back to BACKGROUND TOPICS LIST
|
THE TRIAL AND TRANSPORTATION OF PETER QUIGLY AND MARY O'HARA 2 Declarations, Indictments, Verdict and Sentence 8 Convict life in New South Wales 10 Names 11 Which Patrick or Peter Quigly? 12 Glossary |
|
1 Who were Peter Quigly and Mary O'Hara? The difficulty in knowing these two people lies in the fact that much of the information available was given to the police authorities in the form of statements in response to accusation of crime and may or may not be inaccurate. Peter or Patrick Quigly at the time of his arrest was a publican in Little Dowhill, near Glasgow Cross, Scotland. He was born in County Derry, Ireland and was recorded as aged thirty two on February 5 1816. He claimed he had had a shop in Ireland till business was bad, and that he had been a travelling merchant until bad health intervened. A publican, he admitted he had sold liquor without licence. He and Mary O'Hara married about two years before their arrest in 1816. From the statements they made, it would seem both had been married before.
Old Cross Glasgow Mary O'Hara was also known as Mrs Quigly, and was referred to as Patrick's wife. No record of marriage has yet been traced, but this in itself is not unusual for the time and circumstances. She was born in County Antrim and in 1816 she stated she was aged thirty two. Several members of her family were mentioned in the statements to police, including her brother John, her sister Kitty, and her cousin Esther Darroch. She stated that Kitty came over from Ireland with her husband and herself nearly two years before, and lived with them in Edinburgh where they kept a broker's shop. They moved to Glasgow in 1815 just after Whitsun. |
| 3
Two newspaper accounts of the trial of Patrick or Peter Quigly have been located to date: Glasgow Herald Friday May 3 1816 Glasgow Chronicle Friday May 3 1816 In the first, the Glasgow Herald account, the report appeared in their 'Circuit Court Glasgow' column. The Glasgow Chronicle included it in their 'Glasgow assizes' section. [A] Friday, May 3, 1816 CIRCUIT COURT, GLASGOW Tuesday, the Circuit Court of Justiciary was opened here by the Lords Hermand and Gillies. The court proceeded to the trial of ... (Here followed a trial of those accused of a breaking and entering incident). WEDNESDAY, MAY 1 Owing to the immense crowd of persons waiting to get into court, the greatest confusion prevailed, insomuch that an order was given from the Bench, and by the Lord Provost, to get a way cleared for the Jury to enter the Court. This arose from the doors being laid open, contrary to former years’ practice, and was attended with a great confusion, many persons having lost the skirts of their coats, &c… (Here followed the account of a shooting at Eaglesham and later an excise offence) THURSDAY, MAY 2 The crowd, this day, was so great, that the Judges had difficulty in getting into the Court. Mr Jeffrey and other Barristers were admitted by the subterraneous passages used only for the prisoners… (Here followed the report of an assault on the Kirkintilloch road which the Jury found not proven for all accused except one) John Norval, William Renwick, James Miller, Patrick Quigly, and Mary O’Hara, accused of theft and reset of theft, on Thursday the 1st of February last, by forcing a pane from the shop window of James Drummond and Co., High Street, Glasgow, and stealing therefrom pieces of tartan, gingham, &c. to the amount of £20, the three former having committed the theft, and carried the goods to Quigley’s house. Norval, Renwick, and Miller, pleaded Guilty; Quigley and O’Hara, his wife, pleaded Not Guilty. Quigley spoke very violently and disrespectfully to the Judges on the Bench. From the testimony of several witnesses who were examined, it appeared, that after the apprehension of Norval and the other prisoners who committed the robbery, a search was made in Quigley’s for the stolen property, but at first nothing was found; but on a second search the goods were found in his cellar, and his wife had given a piece of the stolen gingham to a girl to make a gown of, but who, on hearing it was stolen, delivered it up to Mr Brown, a constable. – John Smith, an accomplice in the robbery, deponed that the goods were carried to Quigley’s, and that he knew they were stolen; they got a guinea for one piece, and 13 shillings for the remainder; had been several times at Quigley’s selling stolen goods; and since his apprehension Quigley offered to give him money to fit him out as a pedlar if he would not speak against him. Quigley told witness he would feign insanity at the bar. The Jury unanimously found the prisoners Norval, Renwick, and Miller, Guilty on their own confession; and Quigley and his wife Guilty as libelled. (Here followed on the same day a case of assault at Canniesburn Toll, and two cases of robbery) FRIDAY, MAY 3 The Court met at eight o’clock… (Here followed a case of breaking and entering) John Norval, William Renwick, James Miller, convicted of theft, and Patrick, or Peter, Quigly, and Mary O’Hara, his wife, of reset. The three former are mere boys, and the Court considered them only as tools in the hands of Quigley and his wife, and seduced by them to the commission of the offence. The thieves to be imprisoned for one year in the Bridewell of Glasgow, and Quigley and O’Hara to be transported beyond seas for 14 years. – John Smith, an accomplice in the robbery, deponed that the goods were carried to Quigley’s (Here followed other sentences of prisoners found guilty at the assizes) William
Campbell,
alias Barber, accused of theft, by stealing bed curtains, a blue great
coat, &c., pleaded Guilty. The Jury returned a verdict of Guilty, on his own confession. NOTE William Campbell, alias Barber, was named with Patrick Quigly and Mary O'Hara in the Third Indictment. [B] Friday, May 3 1816 GLASGOW ASSIZES THURSDAY, May 2 … (Here was reported an assault on the road to Kirkintilloch.) JOHN NORVAL, WILLIAM RENWICK, AND J. MILLAR, accused of taking a pane of glass from the window of Messrs. James Drummond and Co.’s shop, High Street, on the 1st Feb. 1816, and of stealing therefrom two webs of tartan, a piece of flannel, a piece of durant, several pieces of gingham; and of entering the house of Mary Jamieson, Argyll Street, on the 1st Feb. 1816, and of forcing the lock of a chest of drawers, and of stealing from said house a half-sheet, a shirt, and a man’s hat, and PATRICK or PETER QUIGLY, and MARY O’HARA, accused of resetting the same. Norval, Miller and Renwick pleaded Guilty, and Quigly and O’Hare Not Guilty. Quigly when called on to plead, behaved in a very indecorous and disgusting manner, and reflected on the administration of justice in Scotland, and expressed his determination to plead his own cause. During the whole trial he behaved with the utmost levity; and appeared to entertain much enmity to the city officers. Baillie Jamieson and Mr Simson identified the declarations of the pannels. Alexander Drummond, shopman with Messrs. Drummond and Co. particularised the articles of the theft. Went with Calder, Ross and Edmond to Menzies’ at foot of Old Wynd, and there found Norval, Miller, Smith and McKinlay. Searched the house and the boys; only found 11s concealed in the lining of Smith’s trowsers, and then lodged the boys in the Police Office about 2 o’clock in the morning of 2nd of Feb. Smith next day confessed that it was by him that the panes, newly put in, had been removed, and the goods taken away: and the said goods were in the house of Quigly, where witness and officers went in the afternoon, but did not find any goods. Witness, along with Mrs Quigly, left the Office, and searched the house at eight o’clock at night, but did not get the goods, and were leaving the house when a boy said to them that he could show them where a bundle was. They then searched a cellar at the back of Quigly’s house: and Bain, the Police officer, found a bundle, in which some pieces of the goods stolen were found. The goods identified; the patterns are peculiar; and witness is well acquainted with them. Saw the patterns in the window the day before the theft. Cross-examined. Witness has sold this description of goods for a long time past. The entry into Quigly’s cellar is from the close. Thinks that the door was not locked. The piece of gingham stolen was the only one in the shop at the time. Neil McLean, shopman with Drummond & Co. identified to the best of his knowledge the goods produced as those stolen. They are the exact patterns of those sold. Ellen Morrison, on the 2nd of February, got a piece of gingham from Mrs Quigly to make a gown; before it was made, being in a house opposite Quigly’s, she was told of the search, when she suspected that the gingham had been stolen, and said she would give it up, and on the Monday gave it to Brown the Officer. Identified the gingham. Agnes Thorburn lives above Quigly. Mrs Quigly asked her to take a bundle in charge for her, but witness refused to do it; at that time the search was going on. The cellar belonged to Quigly’s house. Saw the people searching it at about nine o’clock at night. John Smith, accomplice in the commission of the theft, was one of the party who stole the goods from Drummond’s shop. Carried the goods to Quigly’s house. Quigly gave 34s for them, knowing them to be stolen. Witness had been at his house with stolen goods several times before, which he purchased: and always told him that the goods were stolen. Went a second time to Mr Drummond’s that night, and got a web of tartan. Quigly was told that they were going to do so. Mrs Quigly was present when the goods were taken to the house. Quigly has promised witness money to begin business as a pedlar, and to take him to Ireland, if he (witness) would not say any thing against him; and Quigly said, that on his trial he would pretend to be radgy (insane); and advised him (witness) to do the same. In all transactions witness has had with him, he never believed him to be a lunatic. The jury unanimously found the prisoners Millar, Norval and Renwick Guilty of the thefts libelled, and Quigly and O’Hara of resetting the goods stolen from the shop of Messrs. Drummond & Co. (Here was reported an assault on the keeper at Canniesburn Toll.) WILLIAM CAMPBELL alias BARBER (included in an indictment with Millar, Quigly and O’Hare, already convicted) accused of entering the house of Mr D. Paterson, spirit dealer, Maxwell Street, Glasgow, on the 22nd January 1816, and of stealing from the lobby of said house a blue great coat, and cotton handkerchief, and from an apartment in said house, four pieces of bed curtains, a half –blanket; and PATRICK QUIGLEY and MARY O’HARA resetting the same, the crime of said Campbell is aggravated by his being habit and repute a thief, pleaded Guilty. (Here was reported a trial for robbery.) Friday, May 3 SENTENCES The Court met at eight o’clock…(Here was reported the sentencing of various prisoners convicted at the assizes) John Norval, Wm. Renwick, and James Millar, convicted of theft, and Patrick or Peter Quigly, and Mary O’Hara, his wife, of reset. The three former are mere boys, and the Court considered them only as tools in the hands of Quigly and his wife, and seduced by them to the commission of the offence. The thieves to be imprisoned for one year in the Bridewell of Glasgow, and Quigly and O’Hara to be transported beyond seas for 14 years. (Here was reported the sentencing of the Canniesburn Toll accused convicted at the assizes) William Campbell, alias Barber, found guilty of theft, was sentenced to seven years transportation beyond seas.
|
|
4 Norval, Renwick, and Miller, pleaded Guilty; Quigley and O’Hara, his wife, pleaded Not Guilty. Quigley spoke very violently and disrespectfully to the Judges on the Bench. a search was made in Quigley’s for the stolen property, but at first nothing was found; but on a second search the goods were found in his cellar John Smith, an accomplice in the robbery, deponed that the goods were carried to Quigley’s (Glasgow Herald 3 May 1816 all above) Quigly when called on to plead, behaved in a very indecorous and disgusting manner, and reflected on the administration of justice in Scotland, and expressed his determination to plead his own cause. During the whole trial he behaved with the utmost levity; and appeared to entertain much enmity to the city officers. Smith next day confessed that it was by him that the panes, newly put in, had been removed, and the goods taken away: and the said goods were in the house of Quigly, where witness and officers went in the afternoon, but did not find any goods. Witness, along with Mrs Quigly, left the Office, and searched the house at eight o’clock at night, but did not get the goods, and were leaving the house when a boy said to them that he could show them where a bundle was. They then searched a cellar at the back of Quigly’s house: and Bain, the Police officer, found a bundle, in which some pieces of the goods stolen were found. (Glasgow Chronicle 3 May 1816 above) When the declarations, trial and newspaper account are read, it seems obvious at first glance that all of the accused are merely anti-social types, and initiates of the criminal fraternity. A second or third glance raises some questions - raises them at least, if not settling answers on them. An acquaintance with the history of the late 18th and early 19th century opens the possibility that there may have been more to such a case than meets the eye on first reading. Consider the scenario. A troublesome, outspoken, and hostile Irishman on British soil is got rid of to Australia for the next 14 years. In the context of the American and French Revolutions, the 1798 Irish Rebellion, the Napoleonic Wars, and the Radicalism known to be affecting Scotland in the harsh economic conditions of the post Napoleonic period, it is certainly possible that what we have here is not just anti-social but even anti-establishment and belongs to the world of spies, paid informers and agents provocateurs, used by the British establishment to deal with unwanted elements in British cities. It is generally accepted now that many emigrant Irishmen had joined with Scotsmen in Scots organisations that modelled themselves of those of the United Irishmen, with the same goals - liberty and independence. Just as we saw from their activities that the modern IRA was both political and criminal, so we can begin to perceive that this Irishman's criminal behaviour may have been the lever used by the authorities to remove him from a political career in the tradition of the United Irishmen. 'Once a rebel always a rebel' was the opinion held by at least one Glasgow establishment figure, Samuel Hunter, editor of the Glasgow Herald newspaper and the commanding colonel of the Glasgow Yeomanry. He himself had served in Ireland in the 1798 rising and his enduring hatred of the Irish stemmed from then. A sur-namesake of Patrick Quigly, Fr James Coigly or Quigley, had been got rid of using those very methods not quite 20 years earlier- and he was hanged for treason. The detail of his story persuades us that he was specifically targeted and specifically eliminated. In the years following Peter Quigly's departure to New South Wales, we know of intensive activity in Glasgow that led to the Radical War of 1820. We know too that spies, paid informers, and agents provocateurs were used in those years as well, the most well known probably being Alexander Baillie Richmond who, having begun as a member of weavers' unions around 1812, was gradually enticed by Government emoluments and favours to infiltrate Radical organisations, ending in being dumped by his Government employers and later suing for libel damages against the London distributors of works that he believed had unfairly maligned him. Many more details wait to be drawn out of this story and all point in the same direction: it more than possible that Peter or Patrick Quigly was trapped like a fly in a web, not merely for criminal cause but very likely for political ends also. |
|
5
Francis Jeffrey was the leading advocate for the defence in the trial of Peter or Patrick Quigly and Mary O'Hara at Glasgow in May 1816. It is not known how, when, and by whom he was retained and paid. It is remarkable that such a figure was called to defend a mere publican and his wife on charges of theft and reset in Glasgow. For in recent times he has been called 'one of the most influential commentators on matters of art, politics and science'. He was highly educated, talented, and innovative, rising to the top in several walks of life, therefore only a brief sketch of this successful man's life can be outlined here. His presence in such a trial was probably as a result of a Scots legal practice that began in the 15th century. In an Act of the Scottish Parliament of 1424 it was decreed: And gif thar be ony pur creatur that for defalt of cunying or dispense cannot or may not follow his cause the King for the lufe of God sall ordane that the Judge before quha the cause suld be determined purvey and get a lele and wys advocate to follow sic pur creatures cause Since that time, the Faculty of Advocates has drawn from a list of junior counsel to defend those in need appearing at the High Court, and senior counsel to appear in murder cases. Francis Jeffrey was born on October 23 1773 in Edinburgh to Henrietta Louden and George Jeffrey, a depute clerk of the Court of Session. The eldest of five children, he was educated at the High School of Edinburgh, continuing his studies at the Universities of Glasgow, Edinburgh and Oxford. He was described by a contemporary as a man of small and slight figure and of handsome countenance, and elsewhere as being at times 'vivacious'. He was admitted as an advocate of the Scottish bar of December 16 1794. In 1801 he married Catherine Wilson, who sadly died four years later. In 1802, in collaboration with Sydney Smith and Francis Horner, Jeffrey founded the Edinburgh Review, a magazine whose subjects ranged across the spectrum of arts, politics and science. He remained as editor between the years 1803-1829, setting the standard for all other 19th century magazines that were to follow. In 1818 it had a circulation of 13500. Politically, Jeffrey and the Edinburgh Review favoured the Whig approach to politics, supporting political reform and liberalism, in contrast to the predominant Tory bias of the Law establishment in Scotland. His editorship of the magazine only came to an end when the Whigs returned to Government and the siren of political service called him. By 1812 Francis Jeffrey was successful enough to be occupying a country house at Hatton, once a seat of the Earls of Lauderdale. He married his second wife, Charlotte Wilkes, in 1813 in New York, dining during his visit there with President Madison. In 1820 and again in 1823 he was elected by the students Rector of the University of Glasgow. In 1829 he became Dean of the Faculty of Advocates and in 1830 Lord Advocate. His career as an MP, for Perth constituency, had begun before his appointment to the post of Lord Advocate, and continued after his appointment with his election to be MP for Edinburgh in 1832. He was manager for the Parliamentary Reform Bill for Scotland. In 1834 he was created a Law Lord in the Court of Session, and known as Lord Jeffrey. Francis Jeffrey died on January 26 1850 and was buried in Dean Cemetery in a plot of earth he had chosen for himself while out walking there one day. |
|
6 LIST OF CHARACTERS compiled from those mentioned in the formal statements or newspaper accounts of PETER QUIGLY and MARY O'HARA Alexander, Boyd, of Southbar, juryman Anderson, Mary, witness and daughter of Thomas Anderson wright in Mudies Court Argyle Street Glasgow Bain, James, witness and Police officer in Glasgow Brash, John, architect in Glasgow, juryman Brebner, William, witness and Keeper of the Bridewell of Glasgow Brown, Alexander, witness and manufacturer in Glasgow who lodged in the house of Dundas Paterson in Maxwell Street and like him was robbed Brown, Moses, of Broomhill, juryman Brown, Robert, witness and Horse dealer in Glasgow, and late Master of the Horse Patrole there Buchanan, Mrs Elizabeth, witness and wife of Dundas Paterson BUCHANAN, Jean, had a house in Camlachie were John O’Hara lodged CALDER, Alexander, witness and Glasgow City police officer (Sheriff's officer), with others searched accuseds' home & escorted them to police station. In The Scottish Insurrection of 1820 the authors mention Calder. They record that the authorities, including a strong body of military, raided William Lang's house in Bell Street, Glasgow, on Monday April 10 1820, taking away various items including the key. 'It was later revealed that the Sheriff's officer, Calder, had offered to pay one of Lang's apprentice printers the sum of £300 "to be made a gentleman for life", if he would swear that Lang had printed the proclamation of the "Provisional Government". On Wednesday August 30 1820, James Wilson, a weaver, was hanged and beheaded for treason outside the Court of Justiciary beside the River Clyde in Glasgow. It was the Sheriff's officer, Alexander Calder, who secured his mangled remains in a coffin and had it taken to a pauper's ground near Glasgow for burial, much to the consternation of grieving relatives who had understood his last wish to be taken back to his home town for burial would be observed. At midnight they dug up his body and carried it back to his native Strathaven for burial in the parish churchyard. CAMPBELL or BARBER, William, in custody for theft, extract of a sentence given against him in Glasgow Court on 10 February 1814 used in evidence, in Mary O'Hara's house only once according to her, could write CLEPHANE, Andrew, Advocate Depute, signed each page of the indictment. Colquhoun, Archibald of Killermont, His Majesty’s Advocate for His Majesty’s Interest DAROCH or DARROCH, Esther, witness and prisoner in the Tolbooth of Glasgow, cousin of Mary O’Hara, lived in Whiskey Close Calton, wife of Peter McGuire DAVIE, William, witness and writer (ie solicitor as in Scots usage) in Glasgow Drummond, Alexander, witness and shopman to James Drummond and Company, scotch cloth merchants in Glasgow Drummond, James, witness and managing partner of the concern of James Drummond and Company Scotch Cloth Merchants on the east side of the High Street, Glasgow DUNCAN, Bob, one of the group of lads thieving with Smith, Miller et al Edmond, James, witness and one of the officers of the Criminal Court of Glasgow Ferguson, Hugh, writer (solicitor) in Glasgow, juryman Foster, Charles, of Drummoyne, juryman GARDNER, James, witness and Keeper of the Tolbooth (jail) of Glasgow GILLIES, Adam, (1760-1842), Lord Gillies Scottish Judge, presiding trial judge in this case. He was a Whig judge, a friend of Thomas Muir, with whom he had been called to the bar at the same time. Later in the decade, in 1817, he presided at the first trial for sedition in Scotland for fifteen years, that of Alexander MacLaren, a weaver, and Thomas Baird, a shopkeeper. During the trial the speech that defence advocate Francis Jeffrey gave in favour of Baird was said to be the best defence speech given at the Scottish Bar. The jury requested clemency but Gillies sentence the convicted men, nevertheless, to six months imprisonment and to find security for three years. Gilmour, James, witness and son of David Gilmour, baker in Gallowgate Street of Glasgow GOW, James, lately waiter at the Saracen’s head Inn Paisley and owner with his wife Mary Jamieson, of an Eating House, situated in Argyle Street of Glasgow Gow, Mary, witness and daughter of the said Mary Jamieson and James Gow Graham, Alexander, of Craigbet, juryman Hamilton, James, of Barns, juryman HARLEY, Peggy, resided with Quiglys, taken into custody HENDERSON, Mr Richard, witness and a Town Clerk of Glasgow Hermand, Lord Hermand, one of the trial judges in this case, died 1827 Hurley, Randle, witness and one of the officers of the Criminal Court of Glasgow Jamieson, Mary , or Mrs Gow, witness, wife of James Gow and publican, claimed to have been victim of theft of a sheet Mary O'Hara bought, kept with her husband an Eating House in Argyle Street, Glasgow JAMIESON esquire, Robert, witness and Glasgow magistrate, also called Baillie Jamieson JEFFREY, Mr Francis, leading advocate defending the accused Jones, John, bleacher at Crasslingow, juryman Kennedy, Robert, of Mossvale, juryman Kibble, James, of Whiteford, juryman MacCusker, Hugh, witness and Broker in Bridgegate Street of Glasgow Mackenzie, Elizabeth, witness and wife of Alexander Ross, soldier in the 42nd Regiment of foot, lived at Cross Boys Close, Salt market street of Glasgow [gone to the Regiment in Edinburgh barracks] Marsden, Jane, witness and wife of Archibald Buchanan print cutter, residing in Camlachie of Glasgow MARTIN, Mary, resided with Quiglys, taken into custody McCrone, James, of Braehead, juryman MCGUIRE, Peter, husband of Esther Darroch, lived in Whiskey Close Calton McIntosh, Daniel, witness and weaver residing in the Calton of Glasgow McKINLAY or MCKINLEY, Robert, alias Walter Jamieson, prisoner in custody, whom Mary O’Hara disclaimed all knowledge of; unable to write McLean, Neil, witness and apprentice to James Drummond and Company MENZIES, James, had a public house in Old Wynd where Miller, Smith, Campbell, McKinlay & Norval were apprehended MILLAR or MILLER, James, in custody for theft, aged 16 or 17, worked as a weaver with his father in Calton. could not write Mitchell, John, of Rockvilla, juryman MORRISON, Miss Helen, witness and dressmaker, lived in land behind Quigly in Littledowhill of Glasgow Mount, Sarah, witness and servant or late servant to the William Ralston MUIR esquire, William, witness and a Glasgow magistrate NEWTON, John, witness and comedian 'of the Theatre Royal Glasgow', owned the hat that was stolen from Mrs Gow's Eating House NORVAL, John, prisoner in custody for theft, 14 or 15 years old when apprehended, worked with his father who was a combmaker; able to write O’HARA, Catharine or Kitty, witness and sister of Mary, servant of Mary and Patrick Quigly, residing with them in Littledowhill of Glasgow, taken into custody, owner of the trunk or box cited, came from Ireland with Quiglys 2 years before, lived with them in Edinburgh, came with them to Glasgow, went to reside with Esther Darroch, her cousin O’HARA, Mary, born Antrim, Ireland, aged 32, accused of reset, wife of Patrick Quigly for 2 years; unable to write O’HARRA, Dan, brother of Mary, enlisted in the Train?, left six months before her arrest O’HARRA, Henry/John, brother of Mary, lived in lodgings in Camlachie in house of Jean Buchanan, wore an apron Paterson, Dundas, spirit dealer in Glasgow, whose premises were situated in Maxwell Street Glasgow and who was robbed Paterson, Matthew, witness and Taylor in Glasgow Pollock, James, of Blackhouse, juryman QUIGLY, Patrick, publican in little dow hill, prisoner in Tolbooth, aged possibly 32, born Derry, Ireland, kept shop in Ireland, then travelling merchant, previously find for selling liquor without a license, married 2 years to Mary O’Hara, came from Ireland 2 years before, lived in Edinburgh, had broker’s shop, moved to Glasgow previous year after Whitsun; able to write, accused of reset RALSTON, William, witness and broker in Saltmarket Street, Glasgow from whose shop watches and seals were stolen RENWICK, William, prisoner accused of theft, could not write RODGERS, James, lived in Camlachie, had a house to which Quigly and O’Hara were allegedly taking the box Ross, Agnes, witness and servant to Dundas Paterson Spirit dealer residing in Maxwell Street Glasgow Ross, Hugh, witness and one of the officers of the Criminal Court of GlasgowSIMSON, Andrew, witness and clerk to Richard Henderson SMITH, John, witness, convicted thief, then accused thief, prisoner n the Tolbooth of Glasgow STEWART, John, witness and writer (ie solicitor) in Glasgow TAYLOR, James, witness, weaver and broker lived in Well Street Calton of Glasgow, bought stolen coat from Smith Taylor, John, of Springbank, juryman THOMSON, Mr Robert, one of the advocates for the defence Thorburn, Agnes, witness and widow of Archibald Davidson, Tanner in Glasgow, residing in Littledowhill of Glasgow White, Walter, of Bankhead, juryman
|
|
7 In February 1816, Peter, also known as Patrick, Quigly and Mary O'Hara, his wife, with others, were arrested and questioned by police officers and magistrates in Glasgow on charges of theft and reset, or receiving stolen property. They were tried at the Circuit Court of Justiciary at Glasgow in May 1816. Patrick Quigly and Mary O'Hara, having pleaded 'not guilty', were convicted of the charges against them and sentenced to fourteen years transportation 'beyond seas' - that is, in Australia. They travelled separately to Australia during the course of 1816-1817, to a new life, not of their choosing, far from their native Ireland, and far from the Glaswegian life they were plucked from. background The punishment of transportation from Britain to Australia began in 1787. A form of 'forced exile' it had existed in England from Elizabethan times as a way of dealing with 'obdurate idlers', and later those destined to hang or to be flogged and branded had been sent to the American colonies as a indication of the the king's mercy. After the American War of Independence this was no longer an option. The 'empty' continent whose eastern seaboard had been mapped by Captain Cook became to new recipient of a population of British subjects alienated in principle and now to be alienated in practice from their own society. As Robert Hughes put it, transportation conveyed evil to another world. the process Most prisoners were first transferred from their place of trial to the prison hulks in London. From there they were embarked on the vessel that would carry them 'beyond seas'. This punishment of transportation might be awarded to those convicted for a variety of offences, more often against property or the State than against persons, and who were sentenced to seven years imprisonment or more. It was less severe than hanging in that convicts still had their lives to live, but more severe than a gaol term in one's own country in that the prisoner was separated from friends and family by the insuperable bars of distance and ocean. Sentenced to a term of exile for between seven years and life, the old, the young, male and female, Catholic and Protestant, English, Irish or Scots, all were to be found in varying proportions on the vessels heading to the southern hemisphere. Stealing, of one kind or another, or some activity connected with it was what sent most convicts 'beyond seas'. For some it was, and was meant to be, a living death; the executioner's hand had been stayed. Even when their sentence had been completed, convicts were not normally allowed to return home. Patrick Quigly and Mary O'Hara, his wife, were each sentenced to fourteen years transportation. Like most of their fellow convicts they came from city life, and like one third of the convicts, they were Irish born. In the early days of transportation to Australia some care was taken by government to care for the health and wellbeing of the prisoners aboard ship. When the prisoner was transferred from his or her local jurisdiction to the convict ship, the High Sheriff or other court official was expected to ensure that their health was such that would allow their sentences to be carried out, that each convict had the specified additional articles of wearing apparel, and that they were certified by the Surgeon as free 'from any infectious distemper'. The additional apparel for a female convict was 'one spare jacket or gown, one spare petticoat, two spare shifts, two spare handkerchiefs, two spare pairs of stockings, one spare pair of shoes'. Patrick Patrick Quigly left
England with 199 other male convicts in a ship called the "Sir William
Bensley", arriving in Sydney, New South Wales, minus one of their number,
on March 10 1817. The ship's master was Lew E. Williams and the Surgeon, charged
with the welfare of the convicts on board, was William Evans. Mary Mary O'Hara travelled separately with 101 convict women aboard the "Lord Melville", a 412 ton ship, built at Shields in 1805. They sailed from England on September 15 1816 and reached Sydney, New South Wales on February 24 1817, after 162 days at sea. Thackray Wetherell was the ship's master. Daniel MacNamara was the ship's surgeon. journey and arrival Convicts were handed over to the custody of the master of the ship at the start of their voyage, and transferred to the authority of the Governor of the colony they landed. The documents used to record the transactions were called 'indents' or indentures. Aboard ship, the convicts were housed below deck. Independent surgeon superintendents and special bonuses paid to the charterers for safe arrival gradually improved conditions for convicts and ensured that many survived the voyage without mishap. Mary O'Hara and Patrick Quigly were sent to New South Wales, the eastern province of Australia in 1816. There were only two at that time! The port of Sydney, called after the British Lord Sydney, a Colonial Secretary, was situated in the south eastern section of the Australian coast, mapped by Captain Cook only 46 years earlier. |
|
8 CONVICT LIFE IN NEW SOUTH WALES, AUSTRALIA Male and female convicts travelled to Australia separately. When they arrived there, they discovered that the men who were convicts outnumbered the women five to one. For Patrick Quigly and Mary O'Hara, another discovery would have been that almost a third of the convict population of new South Wales was Irish. Most of the rest were English, the majority city dwellers. Patrick would have been at the upper end of the age range for convicts, for young and very young males constituted the major part. He, like about three quarters of the convict population, had some degree of literacy - a proportion that was far higher than in the population of Britain as a whole. Many
convicts continued to pursue a criminal life if and when the opportunity arose,
and were punished severely if caught, some to a degree that would not now be
tolerated or countenanced in a free society: flogging, the treadmill, solitary
confinement, deprivation of food, the stocks and thumbscrews. Working on a road
gang, interment on Norfolk Island, and finally capital punishment were at the
end of a series of increasingly serious punishments doled out to those who would
not or could not follow the system. Not all convicts were uncooperative. Others
used their determination of character and intelligence in their struggle for
survival in an often inhospitable natural and social environment. Convicts could be assigned to government work service or the service of private settlers, usually as labourers in the case of males, and house servants in the case of females. This was in effect a form of slave labour, and in the case of women convicts a form of prostitution too, in many instances, since the ratio of men to women was 2 to 1 and there were not enough suitable buildings for the women to lodge or reside in. Many women worked in the Female Factory. The first was built at Parramatta in 1804, just beyond Sydney. It was a large long room with cooking facilities for the women to use at one end. The women made rope and span and carded wool. Any man wanting to marry one of the women could apply. The man would walk along the women lined up and drop a scarf or handkerchief beside the woman of his choice. If she picked it up, the marriage could take place almost straightaway. Many convicts had been accustomed to city living and unused to hard and regular physical work. Drunkenness and absconding were the most common offences, part of the process of coming to terms with a harsh reality that was not easily manipulated. Idleness, lack of supervision and living off their wits was what many had been used to: hard grinding work with sheep or bullocks, under the keen eye of an overseer, with specific orders to follow, must have represented a colossal change. Some, after a slow and hesitant start, grasped the new opportunities: training, enterprise, business openings in a new land, all were the making of a man or woman who had experienced at first hand what it meant to live among the dregs of society. Bakers, brewers, shipwrights, engineers, shopkeepers, landholders, tailors, licensees, were the success stories that could become, following on the receiving of a ticket of leave and later on a conditional or free pardon. New relationships, friendship, love, marriage and children, allowed many convicts to lay the foundations of a new and forward looking country even as they built new lives for themselves. Sadly, for many, there were not always enough women to go round, and some convicts, men and women, were just not ideal partners in the relationship stakes. Sadly, too, reform of life style evaded the grasp of large numbers: the old habits, the old problems, the old Adam, were just too ingrained. |
|
9 I am very grateful to Russell Kelly, a fellow researcher researching the female convicts of Australia, for information he provided me with about Peter/Patrick Quigly's and Mary O'Hara's lives in Australia. I have added to it my own findings and presented it as a timeline: 1816 Peter and Mary were arrested, tried, and found guilty of 'reset' in May. They were sentenced to 14 years transportation 'beyond the seas'. Mary left Britain for Australia on 13 September.1817 Peter and Mary travelled in separate convict ships to Australia, Peter on the Sir William Bensley and Mary on the Lord Melville. Both arrived in Sydney, New South Wales, Mary in February and Peter in March. 1818 Peter was sent to Newcastle on July 17 on the HMCB Lady Nelson, sentenced to one year by D'Arcy Wentworth. On the 8th July he had been taken up on suspicion of having committed a robbery. [Newcastle was the first secondary penal colony in Australia and was established in 1804 to confine a group of Irish convicts who had staged an uprising at Castle Hill. It operated until 1824. Repeat offenders were set to work cutting and hauling timber, working coal mines and gathering sea shells which they converted into lime.] 1819 Mary was recorded as living off the King's stores. She was employed by Mr Gore. [Convicts were either 'victualled' or not by the Government stores, ie 'on' or 'off' stores. This depended on their employment. They could become independent of Government victualling if they were assigned to free people or through a Ticket of Leave. Since Mary was an assigned servant from her arrival until at least 1822 she was not 'on the stores'.] [Most convicts were assigned to settlers and emancipated convicts after an application for a convict servant or worker was lodged with the Governor. Some married convicts were even assigned to their free spouses. Convicts were often listed as Government Servants while serving time.] 1820 On a list of prisoners made out by the Superintendent of Police it was noted that on 13th September Peter was absent from his Barrack cell for three days. 1821 In November/December Mary's name appeared on an application list for permission to marry at Liverpool, signed and presented to His Excellency the Governor by the Assistant Chaplain Robert Cartwright. Her intended was James Morris. The application was approved. [This does not seem to fit later events and may be a misrecording. There was another Mary O'Hara in the the Parramatta and Liverpool area (her parents were Francis and Eliz). She had been married in 1817 and may have been seeking permission to marry again in 1821. However the application clearly refers to the Mary O'Hara mentioned as being transported on the Lord Melville, though that could be part of the misrecording. Mary's Memorial records her employed continuously in Sydney from 1817 until at least 1822. The balance of probability falls on this record confusing two distinct Mary O'Haras.] 1822 Mary was recorded as a government servant to William Browne in Sydney. She petitioned the Governor for mitigation of her sentence, with the recommendation of William Browne. [William Browne came free to Australia on the ship Mary in1816; he was a merchant, magistrate and landholder.] In her 'memorial' to Governor Brisbane, Mary declared that she had conducted herself with propriety since her arrival in the colony and humbly begs for a Ticket of Leave off stores. William Browne endorsement reads: I certify that Mary O'Hara has served me for some time past to the entire satisfaction of her mistress and myself and that I believe her to be an industrious and well behaved woman capable and disposed to maintain herself honestly off the store. I further certify that when assigned to me she brought me an excellent character from her former employer, Mr ? Gore. signed Wm Browne In February/March Michael McDermot was convicted by the Court of Criminal Jurisdiction of stealing from Peter. [McDermot was sentenced to 3 years transportation to Port MacQuarie.] Peter Quigley was operating as a dealer in Sydney on a Ticket of Leave issued to Peter on 13 September 1822. 1822-23 Peter appeared on a list of persons to whom convict mechanics had been assigned. 1823 In April/May a convict called George Davey was convicted by the Court of Criminal Jurisdiction of receiving goods stolen from Quigley. [Davey was sentenced to 3 years transportation to Port MacQuarie.] 1823-24 Peter was listed in Colonial Fund statements from July 1823 until December of the following year. He was inscribed on account of rents received for assigned convict tradesmen for the three quarters ending 30 June 1824. 1825 Mary was still doing her time and was recorded as the wife of Peter Quigley in Sydney. Peter 'the Dealer' had two convicts working for him as government servants: John Norris and Patrick Nowlan. [John Norris was born in Londonderry, Ireland in 1778 and after conviction in Inverary, Scotland in 1816, travelled to Australia on the ship Shipley from London in 1817. Patrick Nowlan was born in County Kildare, Ireland in 1801 and was given a life sentence in 1819 which brought him to Australia from Cork by the ship Almorah in 1820.] On August 17 a petition on behalf of Peter Quigley applying for emancipation was received at the Colonial Secretary's office and the process of checking on him and other prisoners named on the list was begun. After searches in the specific police records the police made a formal statement that nothing prejudicial to Peter appeared on their relevant records. In October Peter was named as a witness to the character of the convict John Norris for mitigation of the latter's sentence. In November an application to be granted a conditional pardon was received from Peter. 1828 Mary was still in government servitude. She was recorded as a Housekeeper to Peter Quigley in Market Street, Sydney. Peter was recorded as a shopkeeper at Market Street and the owner of three horses. He was also recorded as a Catholic and Mary as a Protestant. Peter had a clerk working for him called John Smithers who had come out to Australia free on the ship Harvey in 1827. [This vessel arrived in Sydney on August 27 1827 with at least some convicts on board.] 1829 Peter applied for a Ticket of Leave and was granted it on April 24 1829 to replace that of 1822. There was an annotation at the foot of the page which referred to a previous 1822 Ticket of Leave 'In lieu of No 99/103, dated 13th Sept. 1822 now returned mutilated and cancelled'. At right angles across the details of the Ticket of Leave there is writing that is not altogether clear: Torn up 3 May 1830 on his receiving Certificate of Freedom No 30/236 The Ticket of leave described Peter in more or less the same details given when he was transported to Australia. 1830 Peter is listed as receiving his ticket of freedom on May 3 1830, exactly fourteen years to the day after the jury in Glasgow, Scotland had brought in a 'guilty' verdict on him. after 1828/1830 No information about Mary after 1828 has as yet been uncovered by researchers. No evidence of her receiving her certificate of freedom has been found. She may have lived on, she may have died, or she may have gone to Britain or somewhere else away from the colony. We know for certain that Peter did live to receive his certificate of freedom, but what took place afterwards we do not yet know. Russell Kelly is of the opinion that Peter had worked constantly at his business since 1822 and might well have saved enough cash to pay for himself, or for both himself and Mary if she was alive, to go 'home'. The Births, Deaths and Marriages records in the State Archives of New South Wales offer tantalising possibilities but no certainties. A Patrick Quigley, a gardener, of George Street Parramatta, died in 1866 aged 80 and was buried in the Roman Catholic Cemetery, but no definite links with Peter Quigley (alias Patrick) or Mary O'Hara are evident in the certificate of death. In Scotland in the parish of Wigtown an Irish born 'pauper' called Peter Quigeley died in February 1868 at the age of 83. This would have made him almost exactly the age Peter would have been if he had lived that long. Again there is not enough evidence to decide for certain whether this was or was not Peter 'the Dealer'. |
|
10 NAMES MARY O'HARA and PETER or PATRICK QUIGLY A Mary O'Harra wife of Patrick Quigly publican This is how Mary is referred to in her own declaration in 1816. From then on she continues to be referred to in this way. In her second declaration she is referred to as Mary O'Hara alias Mrs Quigly In all of the indictments and in the verdict and sentencing she is called Mary O'Hara, occasionally with the added epithet 'wife of the said Patrick or Peter Quigly'. In the log of the convict women aboard the ship, Lord Melville, she is referred to as Mary O'Hara and 'Quigly' is given as an 'also known as'. In her petition and memorial to the colonial authorities in 1821 and 1822, Mary uses the name Mary O'Hara. What inference are we to draw from this? It would be easy to jump to the conclusion that she and P. Quigly were not married. However, in Scotland there is a long and strong tradition of a woman using her 'own' name. In legal matters, I am reliably informed, until the coming in 1855 of statutory registration laws passed in England, a woman was recorded under her father's surname. Moreover, although she petitioned to marry James Morris in 1821, this may have come under the practice of allowing transported convicts who were already married to be considered for remarriage, but this was usually after seven years had passed and if the spouse lived abroad, neither of which conditions applies here. The authorities were, however, keen to encourage marriage, which they believed was a means of rehabilitation and more stable family life. It may be that Mary had been a common law wife in Scotland, for in Australia she was successful in her petition to marry. 'His Excellency the Governor's approbation' was duly transmitted in December of 1821, and presumably Mary then became Mrs James Morris! B 'Peter or Patrick Quigly' or 'Patrick or Peter Quigly' In the legal Declarations, the Indictments, the Verdict and the Sentencing under the Scots law process in 1816 the name consistently used is either 'Patrick' alone or 'Patrick or Peter Quigly'. However, in the Australian records, as far as they have at present been uncovered, the usage reverses itself (upside down Australia?) and 'Peter' alone or 'Peter alias Patrick Quigly' is used. In the Colonial Secretary Index 1788-1825, the documents referring to him are filed under 'Peter'. Whichever name appears first, there is no doubt that the regular and consistent application of both 'Patrick' and 'Peter' equally to this man is unusual. It is not unique, but it is unusual, and becomes somehow characteristic of him. Where might this usage arise from? The most likely explanation, given that Peter or Patrick was born in County Derry in Ireland, is that he held a Gaelic name: PEADAR, sounded like 'Pa- tur'. This name is the equivalent in Gaelic of the English 'Peter', but when it and its diminutives are pronounced correctly in Gaelic they may sound to English speaking listeners not unlike 'Paddy', the diminutive of Patrick. The Gaelic for Patrick is quite a different sound. At the start of the 19th century, many people in Glasgow, both Irish and Scots, may have spoken some form of Gaelic, and names would have had their normal Gaelic pronunciation. To non-Gaelic speakers calling him 'Patrick' may have been approximating to what they heard him called in Gaelic. Having said all this, there is one problem: Patrick or Peter could write and signed his Declarations with his own signature, 'Patrick Quigly'. Why not Peadar, or even Peter? The last point is only a hunch. perhaps it suited Patrick or Peter to have more than one name. Perhaps it reflected his way of life: to be on the move, wheelin' & dealin', not to be pinned down. For all we know, he may have been known by these names - and by others. C Quigly, Quigley and Coigly 'Quigley' is a slightly more modern spelling than 'Quigly', but this section is not really about the spelling of Quigly but about the connotations it might have had at the time when Patrick or Peter Quigley or Quigly was sentenced to transportation. In the 1790s Europe was n great turmoil and upheaval. The French Revolution and its aftermath left no-one indifferent: either you were for it or against it and vehemently so. Ireland, though on the outskirts of Europe, shared this upset. A group called the United Irishmen were in the forefront of the political struggle, and the government feared the worst especially since it looked as if the Catholics and Protestants in the north of Ireland might manage to put to one side religious matters for the sake of political advancement. The war against the French meant that sympathisers were not just nuisances but seditious and libel for the death penalty if caught. In this climate, an Armagh priest and, many said, United Irishman, Father James Coigly, made his way to England with a view to making for France, to further the plans to seek material assistance from the French for an uprising in Ireland. With the help of spies, normal Government procedure at the time, those who had suspicions of Fr Coigly, tracked him and others of his party as they made their way to the coast. Before they could leave for France they were arrested and charged with high treason. On June 7 1798, despite an unjust trial, James Coigly was hanged at Pennington Heath, near Maidstone in Kent. Many of the Irishmen who lived and worked in Scotland in 1816 when Peter or Patrick Quigly was tried, were refugees from the troubles of Ireland in 1798 and before. A good many Scots reacted very badly at the presence of such people among them, though some Scots had shared and still did share their political aspirations. To hold the name 'Quigly' - a variation of which is Coigly - in Glasgow then, in such a climate, after the sacrifices and hardships of the Napoleonic Wars, might have been not unlike an individual calling himself Bin Laden in New York in the after years of September 2001. Whether you loved or hated him depended on which side you were on. The more we investigate the names of those involved, the more we are likely to grow in understanding of the reality of their experience. |
|
11 WHICH PETER OR PATRICK QUIGLY? Who were Patrick Quigly and Mary O'Hara? In Scotland in 1816 there were Irishmen, many of whom were seasonal workers, or who had come over as refugees after the political disruptions on the 1790s. There were not nearly as many as came to be the norm later in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. We know that both Patrick Quigly and Mary O'Hara were Irish born, Quigly in County Derry and O'Hara in County Antrim. The trial documents tell us this. The trial documents, and later Australian documents, give us few biographical clues and tell us little or nothing about which family each belonged to. Can we work out which Patrick Quigly and which Mary O'Hara they were? Which Patrick Quigly was sent 'beyond seas'? The Patrick Quigly about whom we have most information to date, and who fits best the few facts that we know about the Patrick Quigly who was transported is the one married to Mary Logan and recorded in Paisley in the first decade or so of the nineteenth century. This is a comparison of the two Patricks and the facts known about them. Each Patrick and his 'facts' will be colour coded. Where there is a compatibility it will be indicated. COMPARISON OF Patrick Quigly married to Mary Logan: represented by green font AND Patrick Quigly married to Mary O'Hara & transported: in purple 1 Known as either Patrick or Peter Quigly - Known as either Patrick or Peter Quigly compatible 2 Born 1780-81 or earlier - Born 1783-84 or earlier from known facts slightly different but not incompatible 3 Irish born by context & inference, birth place not known - Born in County Derry, Ireland compatible 4 Employment: described as labourer - Employment: described as a labourer compatible 5 Employment: dealer in Delftware - Employment: travelling merchant slightly different but not incompatible 6 No other employment descriptions - Kept shop in Ireland, broker’s shop Edinburgh, publican later different but not incompatible 7 Employment shows some variety - Employment shows some variety compatible 8 Married: Mary Logan before 1800 last child known born 1810 - Married: Mary O'Hara c 1814-1816 compatible 9 Fathered several known children with Mary Logan - No family with Mary O'Hara * compatible 10 Between Ireland & Scotland, family in Paisley before 1810 - In Ireland, Edinburgh, Glasgow 1813-1816 compatible 11 Educational level not known, family connected to school in Paisley - Can read and sign his name compatible 12 Deceased by 1874, where & when not known - Died after 1830, where & when not known compatible ADDITIONAL POINTS
CONCLUSION The relevant evidence we have thus far suggests very strongly that the two men outlined above were one and the same person. It would be fair to say that while there is no one thing absolutely and totally conclusive there is nothing as yet uncovered which prevents the two men from being the same person; on the contrary there is a lot already known which lends weight to the statement that they probably were. |
back to BACKGROUND TOPICS LIST