929.2 
 
 Oc 4oc 
 

 

o 
 
 
 
MEMOIR 
 
 OF THE 
 
 O’CONOR FAMILY. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
MEMOIR 
 
 OP 
 
 A CONTROVERSY 
 
 RESPECTING THE NAME BORNE BY 
 
 THE O'CONNORS OF BALLIITOBBER, 
 
 THE TITLE OF DON, 
 
 AND 
 
 THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE FAMILY. 
 
 PREPARED AND PUBLISHED, WITH SOME EXPLANATORY NOTES, 
 
 BY 
 
 RODERIC O’CONOR, Esq., 
 
 B ARRIS TER- A T-LA W. 
 
 Intended for the information of the O'Connor Family. 
 
 DUBLIN: 
 
 JOHN FALCONER, 53, UP. SACKYILLE-STREET, 
 printer Id Her gtajeslg’s ^lalionerg Office. 
 
 1857. 
 
923 -a 
 
 OcA'bo 
 
 INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS. 
 
 No subject can be less interesting to the general 
 reader than the descent of a private family, or less 
 in keeping with the sentiments of the present 
 enlightened age, than the vain boastings of family 
 ^ pride. There is something so frivolous in such 
 fictitious pretensions, they are so perfectly irrecon- 
 cilable with the faintest glimmering of common 
 sense, that they unavoidably excite either derision 
 or disgust. There are, however, persons so 
 miserably infected with this sort of family mad- 
 ness, that they imagine themselves entitled, in 
 N right of their ancestors, to an amount of reverential 
 respect not over freely conceded to the most 
 ^distinguished virtue, or to the greatest merit. — 
 The late Mr. Mathew O’Conor, of Mount Druid, 
 ^ brother of the late Owen O’Connor, of Belanagare, 
 appears to have been one of this infatuated class, 
 ^and to have laboured under some such bewildering 
 (rZ delusion when compiling pedigrees to sustain his 
 v vain boast that “ the O’ Conors, of Belanagare 
 s and of Mount Druid, were the only remains of the 
 cr-Ballintobber family.” — ( Weld's Statistical Survey 
 
VI 
 
 of the County of Roscommon , p. 382.) Mr. M. 
 O’Conor was shrewd, calculating and unscrupulous, 
 and, being anxious by any contrivance to re- 
 varnish his neglected escutcheon, made the most 
 of his very scanty and factitious materials. The 
 assumption of a slightly different name, and a 
 fictitious title, apparently severed his family from 
 every other branch of the O'Connors of Ballin- 
 tobber, and suggested to him his disgracefully 
 disingenuous and mischievous manoeuvres. 
 
 The late Charles O'Connor, the great historian 
 of the fabulous period of Irish history, drew out 
 several pedigrees for the different members of his 
 family, which, being framed for partial purposes, 
 necessarily omitted the other branches of the 
 family. Some of those partial pedigrees came to 
 the hands of Mr. M. O’ Conor, who, artfully 
 enough, put them forward as general pedigrees of 
 the O'Conor family, calculating (not without 
 reason,) that they might at a future time pass for, 
 and be received as, such. a Thus the new name, 
 the title of Don, and those insidiously prepared 
 pedigrees, formed his entire stock of evidence, 
 either to sustain his own descent or to calumniate 
 the ancestry of his neighbours, with whose descent 
 he was so well acquainted — ice had it from his 
 
 * One of those pedigrees, dressed up in all the deceptive 
 muffling of feigned antiquity, will be found in the appendix. 
 
vu 
 
 own lips. He certainly had an overweening 
 propensity to exterminate ancient Irish families, 
 and was ever searching out the period of their 
 extinction — it was a curious mania. Thus he 
 discovered that the last of the Plunkets, of Castle- 
 plunket, was a Dominican friar — so there was an 
 end of them. That the last female of the House 
 of Hapsburg erected a monument at Brussels to 
 the memory of the last male of the race of O’Con- 
 nor of Sligo , — ( Recollections of Switzerland , p. 
 18-22.) And that the O’Donnells could not trace 
 their pedigree for five generations, and were driven 
 to deduce a fictitious descent from the infamous 
 traitor, Neal Garbh , which he good-naturedly 
 affected to deplore — ( Military Memoirs of the Irish 
 Nation , p. 159.) Such were the amiable motives 
 which influenced him in his rambling researches 
 and defamatory writings. 
 
 In relation to the new name, Martin A. O’Bren- 
 nan, LL.D., one of the ablest Irish scholars of 
 the present day, states that about the year 1790, 
 the Belanagare family, to serve some whim, first 
 spelled the name O' Conor. He also states that 
 Owen, of Belanagare, took the imaginary title of 
 Don, and that after his death Denis assumed it ; 
 and he adds that Alex. O’Connor Eccles is un- 
 doubtedly the heir-at Jaw of Sir Hugh O’ Connor 9 
 and that every member of the family is equally a 
 
Vlll 
 
 Don, just as all the members of the M‘Dermott 
 
 Roe family are McDermotts Roe ( O’ Brennan s 
 
 Ancient Ireland and Milesian Chiefs , p. 162-3 .) 
 This accords with the true origin of the appellation 
 Dhunne , for all are equally descended from Tirlock 
 O’Connor Dhunne , and with the statements of 
 Charles O’ Conor, D.D., and Mr. Mathew O’Conor, 
 of Mount Druid, who were the brothers of the late 
 Owen O’Connor, of Belanagare, hereinafter cited. 
 
 The ancient name was Connor; and when Brien 
 Boiroihme, Supreme Monarch of Ireland, intro- 
 duced the use of surnames, and ordained that they 
 should be borne by each sept or clan, they assumed 
 the name of some distinguished ancestor, to which 
 they prefixed Mac , the son of, or O, the descend- 
 ant of, such ancestor — O being synonymous with 
 the French de. Thus, O’Connor signified the 
 descendant of Connor, and O’Brien the descendant 
 of Brien (Boiroihme.) 
 
 It is curious to observe with what superficial 
 subtlety Mr. Arthur O’ Conor endeavours to set up 
 his own descent from the O’Connors of Ballin- 
 tobber Castle, as free from all difficulty or doubt, 
 by ingeniously assuming that the descent of the 
 Corrasduna branch of the family is a mere question 
 of their relationship with him! — although he can 
 adduce no evidence in support of his own descent but 
 those garbled and mutilated pedigrees, put forward 
 
IX 
 
 by his father with such palpable insincerity, and 
 for such unworthy purposes. Thus, instead of 
 suggesting any fair ground for questioning the 
 descent of the Corrasduna branch of the family, he 
 merely tells us that he ever heard they were no 
 relations of his family, not reflecting that claiming 
 relationship through an ancestor of some 300 years 
 standing, is nearly as ludicrous as claiming 
 relationship through Adam. 
 
 Some of the Corrasduna branch of the family 
 adopted the modern spelling of the name O’ Conor 
 many years since, and were so named by the late 
 estimable Denis O' Conor, of Cloonalis, in a 
 correspondence still extant, and produced in the 
 course of this controversy, to show how differently 
 he viewed the question, and how little he parti- 
 cipated in the disingenuous manoeuvres of Mr. 
 Mathew O’Conor, or in his exclusive doctrines. 
 Other members of the family retained the old- 
 fashioned name of O’Connor until they found that 
 Mr. M. O’ Conor sought on that account to sever 
 them from their ancestors, and that his children 
 were unceasingly pointing at the distinction be- 
 tween the new and the old name, and at the title 
 of Don , as sustaining their own exclusive claim of 
 descent from the ancient Kings of Connaught, 
 when, in order to do away with the distinction, 
 they adopted the new name. But those pugnacious 
 
Princes had devoted too much attention to their 
 spelling lessons to surrender their mysterious ortho- 
 graphy without a struggle — they protested against 
 the innovation — declared that they had heaps of 
 pedigrees prepared by Charles O’Connor, the 
 greatest historian, genealogist, antiquarian and 
 orthographist of his day, in which there was no 
 room for anybody but themselves ; but as the onus 
 probandi was not on them, they modestly expressed 
 their fervent expectation that nobody would 
 presume to adopt the name of the last Kings of 
 Ireland, without first giving strict legal evidence 
 of their descent for at least 300 years— at the same 
 time most condescendingly intimating that when 
 such evidence was produced, they would exhibit 
 the known liberality of their “ illustrious” and 
 “ patriotic’ 1 ancestors by allowing such persons the 
 
 privilege of assuming the royal orthography 
 
 There was but one mode of dealing with such 
 intractable presumption, namely, to place it under 
 the pressure and control of public opinion, for 
 which purpose the following correspondence was 
 commenced; they were required to set forth the 
 ground of their extravagant assumptions, and lest 
 they should decline doing so, facts were put 
 forward which rendered such a course impracti- 
 cable. In the course of the correspondence, Mr. 
 A. O’Conor was constrained to admit that O'Conor 
 
XI 
 
 was a mere modern invention— a name first adopted 
 bv Charles O’Connor — and that Owen O’Connor 
 could only claim the title of Don under the 
 (extinct) Brehon law, which had no law of inheri- 
 tance and acknowledged no titles in the Irish 
 Chieftains — even his own father’s writings might 
 have taught him so much, for he tells us “ the 
 66 Chieftains themselves preferred certain descend ■» 
 “ able tenures under the laws of England to their 
 “ precarious chieftainries under the Brehon law, 
 u not descendable to their immediate issue , but 
 “ subject to popular election .” — ( History of the 
 Irish Catholics , p. 9.) So that the whole of Mr. 
 Mathew r O’ Conor’s genealogical manoeuvres have 
 been overturned by the lucid explanations of his 
 son, Mr. A. O’Conor. 
 
 It remains in conclusion to explain why it is 
 now deemed necessary to publish the following 
 letters in their present more permanent form. 
 They were only inserted in the Roscommon Mes- 
 senger while Mr. M. O’ Conor’s misrepresentations 
 were insidiously published in books of some his- 
 torical authority, and have already misled many 
 modern writers. It is, then, but just to collect 
 and preserve these letters which contain the 
 refutation of his offensive insinuations and slander- 
 ous writings, for the benefit of those who are 
 interested in the subject, and not to allow them to 
 
Xll 
 
 perish with the scattered fragments of a local 
 newspaper, more especially as we are aware that 
 they have already been misrepresented both as to 
 their object and contents, with a tact and truthless- 
 ness which demands attention. 
 
 Such, then, is our reason for publishing this 
 little Memoir, for the satisfaction of the numerous 
 descendants of the O’Connors of Ballintobber 
 Castle, whether they may belong to its single or 
 double N branches. Should it contain anything 
 unpleasant or offensive to Mr. O’Conor, of Mount 
 Druid, or his brother, Mr. A. O’ Conor, they have 
 themselves to blame. They have been unprovoked 
 aggressors, and calculating on the disingenuous 
 manoeuvres of their deceased father, they forced us 
 to expose his conduct, and to discuss questions, 
 which were rashly made, essential to our interests 
 and justification, both by him and them. 
 
 Upper Leeson Street, 
 
 Dublin , 10th January, 1857. 
 
LETTEK I. 
 
 My Dear Sir, 
 
 As Mr. O’ Conor, of Mount Druid, and 
 his brother, Mr. Arthur O’Conor, have declared 
 their belief that the O’ Conors of Belanagare are 
 the sole representatives of the ancient O’Connor 
 family, I am reluctantly coerced by so extravagant 
 an assumption to enter into a discussion which 
 I should otherwise think exceedingly puerile and 
 unnecessary, and I think I am in a position to 
 show that, my ambitious friends are not even the 
 eldest branch of the O’ Connor family , and that the 
 name 66 O’Conor” is a mere modern invention . 
 
 Sir Hugh O’Connor, of Ballintobber Castle, was 
 born in the year 1541, and was the acknowledged 
 heir and sole representative of the old Royal Family 
 of Ireland. The genealogy of the family previous 
 to his time might easily be made the subject of 
 endless contention, doubt and uncertainty, but from 
 his time there is no obscurity whatever, — the 
 different branches of the family have their respective 
 genealogies, which they have preserved with too 
 much care to admit of any mystification on the 
 subject — there is, in fact, no conflicting evidence . 
 
 The late Owen O’Connor, of Belanagare, who 
 had peculiar means of gaining information on the 
 remote and doubtful periods of the genealogy, and 
 who was intimately acquainted with the several 
 
14 
 
 branches of the family of his own time, placed a 
 genealogy of the family on record, in the Office of 
 the Ulster King of Arms, in the Castle of Dublin, 
 in which he took no small pains to point out the 
 several branches of the family, which were founded 
 by the four sons of Sir Hugh O’Connor, — he not 
 only gave their names in the regular order of their 
 succession, but added the residence of each in the 
 County of Roscommon — his object was manifestly 
 to deduce his own genealogy from Charles O’Connor 
 the third son of Sir Hugh O’Connor. Now let us 
 see what his genealogy sets forth. He states that 
 Sir Hugh O’Connor had four sons — 
 
 1. Calvach O’Connor, of Rallintobber, 
 
 2. Hugh Oge O’Connor, of Castlerea, 
 
 3. Charles O’Connor, of Relanagare, 
 
 4. Bryan Roe O’Connor, of Corrasduna. 
 
 He states that the issue of Calvach O’Connor 
 became extinct. He states that Hugh Oge O’Con- 
 nor, the second son of Sir Hugh, died in 1635, 
 leaving Daniel O’Connor, his eldest son, who died 
 in 1667, at Cloonalis, leaving one son, Andrew 
 O’Connor, who, he states, became “ O’Connor 
 Don,” and died 11th November, 1748, leaving his 
 son Daniel O’Connor, of Cloonalis, whom he also 
 calls “ O’Connor Don,” who died in 1762, leaving 
 four sons and two daughters, — Dominick O’Connor 
 Alexander O’Connor, Thomas O’Connor and 
 Hugh O’Connor, 'and Jane and Elizabeth. He 
 states that Dominick, his heir, took the title of Don, 
 and that on his decease without issue his brother 
 Alexander took the title of Don. 
 
15 
 
 He further states that the four brothers and their 
 sister Elizabeth died without issue, and that their 
 sister Jane married William Eccles, Esq., but he did 
 not state that she had a son, Daniel, a solicitor, 
 who assumed the title of Don, and who indorsed 
 his briefs with the name of Eccles O'Connor 
 Don. 
 
 It is obvious from the statements of Owen 
 O’Connor in his genealogy, which his descendants 
 cannot gainsay, that Mrs. Eccles was the only 
 stock of the Castlerea or Cloonalis branch of the 
 O’Connor family. Her son Daniel died in 1839, 
 leaving you, Sir, his eldest surviving son and heir- 
 at-law, and you are the undoubted heir-at-law and 
 real representative of Alexander O’Connor, the 
 survivor of the four sons of Daniel O’Connor, and 
 therefore the heir-at-law of Sir Hugh O’Connor, 
 there being no issue of Calvach O’Connor, the 
 eldest son of Sir Hugh. 
 
 Ow T en O’Connor further states that Charles 
 O’Connor, the third son of Sir Hugh O’Connor, 
 his ancestor, was succeeded by his sons, Owen and 
 Charles successively, that Charles O’Connor, the 
 survivor of them, left a son, Denis O’Connor, who 
 died in 1750, leaving his son Charles O’Connor, 
 “ a learned and distinguished antiquary, who 
 “devoted his attention to elucidating the history 
 “ of his country and unfolding the long-neglected 
 “records of her people: and who, with indefati- 
 “ gable research and labour, collected the most 
 “valuable information regarding the history and 
 “antiquities of Ireland.” He died in 1791, and 
 
16 
 
 left an elder son, Denis O’Connor, the father of 
 the said Owen O’Connor. He farther states in 
 his genealogy that the fourth son of Sir Hugh 
 O’Connor was Bryan Roe O’Connor, of Corrasduna , 
 but as he deduced his own pedigree from Charles 
 O’Connor, the third son of Sir Hugh, he, of 
 course, had no occasion to record the pedigree of 
 the O’Connors of Corrasduna, which stands thus. 
 
 Bryan Roe O’Connor, of Corrasduna, left an 
 only son Roger or Roderick O’Connor of Corras- 
 duna, who left a son, Major Owen O’Connor, of 
 Corrasduna, who had four sons : — 
 
 1. Roderic O’Connor, of Bally caher, the an- 
 cestor of Patrick O’Connor, of Dundermott. 
 
 2. Thomas O’Connor, of Miltown, my grand- 
 father. 
 
 3. Denis O’Connor, of Willsbrook, the ances- 
 tor of the Willsbrook family. 
 
 4. Bernard O’Connor, in holy orders. 
 
 I need not trouble you with a detail of the 
 members of those three families, so well known in 
 this county, but may add that Roderic O’Connor 
 of Clareview, County Galway, the elder brother 
 of Patrick O’Connor, of Dundermott, is now the 
 heir-at-law and real representative of Byran 
 O’Connor, of Corrasduna , the fourth son of Sir 
 Hugh O’Connor. 
 
 Such being the state of the O’Connor family in 
 this county, Owen O’Connor (who took the 
 Cloonalis estate under the will of Dominick 
 O’Connor of Cloonalis, not by descent) states in 
 his genealogy, “that on the death of his kinsman, 
 
17 
 
 Alexander O’Connor Don, in 1820, he succeeded to 
 the title of O’Conor Don,” as head of the family. 
 
 Now, I ask in the name of common sense, by 
 what title did Owen O’ Conor assume the dignity 
 of “ O’Conor Don,” to the exclusion of the son of 
 Alexander O’Connor’s sister, Mrs. Eccles , his 
 undoubted heir-at-law, and real representative — 
 who would have taken the Estate of Cloonalis but 
 for the will of Dominick O’Connor. 
 
 It is worthy of observation that Dominick 
 O’Connor, of Cloonalis, by his unnatural will of 
 August, 1789, devised the Cloonalis Estate to his 
 brother Alexander O’Connor for life, with remain- 
 der to his first and other sons in tail male, and in 
 default of such issue, in remainder to his brother, 
 Thomas O’Connor (who died in the lifetime of 
 Alexander O’Connor) in strict settlement, and in 
 default of issue, in remainder to Denis O’Connor of 
 Belanagare, the father of Owen O’Connor, for life, 
 with remainder to his cousin Owen O’Connor, of 
 Belanagare, in strict settlement — and in default of 
 issue of the Belanagare family, in remainder to his 
 cousin , Denis O’ Connor of Willsbrook , with divers 
 remainders over to the branches of the Corrasduna 
 family . Is it to be supposed that Dominick 
 O’Connor did not know his relatives ? 
 
 I think, without contradicting the genealogy of 
 Owen O’Connor, I have shown that the three 
 branches of the O’Connor family, whose ancestors 
 I find in that genealogy, are still extant , and that 
 there is no pretence for saying that they are 
 merged in the House of Belanagare, so that state- 
 
18 
 
 ment of my ambitious friends must fall to the 
 ground — sic transit gloria mundi. 
 
 It would be most unreasonable to add more to 
 this already too long letter, I shall therefore con- 
 clude for the present by calling on Mr. O’ Conor, 
 of Mount Druid, and his brother, Mr. Arthur 
 O’ Conor, to disclose the ground of their alleged 
 belief that the O’ Conors of Belanagare are the 
 sole surviving representatives of the ancient O’Con- 
 nor family — and to state on what ground Owen 
 O’Connor assumed the dignity of u O’Conor Don,” 
 for I confess I cannot see any pretext for his having 
 done so. 
 
 I shall, in my next letter, discuss the question of 
 the true orthography of the O’Connor name , and 
 prove, by legal evidence of the most unquestionable 
 character, that the other branches of the family 
 spelled the name O’Connor, and that the name 
 O' Conor was a mere modern invention , introduced 
 by the Belanagare family. 
 
 I remain, My Dear Sir, 
 
 Your faithful kinsman, 
 
 RODERXC O’CONOR, 
 Milton, Tulsk. 
 
 To 
 
 Alexander O’Conor EccLEs,Esq. 
 
19 
 
 LETTER II. 
 
 My Dear Sir, 
 
 As I was obliged to curtail my letter of 
 the 3rd instant, and to postpone my observations 
 on the true orthography of the O’Connor name , I 
 shall now proceed to show that the new name 
 O' Conor, was introduced by the Belanagare branch 
 of the family and was a mere modern Invention. 
 
 I have already shown that the Cloonalis O’Con- 
 nors were descended from Hugh Oge O’Connor, 
 the second son of Sir Hugh O’Connor, and became 
 the eldest branch of the family. Dominick O’Con- 
 nor Don, of Cloonalis, represented the Cloonalis 
 family from the year 1769 to the time of his decease 
 in the year 1795. He was a person of great 
 erudition, and left a valuable collection of rare 
 books, now in your possession, in each of which he 
 wrote the words “Ex libris Dominick O’Connor 
 Don” — and they furnish convincing evidence both 
 of his erudition and literary taste. 
 
 It appears that Daniel O’Connor, the father of 
 Dominick O’Connor Don, executed his bond to 
 Thomas O’Connor of Mil town, my grandfather, in 
 the sum of £2,000, in trust, to secure a portion 
 for his daughter Elizabeth — that judgment was 
 entered on the bond in the Court of Exchequer and 
 certain proceedings taken thereon, and that a bill 
 was filed by Dominick O’Connor Don against 
 
20 
 
 Thomas O’Connor as such trustee, and Elizabeth 
 O’Connor her sister, in relation to her claims, and 
 that the matter was referred to the decision of 
 “ Charles O’Connor, of Belanagare, and William 
 Irwin, of Leabeg, who accordingly made their 
 award,” dated September, 28th, 1779, by which 
 they awarded a sum of £600, with interest, to 
 Elizabeth O’Connor, to be secured to her as 
 counsel might direct, and £50 to be paid, as costs 
 — and they signed their names thereto Charles 
 O’Connor and William Irwin, and the said award 
 was witnessed by Denis O’Connor and John 
 Tyrrel. 
 
 It appears that, by a deed bearing date the 30th 
 October, 1779, made between the said Dominick 
 O’Connor of the one part, and Elizabeth O’Con- 
 nor of the other part, after reciting the said award, 
 the sum of £600 was secured to the said Elizabeth 
 O’Connor, to w'hich deed the parties signed their 
 names Dominick O’Connor and Elizabeth 
 O’Connor and which deed was witnessed by 
 Thomas M c Grath and Robert Young. 
 
 These proceedings and documents are of peculiar 
 importance in discussing the present question, for 
 we find Dominick O’Connor, who represented the 
 Cloonalis family — Charles O’Connor, who repre- 
 sented the Belanagare family — Thomas O’Connor, 
 of Miltown, and Denis O’Connor, of Willsbrook, 
 whom Dominick O’Connor Don in his will named 
 his cousin , all signing their names in the adjust- 
 ment of a family transaction, and signing the name 
 O’Connor and not O’Conor. 
 
21 
 
 I should also remind you that Dominick O’Con- 
 nor Don signed his name to his will in 1789, and 
 to the codicil annexed thereto in 1795, Dominick 
 O’ Connor — and that it was under his will, not by 
 descent , that the Belanagare family took the 
 Estate of Cloonalis, and took it from your father, 
 who was the legal heir of Dominick O’Connor. 
 
 There is a tombstone in the churchyard of 
 Kilkeevan, where the O'Connors of Cloonalis were 
 interred, on which the names of all the descendants 
 of Hugh Oge O’Connor (except Dominick O’Con- 
 nor Don) are inscribed as follows : — 
 
 Daniel O'Connor , the son of Hugh Oge 
 O’Connor. 
 
 Andrew O'Connor. 
 
 Daniel O'Connor Don , and 
 
 Alexander O'Connor Don. 
 
 Why was not Dominick O’Connor Don named 
 on the tombstone ? — because when Alexander 
 O’Connor Don discovered that he had by his will 
 left the Estate of Cloonalis to his distant relative 
 and cut out his sister and her children, he would 
 not suffer his remains to be interred with the rest of 
 he family. 
 
 Now, Sir, is it not clearly proved that the 
 O’Connors of Cloonalis and Sir Hugh O’Connor’s 
 family spelled their names “ O’Connor” and not 
 “ O’Conor,” and is not the onus probandi on my 
 ambitious friends to show by w T hat authority Owen 
 O’Connor of Belanagare, who in 1820 assumed the 
 name of “ O’Conor Don,” took upon himself to 
 alter the name of the O’Connor family throughout 
 
22 
 
 the whole range of his pedigree ? a — That pedigree 
 was prepared by an able lawyer, who well knew 
 what inferences might, in after times, be drawn 
 from the record he was framing, and I am happy to 
 find that so early an investigation of the subject 
 enables me to show that the new spelling is no test 
 of the old family. 
 
 It is not easy to ascertain when, exactly, the 
 Belanagare family altered their name from “ O’Con- 
 nor,’ to “ O’Conor,” but I find that Denis 
 O’Connor, the father of Charles O’Connor (the 
 historian) executed a deed, bearing date the 13th 
 October, 1720, by which he granted an annuity 
 of £70 10s. to Charles Hawkes of Briarfield, out 
 of the lands and mill of Belanagare, which deed is 
 registered in the Registry office, Dublin, 27,491, 
 No. 17,889, to the memorial of which he wrote 
 his name “ Dennis O’Connor” — he appears to 
 have had a prepossession in favour of double N’s. 
 
 There is also a memorial on record of the mar- 
 riage articles executed on the marriage of Denis 
 
 a In Owen O’Connor’s Genealogy, the name is certainly 
 spelled O’Connor — but in the publication of the same pedigree in 
 Burke’s Landed Gentry (late Edition) it is spelled throughout 
 O’ Conor, and it was naturally supposed to be a tanscript of the 
 family pedigree lodged with the Ulster King of Arms, but the 
 investigation which, since this letter was written, became neces- 
 sary, enables us to point to the distinction between the two 
 pedigrees, and to exonerate Owen O’Connor from any charge of 
 having framed his pedigree improperly for the mean purpose of 
 excluding the numerous descendants of Sir Hugh O’Connor, 
 whom he so well knew. We now know who made that disre- 
 putable attempt, and regret to think that he was capable of doing 
 so. 
 
23 
 
 O’Connor, the son of Charles O’Connor (the 
 historian), with Catherine Browne, of Cloonfad, 
 bearing date the 1st December 1760, to which 
 Charles O’Connor and Denis O’Connor were 
 both parties — the name is repeated no less than 
 eleven times in the memorial, and is uniformly 
 written “ O'Connor ” as the memorial was only 
 executed for the purpose of registration by Martin 
 Browne, one of the parties thereto, it does not 
 appear how they wrote their names; it may, 
 however, be fairly presumed that Charles O’Connor 
 and Denis O’Connor signed their names as they 
 are spelled in the memorial, until the contrary is 
 shown by the production of the deed, which, of 
 course, is forthcoming. 
 
 Thus it is fully proved that the four sons of Sir 
 Hugh O’Connor spelt their names O' Connor , and 
 I call on my ambitious friends to state in candour, 
 and with that sincerity which becomes gentlemen 
 in their position, when the curious name O' Conor 
 was invented, and by whom? 
 
 I am informed, by an eminent Irish scholar, that 
 the name O' Conor, with a circumflex over the N, 
 which is the ancient mode of writing it, means 
 O’Connor, the circumflex standing for the second 
 N, and that ignorance of the Irish language might 
 have induced the erroneous spelling of the name. 
 
 Such then being the genealogy and ortho- 
 graphy of the O’Connor family, how should the 
 descendants of Sir Hugh O’Connor deal with the 
 innovation of the late Owen O’Conor? His 
 genealogy has been published, in which the name 
 
24 
 
 O' Conor has been adopted throughout, and given 
 to the whole line of our ancestors. The prominent 
 position which Owen O’Connor attained in the 
 long struggle for Catholic emancipation, and the 
 assumption of the title “ O’Conor Don,” have 
 induced a prevailing notion that he really was the 
 head of the family, and that the new spelling of 
 the name is correct, and distinguishes the true 
 descendants of Sir Hugh O’Connor from all other 
 O’Connors. In many modern Historical Works 
 the new spelling of the name has been adopted to 
 such an extent, and the presumed distinction has 
 gained so much notoriety by adventitious circum- 
 stances, that it would be difficult, if not impossible, 
 to remove the impression, which gains additional 
 strength every day. Under such circumstances, 
 the simplest and easiest way to counteract its 
 unjustifiable effects is to adopt the new name and 
 do away with the distinction — the difference is 
 trifling — de minimis non curat lex . 
 
 I therefore recommend the numerous descendants 
 of Sir Hugh O’Connor now extant, to subscribe 
 their names O' Conor — a course J shall in future 
 adopt for mere conformity sake — and I think that 
 you, Sir, who are the Heir-at-law and real Repre- 
 sentative of Sir Hugh O’Connor, should set us the 
 example. 
 
 I remain, My Dear Sir, 
 
 Your faithful kinsman, 
 RODERIC O’CONOR, 
 Milton, Tulsk. 
 
 To Alexander O’Conor Eccles, Esq., 
 Roscommon. 
 
LETTER III. 
 
 My Dear Sir, 
 
 The long and detailed account which I was 
 necessarily obliged to give in my former letters of 
 the three branches of the O’Connor family, and of 
 their ancestors, precluded the possibility of my 
 directing your attention to the application and 
 conclusive nature of the evidence I adduced in 
 support of my statements, and I therefore think it 
 advisable to offer a few observations on the subject. 
 First, with respect to the genealogy of the Corras- 
 duna O’Connors — the proper evidence in cases of 
 pedigree must consist of the statements, written or 
 oral, of deceased members of the family, who may 
 have been in a position to have known the truth of 
 the facts they stated, and who were at the time 
 entirely free from, all interest or bias on the subject . 
 Such are the conditions on which the statements of 
 deceased members of a family can be received in 
 evidence of pedigree as laid down by the judges 
 in the Berkeley Peerage case. 
 
 Now, Owen O’Connor, of Corrasduna, had four 
 sons — Roderic O’Connor, of Ballycaher, Thomas 
 O’Connor, of Miltown, Denis O’Connor, of Wills- 
 brook, and Bernard O’Connor, in holy orders — 
 they were the cotemporaries and friends of 
 Dominick O’Connor Don, of Cloonalis, and re- 
 sided in his neighbourhood. It did not require 
 any deep historical knowledge, or the aid of either 
 an antiquary or a magician, to enable the sons of 
 Major Owen O’Connor to ascertain who was their 
 
26 
 
 grandfather. They had no interest, no bias, no 
 conceivable object, to induce them to lead their 
 children astray, and the undoubted reputation of 
 the three families founded by them is, that Bryan 
 O'Connor, one of the sons of Sir Hugh O’Connor, 
 was the grandfather of Major Owen O’Connor. 
 
 Then, there is the important evidence of 
 Dominick O’Connor Don, of Cloonalis, the true 
 representative of Sir Hugh O’Connor, whose 
 testimony is above all suspicion. In his will he 
 says, “ I bequeath £50 to my cousin Denis 
 O’Connor, of YVillsbrook.” Again he devised the 
 Cloonalis Estate to his cousin Denis O’Connor, of 
 Belanagare, with remainder to his sons, Owen 
 O’Connor, Mathew O’Connor, Denis O’Connor, 
 and Roderic O’Connor, successively in strict 
 settlement, and in failure of their issue to his cousin 
 Denis O'Connor , of Willsbrook , in strict settlement, 
 with other remainders over. We therefore have 
 the direct testimony of Dominick O’Connor Don, 
 the legal representative of Sir Hugh O’Connor, 
 that Denis O’Connor, of Willsbrook, who was his 
 cotemporary, and one of the sons of Major Owen 
 O’Connor, of Corrasduna, was his cousin, and as 
 such cousin he left him a legacy of £50, and the 
 estate of Cloonalis in remainder, on failure of issue 
 of his cousins of Belanagare. 
 
 Now, let me ask you, how could Denis O’Connor, 
 of Willsbrook, be the cousin of Dominick O’Connor, 
 unless Major Owen O’Connor was the grandson 
 of Bryan O’Connor, the son of Sir Hugh O’Connor? 
 Or will any man of common sense take it upon 
 
27 
 
 himself to say that Dominick O’Connor did not 
 know who Denis O’Connor was, to whom he gave 
 the legacy of £50, and limited his estates as his 
 cousin . 
 
 The statement of Owen O’Connor, his brother, 
 or of any of his cotemporaries of the Belanagare 
 family, could not be received in evidence, because 
 it is probable that they had a strong bias and 
 ambition to assume that the Belanagare family 
 were the only surviving representatives of Sir Hugh 
 O’Connor, and that would render their statements 
 inadmissable in evidence on the question of the 
 pedigree of the other branches of the family, but 
 would they weigh a feather in the scale against the 
 pure and direct testimony of Dominick O’Connor 
 Don, which is plain affirmative evidence. 
 
 The real question is, which now is the eldest 
 branch of the O’Connor family ? Must not that 
 branch be the eldest which is represented by the 
 heir-at-law of Sir Hugh O’Connor, and have I not 
 proved beyond all doubt that you, Sir, are the 
 legal heir-at-law of Sir Hugh O’Connor? — What 
 claim, then, can the Belanagare family have to 
 being the eldest branch of the O’Connor family? 
 
 And lastly, what is the true orthography of the 
 O’Connor family? — I have shown that the late 
 Dominick O’Connor Don signed his name to his 
 deeds and to his will, and to his codicil, in 1795, 
 O'Connor — that he, enumerated his cousins of 
 Belanagare in his will, and named them all O’Con- 
 nors — not a single one of them is named O' Conor 
 in that will under which they hold the Cloonalis 
 
28 
 
 Estate. Then we find their name inscribed on the 
 tombstone, in the church-yard of Kilkeevan, 
 O’Connor — we find the Corrasduna branch of the 
 family always writing their names O’Connor, and 
 even the Belanagare branch, down to Denis 
 O’Connor, the father of Owen, writing their 
 names O’Connor. 
 
 I remain, My Dear Sir, 
 
 Your faithful kinsman, 
 
 RODERIC O’CONOR, 
 Milton, Tulsk. 
 
 To Alexander O’Conor Eccles, Esq., 
 Roscommon. 
 
 [The reader will observe that in the foregoing 
 letters there is not a single unfriendly or unkind 
 expression, the only object of the writer was to 
 stem a current of habitual slander.] 
 
MR. ARTHUR O’CONOR’S REPLY TO THE 
 FOREGOING LETTERS. 
 
 Sir, 
 
 I have seen in the Roscommon Messenger 
 Journals , of the 3rd, 10th, and 1 7 th instant, letters 
 of yours on the O’ Conor family, and I have 
 abstained from answering them up to the present, 
 in order to confine my reply to one letter without 
 trespassing further upon the public. I feel that 
 an apology is due to them from me, for at all 
 obtruding family matters upon them, but I trust 
 they will excuse me for answering an attack made 
 by you on my family, when silence on my part 
 might be construed into an admission of the many 
 misstatements you have put forward, and of the 
 unsound legal opinions which you have given in 
 stating that the title of O’ Conor Don belongs to 
 a person, who inherits not a foot of the O’Conor 
 estates, and who is of a different name and family. b 
 A very cursory review of the history of Ireland 
 will show that every Sept had some distinguishing 
 cognomen borne by their heads or chiefs. In the 
 
 b This is a very peculiarly cool observation coming from a 
 gentleman who so well knows that the Estate of Cloonalis would 
 have descended to Alexander O’Connor Eccles, as the nephew 
 and heir of Dominick O’Connor Don, but for Dominick 
 O’Connor’s unnatural Will, by which he devised it to the 
 Belanagare family, who were, (according to the statements of 
 Charles O’Connor,) very remote kinsmen of his, and thus disin- 
 herited his only nephew. , 
 
30 
 
 O’Conor family there were several Septs, viz: — 
 the O’Conor Don, the O’Conor Roe, and the 
 O’Conors Sligo, c and their several territories are 
 
 c A very slight acquaintance with the history of Ireland is 
 sufficient to expose the fallacy of this statement. The Chiefs of 
 the Irish Tribes never bore any distinctive appellations, as such 
 Chiefs, — O’Nial of Ulster, O’Donnell, of Tyrconnell, O’Ruarc, of 
 Breffney, MacDermott, of Moylerg, O’Brien, of Thomond, and 
 others only omitted their Christian name and bore no title 
 whatever. When O’Nial of Ulster threw off the mask he so long 
 wore with such consummate duplicity, and declared war against 
 Queen Elizabeth, who created him Earl of Tyrone, he assumed, 
 as he declared, the superior title of The O'Nial, and he did so to 
 conciliate his Tribe, who treated English Titles as badges of 
 slavery, and became disaffected towards him for having accepted 
 one from the Queen. On the other hand, the different branches 
 of the tribe retained their Christian names, as Con O’Nial, and 
 Owen O’Nial, who were distinguished warriors of the Tribe of 
 O’Nial. This explanation is given in Abbe Mac Geoghegan T s 
 History of Ireland, and other works of ^he highest authority. 
 
 The names of Dhunne and Ruadh we^e never applied in the 
 O’Connor family as titles of the heads or chiefs of Tribes, 
 nothing can be more ridiculous than such an assumption. 
 Charles O’Connor, D.D., the brother of Owen O’Connor of 
 Belanagare, a learned Antiquary, and one of the ablest Irish 
 historians of his day, — (author of “ Rerum Hibernicarum 
 Scriptores,” “History of the Stowe MSS.” “Columbanus’ 
 Letters,” and “Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Charles 
 O’Connor of Belanagare/’) states in his Memoirs of Charles 
 O’ Connor, that “Tirloch O’Connor succeeded to the throne of 
 Connaught, A.D. 1346, but was opposed by his cousin, another 
 Tirloch O’Connor, who was supported by MacDermott of 
 Moylerg, and O’Rouarc of Breffney, and that the Connaught 
 Electors , harrassed by their dissensions, divided the Government 
 between them, naming one Dhunne (the Irish of brown) from the 
 colour of his hair, and the other Ruadh (the Irish of red.) from 
 the colour of his hair.” This distinctly negatives Mr. A. 
 O’Conor’s unfounded assumption ; Charles O’Conor also states 
 that O’Connor Sligo took that appellation A.D. 1536, and was 
 
31 
 
 distinctly laid down on the ancient maps of Ireland. 
 By the Brehon Law the female line were not only 
 debarred from inheriting title, but they were also 
 excluded from the inheritance of land. Hence 
 the title O’ Conor Roe was borne in succession by 
 the male line until their extinction, and it then 
 dropped. The O’Conor Sligo was also borne by 
 the male line until their extinction, and it was 
 then dropped. The title of O’ Conor Don was 
 borne by Hugh O’Conor, of Ballintober Castle, 
 
 killed in 1581, and not a shadow of authority can be found in 
 Irish history to confer on those appellations of Dhunne or 
 Ruadh any historical existence or representative value. 
 
 Mr. Mathew O’Conor of Mount Druid, in the statement which 
 he furnished, and prevailed on Mr. W eld to publish in his 
 Statistical Survey of the County Roscommon, truly states that 
 the descendants of Sir Hugh O’Connor, as well as Sir Hugh 
 himself, relinquished the distinctive appellation of Dhunne , but 
 that about the year 1750, Dominick O’Connor, the head of the 
 Cloonalis family, assumed the appellation of Don , being a 
 corruption of the Irish word Dhunne, giving it more importance, 
 and sounding like a Spanish title. Thus Charles O’Conor, D.D.. 
 and Mathew O’Conor, of Mount Druid, have exposed the low 
 origin and absurd renewal of the title of Dhunne in its new form 
 of Don, and which, by suggesting a fictitious precedence in a 
 junior branch of the family (of which Mr. A. O’Conor is an 
 offshoot,) was, in all probability, the cause of all the genealogical 
 misrepresentations and manoeuvres of the late Mr. Mathew 
 O’Conor in the latter end of his life, on which his children have 
 placed such silly reliance. The successor of Tirloch O’Connor 
 Dhunne (or the brown haired,) was Felim O’Connor Geangach, 
 (or the crooked,) and his successor was Owen O’Connor Oaoch, 
 (or the blind,) and would any man in his senses say those nick- 
 names, or any of them, were descendible titles only inheritable 
 by heirs male, by the Brehon law, which has no law of 
 inheritance, and inherited by chiefs who, it is notorious, were 
 elected, and inherited nothing as such chiefs. 
 
32 
 
 who compounded with Queen Elizabeth’s Lord- 
 Deputy, Sir John Perrot, for his Patrimonial 
 Estates, and in the articles of Treaty between 
 them signed on the occasion he is styled Sir Hugh 
 O’Conor Don, Prince of the Plains of Connaught. d 
 From his son Charles was descended in a direct 
 line Owen O’Conor, of Belanagare, whom you 
 accuse of having assumed the title of Don without 
 being the head of the family. e And from his 
 fourth son, Bryan, you claim descent, but which 
 
 d The Brehon Law is quite misunderstood by Mr. A. 
 O’Conor. He seems ignorant of the fact that we had Irish 
 Queens as well as Kings, and very distinguished ones too. 
 Queen Meibh, daughter of the supreme monarch of Ireland, 
 ascended the provincial Throne of Connaught twice , and governed 
 the Province with acknowledged skill and judgment. It was 
 her father built the palace of Bathcroghan, in the county of 
 Roscommon, and gave it with the sovereignty of Connaught to 
 Tinne, her husband, on whose death she ascended the throne. 
 But in the name of wonder how could Owen C Conor sustain a 
 claim to any title or property of any sort in 1820, under the 
 abolished Brehon Law (?) which had no law of descent — the law 
 of primogeniture is English law ! ! 
 
 e This is mere statement. In all human probability Owen 
 O’Connor was descended from Sir Hugh O’Connor ; but it is 
 quite evident that he was not in a position to give any legal 
 proof of his descent, and only sustained the pedigree he lodged 
 with the Ulster King of Arms by his certificate (annexed 
 thereto, ) that it was true , according to the best of his belief \ and 
 from which circumstance alone it has been designated his certified 
 genealogy Questions have been raised as to his descent, but we 
 prefer the tradition of his own family, certified by a gentleman 
 of his high reputation, to any assertions of that nature. Were 
 we to call on Mr. A. O’Conor to prove the marriages, births and 
 other matters necessary to establish his descent, he would find 
 very insurmountable difficulties in his way. 
 
33 
 
 requires more proof than you have yet brought 
 forward to establish, when you do not possess one 
 foot of his estates, and when tradition is against 
 you — anything you have stated is mere assertion 
 without proof. f 
 
 f Charles O’Connor, D.D., the brother of Owen O’Connor, 
 of Belanagare, in his already quoted Memoirs of the Life and 
 Writings of Charles O'Connor of Belanagare , was considered to 
 have been too communicative about the other branches of the 
 O’Connor family, and his interesting Memoirs were suppressed. 
 We believe there is but one copy within the reach of the public, 
 and it was fished out of a lake, and is preserved in the library of 
 the Dublin Archaeological Society, where "we have read it. Dr. 
 Charles O’Connor states that the lands of Beagh and Cloony- 
 carney were devised by Sir Hugh O’Connor to his son, Bryan 
 O’Connor. Now it appears from the book of Survey and distri- 
 bution that those lands were forfeited in 1641, by Captain 
 Bryan O’Connor, and were, on the 5th September, 1655, on the 
 petition of Roger O’Connor, who claimed them as the estates of 
 his ancestors, decreed at Athlone by the Commissioners appointed 
 to hear and determine such claims, to Mary O’Connor during her 
 life, with reversion to her son, Roger O’Connor and his heirs. — 
 (This is Mary O’Connor, daughter of Hugh Mergagh O’Connor, 
 of Castleruby, the wife of Bryan O’Connor.) And it further 
 appears from the book of postings, that the said lands of Beagh 
 and Cloonycarney were again forfeited by Roderick O’Connor, in 
 1688, and were sold at Chichester House, Dublin, on the 3rd of 
 June, 1703, to Colonel Henry Sandford, in trust for James 
 Walker, in whose charge they still remain in the Quit-rent 
 office. 
 
 Could Mr. A. O’Conor be ignorant that those lands were so 
 forfeited by Bryan O’Connor and by his son, and know so much 
 about the other estates of Sir Hugh O’Connor. — I regret to 
 think he was not, because in the Military History of the Irish 
 Nation, by Mr. Mathew O’Conor, (his father,) published by his 
 family after his death, he enumerates some of those families 
 whose estates were thus sacrificed, and amongst them “ the 
 O’Connors of Roscommon.” Now, the fact is, that not a single 
 
 B 2 
 
34 
 
 In order to contradict your statement “that 
 Owen O’Connor did not represent the head of the 
 family when he assumed the title of O’ Conor 
 Don,” I will show h that the two elder branches of 
 Sir Hugh O’Conor Don’s family had become 
 extinct, and trace their estates. 
 
 Sir Hugh O’ Conor had four sons — to Calvach 
 (the eldest) he gave Ballintobber — to Hugh (the 
 second) he gave Cloonalis — to Charles (the third) 
 he gave Belanagare, and to Bryan, (the fourth) 
 
 acre of Sir Hugh O’Connor’s estates came by descent to any of 
 his present descendants. They were all forfeited, the descent 
 broken, and new titles created and granted to various claimants, 
 and the possession of any portion of them, under such circum- 
 stances, affords no sufficient evidence of descent. It would 
 prove too much, for it would prove several families to be his 
 descendants who could not possibly be so. 
 
 As to Mr. A. O’Conor’s assertion that tradition is against the 
 other branches of the family, the assertion is made in ignorance 
 of the meaning of tradition — and he seems to think he can make 
 a tradition by saying, “he ever heard so.” It lay on him to 
 prove that tradition, and he had not a scintilla of evidence on the 
 subject. Mr. A. O’Conor acted with the most unscrupulous 
 disregard of his own character in making such a statement 
 without any evidence to sustain it. Tradition must be proved 
 by its own legitimate evidence and not by random assertions of 
 hearsay, not even deserving of credence, and coming from a red- 
 hot partisan. The whole of Mr. A. O’Conor’s fruitless efforts to 
 traduce the other branches of the O’Connor family are clearly 
 traceable to the genealogical manoeuvres of the late Mathew 
 O’Conor, with which, of course, his children were well ac- 
 quainted, and on which they unfortunately placed too much 
 reliance. 
 
 h This word is improperly used — it should be state. Mr. A. 
 O’ Conor does not adduce any evidence, but mere assertions ; he 
 shows nothing but his anxiety to make out his descent, which 
 never has been proved, and of which he has no evidence. 
 
35 
 
 he gave Beagh and Cloonycarney. Calvagh had 
 two sons, Hugh aud Charles — Hugh inherited the 
 estate of Ballintobber, and resumed the title of 
 O’ Conor Don . 1 He made a will, leaving the 
 estate to his son Hugh, and to his heirs male, in 
 failure of such issue to his brother Charles, and 
 his heirs male, and in failure of them to the 
 O’ Conors, of Cloonalis, the representatives of the 
 second son of Sir Hugh O’Conor Don, and their 
 heirs male, and in failure of such issue to them, to 
 the O’ Conors, of Belanagare, (the representatives 
 of the third son of Sir Hugh O’ Conor Don), and 
 their heirs male. J His Son Hugh having died 
 without issue, the estate came to his brother 
 Charles, who, being of weak mind, was prevailed 
 upon to make a will in favour of a female relative, 
 and to leave her the estate, contrary to the en- 
 
 1 This contradicts Mr. Mathew O’Conor’s assertions, who 
 alleges, in the statement he furnished for Mr. Weld’s book, that 
 Sir Hugh O’Connor relinquished the title of Dhuniie, and accepted 
 a knighthood from Sir J ohn Perrot, and that his descendants 
 also relinquished it, until 1750, when Dominick O’Connor, of 
 Cloonalis assumed the title of Don, which was a corruption of 
 Dhunne , — which of these contradictory statements are we to 
 receive as correct ? The son contradicts his father. 
 
 j It is highly probable that this will contains a devise also to 
 the O’Connors of Corrasduna, (the representatives of the fourth 
 son of Sir Hugh O’Connor,) but it would be too much to expect 
 such a statement from Mr. A. O’Conor. It is curious to see the 
 title “ Don” applied to Sir Hugh, who was dead before it was 
 invented by Dominick O’Connor, of Cloonaliss, and how Mr. A. 
 O’Conor spells Sir Hugh’s name, though he admits it was Charles 
 O’Connor who invented the modern name O' Conor late in his 
 life. Mr. A. O’Conor has the happy knack of furnishing evi- 
 dence to overturn his own statements. 
 
36 
 
 tailments of his brother’s will. k — Legal proceedings 
 were instituted by the Cloonalis family, for the 
 recovery of the estate, and those who had obtained 
 an illegal possession of it, under the will of 
 Charles, knowing that their title was bad, and 
 fearing their inability to retain it, they sold it for 
 a mere trifle, to the Hartland family, whose 
 influence (as Protestants) it was expected would 
 be an insurmountable obstacle to the rightful 
 owners (who were Catholics) in asserting their 
 rights in those days. Their calculations turned 
 out but too well founded, and the property of 
 Ballintobber was thus wrested from the O’ Conor 
 family. Hugh O’Conor, of Cloonalis, the second 
 son of Sir Hugh O’Conor Don, was the Com- 
 missioner for the Province of Connaught, in the 
 Council of Kilkenny, in the year 1642, and died 
 in 1655. On failure of male issue in the Ballin- 
 tobber branch of the family, his grandson, Andrew 
 O’ Conor, of Cloonalis, assumed the title of Don 1 
 which his descendants bore until they also became 
 extinct, on the death of Alexander O’ Conor Don, 
 in or about 1820. m 
 
 k Who was this female relative? We suspect that there is 
 some reason for not giving her name. 
 
 1 This again contradicts Mr. Mathew O’Conor’s statement — 
 (See note *.) 
 
 m This is not so ; his descendants did not become extinct. 
 Alexander O’Connor Don left a nephew, the son of his sister 
 Jane, who assumed the title of Don, and retained it during his 
 life ; and his son, Alexander O’Connor Eccles (who has not 
 assumed the title of Don,) is now the real representative and 
 heir-at-law of the Cloonalis family ; and presents, according to 
 
37 
 
 By the will of his brother Dominick O’Connor 
 Don, (which you quote), the estate of Cloonalis 
 was left in case of failure of issue male to 
 Alexander O’Connor, and Thomas O’Connor, (the 
 last of that branch of the family), to the O’Con- 
 nors, of Belanagare, the representatives of the 
 third son of Sir Hugh O’ Conor Don, and such 
 failure having taken place, Owen O’Conor, of 
 Belanagare, became entitled to the estate. He 
 was the head of Sir Hugh O’ Conor Don’s descen- 
 dants, and in him was vested all the remains of Sir 
 Hugh O’ Conor’s estates. In assuming the title of 
 O’Conor Don he acted only as all his ancestors 
 had done , 11 and Mr. Eccles, whom you assert to 
 
 Mr. A. O’Conor’s legal theories, the singular phenomenon of the 
 heir-at-law of an extinct family. Dominick O’Connor, who, Mr. 
 Mathew O’Conor says, was the inventor of the title Don, had a 
 curious notion of its transmissible qualities, for in his will there 
 is a bequest to his dearly beloved wife Catherine O'Connor Don . 
 
 n This is not so ; Tirloch O’Connor, who got the name of 
 Dhunne from the Connaught Electors , to distinguish him from 
 Tirloch Ruadh, was succeeded by Felim O’Connor Geangach , (or 
 the Crooked,) who never assumed the name of Dhwnne ; he was 
 succeeded by Owen O’Connor Caoch (or the Blind,) who never 
 assumed the title of Dhunne, whose son, Carbery O’Connor, died 
 at Ballintobber in 1526, leaving Dermott Miol Machaire 
 O’Connor, the father of Sir Hugh O’Connor — none of those ever 
 assumed the title of Dhunne, and they never heard of such a title 
 as Don , which, according to Mr. Mathew O’Conor, (Mr. A. 
 O’Conor’s father,) was a corruption of Dhunne, invented in 1750, 
 and they did not use the title in their public acts ; yet, in the 
 published pedigree in the late edition of the i( Landed Gentry,” 
 the title of Don is given to each of them , by way of imparting to 
 it a heritable quality, which from its origin, so clearly given by 
 Dr. O’Conor and Mathew O’Conor, it is quite impossible to 
 sustain ; and Mr. Arthur O’Conor acted most unwisely in 
 
38 
 
 have had a right, and who you say actually signed 
 his briefs as Eccles O’Connor Don, had no more 
 right to do so than he had to assume the title of 
 Grand Visier, and it was equally absurd — the title 
 could belong to none but to an O’ Conor , of the 
 race of O’ Conor Don — and if he had even inherited 
 the estate (not a foot of which he got), Mr. 
 Eccles, being of a different name, could not never- 
 theless have assumed the title, which like the titles 
 of O Connor Roe, and O’Connor Sligo, must cease 
 to exist with the last male descendant of the 
 line. 
 
 Thus I hope I have satisfactorily answered your 
 question, as to the grounds on which Owen O’Con- 
 nor assumed the title of O’ Conor Don, and I regret 
 that the legal opinion you have given on the 
 matter seems to be based on vindictive feelings, 
 rather than on the principles of ancient or modern 
 law. You also state in your letter, that Owen 
 O’Connor, of Belanagare, in assuming the title of 
 O’ Conor Don, took upon himself to alter the 
 name of the O’Connor family, throughout the whole 
 
 entering into a discussion with such recklessness, without any 
 means of supporting his allegations, and seemingly relying on the 
 dangerous supposition that everybody was as ignorant as himself 
 on the subject. 
 
 In M‘Connellan’s Translation of the Annals of the Four 
 Masters , A.D. 1189, it is related that O’Connor Maonmay, son 
 of Roderick O’Connor, King of Connaught, was slain by Manus, 
 son of Floinn O’Finachta, who was called Crosach Donn (or the 
 brown-haired squinter,) this is the earliest Don we have met with 
 on record. Those nick-names were very common amongst the 
 ancient Irish. The colour of the hair, a squint, a hump, a 
 stammer, or any peculiarity or defect usually suggested a dis- 
 tinctive appellation. 
 
39 
 
 range of his certified pedigree , 0 prepared by an 
 able lawyer, who knew well what inferences might 
 in after times be drawn from the documents he 
 was framing, and that the prominent position 
 which Owen O’ Conor Don attained in the long 
 struggle for Catholic Emancipation, and the 
 assumption of the title of O’Conor Don, induced 
 the notion that the new spelling was correct, 
 and distinguished the descendants of Sir Hugh 
 O’Connor.” 
 
 Your statement in this matter is perfectly in- 
 correct, and without foundation ; and in order to 
 sustain my refutation of those unjust charges 
 against my uncle — who cannot now answer you, 
 but whose conduct through life, and whose 
 character, is above your censure — I must recur to 
 events which happened in Ireland before his time, 
 
 0 This pedigree is called a certified pedigree from a certificate 
 annexed to it by Owen O’Connor, in which he states that he 
 believes it to be true— on which alone its authenticity rests. This 
 pedigree has been both lodged in the office of the Ulster King of 
 Arms, and published in the u Landed Gentry .” In the former 
 the name is properly spelled O'Connor down to, and even 
 including the name of Owen O'Connor. In the published edition 
 of it the name is most improperly spelt O' Conor throughout the 
 whole pedigree. We are glad to find that this pedigree was 
 taken from the pedigree prepared by Charles O’Connor, because 
 it is in substance a fair pedigree ; but we deeply regret that the 
 pedigrees put forward by Mr. Mathew O’Conor, of Mount Druid, 
 (one of which will be found in the appendix,) were not framed 
 with the same conscientious adherence to well-known facts. Mr. 
 A. O’Conor was very rash in compelling us to expose his father’s 
 disingenuous and unprincipled conduct, which we certainly 
 would not unnecessarily do — he had redeeming qualities, none 
 of which descended to Mr. A. O’Conor. 
 
40 
 
 to throw light upon the subsequent events upon 
 which you treat. 
 
 After the invasion of Ireland by the English, 
 aided by the dissensions which then existed 
 amongst the Irish chieftains, a long struggle w 7 as 
 maintained, and for centuries Ireland was a prey 
 to the horrors of intestine war of the worst descrip- 
 tion, where national and religious animosity was 
 carried to the most extreme lengths — everything 
 was done by their conquerors to destroy every 
 vestige of nationality in the Irish, and the greatest 
 pains and penalties were resorted to, in order to 
 crush liberal pursuits and the exercise of their 
 religion amongst them, as tending to sustain that 
 nationality, hence, very great ignorance existed 
 for a very long period amongst the Irish, and 
 Irish history was almost buried in total obscurity, 
 owing to the prevailing ignorance, and to the 
 extreme danger of writing anything on that subject 
 in those days. Charles O’Connor, of Belanagare, 
 my great grandfather, was the first who had the 
 ability and courage to undertake to rescue the 
 records of Irish history from its sepulchral ob- 
 scurity — his education was very closely attended 
 to by a maternal uncle of his, who had himself 
 been brought up amongst the Courts of Europe, 
 and who, unable to discharge his duties as Catholic 
 Bishop of Ireland, to which he had been appoin- 
 ted, (owing to the severity of the penal laws), 
 applied himself to the education of his nephew, 
 (Charles O’Connor), who, having a good natural 
 
41 
 
 understanding, and a devoted attachment to his 
 religion and country, made great progress, and 
 being possessed of one of the largest and most 
 valuable collections of materials for Irish history 
 in the kingdom, he commenced his writing, which 
 has since been greeted by almost every writer on 
 Irish history who followed him. Guided by the 
 ancient Irish, he restored the orthography of his 
 family name, which had long been spelled according 
 to the English fashion, which, in the depression 
 that had so long previously existed, was paid little 
 attention to, and gave them but little concern. 
 His work, entitled “ Dissertations on the History 
 of Ireland ,” is extant, to which you can easily 
 refer, and you will then find that he spells the 
 name O’ Conor all through with one N. p 
 
 Numerous autograph letters of his are in our 
 possession, in which his name is so written, and 
 which recited so many of the events of his day, 
 that their publication would, in my opinion, afford 
 a very good history of his time, and which 1 trust 
 may ere long be given to the public. Hence, your 
 statement, that Owen O’Connor changed the 
 
 p This is another singular delusion. Charles O’Connor wrote 
 the name O'Connor throughout his Dissertations, which were 
 published by subscription, A.D. 1753, and the names of several 
 O’Connors in the long list of subscribers annexed thereto, 
 including O’Connor Don, are all spelled in like manner — 
 O'Connor. We succeeded in obtaining a copy of it, and found 
 it a very interesting little work, though by no means of the 
 importance ascribed to it by Mr. A. O’Conor. Charles O’Conor, 
 D.D., was the clever man of the family. 
 
42 
 
 orthography of his family name, is without founda- 
 tion. q 
 
 It is nearly a century since Charles O’Connor 
 made the alteration, and not one of his family have 
 since written their name otherwise. Your state- 
 ment that the pedigree, furnished by Owen 
 O’Connor, had been prepared by an able lawyer, 
 is equally unfounded — owing to the same course 
 which crushed literary attainments amongst the 
 native Irish, very great ignorance of their origin 
 and pedigree also prevailed at that time, and 
 Charles O’Connor, of Belanagare, was resorted to 
 by many of the old Irish families for their 
 pedigrees — many of which he gives in his work to 
 which I have already alluded. The O’Connors, 
 of Cloonalis, totally ignorant of the particulars of 
 their pedigree, applied to him for information, 
 and I have the original autograph pedigree which 
 he drew out for them, together with the original 
 autograph pedigree which he drew out for his own 
 family. It was from that pedigree that Owen 
 O’Conor drew the one he gave to the Ulster King 
 of Arms, to which you allude. Charles O’Connor, 
 
 q Certainly not without foundation, for we find that he most 
 pointedly and emphatically did so in the pedigree he gave to the 
 Ulster King of Arms, in which he wrote his own name, Owen 
 O'Connor, and his son’s name Denis O' Conor, and then signed 
 the certificate he annexed to it, O' Conor Don. This was a 
 deliberate declaration that it was then he adopted the name 
 O' Conor ; but we are quite satisfied that neither Charles 
 O’Connor nor Owen O’Connor changed their names with any 
 unfair intention, it was mere caprice — we freely acquit them. 
 They were incapable of such contemptible meanness. 
 
43 
 
 who drew it, was a very simple-minded man, 
 possessing neither the cunning nor the profession 
 of a lawyer, which you accuse him of. I have 
 now answered the several points of your letter, 
 except your claim to be a descendant of Bryan 
 O’Connor, (4th son of Sir Hugh O’Conor Don). 
 It has been before stated that tradition is against 
 you, for I have ever heard you were no connexion 
 whatever of our family. r 
 
 I shall now come to the test of property ; — Your 
 grandfather, Thomas O’Connor, lived in the town 
 of Castlerea, as is evinced by the Book of Con- 
 formity in the Rolls Office in Dublin, in which is 
 entered that Thomas O’Connor and Mary his wife, 
 conformed to the Protestant Faith in 1753 ; at that 
 time I believe he had no property, 53 as Miltown, 
 which you now possess, then belonged to Aylward 
 John Dillon, but which, on his death, reverted 
 to your grandfather, Thomas O’Connor, and to 
 Terence O’Brien jointly, as being married to his 
 
 r This is what Mr. A. O’Conor erroneously supposes to con- 
 stitute tradition — what he ever heard!! He could not show any, 
 the smallest, scintilla of credible evidence to sustain his un- 
 warrantable fabrication, (for it deserves a no less stigmatising 
 character,) that tradition is against the Corrasduna hranch of the 
 O’Connor family, which had the distinct recognition both of the 
 Cloonalis and Belanagare families. 
 
 s Why should he believe that a gentleman and his wife were 
 living in Castlerea without having any property ! ! Is Mr. A. 
 O’Conor aware that Denis O’Connor, the father of Charles 
 O’Connor of Belanagare, was for several years living in a cabin 
 at Knockmore, the estate of Mr. McDermott, of Alderfort, in a 
 state of miserable destitution ? 
 
44 
 
 sisters Mary and Margaret Dillon. And it was 
 by a division of his property by deed of partition, 
 dated 13th July, 1759, that your grandfather then 
 got 18a. 1r. 10p. of East Carrowgarry, and West 
 Carrowgarry, otherwise Miltown, containing 280a. 
 2r. 2p., with the house and improvements thereon 
 as his share; and Terence O’Brien got Dillon’s 
 Grove, East Slevin, and 18a. 3r. 11p. as his 
 share, as is set out in the Registry Office, Book 
 275, in page 148. 1 Thus, you possess neither of 
 two very essential evidences for establishing your 
 claim, and your reference to Domk. O’Connor’s 
 will, I think equally weak to sustain you. He 
 leaves his estate of Cloonalis successively to his 
 brothers, Alexander and Thomas, and their heirs 
 male ; to his cousins of Belanagare, and their heirs 
 male, to his cousin, Denis O’Connor, of Wilis- 
 brook, and to his heirs male, to Peter O’Connor, 
 of Tomona, and his heirs male, to Barny O’Con- 
 nor, of Ballycahir, and Thomas, his brother, and 
 their heirs male, and lastly, to Roderic O’Connor, 
 of Miltown, and Owen, his brother, and their heirs 
 male, and then to his own right heirs. Peter 
 O’Connor, of Tomona, to whom he entailed his 
 
 * 
 
 x The property of Miltown and Dillon’s Grove were devised 
 to the two sisters, and in the partition 18a. 3r. 12p. of Miltown 
 were given with Dillon’s Grove to Mr. O’Brien to make the 
 division equal, which 18 A. 3r 13p. were afterwards purchased 
 by Roderick O’Connor, of Miltown. With a record of the 
 partition before him, Mr. A. O’Connor could not state its 
 contents correctly. 
 
45 
 
 estate, was notoriously no relative whatever , 11 and 
 claimed to belong to O’Connor Roe family, 
 one the last of whom was governor of Civita 
 Vetchia, and whose marble monument was 
 sent from Italy to be placed at Ballinafad 
 churchyard near Strokestown. If, as you state, 
 the Ballycahir family the eldest, the Miltown 
 family the second, and the Willsbrook above of the 
 
 u This is the most extravagant piece of presumption in the 
 whole of Mr. A. O’Conor’s disingenuous and nonsensical state- 
 ment. Bryan O’Connor married Mary O’Connor of Castleruby, 
 (already mentioned in a former note,) and their son Roderic, 
 (whose commissions will be seen in the appendix hereto), left 
 two of his daughters after him in Ireland when he went to 
 France, one of whom married Redmond Fallon, of Ballina 
 House, County Roscommon, and the other married Hugh 
 O’Connor, of Castleruby, her own cousin, the ancestor of Peter 
 O’Connor, of Toomona. Those families have always been 
 warmly attached to each other as relatives and friends, but Mr. 
 A. O’Conor, with his very circumscribed knowledge of the 
 O’Connor family, wholly derived from partially framed pedigrees 
 and his father’s disgraceful manoeuvres, seems bent on depriving 
 the Corrasduna branch of Sir Hugh O’Connor’s family of all its 
 relations, perhaps from an envious feeling. Mr. A. O’Conor’s 
 absurd observations on Dominick O’Connor’s will are quite 
 below any serious notice, and only expose his recklessness and 
 bad feeling. We have a letter, found amongst the papers of 
 Denis O’Connor, of Willsbrook, written by Dr. O’Conor when 
 he was Parish Priest of Castlerea, to Denis O’Connor, which is 
 very characteristic of Dr. O’Conor, who, having taken too 
 warm a part in the sad politics of those times, was afterwards 
 obliged to give up his parish and go to England, where he 
 became chaplain to the Marchioness of Buckingham, at Stowe, 
 in which letter he recognizes Denis O’Connor as his cousin and 
 kinsman; and the most curious part of the letter is, that it is 
 directed by him to Denis O' Conor, Esq., of Willsbrook — it will be 
 found in the appendix to this Memoir. 
 
46 
 
 three is designated as a cousin, although, as you 
 state, farther removal than the Mil town or Bally- 
 cahir families, and that yours is mentioned last in 
 his will, and after persons of the same name, who 
 were no connexion whatever — that although he 
 gives £50 to Denis O’Connor of Willsbrook, (whom 
 he calls his cousin), to buy mourning — he gave no 
 such bequest to the Ballycahir or Miltown family, 
 nor does he acknowledge them as cousins. I must 
 also remark that Mr. Eccles, who you say was the 
 legitimate heir to the title of O’Connor Don, was 
 not even mentioned in that will; the causes that 
 induced that will were that, from attachment and 
 pride in his name, Dominick O’Connor intended 
 his estate should go to a person of that name, 
 although not a relative, in preference to any other, 
 nor does even the expression in his will, denoting 
 a relationship with the O’Connors of Willsbrook, 
 bear you out in the greatest importance you 
 attach to it, as there be many ways by which 
 relationship might have existed besides the one 
 you seek to establish — that of descent in the male 
 line. You state that it did not require any deep 
 historical knowledge, or the aid of an antiquary or 
 a magician, to enable the sons of Major Owen 
 O’Connor, of Corrasduna, to trace their descent; 
 and in the short period of two generations, I sup- 
 pose you can easily inform me who Bryan O’Con- 
 nor, the fourth son of Sir Hugh O’Connor Don 
 was married to, and give evidence of his marriage, 
 &c., and who were the children, and where and 
 how they lost their estates, and how you prove 
 
47 
 
 he had children, and where and in what service 
 Major Owen O’Connor, of Corrasduna, attained 
 his rank. v 
 
 Miltown was Dillon’s Grove property, and did 
 not form any part of the O’Connor estate. Bally- 
 cahir was a lease, made by Sir George Caulfield, 
 of Dunamon, for 31 years; and Corrasduna never 
 belonged to the O’Connor family. w 
 
 T Mr. A. O’Conor’s absurd questions and affected ignorance 
 only demonstrate the ill-fated reliance he reposed in the misre- 
 presentations and manoeuvres of his father, he knows as well as 
 any man living that Major O’Connor derived his title from a 
 commission granted to him by James II. when a mere boy, 
 (which was very usual in those times,) could the Belanagare or 
 the Mount Druid families who devoted their time to 
 compiling pedigrees, be ignorant of the gentleman whose 
 daughter Hugh O’Connor of Belanagare, the brother of Charles 
 O’Connor of Belanagare, married; and of their daughter, 
 Bridget O’Connor, of Castlerea, who spent so much of her time 
 with them, and was so kindly and generously treated by Mrs. 
 O’Conor of Mount Druid, as a relative. And when Charles 
 O’Conor, D.D., mentions in his suppressed Memoirs of the 
 Life and Writings of Charles O'Connor, that Major MacDermott 
 of Emla, the father-in-law of Major Owen O’Connor, of Corras- 
 duna, and the ancestor of the Springfield family, was the old 
 soldier to whom Goldsmith alluded in his “Deserted Village ,” 
 and states that he had the anecdote from Charles O’Connor, of 
 Belanagare, who often saw Major MacDermott, and enjoyed his 
 society so much that he repeatedly spoke of him, even in his last 
 years, as a person whom he never could forget on account of the 
 vivacity of his temper and the affecting emotions with which he 
 could tell the history of his own adventures, and that his parts 
 and the goodness of his heart procured him the friendship of 
 Goldsmith. Oh, how little they knew of the O’Connors of 
 Corrasduna ! ! ! 
 
 w The pedigree prepared by Owen O’Connor, from the 
 autograph draft of Charles O’Connor, names Corrasduna as the 
 
48 
 
 Your reference to the tombstone on which you 
 say that Dominick O’Connor’s name was omitted, 
 owing to his having been refused burial on account 
 of his having cut off his sister, Jane Eccles, and 
 her children, from inheriting the estate, being of 
 recent date after his death, is no evidence whatever 
 or anything you have put forward. In conclusion, 
 permit me to express my great regret for the cor- 
 respondence you have forced upon me. You accuse 
 me of ambition — I cannot know on what grounds; 
 I cannot look for anything I do not possess with 
 regard to the O’Connor family — and if your accu- 
 sation means that I desire to deny to others 
 what I manifestly possess, x you do me a great 
 injustice. I would admit, with the greatest plea- 
 
 residence of Bryan Roe O’Connor — what precise interest he had 
 in the lands we cannot now say, but that interest continued until 
 the death of Major Owen O’Connor, his grandson, who died 
 there, and his son lived there after his death for some years. 
 
 x It is by no means manifest that Mr. A. O’Conor is really 
 descended from Sir Hugh O’Connor, — his pedigree has not been 
 proved in any shape or way, and rests entirely on modern 
 statements, put forward by Charles O’Connor, Owen O’Connor, 
 and Mathew O’Connor, who were all contemporaries. Charles 
 O’Connor died in 1791, and as it is admitted that Dominick 
 O’Connor received his information of those pedigrees from 
 Charles O’Connor, and knew nothing of them himself, his having 
 called the Belanagare family his cousins, affords no evidence in 
 support of their claim. We do not desire to raise any question 
 on the subject, but cannot sanction the assumption that Mr. A. 
 O’Conor is more manifestly descended from Sir Hugh O’Connor 
 than any of his very numerous descendants. If he means that 
 he is so perfect a sample of the O’Connor family that he is 
 manifestly a member of it, he certainly could not pay the family 
 a worse compliment. 
 
49 
 
 sure, the connexion of any person having just 
 claims, and establishing them fairly, nor was it 
 ever characteristic of any of our family to deny 
 them. Owen O’Connor, whose character you 
 impeach by your statement, was of all persons the 
 least capable of the conspiracy with which you 
 charge him. The position which he held in society, 
 and to which you attribute the accomplishment of 
 so mean an artifice, was devoted to a much nobler 
 purpose — that of defending and upholding the 
 rights of his oppressed fellow-countrymen. He 
 was nobly sustained by them, and I have no doubt 
 that with them his memory will stand proof against 
 your charges. The debt of gratitude we owe to 
 our ancestors, who have handed down to us an 
 honoured name, both by their literature and their 
 patriotism, and their moral and virtuous conduct, 
 and still more by their unflinching conscientious 
 adherence to the faith of their ancestors, unawed 
 by the terrors of persecution, aggression, and 
 confiscation of property, and allured not by the 
 temptations of wealth, power and station, coerces 
 us to guard that name with jealous care, both by 
 attention to our own conduct, and by restricting 
 the connexion to those who have just claims to 
 it. Had you not professedly changed the ortho- 
 graphy of your name on your son’s marriage to 
 signify a connexion with our family/ we of course 
 
 y Mr. Arthur O’Conor here most unjustifiably states that we 
 claimed connexion with his family — we don’t know whether his 
 family are descended from Sir Hugh O’Connor or not. We know 
 it has been strongly questioned, and we conceive that such must 
 
 C 
 
50 
 
 should have taken no notice of it, but that being 
 your declared object, I feel that you cannot pro- 
 perly adopt it without offering sufficient proofs to 
 sustain your claim. 
 
 I remain, Sir, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 ARTHUR O’CONOR. 
 
 To Roderic O’Connor, Esq. 
 
 have been the reason that so many pedigrees have been pnt 
 forward to sustain their claim, without any evidence to support 
 them. Our claim is totally different, and whether they are or 
 are not so descended makes no difference to us. Owen O’Connor 
 assumed the title of Don , and adopted the new name O' Conor, in 
 a fair and honourable manner, and did not claim to be the only 
 remains of the Ballintobber family — there were too many old 
 people of the family then living to render such a course practi- 
 cable, even were he capable of such meanness. But Mr. Mathew 
 O’Conor, finding the new name so well established (chiefly by 
 his own contrivances,) and the assumption of the title of Don so 
 successful, sought, by the insertion of misrepresentations in the 
 works of respectable authors, to sever the Belanagare family 
 from the numerous descendants of Sir Hugh O’Connor, and to 
 represent that they were the only remains of the Ballintobber 
 family. Of this we have discovered the most incontestible 
 evidence, which is noticed in the introduction to this Memoir. 
 We have no desire to say an unkind word of Mr. Mathew 
 O’Conor, but we cannot avoid tracing out the origin of the 
 slander which has been so unscrupulously propagated by his 
 children, the foundation of which is to be found in his asser- 
 tions and writings. Mr. A. O’Conor has, by the unmitigated 
 insolence and personal character of his letter, altered the tone of 
 this correspondence, and has himself to blame for the natural 
 consequences of such ungentlemanlike conduct. 
 
51 
 
 MR. R. O’CONOR’S REPLY TO THE FOREGOING. 
 
 My Dear Sir, — Before I enter upon the dis- 
 cussion of any of the multifarious topics of Mr. 
 A. O’Conor’s illogical, evasive, and malignant 
 reply to my very simple demand, “that he should 
 exculpate himself from a charge of reckless and 
 malicious slander on the pedigree of three respec- 
 table families in this county,” I must protest against 
 his most disingenuous insinuation, that the ques- 
 tion can be narrowed to a claim of relationship 
 with his family ; — the question is wholly different, 
 and it behoves him, for his own character’s sake, to 
 sustain his defamatory allegations by convincing 
 proofs, or to retrace his steps. 
 
 The Dundermott family, the Miltown family, 
 and the Willsbrook family — descended as they 
 are from three brothers — have uniformly and un- 
 interruptedly deduced their descent from Bryan 
 O’Connor of Ballintobber. The tradition of their 
 families is unquestionable, and affords the best 
 evidence that can be obtained on such a descent at 
 the expiration of 300 years. 
 
 The Mount Druid family have taken it on them- 
 selves, without a particle of evidence to support 
 the assertion, to impeach the genealogies of those 
 three families; and Mr. A. O’ Conor has submitted 
 his inconclusive reasoning on the subject, in a mani- 
 festo, which exhibits more pertinacious confidence 
 
52 
 
 and less ability — more evasive shuffling and less 
 candour, than I have ever found in any document 
 submitted to the public ; it proves nothing but his 
 unfair intentions, and his utter incapacity to sustain 
 his assertions. 
 
 I shall now proceed to discuss the value of his 
 arguments, and also the tone and malignity which 
 they so plainly evince. 
 
 Mr. A. O’ Conor’s first position is, that the above- 
 named families cannot be descended from Bryan 
 O’Connor because they do not possess one foot of 
 his estates. There is no question of the truth of the 
 allegation, but to make it of any the least value in 
 the discussion, Mr. A. O’ Conor must go a few 
 steps further and show that his estates passed into 
 other branches of the family, or what became of 
 them. 
 
 The eldest son of Bryan O’Connor by Mary, 
 daughter of Hugh Mergagh O’Connor, of Castle- 
 ruby, his wife, namely Colonel Roderick O’Connor, 
 acquired more property by his marriage with Miss 
 O’Shaughnessy, of Gort, his cousin german, than 
 all the other branches of the family then possessed. 
 He got by his marriage extensive estates in the 
 counties of Roscommon and Galway. In whose 
 possession are those estates now ? Did any of them 
 revert to the Belanagare or Cloonalis branches of 
 the family ? — No! Colonel Roderick O’Connor 
 fought in defence of his country, and paid the sad 
 penalty of his patriotism and valour ; he passed 
 over to France with his regiment in 1791. His 
 properties were of course confiscated, — and that 
 
53 
 
 puts Mr. A. O’Conor’ s silly argument quite out of 
 the question. z 
 
 But I must confess that I do not believe that 
 Mr. A. O’ Conor is weak enough to place any 
 reliance whatsoever in his own argument. He 
 adopted it merely to gratify a malignant feeling, 
 and to afford him a pretext for holding up my 
 grandfather and grandmother as apostates , which 
 he calculated would, by a certain class of readers, 
 be considered a degrading and humiliating expo- 
 sure, and for representing the property of their 
 descendants as very trifling. 
 
 Now, what are the facts : — Thomas O’Connor, 
 my grandfather, had very moderate means to com- 
 mence with. He was an officer in the Irish Brigade 
 in France, and attained the rank of Major in that 
 service; he returned, not to obtain possession of his 
 family estates, but to forward himself by honourable 
 exertions. He married Miss Dillon, of Dillon’s 
 Grove, in this county ; her brothers having died, 
 the property devolved on their two sisters, Mrs. 
 O’Connor and Mrs. O’Brien — and Mrs. O’Con- 
 nor’s share of the estate contains 640a. 2r. 37p. 
 Ordnance Survey, besides which, Thomas O’Con- 
 nor purchased 571a. 2r. 3p. in the county of Ros- 
 common, and 835a. 30p. in the county of Galway, 
 and which estates still remain in the family which 
 
 z See the account given of the forfeitures and sale of the lands 
 of Beagh and Clooneycarney, note f , page 33, which was dis- 
 covered on record since this letter was written ; and see the 
 memorial of Colonel R. O’Connor to Louis XIV., in the ap- 
 pendix. 
 
54 
 
 Mr. A. O’Conor has so unsuccessfully endeavoured 
 to exhibit as descended from paupers and apos- 
 tates. Let us apply Mr. A. O’Conor’s test to his 
 own family : — My grandfather was a second son, 
 so was Mathew O’ Conor, of Mount Druid — had he 
 one acre of an estate of O’Connor property? Mount 
 Druid is leasehold property purchased by him ; 
 Elphin house and premises are held from the 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and Mr. A. O’ Conor 
 has very little real property in this county, and 
 none of what he calls an O’Conor estate. Now, 
 was there any necessity for Mr. A. O’Conor to 
 scramble through the title to my family residence 
 to show that it was not (what nobody in his senses 
 could suppose it to be), the residence of Bryan 
 O’Connor 300 years ago. 
 
 As to Mr. A. O’ Conor’s unmeaning observa- 
 tions on the residence of Bryan O’Connor, at Cor- 
 rasduna, and on the residence of Mr. O’Connor of 
 Dundermott’s ancestors at Ballycahir, it is observ- 
 able that Owen O’ Conor, in his genealogy, inserts 
 Bryan O’Connor thus : — “ Bryan Roe O'Connor, 
 of Corrasduna and Dominick O’Connor Don, 
 in his will, designates Ballycahir as the residence 
 of Mr. O’Connor of Dundermott’s father’s family. 
 
 Now, as to Mr. A. O’ Conor’s strange reasoning 
 in favour of the title of “ Don,” I shall only say 
 that I found it necessary to impeach the genealogy 
 of O’ Conor Don, because that genealogy appeared 
 to me to have been framed to sever numerous 
 descendants of Sir Hugh O’Connor’s from the 
 ancient O’Connor family, by the adoption through- 
 
55 
 
 out of the new and unauthorised name of “ O’Con- 
 or.” 3 Being under that necessity, I impeached it 
 on three grounds:— 1st. The improper suppression 
 of the heir-at-law of Sir Hugh O’ Conor, in aid of 
 his own claims. 2nd. As it misrepresented the 
 name of the family. 3rd. For its deduction of the 
 title of Don as a heritable dignity. I have estab- 
 lished, beyond a question, that O’ Conor was not 
 the name borne by the family ; and I have Mr. A. 
 Conor’s plea of confession that Charles O’Connor, 
 the historian, was the first of the family who 
 spelled the name O’ Conor. 
 
 Mr. A. O’ Conor has put the title of Don upon 
 grounds that prove beyond all question that it 
 was not a heritable dignity. Mr. A. O’ Conor says 
 it was the title of the Chieftain of the sept or 
 family ; Mr. Hume tells us that the chieftains and 
 Tanists , though drawn from the principal families, 
 were not hereditary, but established by election , or, 
 more properly speaking, by force and violence , and 
 that their chief profit resulted from arbitrary 
 exactions. “ Now, Mr. A. O’ Conor has not shown 
 that the title has any historical existence or repre- 
 sentative value , but says that his uncle claimed the 
 title according to the (extinct) law of Tanistry ! ! ! 
 
 The Brehon law of descent could not co-exist 
 with the English law ; and it is sheer nonsense to 
 talk of taking anything by the Brehon law in 
 Ireland, or of excluding females in the law of 
 
 a In the published edition of this genealogy, the name 
 ^O’Conor” was adopted throughout, but not in the edition 
 prepared by Owen O’Connor. (See note °, page 39.) 
 
56 
 
 inheritance while Queen Victoria reigns over her 
 Irish dominions, so that Mr. A. O’Conor’s his- 
 torical researches and legal views are alike incon- 
 clusive and unprofitable. 
 
 The long hatched scheme of the exclusive repre- 
 sentation of the O’Connor family has come to its 
 end, and is quite untenable. 
 
 There are numerous families descended from the 
 ancient O’Connors who give themselves no trouble 
 about genealogies or pedigrees, and who, by the 
 new spelling of the name, were intended to be cut 
 off in a wholesale manner. Now, for example, let 
 us examine O’ Conor Don’s pedigree with that 
 view: — It states, “ Tirlough O’ Conor governed 
 Connaught for 21 years, and died in 1345, leaving, 
 with several younger sons , Hugh O’ Conor, king of 
 Connaught. Hugh O’Conor died in 1356, leaving 
 several sons.” Now, without going farther, how 
 are those numerous younger sons accounted for? 
 Don’t you think that some of them left families, 
 and have existing representatives as well as the 
 eldest sons ? — and here their ancestor’s names are 
 so far tampered with that they are severed from 
 the family ! They are scattered over the country, 
 giving themselves no trouble about the genealo- 
 gists, tradition makers, or magicians, of the exclu- 
 sive representation coterie. Is that a just or an 
 honest mode of dealing with the genealogy of an 
 ancient family ? I cannot think so. b 
 
 b Though Charles O’Connor was the grandfather of Owen 
 O’Connor, he was, singularly enough, his contemporary, having 
 died in 1791, so that he may have suggested the change in the 
 
57 
 
 Mr, A. O’Conor is too free in making assertions, 
 but very slow in producing evidence. Mr. A. 
 O’ Conor mistakes his position — he is called upon 
 to produce evidence, and he assumes that he is 
 appealed to as judge; in the exuberance of his 
 vanity he expresses a hope that I shall not write 
 my name with one N without his sanction. I 
 must deline consulting his hopes or wishes until 
 he satifies me that he has something like evidence 
 in support of his unwarrantable assertions, which 
 I repudiate as altogether unfounded. 
 
 I have called on Mr. O’ Conor of Mount Druid, 
 and his brother, to state the grounds on which they 
 ventured to calumniate the descendants of Bryan 
 O’Connor. The ambiguous phraseology of Mr. 
 A. O’ Conor’s letter, which assumed more the char- 
 acter of a lampoon than of a rational reply, renders 
 it incumbent on me to demand an explanation, and 
 call upon Mr. A. O’ Conor either to define his 
 defamatory insinuations against Mr. Bryan O’Con- 
 nor, and to state his evidence in support of them, 
 or to withdraw them. Mr. A. O’Conor knows that 
 
 spelling of the name, without giving the alteration any great 
 antiquity, and it is to be regretted that nobody can explain why 
 the alteration was made, and extended to those who never bore 
 the name of O' Conor , — restoring a name to a family, which the 
 family never bore, is rather an unintelligible operation, and is a 
 ludicrous one to ascribe to Charles O’Connor ; and yet it is 
 precisely what Mr. A. O’Conor ascribed to his erudite great 
 grandfather, for he says that he restored the orthography of the 
 O’Conor name ! 
 
 Mr. Brennan, the eminent Irish scholar, in his work recently 
 published, treats the alteration as a mere freak of Charles 
 O’Connor’s, without any foundation. 
 
 c 2 
 
58 
 
 he owes it to his own character to do so. I shall 
 say no more on the subject for the present, but I 
 shall return to it if necessary — I cannot leave 
 matters as they now stand. 
 
 1 am, my dear Sir 
 
 Your faithful kinsman, 
 
 RODERIC O’CONOR. 
 
 7th March, 1856. 
 
 To Alex. O’Cqnor Eccles, Esq. 
 
 LETTER II.— FROM MR. A. O’CONOR. 
 
 Elphin House, 14 th March , 1855. 
 
 Dear Sir — I have seen a letter from Mr. 
 Roderic O’Conor, of Miltown, in the last num- 
 ber of your Journal. His former letters and my 
 reply, (which I consider unanswered) are before the 
 public, and I leave the merits of both to their 
 decision. 
 
 1 am, dear sir, yours faithfully, 
 
 ARTHUR O’CONOR. 
 
 To Alex. O’Conor Eccles, Esq. 
 
59 
 
 MR R. 0 CONOR’S FINAL REPLY" 
 
 2nd July, 1855. 
 
 My Dear Sir — I very much regret that I am 
 under the painful necessity of again adverting to 
 Mr. Arthur O’ Conor’s letter of the 3rd March, 
 which he, with such hasty indiscretion, published 
 in two Roscommon newspapers, on the eve of our 
 last spring assizes, and which contains such disin- 
 genuous and unscrupulous insinuations against the 
 ancestors of so many respectable families in the 
 county of Roscommon. 
 
 The grave character of those insinuations left 
 us no alternative but an appeal to the only legally- 
 constituted authority for the decision of such ques- 
 tions within our reach, namely, an appeal to the 
 decision of the Ulster King of Arms, at the Castle 
 of Dublin. We accordingly brought the sub- 
 ject before Sir J. Bernard Burke, and undertook 
 the perplexing and difficult task of collecting 
 evidence to refute aspersions of so stale and unex- 
 pected a nature. And it was not until the 11th 
 of June, that we obtained, under the fire (or per- 
 haps I should say smoke) of the enemy’s guns, 
 the following judicial decision from Sir J. Bernard 
 Burke, under his seal of office : — 
 
 “ Patrick O’Connor, of Dundermott, in the 
 county of Roscommon, Esq., and Roderic O’Con- 
 nor, of Miltown, also in the county of Roscommon, 
 Esq., having submitted to me various documents 
 
60 
 
 referential to their family, and being desirous of 
 my opinion and decision as to their ancestors, I 
 have minutely examined the said several documents, 
 and have arrived at the conclusion that the families 
 of Ballycahir (of which Mr. O’Connor of Dunder- 
 mott, is a descendant^ of Miltown, and of Wills- 
 brook,springfromthreebrothers — Roderic, Thomas, 
 and Denis O’Connor, who are legitimately des- 
 cended from a branch of that line of the great 
 house of O’Connor or O’Conor, of which O’Conor 
 Don is the representative. 
 
 “ This judgment is formed after a most careful 
 consideration of the strong family and traditional 
 evidence 0 placed before me, corroborated by the 
 
 c In the laborious investigation before Sir Bernard Burke, no 
 less than 10 statutory declarations were obtained from France 
 and different parts of this country, proving the traditional 
 accounts received from old members of the family, and facts 
 within their knowledge. The marriage of one of Colonel 
 O’Connor’s daughters with the Marquess de Yienne ; the death 
 of her son at Miltown, and his burial at Ballintobber, County 
 Roscommon ; the transmission of articles of French manufacture 
 by the daughter of Colonel O’Connor, from France to the Bally- 
 cahir family, and their preservation to the present time in the 
 family ; the marriage of one of Colonel O’Connor’s daughters, 
 who remained in Ireland, to Redmond Fallon, of Ballina House, 
 County Roscommon ; the manner in which Colonel O’Connor’s 
 son and two daughters, left in Ireland, were reared by fosterers 
 named Kaveny, on his estate after he left Ireland — his residence 
 at Corrasdima, and the removal of his tombstone from thence to 
 Ballintobber — the inscription on it, and the declarations of his 
 children that the Colonel was their grandfather, and lost his 
 estates by leaving the country and entering the French service, 
 and a number of other minor circumstances, which one would 
 scarcely expect to be able to trace after so great a lapse of time. 
 
61 
 
 transmission in the family of Ballycahir of the 
 French commissions of the time of Louis XIV., 
 by the MSS. of my predecessor, Sir William 
 Betham, and by the devise in the will of Dominick 
 O’Connor Don, bearing date 8th August, 1789, 
 in which he styles Denis O’Connor, of Willsbrook, 
 his cousin, and includes Barney O’Connor, of Bally- 
 cahir, and Roderick O’ Connor, of Miltown, amongst 
 those to whom he leaves the reversion of his 
 property. 
 
 (Signed), 
 
 “J. BERNARD BURKE. 
 
 “ Record Tower, 
 
 “ Dublin Castle, 
 
 66 11th June, 1855.” 
 
 Mr. Arthur O’ Conor, in his ill- concealed bigotry, 
 made an unjustifiable attack on my grandfather for 
 having conformed to the Protestant religion, and 
 had the presumption, without a scintilla of evidence, 
 to state that he was living in Castlerea without 
 any visible means, and that he had no property 
 but what he got by his marriage. Pray, what 
 property had his father, Mr. Mathew O’ Conor, 
 before his marriage? — he was educated for a priest, 
 became an attorney, and, like Mr. Arthur O’ Conor, 
 being a handsome man, he got the wife and the 
 fortune — his first advance in life — L’embarras de 
 richesses was not his complaint in those days ; and 
 as for his boasted adherence to the religion of his 
 
62 
 
 forefathers, see what he says in 44 Recollections of 
 Switzerland ,” page 48, talking of Cologne — 44 Until 
 44 1793 the gloom of surtouts and cocked hats, the 
 44 foppery of silver shoe-buckles, the filth of long 
 44 beards, cowls, and sandals, overspread and saddened 
 44 the streets, squares, quays, and public walks. 
 44 In that year the fires of the French Revolution 
 44 spread to the borders of the Rhine, and involved 
 64 in promiscuous ruin the abodes of princes and 
 44 priests , of nobles and monks , alike regardless of 
 44 aristocratic claims founded on immemorial enjoy- 
 44 ment, and sacerdotal rights deriving title from 
 44 alleged divine right and consecrated superstition , 
 44 all the trumpery of holy girdles and cowls were 
 44 consumed .” In the third page he compares Lon- 
 don to Rome, and tells us that 44 During the ages 
 44 of ignorance and barbarism, papal supremacy 
 44 impelled into the eternal city much of the riches 
 44 of the western countries of Europe, but the 
 44 greatness and glory of London may be traced, 
 44 not to robbery and superstition . but to the indus- 
 46 try of an enterprising people.” 
 
 Verily, Mr. Arthur O’Conor is most unfortunate 
 in the topics he selects for his defamatory pur- 
 poses, in his vain struggle per fas aut nefas to 
 elevate a junior branch of the family above its pro- 
 per position, and to calumniate and extinguish 
 everybody else, which he considers is a duty 
 imposed on him by the literary accomplishments of 
 his 44 illustrious and patriotic” ancestors. Mr. A. 
 O’ Conor has announced at the baptismal font 
 a forthcoming work of his 44 illustrious” great 
 
63 
 
 grandfather, Charles O’Connor, by Mr. Mathew 
 O’Conor, on the Irish Brigade in France. On 
 any matter relating to the O’Connor family, it 
 must be received with great caution. There were 
 many of the O’Connor family in the Irish Bri- 
 gade — has he named them all ? 
 
 It is far from my intention to emulate Mr. 
 Arthur O’ Conor in the substitution of scurrility 
 for argument. I am not, like him, reduced to that 
 humiliating extremity. Were I so disposed, he 
 would have ample cause to regret his rashness in 
 venturing to traduce those who are so immeasu- 
 rably beyond his reach. Neither have I been the 
 aggressor in this most ludicrously ridiculous corres- 
 pondence— it was forced upon me by his inordinate 
 vanity and folly. Finding that the new name 
 O’ Conor was most unwarrantably claimed as the 
 distinctive appellation of the descendants of the 
 ancient family, and finding that it was put forward 
 as such in Mr. Weld’s Statistical Survey of the 
 County of Roscommon in 1832— in Mr. Hardi- 
 man’s new edition of Roderic O’Flaherty’s West 
 Connaught in 1846 d — in the translation of the 
 
 d In Mr. O’Flaherty’s West Connaught, page 134, it is stated 
 on the erroneously-assumed authority of the “ illustrious” Char- 
 les O’Connor, that the name O' Conor was adopted A.D. 
 1030, by the then King of Connaught, and continued in the 
 family ever since, thus giving the modern name O’Conor, 700 
 years of wholly unauthorized existence, and misrepresenting the 
 name borne by the family for 700 years. But Charles O’Connor 
 in his Dissertations, published in 1753, page 234, tells us that his 
 Majesty of A.D. 1030, bore the old-fashioned name of O’Connor, 
 and gives that name to his descendants throughout his Disserta- 
 
64 
 
 Annals of the Four Masters — and in several other 
 modern books published by the Archaeological 
 Society, I, without casting any imputation on 
 any person, adopted the new spelling of the old 
 name, to prevent my being spelled out of my just 
 position amongst the descendants of a respectable 
 ancestry,— when, to my unutterable astonishment, 
 Mr. O’Conor, of Mount Druid, and his impetuous 
 brother, Mr. Arthur O’ Conor, had the temerity to 
 question my right to do so, and, to throw ridicule on 
 the subject, accused me of claiming relationship 
 with them ! ! 
 
 I assure you, Sir, it never once occurred to me 
 that I was claiming relationship with them or their 
 family; nor can I think how it can serve or exalt 
 me, or raise, or in any way add to my respecta- 
 bility to make such a claim. I am no genealogist, 
 and attribute very little importance to such con- 
 siderations, but I could not submit to such aggres- 
 sive arrogance. 
 
 I have not denied to Mr. Arthur O’Conor the 
 only position he can claim in the O’ Conor family, 
 
 tions, without exception . Now, in both Weld’s Statistical 
 Survey of Roscommon , and Mr. Hardiman’s West Connaught , 
 we are told that it was Mr. Mathew O' Conor, of Mount Druid , who 
 obligingly furnished the particulars respecting the O' Conor family . 
 Mr. M. O’Conor treated the title of Don with unrestrained 
 ridicule. See Recollections of Switzerland , page 130, where he 
 sarcastically describes the dignity of Don and Roe as “ dis- 
 tinctions founded on ancient barbarism, long since consigned to 
 oblivion, and lately revived by plebeian pride, seeking dis- 
 tinction in names as substitutes for wealth and nobility, and 
 endeavouring to cloak rags and poverty with the mantle of 
 aristocracy.” 
 
65 
 
 in support of which neither he nor any of his family 
 have offered a single particle of evidence beyond 
 their own statements and the traditions of their 
 family. 6 I have insisted, and do insist, that he 
 cannot show the heir-at-law and real representative 
 of Sir Hugh O’Connor in his branch of the family. 
 
 e The only published pedigrees of the O’Connor family 
 emanated from Owen O’Conor and Mr. Mathew O’Conor, and 
 neither of them adduced any evidence to sustain their statements, 
 and were far from being communicative on any subject that did 
 not suit their own especial purposes. Charles O’Connor’s 
 brother, Hugh, is not represented as having married, perhaps 
 because he married Major Owen O’Connor, of Corrasduna’s 
 daughter. William Eccles is not represented as having had any 
 children, though his son was the only nephew of Dominick 
 O’Connor and Alexander O’Connor, of Cloonalis. 
 
 Charles O’Connor, in his account of the O’Connors, in his 
 Dissertations , page 132, states that the late Andrew O'Connor 
 of Ballintobber , in the County of Roscommon, was descended in 
 15 lineal generations from Cathal Crove Darg, the brother of 
 Roderick O’Connor, the last King of Ireland. This is an 
 extraordinary mistake. Andrew O’Connor resided at Cloonalis, 
 and had nothing to do with Ballintobber, and this great 
 genealogist takes no notice of the other sons of Sir Hugh 
 O’Connor. It really looks as if he knew very little of the family, 
 and did not belong to it — and of his descent no evidence has 
 been adduced that we can discover. 
 
 Mr. O’Conor, of Mount Druid, and his brother, Mr. A. O’Conor, 
 whose reckless impetuosity involved us in this humiliating 
 controversy, having expressed their desire to put an end to it, 
 we did everything in our power, consistent with self-respect, to 
 obviate the necessity of saying an angry word on the subject ; 
 but Mr. A. O’Conor mistook his position, and with characteristic 
 inconsistency, required, as a sine qua non, that we should say we 
 adopted the new spelling of the family name out of compliment to 
 O'Connor Don. This, of course, we could not do, having already 
 assigned a more rational and less complimentary reason for 
 having done so. 
 
66 
 
 That the Cloonalis branch did not merge in the 
 Belanagare family, and is still extant, and repre- 
 sented by you, Sir, as its legitimate heir, according 
 to the law of the land — and that his uncle, Owen 
 O’Connor, had no more right to assume the title of 
 Don than he had to assume the title of Earl of 
 Kingston. By the (extinct) law of tanistry it was 
 elective — who elected him? By common law, if 
 descendable, it went to the heir-at-law. Who was 
 he on the death of Alexander O’Connor Don ? If 
 Mr. Arthur O Conor contests these statements, let 
 him get the decision of Sir Bernard Burke on the 
 subject; he was no way backward in trying the 
 effect of his arguments with him in our concerns — 
 let him now try his power of persuasion in his own 
 case, and he will find Sir Bernard Burke very slow 
 in sanctioning his groundless assumptions. 
 
 I remain, my dear Sir, 
 
 Your faithful kinsman, 
 RODER1C O’CONOR, 
 Milton, Tulsk. 
 
 To Alex. O’Conor Eccles, Esq., 
 
 Roscommon. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 The curious pedigree of the O’Connors, of Ballintobber Castle, 
 furnished by Mr. Mathew O’Conor, of Mount Druid, to Mr. 
 Hardiman, and by him published in his edition of Roderic 
 0 ’ Flaherty s West Connaught , after he had previously got Mr. 
 Weld to insert a note in his Statistical Swrvey of Roscommon, 
 page 238, stating that u the O’ Conors of Belanagare and of 
 Mount Druid, are the only remains of the Ballintobber family” ! ! 
 No. 1. — Cathal Crove Darg O'Conor died in the Abbey of 
 Knockmoy, A.D. 1224. 
 
 2. —Hugh, his son, succeeded to the Government of the 
 
 Irish Province in Connaught. 
 
 3. — Roderic, Hugh’s son. 
 
 [This is erroneous ; Hugh was succeeded by Feidlim, his 
 brother, who built the Abbeys of Roscommon and Tomona, and 
 died in 1264. Hugh, his son, succeeded him, and died in 1274. 
 — Leland, vol. 1, p. 208.] 
 
 4. — Eogan, Roderic’s son, succeeded to the Government 
 
 of the Irish of Connaught for three months, and was 
 murdered in the Monastery of Fryers Preachers, in 
 Roscommon, A.D. 1274. 
 
 5. — Hugh, Eogan’s son, succeeded, Governor of the Irish 
 
 of Connaught, and was killed by his own kindred, 
 A.D. 1309, at Kill-an Cloghan, in Breffney. 
 
 6. — Torloch, Hugh’s son, obtained the Government of the 
 
 Irish Province in Connaught, and was killed at 
 Fiodh Doruda, in Munster, Eolus, A.D. 1345. 
 
 7. — Hugh, Torloch’s son, obtained the Government of the 
 
 Irish Province of his ancestors, was deposed A.D. 
 1350, and murdered in Baly-loch-Decar, by Donagh 
 O’Kelly, the Chieftain of Hy-Many, A.D. 1356. 
 
68 
 
 8. — Torloch Og, Hugh’s son, obtained the provincial 
 
 Government of his ancestors, and was killed in Clan- 
 Conrey, A.D. 1406. 
 
 [No mention is made here of the division of the Government 
 between him and his cousin, by the electors, who gave the names 
 of Dhunne and Ruadh to the two cousins, according to Dr. 
 O’Conor, in his suppressed work.] 
 
 9. — Feidlim Geangach, a minor, when his father died, 
 
 succeeded in his advanced age to the patrimonial 
 possessions of his father, and lived in the Castle of 
 Ballintobber. He was killed in a skirmish with the 
 O’Kelly’s, ofHy-Many, 1474. 
 
 10. — Eogan Caoch, Feidlim’s son, died chief of his name, 
 
 at Ballintobber. Edania, the daughter of Daniel 
 O’Conor of Sligo, his wife, died in 1476, and he died 
 himself, A.D. 1485. 
 
 11. — Carbre, the son of Eogan Caoch and Edania, died in 
 
 his Castle at Ballintobber, 1546. He married Der- 
 vorgilla, the daughter of Feidlim Finn O’Conor, his 
 t own kinsman. 
 
 12. — Dermott, the son of Carbre and Dervorgilla, suc- 
 
 ceeded to the estate of Ballintobber, married 
 Dorothy, the daughter of Teig boy O’Conor Roe, and 
 died at Ballintobber, A.D. ; he lived in 1585. 
 
 13. — Hugh, the son of Dermott and Dorothy O’Conor, 
 
 married Mary O’Ruarc, the daughter of Bryan na 
 Murtna O’Ruarc, who was executed in London ; he 
 compounded with the Queen’s Lord Deputy, Perrot, 
 for his patrimonial estates, and died in his Castle of 
 Ballintobber, A.D. 1627. 
 
 [F ew persons reading this pedigree would recognise Sir Hugh 
 O’Connor in number 13 ; no account is given of his family, all 
 supposed to be extinct but the Belanagare and Mount Druid 
 families — this is beautifully managed.] 
 
 14. — Cathal Og., otherwise Charles, the third son of 
 
 Hugh and Mary O’Ruarc, obtained the Castle and 
 estate of Belanagare from his father, on his inter- 
 marriage with Anne O’Molloy, the daughter of 
 William O’Molloy, of Oghtertire, Esq. ; he died on 
 9th February, 1634. 
 
 [This is erroneous ; he got his share of the estates of Sir Hugh 
 
69 
 
 O’Connor by bis Will — perhaps this is a suggestion that there 
 is some evidence of the marriage which does not exist. Mr. 
 Mathew O’Conor had a morbid feeling about marriages — it was 
 quite a professional dodge in pedigree making.] 
 
 15. — Cathal Og., or Charles, the second son of the aforesaid 
 
 Cathal Og. and Anne O’Molloy, married Cecilia 
 O’Flynn, the daughter of Fiacra O’Flynn, of Ballin- 
 lough, Esq., and the chief of his name. This latter 
 Cathal Og., or Charles O’Connor, died at Ballin- 
 tobber, A.D. 1690. 
 
 16. — Denis, the son of said Charles and Cecilia, married 
 
 Mary O’Ruarc, the daughter of Colonel Tiernan 
 O’Ruarc (the grand-nephew of the above-mentioned 
 Bryan na Murtha, who forfeited.) He left issue of 
 that marriage, viz., Charles, his eldest son, born in 
 1710 ; Daniel, bom in 1721, and Hugh, born in 1729. 
 
 [He would not state for the world that Hugh married Cathe- 
 rine, daughter of Major Owen O’Connor, of Corrasduna. Oh, 
 no — there were no such people! Corrasduna was not an 
 O’Connor estate, but he adds] — 
 
 Charles, born 1710, was the venerable author of the 
 Dissertations on the History of Ireland , and he 
 also compiled the foregoing account of his own Name 
 and family ; he was the great-grandfather of the 
 present Denis O’Conor Don, M.P., for the County 
 Roscommon. 
 
 [The venerable author was in his 43rd year when he published 
 his Dissertations , and then spelled his name O'Connor.] 
 
 Mr. Hardiman, in page 141, tells us the following extravagant 
 story : — “ During one of the late agrarian disturbances, a 
 “ deputation of the people waited on the late Mathew O’Conor, 
 “uncle of the present O’Connor Don, and announced to him 
 ‘ ‘ that at a general meeting of the Barony, it was proposed and 
 “unanimously resolved , that he should be proclaimed King of 
 “ Connaught ; not anticipating any dissent on his part from this 
 " wise resolve, the deputies respectfully requested him to appoint 
 “ a time for the performance of the ceremony, on the hill of 
 “ Camfree. How the singular proposal was entertained may be 
 “ easily anticipated. Mr. O’Conor himself related this circum- 
 “ stance to the editor.” 
 
 Mr. Mathew O’Connor had undoubtedly a desire to be 
 
70 
 
 considered at least one of the heads of the family ; he tells us in 
 Recollections of Switzerland , page 132:— “ In the saloon we 
 wrote our names in the travellers’ book. I waited till the rest of 
 the company had finished, and then, as an Irish Chieftain, I 
 wrote my name, adding Hibernus Gentis suos Caput, being the 
 oldest of the race, and according to the Brehon custom , the head of 
 the sept ” (a) 
 
 MEMORIAL OF COLONEL KODERICK O’CONNOR 
 TO LOUIS XIY. 
 
 A.U ROY. 
 
 Sire, — O’Connor, Capitaine dans la brigade d’offici^rs detaches 
 du regiment Irelandais de Galmoy, repr^sente trds humblement 
 a votre majesty, qu’en 1688 il fut prisonier de guerre en Angle- 
 terre ; en 1689 colonel en Irelande oh il leva vingt deux 
 compagnies d’infanterie ; en 1691 passa d la tete d’un regiment 
 d’infanterie en France oh il fut, en 1692, r<$duit a etre capitaine 
 dans le regiment de Chari emont, et a l’incorporation du dit 
 rdgiment dans celui de Galmoy en 1698 capitaine rbformb, et au 
 si§ge d’Aire lieutenant-colonel par la lettre de Monsieur le 
 Marquis Goesbrian. Sous le bon plaisir de votre majesty, depuis 
 vingt cinq ans qu’il fut fait colonel, il a servi sans discontinuer 
 et sans avoir rien d se reprocher. Il se voit aujourd’hui capitaine 
 r^formb avec quarante cinq sous par jour pour toute apparte- 
 nance, ayant £tb traits a la derniere rdforme de la susdite brigade 
 comme les autres officiers qui la composent et qui auraient vu 
 son chagrin ; que le suppliant, en consideration de sa naissance 
 et du rang qu’il a eu dans le service, fut distinqud, dont il avait 
 d’autant plus besoin qu’il est chargd d’une famille actuellement 
 demeurante d Paris. Sire, de ddtail de ses pretentions est bien 
 connu de Monsieur le Marquis de Goesbrian qui s’en est informb 
 
 (a) This claim is in accordance with the decision of James VI. The Blairs, 
 of Blair, in the County of Ayr, in Scotland, claimed the chiefship of all the Blairs 
 in the south and west of Scotland ; but the Blairs of Balthyock disputed the 
 honour with them. James VI., to whom the point was referred, determined 
 that “the oldest man for the time being, of either family, should have the 
 precedency .” — Sir Bernard Burke’s Landed Gentry , new edition , Blair of 
 Blair. 
 
71 
 
 et le suppliant peut dire sans vanity que, sans se faire un m6rite 
 d’etre du nom et de la famille des derni^rs rois Irlandais, son cas 
 est autrement si smgulier, que les graces qu’il plairait £ v6tre 
 majesty de lui faire tireraient par aconsequence et ne pourraient 
 servir d’exemple a personne, ce qui est a. la connaisance de la 
 Reyne d’Angleterre. II vous supplie tres humblement de lui 
 donner le moyen de faire subsister sa famille en lui accordant la 
 confirmation de la lettre de Monsiuer le Marquis de Goesbrian, 
 ou le rang de capitaine d’infanterie, avee les memes apparte- 
 nances £ la suite de Paris qu’il a eues avant la r^forme, une pen- 
 sion ou quelqu’autre grtlce qui le puisse tirer de 1 accablement 
 il est, et il continuera. Sire, d’adresser ses voeux au ciel pour 
 v<5tre Majesty. Au Grand Roi. 
 
 [The foregoing address appears to have been written by Roger 
 O’Connor, in 1714, as it states in the beginning that he was 
 colonel in 1689, twenty-five years previous to this application 
 being made. — See 3rd and 7th lines.] 
 
 A Paris, le Premier December, 1716. 
 
 Je vous addresse, Monsieur, l’ordre du Roi que son Altesse 
 royale a jug<S h propos de faire expkdier, pour vous donner le 
 commandement dela 3rme brigade des officiers reform bs du regi- 
 ment Irelandais de Lee. Elle se promet de vos soins que vous 
 la maintiondrez en bon etat et dans une bonne discipline. Je 
 suis tout a vous. 
 
 INNOLERS. 
 
 DEPAR DU ROI. 
 
 Sa Majestb ayant, en execution de son ordonnance du dixhuit 
 aoust dernier, fait composer quatre brigades des capitaines et des 
 lieutenants reformds qui etaient detenus h la suite du regiment 
 d’infanterie Irlandaise de Lee, et jugeant du bien de son service 
 de mettre £ la tete de chacune des dites brigades un officier du 
 meme regiment soat la capacity et la frid£lit6 lui solent connues, 
 sa Majesty, de l’avis de Monsieur le Due d ’Orleans regent, a 
 choisi le Sieur d’O’Connor, Tun des dits capitaines rMormes, pour 
 commander la troisl§me des dites brigades, ordonner aux capi- 
 taines qui la composent ce qu’ils auront £ faire pour la service de 
 sa MajVste, tenir la main £ ce qu’ils soient partout en bonne 
 descipline, et generalement s’y employer £ tout ce qu’il jugera 
 nkcessaire pour la maintenir en bon etat, sa Majestb enjoignant 
 
72 
 
 aux officiers de la dite brigade de reconn aitre £ l’avenir le dit 
 Sieur d’O ’Connor pour leur commandant et lui obeir en tout ce 
 qu’il leur ordonnera pour le service de sa Majesty sans y apporter 
 aucune difficult^. L’intention de sa Majeste est aussi que les 
 gouverneurs et lieutenants generaux de ses provinces ou ceux 
 qui y commandant en leur absence, les gouverneurs de ses villes 
 et places, les intendants de ses dites provinces, les inspecteurs 
 generaux sur ses troupes, et les commissionnaires sur ses oeuvres 
 fassent reconnaltre le dit Sieur d’O’Connor dans le dit com- 
 mandement. 
 
 LOUIS. 
 
 Fait & Paris le XXYI. Novembre, 1716. 
 
 PHELYPEAUX. 
 
 Louis d’Orleans, due de’chartres, premier prince du sang, 
 colonel general de l’infanterie Francaise et etrangere, vu le pui 
 brevet. 
 
 Yous mandons a tous ceux qu’il appartiendra de faire recon- 
 noitre le Sieur d’O’Connor en qualite de commandant de la 3me. 
 brigade des officiers rdforme, e detach 6s du regiment d’infanterie 
 Irlandaise de Lee. 
 
 LOUIS D’OKLEANS. 
 
 Donne, & Paris le 10 April, 1722. 
 
 Par S. A. S. Montgarret. 
 
 The foregoing memorial, presented to Louis XI Y., King of 
 France, and commissions, are taken from the original documents 
 remaining in the custody of Koderic O’Connor, Esq., East 
 House, Galway, who is now the heir-at-law of Colonel O’Connor, 
 whose commissions and numerous papers connected with his 
 military services, have been handed down to him from his 
 ancestors, who preserved them with scrupulous regard. 
 
 SEAL. 
 
 JAMES E. 
 
 J ames the Second, by the Grace of God, King of England, 
 Scotland, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, etc., to 
 
73 
 
 our trustie and well-beloved Roger O’Connor, greeting : — We, 
 reposing special trust and confidence in your loyaltie, courage 
 and good conduct, doe by these presents constitute and appoint 
 you to be Captain in the regiment of Charlemont. You are, 
 therefore, to take the said companie into your care and charge, as 
 Captain, and duly to exercise as well the officers and soldiers there- 
 of in arms, and to do your utmost endeavour to keep them in good 
 order and discipline. And we do hereby command them to be 
 obedient to you, as their captain, and you to observe and follow 
 such orders and directions as you shall from time to time obtain 
 from us, or any your superior officers, according to the rules and 
 discipline of war, and in pursuance of the trust and confidence 
 we do hereby repose in you. 
 
 Given at our court at Quenonville, this 26th day of May, 
 1692, and in the 8th year of our reign. 
 
 By his Majesty’s command, 
 
 P. SAYLE. 
 
 Sir, — The King has spoke to Mr. Hamilton, that your 
 absence from the regiment, being upon their Majesties’ account, 
 may bring no prejudice to your pretensions. And his Majesty 
 desires you may go to-morrow morning to Mr. Hamilton before 
 he goes away, to inform him yourself of your case. — Sir, your 
 most humble and obedient servant, 
 
 Sunday’s night, 21st November. PERTH. 
 
 To Captain R. O’Connor. 
 
 John Dalton, in King James's Army List , recently published, names Colonel 
 Roger O’Connor, whose regiment was broken up previous to 1688 ; and who, it 
 appears from his Memorial to Louis XIV., on his subsequent appointment 
 commanded 22 companies of Infantry, and afterwards passed over to France a 
 the head of his regiment, in 1691. He was reduced to the rank of captain in 
 France. In the Irish regiments that passed into the French service, the 
 colonels were reduced to captains, and the captains to lieutenants. — Histoire de 
 L’ Irelande par Mons. L’ Abbe MacG-eoghegan, Tom. 3, p. 752. O' Conor's 
 Military Memoirs of the Irish Nation ., p. 194. 
 
 D 
 
74 
 
 A Letter from Dr. Charles O' Conor, D.D., brother of Owen 
 O'Connor, of Belanagare , to Denis O'Connor of Willsbrook. 
 
 My Dear Cousin, — I must trouble you with those lines to 
 send you the enclosed papers, and to beg you will show them to 
 such of your friends as you may think are corrupted by political 
 bigotry, or cramped by the influence of slavery or oppression. 
 ( Bum this . ) I have been obliged, by numberless applications, 
 to establish a general rule that no stranger should come in upon 
 us on Christmas -day to give Mass in the Parish. I assure you 
 they keep very clear of us at all other times, and would be very 
 backward in giving the least assistance in the administration of 
 a Parish. 
 
 Mr. M'Dermott, to suit your convenience will, if you please, 
 give your family prayers on Christmas-day about 10 o’clock. 
 This mass will serve for the people of Anagh, Cloonroughan, 
 Cloonavindin, &c. Please let me know per bearer your senti- 
 ments on this head. 
 
 As I am to have a mass at convenience in future, Mr. 
 McDermott or I will occasionally give you mass on Sundays and 
 Holidays in future, according as may suit your convenience. I 
 hope you need not be told there is no one more anxious to serve 
 you in all such particulars than your affectionate kinsman, (b) 
 
 CH. O’CONOR. 
 
 To Denis O’Conor, Esq., Willsbrook. 
 
 Inscription on the Tomb of the Fallons , of Ballina House , in 
 Dysart Churchyard, 
 
 This monument was first erected by William Fallon for his 
 wife, Anne Egan, his father, Redmond, and his mother, 
 Margt. O’Connor, Feb. 20, 1720. 
 
 (6) Charles O’Conor was P. P. of Kilkeevin Parish, and Mr. M £ Dermott was 
 his curate. Both Cloonalis and Willsbrook are in the Parish of Kilkeevin, and 
 immediately near each other, which accounts for the close and intimate 
 acquaintance that so long existed between both families, who were so nearly 
 related. 
 
75 
 
 Inscription on the Vault of the Corrasduna family at Ballintobber , 
 County Roscommon. 
 
 Pray for the souls of Owen O’Connor, Esq., and his Wife, 
 Catherine O’Connor, alias M‘Dermot, and children, who 
 caused this monument to be erected for themselves and their 
 posterity. — June 20, 1762. 
 
 Inscription on the Vault of the Willsbrook family at Ballintobber , 
 County Roscommon. 
 
 Pray for the souls of Denis O’Connor, of Willsbrook. Esq., 
 and Sarah O’Connor, alias Irwin, his beloved wife, who 
 caused this monument to be erected for themselves and their 
 posterity, in the year 1799. 
 
 Inscription on a tombstone found at Castleruby , and now at 
 Tomona , Co. Roscommon , the seat of the late Peter O'Connor, Esq. 
 
 Pray for the souls of Roger O’Connor, of the ancient family 
 of Castleruby, Esq., and Anne O’Connor, alias Crofton, of 
 Mote, his wife, and for the souls of such of their ancestors 
 and posterity as dyed or will dye in a redeemable state. 
 This monument was erected by the order of Michael O’Con- 
 nor, Esq., remainder man of said family, and his wife, 
 Bridget O’Connor, alias Farrell, of the family of Ardanra, 
 the 2nd day of May, 1755. 
 
 Inscription on a tombstone in Kilkeevin Churchyard. 
 
 Here lies the remains of the descendants of the antient 
 Monarks of Ireland. General Daniel O’Connor Don, and 
 Anne O’Connor, alias Birmingham, his wife, sister to Lord 
 Baron Athenry. Colonel Andrew O’Connor Don, and 
 Honoria O’Connor, alias Dowell, his wife, daughter to 
 Colonel Luke Dowell, of Mantagh. Daniel O’Connor Don, 
 and Margaret O’Connor, alias Ryan, his wife. Sir Thomas 
 
76 
 
 O’Connor, Knight of St. Louis, and General in his Christian 
 Majesty’s service. The Revd. Andrew O’Connor — Sir 
 Hugh O’Connor, Knight of Calatrava, Brigadier-General in 
 his Catholic Majesty’s Service, and Governor of Chili. 
 Thomas O’Connor and Jane Eccles, alias O’Connor. 
 
 This tombstone is a pretty extensive record of how the Cloonalis 
 family spelt their names ; the male line of Roderic O’Connor, 
 king of Ireland, became extinct many centuries ago— the present 
 O’Connors are descended from his uncle. 
 
 It appears that both O’Connor Roe and O’Connor Hhunne, 
 signed their indenture of composition with Sir John Perrott, on 
 the 3rd day of October, 1585. — O’Connor Roe, Hu. O’Connor. — 
 Hardiman’s West Connaught , p. 358. 
 
 Also, that O’Connor Sligo, signed his indenture of composition 
 with Sir John Perrot on the 23rd September, 1585. — Sir Honel 
 O’Connor Sligoe. — Ibid , p. 346. 
 
 There is no instance, either on record or in any history pub- 
 lished previously to 1753, in which the name has beeA spelt 
 O’ Conor, nor a shadow of authority for the very unprincipled use 
 made of the alteration, which was a disgraceful imposture. 
 
 Now, it appears beyond all question, from the foregoing in- 
 scriptions and records, that the ancient name of the family was 
 O'Connor, and yet, in a pedigree published in the late edition of 
 the “ Landed Gentry the name O' Conor is erroneously given 
 as the family fiame. Mr. Connellan, in his edition of the 
 Annals of Ireland , published in 1846, being deceived by simi- 
 lar misrepresentations, and the adoption of the modern appellation 
 of “ O’Conor Hon,” also adopted the new spelling throughout his 
 valuable work, and he tells us, that the descendants of Tirloch 
 Don (or the brown haired) called themselves “O’Conors Hon; 
 and the descendants of Tirloch Roe (or the red haired,) called 
 themselves “ O’Conors Roe” — and that another branch of the 
 family got great possessions in the county of Sligo, and were 
 styled “ O’Conors Sligo.” All those branches were descended 
 from the same stock, and their names are spelled alike on their 
 sepulchral monuments, and in their wills, deeds, and public acts, 
 
77 
 
 and in all the histories of their times, and there was not a single 
 “O’Conor” amongst them. 
 
 With respect to the modern appellation of “O’Conor Don,” 
 (or the brown-haired O’Connor), Mr. Connellan, Dr. O’Conor, 
 and his brother, Mr. Mathew O’Conor, give us the same account 
 of its true origin, about which there can be no mistake . — (See 
 page 130, note c .) While Mr. A. O’Conor very rashly takes it 
 upon himself to contradict them all, and inconsiderately attempts 
 to set it up as a heritable Brehon dignity, descendable only to 
 heirs male, by the (extinct) Brehon law ! — a law which never 
 acknowledged any descendable dignity, not even in the kings of 
 Ireland, and had no law of descent, even for landed property. 
 What could he be thinking about when he made such a blunder ? 
 But the erudite compiler of the above-mentioned pedigree, (in 
 which he states that the appellation of O’Conor Don proceeded 
 from Tirlock Don O’Connor), tells us that “ other statements carry 
 up the period of the adoption of the style of Don to the time of 
 the Milesian invasion, under Prince Don, the son of Milesius.” — 
 Now, there never was an invasion of Ireland under Prince Don, 
 the son of Milesius ? Donn, the son of Milesius, by his first 
 wife, daughter of the King of Scythia, was drowned, left no 
 descendant, and never landed in Ireland ! — nor could the title 
 have any connexion with the Spanish title Don, which is from 
 Dominus , and was not introduced by the Romans into Spain for 
 centuries after the invasion of Ireland by the Milesians. This is 
 a rich sample of affected ambiguity. The anonymous annotator 
 might as well have claimed the honour as flowing from the River 
 Don, (the Tanais of the ancients), which, after a course of 1,100 
 miles, empties itself by three branches into the sea of Azoph, and 
 he might add, that the three branches were typical of the three 
 branches of the O’Connor family which assumed the modern title 
 “ O’Conor Don.” 
 
 We should raise no objection to the name any gentleman might 
 choose (as Mr. Connellan expresses it) to call himself, nor should 
 we think of impeaching the title of Don, had it not been used as 
 part of the machinery employed to set up the Belanagare family 
 “ as the only remains of the O’Connors of Ballintobber, ” or the 
 new spelling of the name, but that it was put forward to sever 
 the numerous descendants of a respectable family from their 
 ancestors. There was no possibility of defeating the treacherous 
 
78 
 
 manoeuvre without adopting the new name, but by impeach- 
 ing the new spelling, and the shadowy and fictitious title of 
 “O’Conor Don,” and stripping them of the significance ascribed 
 to them. Not wishing to interfere with our quondam friends, we 
 simply adopted the new spelling. They had not the sense to 
 leave it so, and have themselves to blame for the consequence of 
 their aggressive arrogance.