Thomas
Kirwan’s many acts of gallantry were recorded in contemporary newspapers and
acknowledged by the officers and men of the 59th and by the ship’s
Master James Gibbs and James Thompson, one of the two other surviving crew
members. The Waterford Chronicle was
silent on the issue of the affidavit, until an article was published on
Saturday, 23rd March, 1816, which openly questioned the facts as
drawn up in it and offered much evidence to refute it:
On
the 14th of last month, an advertisement appeared, purporting to be
the affidavits of several persons, and detailing exertions made to preserve the
lives of those who were on board the Seahorse Transport. To that document, the
name of Thomas Kerevan was annexed. At the earliest solicitation, on the
personal authority, and in the name of Thomas Kerevan, we have to inform the
public, that there were statements in these affidavits to which he neither did
nor could bear any testimony whatsoever, as the occurrences set forth in them
did not come under his observation. He feels it to be a duty which he owes to
himself and to the public to withdraw the sanction of his name, however humble
his station in life may be, from matters of which he was utterly ignorant.
Having said this much on the authority mentioned, we are bound to justice to
state more particularly than we formerly did the services performed by T
Kerevan and to which his affidavit, with very few exceptions, mostly refers.
These services are substantiated by the unquestionable authority of the
certificates of those who experienced the benefit of his exertions.
Henry Hartford, Esq, Lieutenant in the
59th Regt. has certified “that Thomas Kerevan was the person who
brought him on shore at Tramore Bay on the 30th January.” Alexander
MacPherson, Esq, Lieutenant in the 59th Regt. Has certified “that
the same person brought him on shore on the 30th of January” James
Gibbs, late master of the Seahorse, has certified “that the same person gave
him all the assistance in his power on the day of the wreck” James Thompson,
seaman, has certified “that the same person brought him on shore and saved his
life.” J Curtis, Serjeant of the 59th, has certified “that the same
person saved one corporal, one woman, and five privates.” The names of these
persons are affixed to the certificate.
A statement of these facts has been drawn
up and authenticated by Mr MacPherson, Mr Hartford, and Mr Curtis and by
several Gentlemen of the highest respectability. Major Robart has borne the
strongest testimony to the efforts of Kerevan in saving the crew and property
of the Brig Apollonia, and also with respect to his exertion on behalf of those
on board the Seahorse. Kerevan is a native of Tramore, served several years as
a yeoman there, and has uniformly, in cases of wrecks, attended to the utmost
of his power to the safety of crews and the preservation of property. On the 30th
of January, he was often in the most imminent danger of losing his life. The
Officers of the 59th offered him money, but he refused it, saying if
he had any money, he would rather give it to them, than take anything from men
in their situation. His means of subsistence are scanty and circumscribed, but
there can be no doubt of the generosity of government being extended towards
him, both on his own account, and on account of the wisdom and advantages of
liberally rewarding such humane and brave actions. In doing justice to him, we
do not mean, in the slightest degree, to detract from the merits of those
services which were performed by others. To these we fully adverted at the time
of the melancholy catastrophe. They were truly noble, and give their authors a
well-founded claim to public esteem, and, where necessary, to the most solid
proofs of the approbation of Government.[1]
J.B.
Trotter Esq also remarked that his conduct should not pass unnoticed by the
government. Kirwan, a publican, was born circa 1788. He was about 28 years of
age, at the time of the wreck in 1816. He was an expert swimmer, and was reported as having swum
repeatedly from the shore to the wrecks and rescued eleven men including three officers.
Mr Henry McDougal
wrote to Sir Robert Peel, the Chief Secretary of Ireland from 1812 to 1818, to
state that Kirwan was in ‘the utmost pecuniary distress’ and informed him that
he had been actually in prison for some time after the wreck, over a debt of
£6. McDougal, a Presbyterian and an able solicitor, procured his
release, as he thought that it did not reflect well on the city of Waterford that
such a man remained in prison. McDougal was held in great
esteem by his contemporaries, ‘prized by the wise and beloved by the good.’[2] Kirwan eventually received £30 in total for all his efforts, but was said to
grateful for the little which was done for him.
In 1818, Thomas Taylor, the clerk of the Chief
Secretary’s Office, wrote a letter to Robert Grubb who was then the
superintendent of the works at Dunmore Harbour, enquiring about the efforts of
individuals to save shipwrecked men in Waterford. Grubb replied in a letter
dated 3 October 1818, that
Perhaps
the enquiry you want belongs to Tramore where I recollect one man was
understood to be remarkably active and successful in saving many soldiers out
of the Seahorse Transport which was lost there. I have satisfied my own
recollection by reference to a confidential friend & I believe I have
written all the information we can provide.[3]
Kirwan’s
plight was to make headlines when, Richard Lalor Sheil was accused of slandering Sir
Robert Peel, during an aggregate
meeting in Dublin in
December 1824. Sheil, a lawyer and politician, was a fervent ally of Daniel
O’Connell and was a co-founder of the Catholic Association in 1823. The affair
revolved around Sheil repeating a remark of the late Henry
McDougal, made at
the Bar in Kilkenny, concerning the reward that Thomas Kirwan received,
and that he had not been offered more on account of being a Catholic. McDougal, at that time, the Recorder for Waterford died in 1823; he had
previously requested Sheil not to mention his remark in public, an obligation
that Sheil considered to be released from on the death of the latter.[4]
When the controversy about the affair first arose, Mr Nicholas Mason, a
respectable merchant from Dublin corroborated what Sheil had publicly
mentioned. The newspapers
of the day thoroughly covered the affair:
At
the late aggregate meeting in Dublin, Mr Sheil permitted himself to indulge in
the following piece of malevolent romance: Mr Sheil said, a few years ago a
transport with a number of soldiers on board was driven by a violent storm upon
the coast of Waterford. The people, as is unfortunately usual, assembled rather
for the purpose of depredation than of assistance. There was one individual
among the crowd who exhibited an honourable contrast to his habitual
indifference, and evinced an intrepidity which amounted to heroism in his
efforts to save his fellow-men. The late Mr. McDougall, who mentioned the fact
which I am about to relate, was deeply struck by the intrepidity of this humble
hero, and after remunerating him as far as his individual means would allow, he
determined to make an application to Government on his behalf.
It was, sir, under the administration
of the gentleman whose name has been engrafted upon the English language and
gaining an equivocal perpetuity, has furnished the legacy of a familiar and
permanent designation of the police. Mr. McDougall was not introduced to the great
man, but presented to one of the external minions of the anti-chamber, to whom
he communicated the details of this noble action. The gentleman, with the small
nonchalance of office, stated that it should be conveyed to Mr. Peel, and
retired into the penetralia of authority. After an interval of some time, he
returned and said, “Mr. Peel presents his compliments to Mr. McDougall, and
begs to know to what class the person in question belongs?”—“He is,” said Mr.
McDougal “a poor fisherman upon the coast, and supports a large family by his
laborious peril.” “That,” said the gentleman of the anti-chamber, “is not
exactly what Mr. Secretary Peel means to inquire, you must understand me. To
what particular class does he belong? I perceive that you do not apprehend me.
To what particular—or, in one word, is he a Protestant?” Mr. McDougall it
appears is dead. The primary evidence to contradict Mr. Sheil’s statement,
therefore, no longer exists.[5]
The
article then referred its readers to an extract from the Waterford Mail, as
evidence of the falsehood of Mr Sheils statement, the full article of which
reads:
Mr
Sheil’s Story
It appears from the report of the last
‘aggregate meeting,’ that Mr. Sheil commenced his speech with an anecdote,
related as he affirmed, by the late esteemed and lamented Henry McDougal, of
this city. The drift of the story is to show the alleged fatal distinction
which the Government of this country has been in the habit of making, between
Protestants and Roman Catholics.
‘The late Mr. McDougall, of
Waterford’, said he, ‘on one occasion, when Mr. Peel was Secretary for Ireland,
made an application at the Castle, on behalf of a poor fisherman with a large
family, who had signalized himself in saving several unfortunate human beings
from being shipwreck; but what, think you, was the answer to the application?
Why the cold interrogatory, ‘is the man a Protestant?’ Mr. Sheil does not
conclude the story, but the conclusion from such premises is not to be mistaken,
"because the poor fisherman was not a Protestant, his services were
disregarded, and the application was refused."
It would be well for Mr. Sheil that Mr
McDougal were alive to confirm the truth of this fact, for there is not a
semblance of probability on the face of it. We shall, however, not indulge in
comments, but proceed to lay before our readers some information, which we have
collected from the most unquestionable sources, concerning this identical
fisherman, and the present Right Hon. Secretary for the Home Department.
At the melancholy shipwreck of the
Sea-horse transport which occurred in the Bay of Tramore in 1816, the exertions
of a man named Thomas Kerevan, in assisting the unfortunate people on board,
attracted the particular attention of all who witnessed that distressing
event. Some gentlemen in this city
afterwards interested themselves warmly in his behalf, and amongst them the
late Mr McDougall. A statement was drawn
up setting forth the services of Kerevan, and this statement Mr. McDougal
undertook to lay before Government, in full confidence that it would meet with
due attention. We cannot say what precise steps Mr. McDougal took to bring this
matter under the notice of Mr. Peel, but we can affirm, that shortly after Mr.
McDougal had returned to Dublin, a letter was received from him by a gentleman
in this city, stating, that he had attended to Kerevan's affair; that it had
been most favourably entertained; that he had no doubt of his success; but that
he would recommend the statement to be drawn up anew, and in such a form as
would enable Kerevan to swear to it. Mr
McDougal’s recommendation was instantly followed; but before the second
statement could have been made use of, Kerevan, (aided with funds by a gentleman
in this city) proceeded to Dublin himself, and there, accompanied by Mr
McDougal, Thomas Kerevan paid his respects at the Castle, obtained a most
gracious reception, and a promise that his claims should be enquired into. Nor
was this promise forgotten; for very shortly afterwards, the late Lieut. General
Doyle, who then commanded in this district, received an order from Government
to proceed from Clonmel, where he resided, to Tramore, and investigate the
claims of persons, who had memorialed for compensation; and on that occasion
not only was the claim of Kerevan enquired into, but allowed.
As a reward for his services, he was
offered his election either of a sum of money immediately, or to have his name
entered for the first suitable situation that might become vacant. Kerevan
preferred the former, and was accordingly paid a sum of money amounting to
thirty-pounds; a sum which however trifling, we are rejoiced to say made
Kerevan a happy man, and produced a most beneficial operation on his worldly
prospects. Recommended by this affair, and the notice taken of him by
Government, he was soon after appointed a Barony Constable. He has since been
employed in various respectable situations, and at present resides in Carrick
on Suir, in the neighbourhood of which town, we understand, he now rents a very
large farm. He was a publican and not a fisherman, by the way, at the time of
the occurrence in question, nor had he then a large family according to the
embellishment in this story.
So much for a new but correct
version, and so much for the “fatal and disastrous question” of Mr Peel. We
have only to add that none of the late Mr McDougal’s most intimate friends in
this city, or of those who had the best right to be informed on the subject,
ever heard him tell, hint, at, or allude to, such an occurrence as that which
is represented to have taken place at the Castle in connection with the case of
Thomas Kerevan.[6]
It is noteworthy to relate that the account in
The Waterford Mail omits to mention that
Kirwan had spent time in the debtor’s prison in the city.
The
matter surfaced again when Sheil was cross examined by Viscount Palmerston in
the House of Commons.
Kirwan had stated to Sheil, that he and Mr McDougal had an interview with Mr
Peel. Kirwan, 36 years of age at the time, asked for a minor position in revenue,
but was told that he was too old. Sheil observed that Peel would not have said
that as Kirwan was a very strong and healthy man and whoever said that must
have been mocking him. Sheil described Kirwan as, a very decent man, who could
both read and write, ‘I should call him a very intelligent man.’[7]
When it was put to Sheil, that General
Doyle, the commander of the district was responsible for the granting of
monetary rewards, Sheil remarked that Kirwan had told him that he had a
conversation with General Doyle and that General Doyle had given him the choice
of whether he would take £30 or wait until he should get some small place, and
that he preferred taking the £30. Kirwan then stated that his name was taken
down at the castle in the list of promotion for some petty office, but that he
had not been appointed, although some years had elapsed, and he requested Sheil
to draw a memorial for him, calling the attention of the government to it.
Major General William Doyle was in command of the Southern District in 1816. He
was promoted to Lieutenant general prior to his death in Waterford on 12 June
1823. Prior to his appointment to the staff in Ireland, he held a Lieutenant
Colonelcy in the 62nd Foot, part of which was saved from the wreck of the Lord
Melville.
Mr McDougal mentioned to Sheil, that
when the question was put to him as to whether Kirwan was a Protestant or a
Catholic, he answered, that ‘Kirwan did not ask whether the eleven persons whom
he saved were Protestants at the time he was plunging into the sea.’[8]
Sheil
was particularly disgusted that the sum of £30 only was paid to a person who
had saved eleven men in the employment of government. He considered such a sum to
be an inadequate remuneration. Three officers were saved and eight soldiers at
the same time as others were ‘committing acts of the greatest barbarity’:
I believe that no individual whatever
exerted himself to save the lives of the soldiers on board the two transports
that were wrecked, except this individual; I believe the crowd on the sea coast
assembled together for the purpose of plundering the wrecks, a practice not
confined to Ireland, but which prevails as extensively on the coast of
Cornwall; so far was their barbarity carried, that they actually cut the
fingers of the dead bodies of some women for the purpose of obtaining rings.[9]
Peel himself, later took the witness
stand and explained the circumstances which induced him to order that Kirwan,
receive a monetary reward instead of being employed in the revenue service. Peel
recounted, having had a conversation concerning Kirwan with Mr Edward Courtenay,
a Quaker from Waterford and produced a letter from him to the house. Courtenay
remarked that Kirwan was:
An
active, intelligent, steady fellow, but that he seemed to prefer a pecuniary
reward, being about to settle himself at home. I also told thee that he was a
Roman Catholic, that the population about Tramore consisted of that persuasion,
and that I had a particular wish that this man should be noticed; to which thou
answered smiling, “Mr Courtenay, you cannot imagine that the religious
principles of the man can operate in the affair, or words to that effect.”
Peel
also stated that no individual in Dublin Castle had been authorised to ask
Kirwan what religion he was. With regards to the size of the reward, General
Doyle, who commanded the district, had been instructed to examine into all the
claims that had been preferred by persons who had been instrumental in saving
lives from the Sea Horse. The whole case had been referred to General Doyle,
who was instructed to report to the government, what sum he thought was a just
remuneration to each individual respectively for the services they had
performed and that the sum named by General Doyle was £30 and that £30 was
presented to Kirwan as remuneration for his services:
Although
the sum of £30 paid to Kierevan, may appear small, when his services are
considered, yet it ought to be recollected, that there were many other persons
who exerted themselves on the same occasion, and that the total sum paid by the
government, in defraying local expenses incurred, in consequence of the
shipwreck, and in rewarding persons named as deserving of remuneration,
amounted, in the whole, to £340, Kierevan receiving a much larger portion of it
than any other person in his class of life.[10]
Sheil later related that it appeared by Peel’s
own testimony that ‘Kirwan’s religion had been a matter of comment by a Quaker’
and that he had established a further charge against himself when he admitted
that:
Kirwan received no more than the
wretched sum of £30. When I stated in the committee, that the government, at
the head of which Mr Peel was placed, had given this despicable remuneration,
and that Mr Peel had full cognizance of the fact, the members were astonished.
They could hardly believe, though it is beyond dispute, that Mr Peel could have
appraised heroism at such a price. Let Mr Peel argue the matter as he will, his
web of sophistry will be without avail. He cannot get over the plain and most
discreditable fact, that he paid for the lives of eleven soldiers at a less
rate than £3 a head. It is idle for him to allege, that a certain quantity of
the public money was allocated to the occasion, and that Kirwan got his share.
Had he possessed one touch of generous sentiment, he would have thrown open his
coffers, and flung a handful of his inglorious gold to the man whose courageous
humanity was beyond all praise. Kirwan is to this day unremunerated; and if I
may say, that I have done more for him that Mr Peel. I repeat it, Mr Peel is
not a high-minded, nor is he a fair-minded man.[11]
Despite the controversy, things appear to have
worked out well for Kirwan, as he had a large family and was farming land around
Clonmel, rented at £100 pa in 1824, which must have been a considerable sized
property. The tradition of lifesaving was kept on in the family, when in September
1845, Thomas’s son Patrick, then about 20 years of age, dived into the river at
high tide and rescued a child of five or six years of age that had fallen
overboard the Rhadamanthus, which was lying at the Milford packet stage on
Waterford Quay: ‘It is singular that this young man is son of Thomas Kirwan,
who saved eleven lives of her Majesty’s troops on 30th January 1816,
in Tramore, at the wreck of the Sea Horse transport.’[12]
[1] The
Waterford Chronicle,
23 March 1816.
[2] Freeman’s
Journal, 8
February 1826.
[3] Official Papers, 509/4, National
Archives of Ireland.
[4] The
Treble Almanac,
1822, findmypast.ie.
[5] London
St James Chronicle and General Evening Post, 15 December 1824.
[6] Waterford Mail, 8 December 1824.
[7] Selection
of Reports and Papers of the House of Commons, vol 8 State of Ireland, Pages 90-97
[8] Same.
[9] Same.
[10] Selection
of Reports and Papers of the House of Commons, vol 8 State of Ireland, Page 548.
[11] John Cumming Editor, A collection of Speeches spoken by Daniel
O’Connell and Richard Lalor Sheil on subjects connected with the Catholic
Question, Dublin 1828, Pages 89-90.
[12] The Nation, 29 September 1845.
No comments:
Post a Comment