irish nor am I a Mason. My original interest was in Sir Henry, his life in Cork and Vaucluse in Sydney but which over the years has overlapped to include 'Vernon Mount'. I have collected documents, two of court martials, two Wills, photographs of Atwell Hayes, Sir Henry, his daughter Mary Jude and those of the outside and inside of 'Vernon Mount'.
I will be in Dublin on the 11th February and after a few days will motor down to Cork.
I would appreciate your response.
Rolf Grunseit
Dear Mr Grunseit
Before you do anything, please contact Ricky Pound (rickycraigpound@hotmail.co.uk) for his opinion. He is sound, and a scholar, and I advised him at one stage. His work on Burlington's Villa at Chiswick is very interesting (this has been published), and he is a genuine scholar, not a fantasist. Once we have his views than I suggest you send the two Irish scholars a synopsis of Pound's views and my own. One of the problems we have is that there are some peculiar people who see allusions everywhere, so caution is advised. However, the Mount Vernon material seems to have something very interesting, and I think the elliptical ceiling painting is not simply Classical nods, but is connected with ideals of Enlightenment, Freedom of Thought, Wisdom, and the connection between Architecture and Enquiry, shedding Light into Dark Corners. May I suggest you consult my website? I am inviting subscrioptions to my forthcoming book entitled Freemasonry and The Enlightenment: Architecture, Symbols, & Influences. The book is now at Proof stage, and the page-proofs go off to the Indexer this month, so if you want your name printed in the List of Subscribers (Pound and other worthies have subscribed) you should fill in the form and send it to my publisher with your credit-card number immediately. As you are in Oz you will have to add £15 to the Subscription price, but even then, with masses of pictures (some in colour), a huge and dense text, a vast Bibliography, and a Glossary, it will be good value at the Subscription price. When it is published the price will be greater. Kind best wishes JSC ----- Original Message -----
From: Rolf Grunseit To: Professor James Stevens Curl Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 8:03 AM Subject: Re: Vernon Mount Dear Professor! You have made my day and thank you for your congratulations. With your permission I will send your reply to Donough Cahill and the Knight of Glin. And please include 'Vernon Mount' in your list of Masonic buildings; I have many more significant photographs of 'Vernon Mount's' interior. Rolf Grunseit -----
Original Message ----- From: Professor James Stevens Curl To: Rolf Grunseit Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 6:46 PM Subject: Re: Vernon Mount
Dear Mr Grunseit How interesting! I am always a bit leery about giving too much weight to numbers: they COULD have esoteric significance, or they could only be just there for reasons of convenience, structure, geometry, or architecture. However, as we are clearly looking at the Personification of Wisdom, associated with Geometry and therefore with Architecture, and we have such a wonderful example of a plan constructed on very clever geometrical principles, I would bet there is more to this, and I would say it is more than likely the building has Masonic significance. Your problem will be that anything masonic down there will not have any official support, as religious prejudices will mean the building is regarded with not a little horror, and you will not find a great deal of support for its retention or repair: not only that, but as Ireland is virtually bust, there will be not a penny to help it. After all, papal encyclicals in the 19th century advocated burning books with any Enlightenment-Masonic content, and such attitudes from the past prevail in Munster (and indeed throughout this benighted land), and that, too, will prejudice any attempt to restore/repair/retain the building. Personally, I think it is a wonderful plan, beautifully conceived and executed, comparable with certain plans found in eighteenth-century work in France and Germany with which we know there were Masonic connections. In short, I think this beautiful and fascinating place does indeed have Masonic-Enlightenment associations, and I congratulate you on spotting them. I wish you well in your endeavours. James Stevens Curl ----- Original Message ----- From: Rolf Grunseit To: historian@jamesstevenscurl..com Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 3:04 AM Subject: Vernon Mount
Sincerely
Rolf Grunseit.
Email reply from Ricky Pound
Dear Rolf Grunseit. My name is Ricky Pound and I have been forwarded your email that you sent to Professor James Stevens Curl regarding possible Masonic symbolism at Vernon Mount, Cork, Ireland. Let me tell you a little about muself- I am the manager of a Neo-Palladian Villa in London called Chiswick House (English Heritage) and over the past 13 years I have made various discoveries about masonic symbolism which can be found in the Villa's ceiling paintings and architecture. Much of my reseach has been published in the likes of the Brentford and Chiswick Historical Society and The English Heritage Historirical Review and I have lectured at the Research into Lost Knowledge Society and the Canonbury Masonic Research Centre. As such I have in depth knowledge of 18th century Masonic iconography together with a good knowledge of Roman, Egyptian and Greek mythological symbolism and thier use as metophor and allagorical applications in art, both Masonic and other. As such I feel that I am well qualified to comment on the possible Masonic symbolism within Vernon Mount and possible masonic applications within its surrounding gardens. However, the email that Professor Curl forwarded to me were without pictures. Please could you send me as many high resolusion photographs as possible please together with as much surrounding information as possible via email? The biggest 'clue' to unlocking the meaning of the house may well be in the form or plan of the villa. I also find the ceiling painting of Mivera (Athena- Wisdom) and the seven doors particularly intruging (Just for your records where I work at Chiswick House which was designed by Richard Boyle, 3rd Earl of Burlington and 4th Earl of Cork (1694-1753), who owned extensive lands around Cork including Listmore Castle) I look forward to hearing from you, Regards, Ricky Pound
Dear Rolf,
Thank you for your email. You may want to consider adding to your lecture that at his mansion at West Wycombe Francis Dashwood had painted several depictions of the Egyptian child-god Harpocrates with his finger raised to his lips indicating the need for (masonic) silence. Harpocrates was accompanied by the Roman goddess Angerona who again is associated with silence and secrecy. Unfortunately you will have trouble convincing Grand Lodge that Dashwood was a Freemason as he is not listed as belonging to a lodge. However, is is almost certain that he was a Freemason, as proven by his love of clubs and the people he surrounded himself with, such as the Freemasons William Hogarth, John Wilkes and Benjamin Franklin, to name but a few! Of interest is that many original members of the Society of Dilettanti had previously been Freemasons on the continent as part of their Grand Tours. For example, of the twenty-four known members of the Florentine Lodge twelve would become founder members of the Dilettanti. In 1733 the lodge had a coin minted (see attached) with on the obverse the figure of Harocrates accompanied with the Masonic symbols of cornucopia, broken column, set-square, compasses, level, chisel ect with the motto "AB.ORIGINE" (see Jason M. Kelly, The Society of the Dilettanti (New Haven and London: Published for the Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art, 2009) pp.17-18). Regards, Ricky
Thank you for your email. You may want to consider adding to your lecture that at his mansion at West Wycombe Francis Dashwood had painted several depictions of the Egyptian child-god Harpocrates with his finger raised to his lips indicating the need for (masonic) silence. Harpocrates was accompanied by the Roman goddess Angerona who again is associated with silence and secrecy. Unfortunately you will have trouble convincing Grand Lodge that Dashwood was a Freemason as he is not listed as belonging to a lodge. However, is is almost certain that he was a Freemason, as proven by his love of clubs and the people he surrounded himself with, such as the Freemasons William Hogarth, John Wilkes and Benjamin Franklin, to name but a few! Of interest is that many original members of the Society of Dilettanti had previously been Freemasons on the continent as part of their Grand Tours. For example, of the twenty-four known members of the Florentine Lodge twelve would become founder members of the Dilettanti. In 1733 the lodge had a coin minted (see attached) with on the obverse the figure of Harocrates accompanied with the Masonic symbols of cornucopia, broken column, set-square, compasses, level, chisel ect with the motto "AB.ORIGINE" (see Jason M. Kelly, The Society of the Dilettanti (New Haven and London: Published for the Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art, 2009) pp.17-18). Regards, Ricky
Ricky Pound, 14/01/11
Response to the questions regarding the possible Masonic status of Vernon Mount, Cork. ‘While enlarging this photograph of Vernon Mount's ceiling 200 times, I focused on the young boy paying homage to the goddess Athena/Minerva and saw that his left was holding out to her a pair of open dividers which is a Freemason symbol’. We can be certain that the small boy who holds compasses and rests on a globe is the muse Urania who is associated with Astronomy. Next to him is a second muse Terpsichore with lyre, thus it is almost certain that the other six cherubs are the remaining six muses, all related to the arts and knowledge. A small muse to the left of the painting is seated and painting a picture, another reference to the arts. This would fit perfectly with the presence of Minerva/Athena a great patroness of the arts and associated with wisdom.
The presence of the horse Pegasus and the head of Medusa on the shield are also connected with the nine muses in mythology. In one version of the myth the muses are born from a fountain created by the hoofs of Pegasus. Pegasus was also believed to have been born from the blood of the beheaded snake-haired Medusa. In this respect the birth of the muses and Pegasus can be viewed as creation myths.
The laurel plant is associated with poets and is sacred to the sun god Apollo, the great patron of the Arts and the protector of the nine muses.
On seeing the painting for the first time I was reminded of a similar themed painting by Antonio Verrio (1639-1707) in the White Closet room at Ham House which can be entitled 'Divine Wisdom Presiding over the Arts' (see below). Here a personification of Wisdom points up to a small All Seeing Eye and is surrounded by personifications of the seven Liberal Arts. Here we can be much more certain of a Masonic program as the ceiling was painted for Elizabeth Dysart and her husband, John Maitland, 2nd Earl and 1st Duke of Lauderdale. Lady Dysart was a member of the secret Sealed Knot and letters exist between John Maitland and Sir Robert Moray, the first known Freemason. In their correspondence Moray stated he would ‘play the mason’ and finish his letters with a pentacle, indicating more sensitive text was included below in invisible ink and possibly in cipher.
Divine Wisdom and the Liberal Arts by Antonio Verrio at Ham House
‘The steps numbered 3, 4, 5, 8 and 14 I realised were all significant Masonic numbers. The first floor plan also shows 8 columns and 7 doors, again symbolic Masonic numbers’.
The spiral staircase or ladder represents the mason’s spiritual ascent from ignorance to Masonic enlightenment, in much the same way as he is transformed from the imperfect to perfect ashlar block. However, sometimes other combination of number can be important. For example the numbers 3, 4 and 5 together may represent Euclid’s 47th Proposition, an important practical mathematical formula important in Freemasonry which appears on John Pines frontispiece to Anderson’s Constitutions of the Free Masons of 1723.
. Left- Past Masters Jewel featuring the symbol fo featuring the symbol for the 7th 47th Proposition.
47th Propositi
In Freemasonry certain numbers are important. However, the most significant numbers are 3, 5, 7 and 15. These numbers are often represented in the form of steps on a spiral staircase or staves on a ladder. They can appear individually (for example 3 steps leading to a Temple) or together separated into blocks of 3, 5 or 7. Added together they equal 15, a number which frequently appears in the catechism of the Master Mason degree (3rd degree). In this degree it is told how 3 Fellow Craft masons were involved in the murder of Master Hiram Abiff who was assaulted at 3 different entrances of the Temple. After 15 days King Solomon sent out 3 groups of 5 (3x5) masons to look for the body of Hiram who, once found and reburied, had 15 loving masons attend his funeral.
When you first mentioned seven doors (with paintings above?) my first thought that they may represent the seven Liberal Arts. Can you tell me if any of these paintings relate to any of the Liberal Arts?
The eight internal columns, usually arranged in a circular arrangement, is a feature of several Neo-Palladian Villas of the eighteenth century. These include Nuthall Temple (Thomas Wright, now demolished), Foots Cray Place (1754 by Matthew Brettingham, now demolished) and Chiswick House (Lord Burlington, c.1730). Many of these designs were based on Andrea Palladio’s reconstructions of the Lateran Baptistry which appeared in his seminal I Quattro Libri Dell’ Architettura in 1570 (first published in English as the Four Books on Architecture by Leoni in 1715).
‘The centrepiece is that of the arch Angel Michael draped in Masonic blue blowing the trumpet indicative of resurrection. Note the fingers of his right hand (500 magnifications), is he making a Masonic sign? Also note the size of Michael's breasts. He is flanked on either side by centaurs. The Centaurs represents the sign of Sagittarius, or “The Archer.”
‘Right at the top or the picture in an octagonal frame is another muse painting the rainbow surrounded by ornate finials’.
As you rightly point out the angel blowing the trumpet in one of the side panels and dressed in blue is the archangel Michael. However, apart from the obvious Christian overtones the figure may be a veiled reference to the Greek God Hermes, a deity of particular importance in the ‘Old Charges’ of the ‘operative’ masons. In essence the archangel Michael is a Christianised version of Hermes, the ‘Messenger’ of the gods.
Indeed, the word ‘angel’ derives from the Latin word ‘Angelus’ itself meaning ‘Messenger’. Michael is often depicted weighting the souls of the dead, another characteristic shared with the god Hermes who delivered souls of the dead to Olympus and Hades. Hermes is readily recognisable through the small wings on his caduceus, on hispetasus and feet. These have been transformed in Christian iconography into wings of God’s heavenly messengers. Hermes can also be associated with Hermes Trismegistus and a group of important Hermetic texts known as the Corpus Hermeticum. Hermes (‘thrice greatest’) Trismegistus was also the father of alchemy whose transformational elements and philosophy shares similarities to that of Freemasonry.
As you say in your email the archangel Michael bares a breast: - a gesture that could be interpreted as a Masonic gesture indicating initiation. The colour blue is often reserved for figures of particular importance, such as the Virgin Mary. The first three degrees of Freemasonry are often called ‘Craft’ degrees, or ‘Blue’ Masonry. The blue shawl which is draped around Michael is very similar to the figure of ‘Architecture’ in the Blue Velvet Room at Chiswick House (see attached) who also offers an exposed breast to the observer whilst holding a ground floor temple plan of Solomon’s Temple and holds compasses. At least one of the putto who accompanies ‘Architecture’ also wears a blue sash.
Unfortunately the resolution of your attached photograph is not of a quality that allows me to see if Michael is performing a Masonic gesture. Can you provide a larger resolution photograph?
From the 1720s the twelve signs of the Zodiac started to be used in Masonic symbolism. For example, in 1728 the twelve members of the Stewards Lodge (including William Hogarth) each identified themselves with a sign of the Zodiac. Each sign of the Zodiac was often associated with one of the twelve tribes of Israel. At Chiswick House, for example, representations of the seven planets are accompanied by their appropriate Zodiacal bodies. Many modern Masonic lodges have ceilings painted to represent the universe above, a reminder of Freemasons former interests in astronomy and astrology. The signs of the Zodiac also appeared on early Royal Arch banners, dating from around 1730 onwards.
Above- Architecture with three apprentices in the Blue Velvet Room ceiling at Chiswick House. Notice the architectural implements in the form of set-square, plumb line and T-square. The putto on the left raises his finger to his lips in a gesture of secrecy replicating the Egyptian child-god Harpocrates.
The rainbow also occasionally appears in Masonic symbolism. For example, the rainbow is associated with God’s Covenant with man which appeared after the great deluge. Hence the rainbow sometimes appears in the presence of Hermes, who in the ‘Old Charges’ was believed to have protected the arts and sciences from the flood waters by writing down their secrets on two stone tablets- one which could not burn and the other which could not dissolve in water. The rainbow can also be viewed as a bridge or even as a section of the Zodiac wheel (as at Chiswick). An early ritual said to be connected with early Royal Arch ritual asked the question ‘Whence comes the pattern of an arch’. The response, ‘from a rainbow’.
In your email you suggest the faces of the muses are based on Sir Henry’s children and Minerva, his wife. This is entirely plausible. It is not unknown in this period for family members to appear in mythological paintings in the guise of gods or goddesses (for example at Chiswick House four paintings by Sebastiano Ricci feature the same lady in mythological scenes. The lady is rumoured to have been his mistress! It has also been suggested that some of the gods and goddesses in the Red Velvet Room ceiling have the features of family members and friends including the poet and Freemason Alexander Pope).
The Unusual Geometric Plan of the Villa
One of the most interesting aspects of Vernon Mount is its very unusual plan. From the outside the villa appears quite stark in appearance resembling a military or even an institutional piece of architecture which is curved walls. Such an unusual design appears to be in the vein of French revolutionary architects such as Etienne-Louise Boullée (1728-1799), Jean Jacques Lequeu 1757-1825) and Claude-Nicolas Ledoux (1736-1806) whose simple use of elemental geometric forms produce an air of solemnity and melancholy mixed with the sublime, similar to that produced in England by John Soane at buildings such as the picture Gallery at Dulwich and Soane’s house at Holborn.
Above – Hamels Dairy by John Soane
I have viewed some plans by John Soane and two appear very similar to the form of Vernon Mount with its curved walls and staircase arrangements. These are properties at Hamels Dairy, c.1783 (above) and Tendring Hall, Suffolk. 1784 (below).
Above- Tendring Hall, Suffolk. 1784 by John Soane
Above- First floor plan of Vernon Mount
So, can Vernon Mount be called a ‘Masonic’ piece of architecture? Unfortunately on the limited amount of information I have had access to I cannot give a definitive ‘yes’ or ‘no’. From what I have seen there are no explicit references to Freemasonry in the architecture or paintings at Mount Vernon which cannot be explained in Atwell Hayes and Sir Henry Browne Hayes appreciation of the arts. However, having said this Atwell Hayes was a Freemason and there are elements in the Villa which are important to Freemasons including the nine muses, the seven Liberal Arts, Minerva (wisdom) and the Zodiac signs.
Although unusual, the design of the Villa follows in the European Neo-classical tradition of building present in the 1780s and 1790s, as defined by architects such as John Soane and several French revolutionary architects on the continent. Thus the design is not masonic but as Professor Curl points out, this type of geometric design were produced by architects who fostered strong Masonic associations (for example John Soane was a Freemason and Lequeu almost certainly).
Ricky Pound, 14/01/11
Response to the questions regarding the possible Masonic status of Vernon Mount, Cork. ‘While enlarging this photograph of Vernon Mount's ceiling 200 times, I focused on the young boy paying homage to the goddess Athena/Minerva and saw that his left was holding out to her a pair of open dividers which is a Freemason symbol’. We can be certain that the small boy who holds compasses and rests on a globe is the muse Urania who is associated with Astronomy. Next to him is a second muse Terpsichore with lyre, thus it is almost certain that the other six cherubs are the remaining six muses, all related to the arts and knowledge. A small muse to the left of the painting is seated and painting a picture, another reference to the arts. This would fit perfectly with the presence of Minerva/Athena a great patroness of the arts and associated with wisdom.
The presence of the horse Pegasus and the head of Medusa on the shield are also connected with the nine muses in mythology. In one version of the myth the muses are born from a fountain created by the hoofs of Pegasus. Pegasus was also believed to have been born from the blood of the beheaded snake-haired Medusa. In this respect the birth of the muses and Pegasus can be viewed as creation myths.
The laurel plant is associated with poets and is sacred to the sun god Apollo, the great patron of the Arts and the protector of the nine muses.
On seeing the painting for the first time I was reminded of a similar themed painting by Antonio Verrio (1639-1707) in the White Closet room at Ham House which can be entitled 'Divine Wisdom Presiding over the Arts' (see below). Here a personification of Wisdom points up to a small All Seeing Eye and is surrounded by personifications of the seven Liberal Arts. Here we can be much more certain of a Masonic program as the ceiling was painted for Elizabeth Dysart and her husband, John Maitland, 2nd Earl and 1st Duke of Lauderdale. Lady Dysart was a member of the secret Sealed Knot and letters exist between John Maitland and Sir Robert Moray, the first known Freemason. In their correspondence Moray stated he would ‘play the mason’ and finish his letters with a pentacle, indicating more sensitive text was included below in invisible ink and possibly in cipher.
Divine Wisdom and the Liberal Arts by Antonio Verrio at Ham House
‘The steps numbered 3, 4, 5, 8 and 14 I realised were all significant Masonic numbers. The first floor plan also shows 8 columns and 7 doors, again symbolic Masonic numbers’.
The spiral staircase or ladder represents the mason’s spiritual ascent from ignorance to Masonic enlightenment, in much the same way as he is transformed from the imperfect to perfect ashlar block. However, sometimes other combination of number can be important. For example the numbers 3, 4 and 5 together may represent Euclid’s 47th Proposition, an important practical mathematical formula important in Freemasonry which appears on John Pines frontispiece to Anderson’s Constitutions of the Free Masons of 1723.
. Left- Past Masters Jewel featuring the symbol fo featuring the symbol for the 7th 47th Proposition.
47th Propositi
In Freemasonry certain numbers are important. However, the most significant numbers are 3, 5, 7 and 15. These numbers are often represented in the form of steps on a spiral staircase or staves on a ladder. They can appear individually (for example 3 steps leading to a Temple) or together separated into blocks of 3, 5 or 7. Added together they equal 15, a number which frequently appears in the catechism of the Master Mason degree (3rd degree). In this degree it is told how 3 Fellow Craft masons were involved in the murder of Master Hiram Abiff who was assaulted at 3 different entrances of the Temple. After 15 days King Solomon sent out 3 groups of 5 (3x5) masons to look for the body of Hiram who, once found and reburied, had 15 loving masons attend his funeral.
When you first mentioned seven doors (with paintings above?) my first thought that they may represent the seven Liberal Arts. Can you tell me if any of these paintings relate to any of the Liberal Arts?
The eight internal columns, usually arranged in a circular arrangement, is a feature of several Neo-Palladian Villas of the eighteenth century. These include Nuthall Temple (Thomas Wright, now demolished), Foots Cray Place (1754 by Matthew Brettingham, now demolished) and Chiswick House (Lord Burlington, c.1730). Many of these designs were based on Andrea Palladio’s reconstructions of the Lateran Baptistry which appeared in his seminal I Quattro Libri Dell’ Architettura in 1570 (first published in English as the Four Books on Architecture by Leoni in 1715).
‘The centrepiece is that of the arch Angel Michael draped in Masonic blue blowing the trumpet indicative of resurrection. Note the fingers of his right hand (500 magnifications), is he making a Masonic sign? Also note the size of Michael's breasts. He is flanked on either side by centaurs. The Centaurs represents the sign of Sagittarius, or “The Archer.”
‘Right at the top or the picture in an octagonal frame is another muse painting the rainbow surrounded by ornate finials’.
As you rightly point out the angel blowing the trumpet in one of the side panels and dressed in blue is the archangel Michael. However, apart from the obvious Christian overtones the figure may be a veiled reference to the Greek God Hermes, a deity of particular importance in the ‘Old Charges’ of the ‘operative’ masons. In essence the archangel Michael is a Christianised version of Hermes, the ‘Messenger’ of the gods.
Indeed, the word ‘angel’ derives from the Latin word ‘Angelus’ itself meaning ‘Messenger’. Michael is often depicted weighting the souls of the dead, another characteristic shared with the god Hermes who delivered souls of the dead to Olympus and Hades. Hermes is readily recognisable through the small wings on his caduceus, on hispetasus and feet. These have been transformed in Christian iconography into wings of God’s heavenly messengers. Hermes can also be associated with Hermes Trismegistus and a group of important Hermetic texts known as the Corpus Hermeticum. Hermes (‘thrice greatest’) Trismegistus was also the father of alchemy whose transformational elements and philosophy shares similarities to that of Freemasonry.
As you say in your email the archangel Michael bares a breast: - a gesture that could be interpreted as a Masonic gesture indicating initiation. The colour blue is often reserved for figures of particular importance, such as the Virgin Mary. The first three degrees of Freemasonry are often called ‘Craft’ degrees, or ‘Blue’ Masonry. The blue shawl which is draped around Michael is very similar to the figure of ‘Architecture’ in the Blue Velvet Room at Chiswick House (see attached) who also offers an exposed breast to the observer whilst holding a ground floor temple plan of Solomon’s Temple and holds compasses. At least one of the putto who accompanies ‘Architecture’ also wears a blue sash.
Unfortunately the resolution of your attached photograph is not of a quality that allows me to see if Michael is performing a Masonic gesture. Can you provide a larger resolution photograph?
From the 1720s the twelve signs of the Zodiac started to be used in Masonic symbolism. For example, in 1728 the twelve members of the Stewards Lodge (including William Hogarth) each identified themselves with a sign of the Zodiac. Each sign of the Zodiac was often associated with one of the twelve tribes of Israel. At Chiswick House, for example, representations of the seven planets are accompanied by their appropriate Zodiacal bodies. Many modern Masonic lodges have ceilings painted to represent the universe above, a reminder of Freemasons former interests in astronomy and astrology. The signs of the Zodiac also appeared on early Royal Arch banners, dating from around 1730 onwards.
Above- Architecture with three apprentices in the Blue Velvet Room ceiling at Chiswick House. Notice the architectural implements in the form of set-square, plumb line and T-square. The putto on the left raises his finger to his lips in a gesture of secrecy replicating the Egyptian child-god Harpocrates.
The rainbow also occasionally appears in Masonic symbolism. For example, the rainbow is associated with God’s Covenant with man which appeared after the great deluge. Hence the rainbow sometimes appears in the presence of Hermes, who in the ‘Old Charges’ was believed to have protected the arts and sciences from the flood waters by writing down their secrets on two stone tablets- one which could not burn and the other which could not dissolve in water. The rainbow can also be viewed as a bridge or even as a section of the Zodiac wheel (as at Chiswick). An early ritual said to be connected with early Royal Arch ritual asked the question ‘Whence comes the pattern of an arch’. The response, ‘from a rainbow’.
In your email you suggest the faces of the muses are based on Sir Henry’s children and Minerva, his wife. This is entirely plausible. It is not unknown in this period for family members to appear in mythological paintings in the guise of gods or goddesses (for example at Chiswick House four paintings by Sebastiano Ricci feature the same lady in mythological scenes. The lady is rumoured to have been his mistress! It has also been suggested that some of the gods and goddesses in the Red Velvet Room ceiling have the features of family members and friends including the poet and Freemason Alexander Pope).
The Unusual Geometric Plan of the Villa
One of the most interesting aspects of Vernon Mount is its very unusual plan. From the outside the villa appears quite stark in appearance resembling a military or even an institutional piece of architecture which is curved walls. Such an unusual design appears to be in the vein of French revolutionary architects such as Etienne-Louise Boullée (1728-1799), Jean Jacques Lequeu 1757-1825) and Claude-Nicolas Ledoux (1736-1806) whose simple use of elemental geometric forms produce an air of solemnity and melancholy mixed with the sublime, similar to that produced in England by John Soane at buildings such as the picture Gallery at Dulwich and Soane’s house at Holborn.
Above – Hamels Dairy by John Soane
I have viewed some plans by John Soane and two appear very similar to the form of Vernon Mount with its curved walls and staircase arrangements. These are properties at Hamels Dairy, c.1783 (above) and Tendring Hall, Suffolk. 1784 (below).
Above- Tendring Hall, Suffolk. 1784 by John Soane
Above- First floor plan of Vernon Mount
So, can Vernon Mount be called a ‘Masonic’ piece of architecture? Unfortunately on the limited amount of information I have had access to I cannot give a definitive ‘yes’ or ‘no’. From what I have seen there are no explicit references to Freemasonry in the architecture or paintings at Mount Vernon which cannot be explained in Atwell Hayes and Sir Henry Browne Hayes appreciation of the arts. However, having said this Atwell Hayes was a Freemason and there are elements in the Villa which are important to Freemasons including the nine muses, the seven Liberal Arts, Minerva (wisdom) and the Zodiac signs.
Although unusual, the design of the Villa follows in the European Neo-classical tradition of building present in the 1780s and 1790s, as defined by architects such as John Soane and several French revolutionary architects on the continent. Thus the design is not masonic but as Professor Curl points out, this type of geometric design were produced by architects who fostered strong Masonic associations (for example John Soane was a Freemason and Lequeu almost certainly).
Ricky Pound, 14/01/11
