County Meath

CO. MEATH – 90%, [94,600] c. 1,200 [c. 4,300 (1815)]
BOROUGH	TYPE	PATRON	ELECTORATE
Athboy	Manor	Earl of Darnley	30 freeholders (1783)
Duleek	Corporation	Abel Ram; sold 2 seats c. 1789 (£10,000) to Henry Bruen	13 burgesses (probably fewer)
Kells	Corporation	Earl of Bective (Marquess of Headfort)	A few freemen and burgesses
Navan	Corporation	Earl of Ludlow (1 seat)	13 burgesses and 60–70 freemen; only 9 voted in 1783
		John Preston (Lord Tara) (1 seat)
Ratoath	Manor	Gorges Lowther (2)	Freeholders
Trim	Corporation	Earl of Mornington (Wellesley)	13 burgesses and 300 freemen

Co. Meath - Constituency

Co. Meath was declared in 1790 to be:

not inferior to most of the Counties of this kingdom, from its happy situation, nearly adjacent to the metropolis, from the prodigious fertility of its soil, and the great opulence of its inhabitants. Such causes naturally lead to independence and liberty and in fact, no County in Ireland can boast of a more virtuous and patriotic representation within the memory of man.

In 1785 it was said that ‘Lord Mornington (2216), Mr Rowley and Mr Lowther have the chief influence.’ It was thought that the county was in general well governed. The Mornington (Wesley/Wellesley) interest persisted throughout the century. The young – he was 21 at the time of his appointment – Lord Mornington (Marquess Wellesley, 1799 (2215)) was Custos Rotulorum for the county until his death in 1842.

Meath had a number of potential interests. At the end of the century there were thought to be at least ten landowners with incomes over £5,000 p.a. and many others with incomes of £2,000–3,000 p.a., so given this spread of interests the county was subject to electoral divisions as the groups coalesced, split apart and regrouped.

Many of these connections were consolidated by marriages.

At the beginning of the century the Prestons and the Ludlows were connected: Peter Ludlow married Mary Preston, the daughter and heiress of John Preston; the son (1728) of another John Preston (1727) married his cousin, Alice, a daughter of Ludlow. They shared control of the parliamentary borough of Navan. Hercules Langford, who represented the county from 1761 until his death in 1794, had married his daughters to Lord Longford and Lord Bective and thereby consolidated an interest in the county. Most of his property was in the north, where he had represented Co. Londonderry from 1743 to 1760, but his principal residence was Summerhill, Co. Meath.

In 1784 the electorate was estimated to be about 1,200, and although it was a very Catholic county with a number of Catholic peers, such as Lord Fingall, the number of voters had risen only to about 4,300 in 1815. The county had six parliamentary boroughs – Athboy, Duleek, Kells, Navan, Ratoath and Trim – making a total of 14 MPs.

ID	County	Year	Type	Ref. No.	Name
1	Co. Meath	1692	Election	1398	Charles Meredyth
2	Co. Meath	1692	Election	1611	John Osborne
3	Co. Meath	1695	Election	174	Thomas Bligh
4	Co. Meath	1695	Election	634	Sir John Dillon
5	Co. Meath	1703	Election	174	Thomas Bligh
6	Co. Meath	1703	Election	634	Sir John Dillon
7	Co. Meath	1709	By Election	1727	John Preston
8	Co. Meath	1711	By Election	2211	Garret Wesley
9	Co. Meath	1713	Election	2211	Garret Wesley
10	Co. Meath	1713	Election	1727	John Preston
11	Co. Meath	1715	Election	1511	James Napper
12	Co. Meath	1715	Election	1727	John Preston
13	Co. Meath	1719	By Election	1280	Peter Ludlow
14	Co. Meath	1727	Election	1280	Peter Ludlow
15	Co. Meath	1727	Election	1727	John Preston
16	Co. Meath	1733	By Election	1512	James Lennox Napper
17	Co. Meath	1751	By Election	1396	Arthur Francis Meredyth
18	Co. Meath	1761	Election	1273	Gorges Lowther
19	Co. Meath	1761	Election	1821	Hercules Langford Rowley
20	Co. Meath	1768	Election	1273	Gorges Lowther
21	Co. Meath	1768	Election	1821	Hercules Langford Rowley
22	Co. Meath	1776	Election	1273	Gorges Lowther
23	Co. Meath	1776	Election	1821	Hercules Langford Rowley
24	Co. Meath	1783	Election	1273	Gorges Lowther
25	Co. Meath	1783	Election	1821	Hercules Langford Rowley
26	Co. Meath	1790	Election	1273	Gorges Lowther
27	Co. Meath	1790	Election	1821	Hercules Langford Rowley
28	Co. Meath	1792	By Election	883	Gorges Hamilton
29	Co. Meath	1794	By Election	2051	Thomas Taylour (Lord Headfort)
30	Co. Meath	1795	By Election	2039	Clotworthy Taylor
31	Co. Meath	1797	Election	883	Gorges Hamilton
32	Co. Meath	1797	Election	2039	Clotworthy Taylor
33	Co. Meath	1800	By Election	1959	Sir Marcus Somerville
34	Co. Meath	1801	UK	883	Gorges Hamilton
35	Co. Meath	1801	UK	1959	Sir Marcus Somerville
36	Co. Meath	1802	Election	1959	Sir Marcus Somerville
37	Co. Meath	1802	Election	176	Thomas Cherburgh Bligh

Co. Meath - Boroughs

Athboy was an ancient borough by prescription with a charter dated 1410, 9 Henry IV. There were further charters of 9 Henry VII and 8 James I all confirming the liberties and privileges of the corporate or free borough. The corporation was to consist of a provost, 12 free burgesses and commonalty of the town of Athboy, which was to comprise the rest of the inhabitants within one mile around the town. Athboy was to have the same privileges as Kells.

It sent two MPs to the 1613 parliament – the earliest for which there are any authentic records. The privilege of electing two MPs was confined to the corporation. In 1695 (or letters patent of 1693) William III erected Athboy into a manor for the Bligh family; it was on this that they founded their right of excluding under-tenants from voting in parliamentary elections, which was a key element in the 1783 controverted election.

Throughout the century Athboy belonged to the Bligh family and originally Trim did also, for Thomas Bligh (0174) who died in 1710, was said to be its patron. Previously

This ancient Borough for many years submitted to the absolute sway of the Plunket family but the prevailing interests of Protestantism here also were, at last, totally victorious and at the Revolution, or soon after, Mr Bligh (0174), a gentleman who had acquired opulence by the service of Cromwell, seemed to possess the ascendancy in this Corporation but Mr Robert Johnson (1101 (1703–05), 1102 (1705–13)) and the Parkinson family, disputed his ascendancy and were, in their turns, victorious and sometimes represented it.

In 1713 the Bligh family acquired considerable property near Athboy and gained control of the borough, and in 1713 John Bligh (0172) was returned for it. Bligh sat until 1721, when he was created Lord Clifden (Earl of Darnley, 1725).

In 1721 Richard Ash[e] (0058) was returned in opposition to the Darnley family. However, the Bligh (now Darnley) family again, by superior property, prevailed and so continued for thirty years, when Sir Benjamin Chapman (0388), claiming from his relation to Johnson, etc. opposed them in 1768 without success. In 1776 his brother (0389) succeeded and after the last election, two brothers of this family petitioned, but failed of success. So stands the fortune of this Corporation at present.

The petition was heard on 21 November 1783, when William and Thomas Chapman petitioned against the return of Hugh Howard (1042) and Thomas Cherburgh Bligh (0176). The election and its results appears to have been confused. At first there were 16 votes for the sitting members and 25 for the petitioners, but the returning officer, Francis Hopkins, Lord Darnley’s agent (seneschal of the manor) excluded 20 of the petitioners’ votes and only 5 of the sitting members’ – which he subsequently admitted – making the final result 16 for the sitting members and 5 for the petitioners. The House of Commons committee resolved that:

1. the freeholders at large of the borough and Manor of Athboy were entitled to vote for members to serve in parliament for the said borough of Athboy;

2. they would determine the votes of the petitioners as they appeared in the poll book.

They then decided that the sitting members were duly elected. Most of the evidence was colourful, but that given by Thomas Patterson provides an interesting example of a fictitious qualification:

Mr Francis Hopkinson [Lord Darnley’s agent] sent for the witness and gave him the lease; the name of the lands was Mullaghstones; he got no possession of the lands, and had no part of them at that time; the lands were worth more than 40s yearly; he gave him the lease to serve Lord Darnley.

In 1783 the town was said to have 1,500 inhabitants and to be ‘a Manor town, the property of Lord Darnley. The tenants of the Manor only have votes and the Darnley family always appoint the Returning Officer’; the 1790 commentator stated that ‘From the wealth and animosity of both parties new contests are expected. The public have nothing else to hope for from these feuds, except this, that such dissensions may completely open the Borough to merit. A consummation devoutly to be wished for.’ He was to be disappointed. The borough was disfranchised at the Union and the £15,000 compensation was paid to the trustees of the will of John, Earl of Darnley, to be applied upon the trusts of that will.

Duleek was another ancient borough with a charter of Edward IV. It followed the usual pattern of a portreeve, 12 burgesses and freemen, who, in 1783: ‘between them do not number 13, none of which reside in either the town or county’. The owner of the land that the borough stood on was Mr Trotter, but the corporation belonged to the absentee Rams. In 1790 it was said that it ‘is and always has been a most insignificant Corporation. The family of Jones first governed it and afterwards, by many revolutions, it fell into the power of the Ram family (1760), who lately (1789) sold their interest in it to Colonel Bruen (0268) for ten thousand pounds.’ Col. Bruen died in 1795, leaving a young family, and the £15,000 compensation for Duleek’s disfranchisement was paid to the trustees of his will.

Kells was another presciption borough. Its earliest charter was granted by Walter de Lacy in the reign of Richard I. The corporation comprised the sovereign, two provosts, 24 burgesses, one recorder, one prothonotary and town clerk, two serjeants at mace, three clerks of the market and the commonalty of Kells, and it had a select body called a common council. Kells sent two members to parliament in 1561.

In 1790 its history was reported as follows:

This Borough, from the time of the Lord Chief Baron Cusack, to the Revolution, was chiefly under the direction of the Cusack family. At that period, the Taylour family (now Earls of Bective) first appeared to interfere in the Corporation – and by the slow, but sure acquisition of immense wealth and by continual residence in its vicinity, obtained the whole and uncontrolled domination of Kells which nothing now, in the verge of probability, seems capable of overturning.

From 1692 until 1800, except for the first parliament of Queen Anne and the early parliaments of George III, it was represented by at least one and sometimes two members of the Taylour family. In 1783 the town had about 2,000 inhabitants.308 At the Union the £15,000 compensation was paid to the trustees of the marriage settlement of Thomas, Earl of Bective.

Kells was another prescription borough. Its earliest charter was granted by Walter de Lacy in the reign of Richard I. The corporation comprised the sovereign, two provosts, 24 burgesses, one recorder, one prothonotary and town clerk, two serjeants at mace, three clerks of the market and the commonalty of Kells, and it had a select body called a common council. Kells sent two members to parliament in 1561.

In 1790 its history was reported as follows:

This borough, from the time of the lord chief baron Cusack, to the Revolution, was chiefly under the direction of the Cusack family. At that period, the Taylour family (now earls of Bective) first appeared to interfere in the corporation – and by the slow, but sure acquisition of immense wealth and by continual residence in its vicinity, obtained the whole and uncontrolled domination of Kells which nothing now, in the of probability, seems capable of overturning.

From 1692 to 1800, except for the first parliament of Queen Anne and the early parliaments of George III, it was represented by at least one and sometimes two members of the Taylour family. In 1783 the town had about 2,000 inhabitants. At the union the £15,000 compensation was paid to the trustees of the marriage settlement of Thomas, Earl of Bective.

Navan was first incorporated by Edward IV in 1469. It comprised a portreeve (and sometimes a deputy portreeve), 12 burgesses, a town clerk, two serjeants-at-mace, a recorder and a craner. In 1790 the following history of the borough was recorded:

This ancient Borough, alternately with Trim, possesses the honour of being appointed the Sessions Town of Meath and it was in the times of Popery, chiefly under the influence of the Gormanstown family, but on the Revolution, the Protestant interest entirely prevailed in this, as well as in most other Corporations.

General Arthur Meredyth (1395) a Military character then well known, first availed himself of this crisis in the situation of Navan and obtained a predominant influence, which his family retained for several years. At length, however, the Ludlow family disputed the Borough and succeeded as to a moiety of the representation and being afterwards reinforced by the accession of the Preston family and more closely united by intermarriage with that powerful interest, they totally excluded the Meredyths and have now conjointly represented the Borough for the last fifty years, without any considerable interruption, except only in the year 1753, which however being soon removed, has left those families ever since, absolute in their influence.

There is a list of freemen and burgesses compiled about 1761 which shows not only the freemen admitted before 1754 but the increase between 1754 and 1758. Nineteen were admitted between 1710 and 1750, and 17 were created between 1754 and 1758 in the interests of the joint patrons, John Preston (1729) and his brother-in-law, Lord Ludlow. In total Ludlow was thought to have the support of 53 freemen and four burgesses, Preston 85 freemen and six burgesses; in addition there were 76 freemen and two burgesses whose position was doubtful.

In all there were 214 freemen and 12 burgesses. This shows how a takeover could occur even in a comparatively large borough. By 1783 the borough officially had 12 burgesses and 120 freemen and the town about 2,500 inhabitants, including ‘60–70 Freemen, 9 whereof only polled on the last election (1783)’. Navan was disfranchised by the Act of Union and the £15,000 compensation was equally divided between John Preston, Lord Tara and the Earl of Ludlow, its proprietors and patrons.

No charter is extant for this borough, which in 1790 was:

a Manor, sending Members to Parliament and of a date, not superior in antiquity to Duleek. It has been always considered a close Borough, though from the nature of its constitution it certainly should be free. The families of Reading and Piers had first this Manor in their hands. At last, after some fluctuations of property, it rests under the absolute control of Gorges Lowther (1273), Esq. at present one of the representatives for the County of Meath. It is regularly exposed to sale, these manorial voters implicity obeying the mandates of their master, nor daring to think for themselves.

In 1783 the manor had 400 inhabitants and in 1773 it was said that Gorges Lowther ‘purchased it from Noah Webb of Dunshaughlin’, probably in the 1730s – he was first returned for Ratoath in 1739. Ratoath was disfranchised at the Union and, as Lowther died in 1792, the compensation was paid to his grandson and namesake, Gorges Lowther.

Trim was first enfranchised by a charter of Walter de Lacy, Lord of Meath. By a charter of 1572, 13 Eliz. I, the corporation comprised a portreeve, burgesses and freemen unrestricted as to numbers. In 1783 Trim was a town of ‘2,000 inhabitants. Electors, a Sovereign, 12 Burgesses and about 300 Freemen under the direct influence of [its] Patron Lord, Mornington.’ In 1790 it was said that:

This County assize town, is one of the most ancient Boroughs of Ireland. It was first the baronial seat of the Lacy family, afterwards of the Barnewalls. Parliaments have been holden there and Kings entertained in it with splendour.

The decay of this ancient Borough is however at this day too evident. The family of the great Duke of Wharton had the chief influence in this Borough from the Restoration to the Revolution. At this period, the Wharton property was sold for a mere trifle to Mr Garret (Wesley, 2211) the ancestor of the Mornington family hence their influence commenced, but the family of Ashe of Ashefield (now Sir Thomas Ashe’s) ousted them and kept possession of the Borough for forty years. However, the fate of the Borough, now thirty years quietly enjoyed by Lord Mornington, is shortly to be decided in the King’s Bench.

The Belfast Newsletter reported the case, ‘which involved the following question; “Whether the Borough of Trim should be free or not…’. The contest had gone on for four years, and:

during this period two general verdicts had been obtained against his Lordship at the Assizes of Trim, by juries composed of gentlemen of the first character and consequence in the county. The Court, however, thought proper to lay both aside, and contrary to the hopes and expectations of the public, pronounced against the plaintiffs. By this decision the new Burgesses, consisting of near three hundred, though declared by two juries ‘agreeable to the strict letter and spirit of the charter and to the immemorial usage and custom of the corporation’, are by this determination, stripped of that privilege.

Lord Mornington established his control over the borough, which he used to start his distinguished brothers on their political careers. His next brother, William (2216), was returned in 1783, in 1790 he returned Arthur (2210), later 1st Duke of Wellington, while Henry (2213) was returned for a few months in 1795. As Marquess Wellesley, he was paid the £15,000 compensation for its disfranchisement at the Union.

Constituencies and Elections

County Meath

Co. Meath - Constituency

Co. Meath - Boroughs