Chapter 3 Footnotes | Hardiman's History of Galway

Footnotes

Scan page 9

The extent of the commerce of Galway, even at this early date, may be ascertained from the following view of its customs and revenues, compared with those paid in Limerick for corresponding periods. In the great roll of the Pipe No. 8, preserved in Bermingham tower, it appears that the neat produce of the customs paid in Limerick from the 16th of April, 5 Edw. I. (1877) to the festival of Saint Michael, in the 6th year of the same king, was 6l. 18s. and that their amount, for the same period, in Galway, was 24l. 15s. 2d. In roll 9, it appears that the produce of the customs in Limerick, from Michaelmas in the 8th, until Easter in the 10th year of Edw. I. was 21l. 5s. 2d. and that in Galway, for the same period, they amounted to 53l. 5s. 10¹⁄₄d. In roll 15, the customs of Limerick, from the festival of All Saints in the 14th, to the same festival in the 15th year of Edw. I. amounted to 9l. 18s. while in Galway they produced for the same year, 58l. 15s. 7d. Soon after this, the trade of Limerick appears to have been reduced almost to nothing, while that of Galway continued in the same flourishing state; for on roll 17, the neat produce of the customs of Limerick appear to have amounted only to 1s. 6d. for a period when they amounted in Galway to 18l. 4s. 5¹⁄₂d.

The subjoined list and amount of the customs paid in Galway, for several years before the year 1400, have been carefully abstracted from the great rolls of the Pipe, preserved in Bermingham Tower.

	40	15	0¼
1276
1277	24	15	2
1278	7	8	0
1281	55	5	10¼
1282	22	2	6
1288	18	4	5½
1289 to 1291	16	7	3
1290 to 1292	20	7	0
1292 & 1293	20	0	0
1293 & 1294	21	10	5½
1296 & 1297	68	7	1
1302	20	0	0
1303	4	7	1
1311	60	0	0
1321 & 1322	36	2	3
1386
1387
1388
1389	239	6	11
1390
1391
1392
1393 & 1394	118	5	10
1398	78	5	0

For the years omitted above there are no accounts on record.

In 1283 the following account was returned of the possessions which belonged to Walter de Burgo in Galway and Connaught, and which Avelina his widow held in dower, from the day next before the festival of St.

Urban the Pope, 2d Edw. I. to the 22d February, 8th Edw. I.

	£.	s.	d.
For 11 acres of the demesne of the town, which, with other lands before the town, were delivered by the king's writ to Richard, son and heir of said Walter	2	0	0
For the rents of the burgages there	35	17	6
For the lands held by Wil. de Mountenaye	1	7	6
For one place which William de Schepe-shend holds there	0	5	6
For the mill	36	13	4
For the fishing of the salmon weirs	11	0	0
For the rent of the eel weirs	10	11	0
For the toll there	11	0	0
For the rent of the burgages of the town	17	17	6
For the perquisites of the Hundred Court	11	0	0
For the increase of the said perquisites	0	10	0
For the increase of the salmon and eel weirs	1	6	8

The principal Anglo-Norman Tenants of Walter de Burgo in Connaught A.D.1280. Thomas Fitz Lyons and John Fitz Thomas, 2 cantreds in the lands of Kerymoy and Kerylothnarne.

Henry de Rupe in Sylmorne.

John le Chaun in Moynterathy.

John Fitz Wil. de Cogan in Moyntermolinnan.

John Fitz Robert in Oloman.

John de Cogan, sen. in Kenalethy.

Hubert de Burgo in Koratheg.

Hubert de Burgo in Kratagne.

Ric. de Rupella in Monbrach.

John Dolfyn in Rathgorgyn.

Mich. le Norreys in Casselfidigan.

John Lynet,

Norman Fitz William, in Cathernemot and Cathoel Robert Barun, William Hose,

John Dolfyu in Galboly.

William Core in Rathredy.

Radmundus Huskard and John de Burgo, Thomas Fitz Jordan and Dondonenald in Kylmalethyn, and Theobald Pincernus (Butler) the castle of Mylyck.—Rot. Pip. 11, B. T.

A. D. 1365, June 2. Joan, daughter and heir of William Sepishend, chief miller of the mills of the town of Galway, gave and confirmed to Thomas Martyn, and his heirs, all the profits and emoluments arising out of the said mills of Galway, descended to her by hereditary right; to hold as freely and quietly as her said father, John her grandfather, and William her great grandfather, held the same of the Lords Walter, Richard and William de Burgo, late Earls of Ulster and Lords of Connaught—Rot. Pat. 27, 28 Hem. VIII.

Back to text

Scan page 11

in consequence of which he was outlawed, and died the king's enemy—so that from the death of Feylym O'Conoghur, to the time that said Robert D'Ufford was again appointed lord justice, the king received little or nothing out of said lands, except one cantred called O'Many, which he granted to Robert de la Rokele in fee farm. That Robert D'Ufford, at his second coming, by means of a considerable army and at great expense, again repaired the castle of Roscommon; and demised two cantreds and a half, part of said lands, to one O'Conoghur; and that other lords justices had afterwards granted the same to several of the O'Conoghurs, who rarely paid any rents thereout. That the lands would be worth 250 marks yearly, if the Irish were driven from those parts; but this, they say, cannot be done without great power and expense, (far exceeding the value of the land,) as O'Conoghur is one of the five captains of Ireland. And they finally say, that the king, without any prejudice or injury to himself, or any other, might grant the same to the said Earl, or any other Englishman; but that it would be more for the interest of the king, and of his faithful subjects in those parts, if they were granted to the Earl: because he holds all his lands in Connaught and Ulster, and has a great power of English and Irish contiguous, by which he could more effectually keep down the natives."—Rot. Placit. B. T. & Exempl. in Offic. Rotulor.

The grant was accordingly made; and by patent, dated 16th Aug. 3 Edw. II. (1509,) reciting, that Richard de Burgo held all his lands and possessions in Connaught for 500 marks yearly, and other tenures, the king, in consideration of his good and faithful services to Edw. I. remitted the said yearly rent, and granted that all his lands should thenceforth be held by the other tenures or services due and accustomed thereout: and by patent dated the same day, he was appointed keeper of the castles of Roscommon, Raudon and Athlane, together with all the lands and tenements belonging to the same, during his life. Idem.

Notwithstanding all these services and rewards, it appears that the Earl of Ulster, soon after the invasion of Bruce, was put under arrest, and imprisoned in the castle of Dublin, on suspicion of having invited over that leader. He was soon after liberated; but not, however, until he was previously obliged to swear, that neither he, his friends,

Back to text