A note on Sir Thomas

It has been quite busy of late, and I've neglected the blog so my resolution is to try little and often (well monthly at least!) so happy Christmas all who take the time to read this, I am always amazed at the geographical spread.

 

Here is a small note on Sir Thomas Colclough

 

LORD DEPUTY [RUSSELL] TO LORD BURGHLEY, 8 SEPT., 1595. DUBLIN CASTLE.

Though Her Majesties (H.M) late letters for an extraordinary care to be had of the Fort of Duncannon, bearing date the last of June, came not to me till the 27th of August, yet before the receipt of that direction from her Highness I was so careful of that fort of Duncannon as I moved it twice in Council how it might be provided for, and therefore charge was given to Sir Thomas Colcloghe  a gentleman of living hard by it,  upon any sudden occasion to vittle (provide provisions - food) and man it, and the like to the Mayor of Waterford  least he should fail thereof, but since the receipt of H.M.'s letters we have committed the oversight of that Fort to Sir John Dowdall, with a charge to H.M. of 30 warders till H.M.'s further pleasure be known. So Sir Thomas was of sufficient status and loyalty to be trusted with part of the defence of Waterford from the Irish, the Spaniards and the Catholics, of course  the Armada still fresh in the memory and the Anglo-Spanish conflict would fester on until 1605.  On or about  the 11 Sept., 1595, Paul Sherlock, Mayor of Waterford, who had temporary charge, delivered up the Fort of Duncannon with all the Ordnance and Implements, 6 Barrels of Powder, 211 lb. of lead, 25 Pikes, and 4 Partisans (in this context possibly irregular military men, users of a Halbert or Halberd a pole type weapon with a sharp point below which was a form of axe used two handed - JC 2014), to Sir John Dowdall, Kt.,  a George Noell was then nominated as Constable of the fort, but not having been ratified by the Privy Council, this Captain George Noell was appointed Constable of the Fort  by the Lord Deputy, he was, on the 12 July, 1597, promoted Captain and appointed to a Foot Company. Strengthening and garrisoning of Duncannon together with the steps taken for the protection of the town of Waterford, and the fortifying of the Passage and the  Rock greatly would have impressed the (loyal to the crown, not the native Irish)  Citizens of that town with the resources and determination of the Government to prevent any of those places falling into the Enemy's, the Gael's, hands. Waterford was intensely Roman Catholic…

 

Thus Sir Thomas Colclough was of sufficient value , had undoubted loyalty, and unerringly adhered to the new state religion to be trusted with albeit briefly, with the some of the defence of a strategic port in Ireland.

John Colclough of Ballyteigue

Perhaps of interest...

Rebellion wise, how a family spread itself over both sides of a conflict, firstly my namesake and his unfortunate end...

 

 

Sourced: The United Irishmen, their lives and times – Richard Robert Madden pp 505-513.

 

J. Madden & Co., Leadenhall-Street., 1843

 

MEMOIR OF JOHN COLCLOUGH OF BALLYTEIGUE.

 Taylor truly describes Mr. Colclough as a gentleman of respectability, and one who bore a very excellent private character. He was a relative of Sir Vesey Colclough, who had represented Wexford and Enniscorthy in four successive parliaments. "He was in his stature of a full middle size, had rather a long visage, wore his own hair, which was tied behind. He was about thirty years of age, of a cheerful aspect and polished manners. Mr. Colclough was also executed on the 28th of June."  When Colclough and his lady, along with Bagenal Harvey, were brought into Wexford after their capture, the latter appeared pale and dejected ; but "Mr. Colclough's fortitude," says Taylor, " did not apparently forsake him until he approached the gaol, where he beheld his friend Keogh's head on a spike. On inquiring whose head it was, and hearing it was Keogh's, he seemed like a man electrified, and sank into all the anguish of despair and guilt, and never recovered any show of spirits." The only charge brought against him was, that he had been seen in the rebel forces at the battle of Ross. He admitted having been compelled to attend the general-in-chief to that place; but he proved that, at an early period of the day, he had taken the first opportunity afforded him of quitting the insurgent force, and returning to Wexford. The defence was of no avail; his death, like that of Grogan and Harvey, had been previously determined. John Henry Colclough left a widow and an infant child. His property was not large, and, being chiefly leasehold, no attainder was issued. His widow married a Mr. Young, a magistrate of the county, the late occupier of Ballyteigue. It is stated by Sir Richard Musgrave that, a short time before his execution, he directed his son to be brought up in the Protestant religion: no such direction was ever given by Mr. Colclough. The circumstance of his being unattended at the place of execution by a clergyman of the church to which he belonged, was taken by Sir Richard Musgrave as an evidence of his conviction of "the errors of Romanism," and a probable reason for his alleged desire to have his child brought up in another religion. The fact is that Colclough, up to the last moment, expected a respite, from his intimacy with some of the officers of the army then at Wexford, whose interference in his behalf he relied on. This expectation prevented him from calling to his assistance a Roman Catholic clergyman; he thought if he had done so it would operate against him. It is only to be lamented that any consideration should have so far weighed with one in his awful circumstances, as to deprive him of that spiritual assistance which he stood in need of at his last moments. One of the Wexford loyalists of the name of Jackson, who was charged with being an Orangeman, and condemned to suffer death, while the rebels were in possession of Wexford, gives the following account of Colclough's execution : " 27th June, 1798. — Before I went on board the vessel I saw Mr. Colclough, who had been tried and convicted, brought by himself to the place of execution, at the bridge, between five and six o'clock this evening. As soon as he came to the foot of the gallows, he addressed the spectators with a firm, distinct voice, and without the least change of countenance, nearly as follows: ' Gentlemen, I am now come to that time which is the most awful that man can experience. Thank God, I am not afraid to die! I can smile at the gallows and at the rope with which I am to be executed! I wish to feel if it be strong enough. [He took hold of the rope and proceeded.] I shall thank you, gentlemen, for a little water, as I desire to drink a toast before I die. [Some water was immediately brought him, and he took the mug in his hand.] Here' said he, ' is success to the king and constitution, and I hope my fate will be a warning to all mankind not to attempt to interfere with the order of government, or to disturb the peace of their country. As I shall answer it to God, before whom I must shortly appear [here he laid his hand upon his breast], I declare that I did not know of the rebellion breaking out till within three hours of the time when arms were taken up. But I acknowledge the justice of my sentence, for about three years ago I was one of the principal abettors in this business. I have now, gentlemen, only one favour to ask of you, which is, that you will not take off my coat and waistcoat, as I have only an old, borrowed shirt under them, and I wish to appear decently before the people.' All the other criminals, it should be observed, had been stripped to their shirts before their execution. "He then knelt down and prayed a few minutes, after which he was drawn up, and I quitted the spot while he was suspended. " The persons whom I have already mentioned, and two others, were all that were executed while I remained in Wexford. Messrs. Harvey, Keoghe, Grogan, and Colclough were Protestants. Mr. Colclough was of a very respectable family, and possessed considerable property in the county of Wexford, and was very much esteemed by all who knew him, as a worthy and ingenuous man." Charles Jackson, in his narrative of transactions in the Wexford rebellion, has the following reference to the trials and executions on the 27th and 28th of June : " Wednesday, 27th June. — The adjourned trial of Mr. Grogan recommenced, and lasted four hours (in the whole nine hours), when he was found guilty…" A party, consisting of a sergeant's guard belonging to the 29th regiment, was now ordered to march to the quay to receive Mr. Harvey and Mr. Colclough, who had been taken prisoners in the Saltee Islands; and about three o'clock this afternoon they arrived. Great numbers of officers belonging to the different corps now in the town had assembled on the quay to see men who had become so notorious. "On their landing, Mr. Harvey appeared to be very much dejected, and scarcely spoke to anyone. Mr. Colclough, on the contrary, seemed to be in very good spirits. On hearing many persons inquiring which was Mr. Harvey and which Mr. Colclough, he pulled off his hat, and bowing in the most polite manner, said, ' Gentlemen, my name is Colclough.' They were then both taken to the gaol. "Some of the soldiers who had been of the party sent to the Saltee Islands to apprehend Mr. Harvey and Mr. Colclough, informed me, that when they came to the island they found but one house upon it, in which lived an old man and family ; that upon their landing they heard somebody holloa, as if to give warning to others ; and they then saw the old man run across a field into his house. The soldiers followed him, and endeavoured by every entreaty to prevail upon him to discover to them the place where the fugitives were concealed, but without effect. Finding they could get no intelligence by this mode of address, and having certain information that the persons they sought for were there, they tied him up, and gave him two dozen lashes, when he acknowledged that Mr. Colclough and Mr. Harvey were in a cave in a rock close to the sea. He then conducted them to the other side of the island, where they found the cave; but it was so situated that it was impossible to approach the fugitives without a deal of trouble and danger. It was then thought most prudent to call to Mr. Harvey, who making no answer, the commander of the party told those within that resistance was vain, that he had a large body of men with him, and should immediately order them to fire into the cave if those who were concealed there did not come out. On this Mr. Colclough appeared, and he and Mr. Harvey surrendered themselves. "The soldiers were of opinion that if he had defended himself, by firing through the chinks of the rock, he might have killed several of them before they could possibly have shot at him with any effect. When he was taken, he had an old musket, a pocket pistol, and two cutlasses. Colclough's wife was with him. There was a very neat feather-bed, blankets, and sheets, in the cave, and a keg of whiskey ; also a jar of wine, a tub of butter, and some biscuits ; a large pound-cake that weighed above twenty pounds, a live sheep, and a crock of pickled pork ; also tea, sugar, &c. The two chests of plate were also found near the cave; these were brought in a boat to town, and placed under the care of a magistrate. Mrs. Colclough was not brought to Wexford with her husband and Mr. Harvey. "In the evening the trial of Mr. Harvey commenced, and notwithstanding the notoriety of his guilt, such was the candour and forbearance of the court-martial that his trial lasted eight hours, when he was found guilty Mr. Colclough's trial and execution followed. " Mr. Colclough was in stature of a full, middlesize ; but rather of a long visage. He wore his own hair, which was of a sandy colour, and tied behind. He was about thirty years of age, of a cheerful aspect, and of pleasant manners." Gordon states that "Harvey and Grogan were executed together on the 28th of June ; Colclough, alone, in the evening of the same day." Hay states that Grogan and Harvey and a Mr. Pendergast, a rich malster of Wexford, were executed on the 27th of June; and that Colclough was tried the same day and executed the day after, the 28th of June. I discovered the tomb of John Henry Colclough in the old burial-ground of the church in Wexford (no longer existing) that was called St. Patrick's Church, after many fruitless inquiries, strange to say, of all the persons in the town who might have been expected to know where the remains of their judicially-murdered townsmen were buried. The following is the inscription on his tomb : Here lieth the body of John Henry Colclough, Of Ballyteigue, who departed this life The 27th of June, 1798, In his 29th year. In the same place of burial there is a tomb with the following inscription — perhaps in memory of one of the family of Bagenal Beauchamp Harvey: Captain Pierce Harvey, died The 23rd of October, 1816, Aged 87 years. There is also in this churchyard a monument " To the memory of the North Cork militia officers killed at Oulart." To the honour of the medical profession be it said, very few of its members were unfaithful to the interests of humanity, or forgetful of the duties imposed on them by their calling. I wish I could say as much for the members of two other professions. A wretch of the name of Waddy, a physician of Wexford, was an exception to the rule that applies to the medical profession. He crawled out of the place of concealment in which he skulked, when Wexford was delivered from the rebels and fell into the hands of the king's troops, and volunteered to set out on an expedition to the Saltee Islands, in search of two fugitive gentlemen with whom he had been long previously on terms of intimacy — Messrs. Col-clough and Bagenal Beauchamp Harvey. The base man, having abandoned his professional duties for the pursuit of a man-hunter, set out, no doubt furnished with private information obtained by treachery. He was a keen ascendancy sportsman; the scent of rebel blood was a trail not to be misled by the medical man -hound of Wexford. He set his prey, secured it, and bagged the blood- money that was offered for it. Like the gallant Captain John Warneford Armstrong, after he had consigned his two friends and dupes to death, Dr. Waddy was feasted, eulogized, and extolled. Gentlemen spoke of him on the magisterial bench and in the grand jury room as a virtuous citizen of great energy of character. Dr. Waddy's honours and laudations could not fail to be highly gratifying, for the time being, at the hands of the Orange potentates of Wexford, just recovering from their recent panic, and that worst kind of fear, the poltroonery of fanaticism, inciting to acts base, bloody, and brutal. The good service done by the discovery and capture of his old acquaintance, Bagenal Harvey, and the young gentleman, John Colclough, whose family he only knew in his medical capacity, was deemed worthy of civic honours and after-dinner orations in the company of half-drunken Orange loyalists- But a year and a-half had not passed over before the doctor's peace of mind was disturbed, not by remorse, perhaps, but by constant dread, and perturbation of spirits, rather exacerbated than relieved by recourse to stimulants, which at times produced excitement that amounted to a state of disordered intellect. In one of those fits of temporary insanity so induced, an unfortunate friar lost his life at the doctor's hands, attempting to escape, as Waddy alleged, after an attempt to murder him. But as dead friars tell no tales, the monk's version of this tragical occurrence is not on record, in this world. The following version of it is the mundane one of the northern organs of Orangeism of the time, taken from a Dublin communication, dated 28th December, 1799: " An occurrence of a very extraordinary kind took place a few days since in the county of Wexford, at Clougheast, the seat of Dr. Richard Waddy. Dr. Waddy having rendered himself very obnoxious to the rebels by his active loyalty during the rebellion, particularly by having been principally concerned in the apprehension of Bagenal Harvey, found it necessary, for the safety of his life, to reside in the old vaulted castle of Clougheast, where the entrance of his bed-chamber was secured by an antique portcullis. Thus fortified, Dr. Waddy had hitherto defied all threats of assassination which came against him from every side.  A few days ago, a mendicant Popish friar of Taghmon, named Burn, visited the doctor at his castle, and was hospitably entertained at dinner. Burn begged to be allowed to remain, and, after some difficulty on the part of his host, was permitted to lie in a second bed in the vaulted chamber. While the doctor and the friar were going to their beds, the friar expressed great anxiety that his host should say his prayers, a duty which the doctor, who drank freely, seemed disposed to neglect. In the middle of the night, Dr. Waddy heard somebody drawing his cavalry sword, which hung at his bed's head, and immediately after was attacked by the friar, who had arisen from his bed, dressed himself, and was now endeavouring to murder his host. The latter received several wounds on the head and arm, and at length the friar, supposing he had accomplished his purpose, attempted to escape under the portcullis. Dr. Waddy had just strength enough left to loose the cord which supported it, and it fell on the priest with such violence as almost to sever his body, which fell down lifeless into the apartment below. The next morning the body of the friar was found, and the servants coming into their master's room, found him covered with his own blood. Immediately medical aid was had, and we have the satisfaction of learning that Dr. Waddy is out of danger. A coroner's inquest was held on the body of Burn, and the jury (composed of the Roman Catholic inhabitants of the neighbourhood) found a verdict of accidental death." A kinsman of John Henry Colclough, Mr. John Colclough of Tintern Abbey, was the nephew of Mr. Cornelius Grogan, and in 1798 was at the head of the family interest, which was very considerable, in the county of Wexford. Before the outbreak of the insurrection he and Mr. Thomas McCord, a respectable gentleman of the same county, left Ireland, and had taken up their abode at Haverfordwest, in Pembrokeshire. It was respecting their' residence, perhaps the following notice of a catastrophe in his family may account for Dr. Waddy's terror of assassination. Mr. Samuel Waddy of Jamesville, in the county of Wexford, was murdered in his house, on the night of the 1st of May, 1793, by a man of the name of Spain, who had been recently discharged from his service. For particulars see Exshaw's Magazine, May, 1793. hence there that a remarkable correspondence took place, which I now refer to. The Duke of Portland addressed the following letter to the magistrates at Haverfordwest : " Whitehall, 22nd June, 1798. " Gentlemen — I have received your letter on the subject of the late influx of persons in your county from Ireland, and am extremely sorry to observe that there are so many young clergymen and able-bodied men among them. The conduct of such persons, in remaining out of Ireland at a moment like the present, is very much to be censured; and I desire that you will use your best endeavours to impress them with a due sense of the dangerous tendency of such an example, and of the dishonourable and disgraceful imputations to which it obviously exposes them; and, at the same time, that you will make known to the clergy that their names will certainly be reported to their respective diocesans. With respect to Mr. Colclough and Mr. McCord, I desire that they may have full liberty either to go to Ireland or to stay in the country; and that all persons for whom they will answer, as well as all infirm men, women, and children, may be admitted to the same indulgence. “I am, gentlemen, " Your most obedient, humble servant, " Portland. " To Messrs. Jordan and Bowen, at Haverfordwest." When the Wexford gentlemen got information of this correspondence, the Protestant gentlemen of the county were summoned to a general meeting in the town of Wexford, on the 7th of July, 1798, by General Lake. A copy of the duke's letter was laid before them : Dr. Duigenan says they were all struck with amazement, and they determined unanimously to send a letter to the duke on the subject, of which the following is a copy — it was signed by the high sheriff of the county : " The committee of gentlemen of the county of Wexford, appointed by General Lake, having read a copy of a letter from his Grace the Duke of Portland to Messrs. Bowen and Jordan, magistrates in the town of Haverfordwest, South Wales, dated 22nd June ult., .and which appears to have been in answer to a letter received by his grace from those gentlemen, cannot avoid testifying their hearty sorrow at the censure thrown upon the clergy of their dioceses in said letter, and their indignation at the gross misrepresentations which must have occasioned it. They are unanimous in a high opinion of the loyalty, patriotism, and proper conduct of the clergy, and strongly feel the necessity of their flight and absence during the continuance of the rebellion which so unhappily raged in this country; as, had they not effected their escape, they have every reason to conclude that they would have shared a similar fate with those unhappy few of that body who early fell into the hands of the insurgents, and were afterwards massacred in cold blood. " They lament that men of such unblemished character and conduct should, from the secret representations of persons no way qualified, be proscribed that protection and asylum so liberally bestowed on the persons of Mr. John Colclough and Thomas M'Cord, men who were and might have remained in perfect security in his majesty's fort at Duncannon, and whose characters are by no means free from imputation in this country, and on whom they are sorry to find such favour lavished by the English cabinet ; as they are certain no favourable account of their conduct could be made to government, save by themselves. " Edward Percivall, "Sheriff, and Chairman of the Committee." "Wexford, 7th July, 1798." "To His Grace the Duke of Portland, Whitehall." To this letter his grace never condescended to return any answer. The following paragraph was inserted in the Waterford newspaper of the 10th July, 1798 : " Yesterday, Mr. John Colclough of Tintern Castle, county of Wexford, was brought here from Milford, in custody of two king's messengers ; he was escorted by a party of the Union cavalry to Thomastown, on his way to Dublin. Mr. McCord, who was implicated in the charge for which the former was apprehended, had made off ; but it is said that there was no probability of his avoid ing the vigilance of his pursuers. These are the two gentlemen who were spoken so favourably of in a letter from the Duke of Portland to Messrs. Jordan and Bowen, of Haverfordwest. "Clericus Wexfordiensis."

Some more

http://www.colclough-family.com/
if the link doesn't work try right click and cut and paste, I will try and maintain a family name database there, it might load slowly but persevere and I will try to make it less cumbersome

Above because I am going to try to move away from this Google based format

Also below... because I'm not sure if it is going to work yet

Some pre-Ireland Colclough information

 

 

COLCLOUGH, William (d.c.1414), of Newcastle-under-Lyme, Staffs. and Calverhall, Salop.

Published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1386-1421, ed. J.S. Roskell, L. Clark, C. Rawcliffe., 1993
Available from Boydell and Brewer

 

Family and Education

younger son of Richard Colclough† (d. by 1385), of Newcastle-under-Lyme, and brother of John*. m. Elizabeth.1

Offices Held

Escheator, Salop and the adjacent Welsh march, 9 Nov. 1406-30 Nov. 1407.

Biography

Colclough’s first election to Parliament in 1384 undoubtedly owed a great deal both to his father, who had himself sat for Newcastle in 1360, and his elder brother, John, the mayor, with whom he was then returned (and with whom he again represented the borough in January 1390). As a close relative of two of Newcastle’s most distinguished residents and office-holders, he could thus be sure of a seat in the Commons, although his ensuing popularity with the electors may also have been due to the fact that he was a lawyer. In March 1386 he stood surety in Chancery for the parson of the neighbouring village of Wolstanton (where his family owned property), and he again appears as a mainpernor in 1390 and 1391. During the Easter term of 1393 he acted as his brother’s attorney in a lawsuit over the manor of Hanley. Four years later he was summoned to defend himself in an assize of novel disseisin at Stafford, although the action, which was arraigned by a local widow, may well have been collusive. At some point before 1411, Colclough became either the owner or feoffee-to-uses of land in and around Newcastle which was also the subject of litigation.2 We do not know when he went to live in the Shropshire village of Calverhall, but it seems likely that he left Newcastle during the years between his last return to Parliament (January 1397) and his appointment as escheator of Shropshire (November 1406), perhaps as a result of a lucrative marriage. He was dead well before the summer of 1415, when Sir William Newport* sued his executors for a debt of 40s. He left a widow, Elizabeth, who together with his brother, John, was responsible for the administration of his estate.3

Ref Volumes: 1386-1421

Author: C.R.

Notes

The possibility that Colclough represented Newcastle in the Parliament of 1372 (the return records the election of Thomas Colclough, but the writ de expensis refers to William) is very slight, on chronological grounds alone (Staffs. Parl. Hist. i (Wm. Salt Arch. Soc.), 113-14).

•       1. Ibid. xvii. 54; JUST 1/1504 m. 101.

•       2. CCR, 1385-9, p. 152; 1389-92, p. 509; Wm. Salt Arch. Soc. xv. 24, 55; xvi. 76; JUST 1/1504 m. 101.

•       3. Wm. Salt Arch. Soc. xvii. 54. A William Colclough became bailiff of Newcastle in 1406, but since the subject of this biography was then active as escheator of Shropshire, and presumably living in Calverhall, we may assume that one of his many kinsmen held this office (T. Pape, Med. Newcastle-under-Lyme, 172).

 

The William Salt Archive is a fantastic source for east midlands history...

John

experiment

I wonder if this will work, I've been trying to put together a database of all the names in BHDC's and Bernie's documents,

http://www.colclough-family.com/


if the link doesn't work try cutting and pasting

See if this will work...
John

Some notes on Duffry... for Alymer and Pamela, it's very hard to find specific information but this is what I have been able to track down, indeed you may already know this

 

http://www.buildingsofireland.ie/cgi-bin/viewsite.cgi?siteid=312

Duffry Hall had been built by Caesar's Colclough’s (b. 1696) grandfather Patrick (a Catholic active Jacobite) in about 1685,  Caesar was the Protestant son of the exiled Dudley, who with the aid of his uncles had succeeded in recovering more than half of his father's sequestrated lands and a great deal more besides.

 In 1663 Patrick had married his second cousin Katherine Bagenal and such of his time as was not devoted to his duties as justice of the peace, High Sheriff of Wexford, Deputy Lieutenant and M.P. for Enniscorthy was taken up with building operations. The Hall, which was beautifully situated on the southern slopes of the Blackstairs mountains was described as the most magnificent seventeenth century building in Co. Wexford.

I cannot find any information on Duffry Lodge but the above Patrick had a son Patrick who it seems was killed by his own gun climbing over a wall at Mohurry (Duffry) deer park, any aspiring family with an estate and a deer park would have had a hunting lodge, and why not Duffry Lodge? If I was to guess I would say it would have been built 1685 or certainly not long thereafter. On the map above there is a lodge noted but it doesn't seem to be called Duffry Lodge, but again if I was to guess that's where it could be.

I hope this is of some use I will keep looking but there is not much mention if Duffry Lodge in the documents I have been able to track down.

John

 

More on Vesey

A most interesting person...


Post Nuptial Settlement of Vesey Colclough, dated June 1767.
Registered, 7th July, 1767.
 This Indenture made 13th June, 1767 between Vesey Colclough of Tintern Abbey, in the County Wexford Esq., and Catherine Colclough otherwise Grogan, his wife, of the first part; Henrietta Colclough, of the City of Dublin, widow and relict of Caesar Colclough late of Mocorry, in the County of Wexford, aforesaid Esq., deceased of the second part; John Carroll of the City of Dublin Gentleman, of the third part; The Rev. Thomas Colclough of Kilmagee in the County of Kildare, Clerk, of the fourth part; Agmondisham  Vesey, of Lucan in the City of Dublin Esq., and Adam Colclough of Shroughmore in the County of Wexford aforesaid of the 5th part; John Grogan, of Johnstown, in the said Co. of Wexford Esq., and Cornelius Grogan, eldest son and heir apparent of the said John Grogan of the 6th part; and Sir Charles Bingham of Castlebar in the County of Mayo, Bart, and John Jervis Whyte, the elder, of Ballyillis in the said Co. of Wexford Esqr, of the 7th part. Witnesseth that for and in consideration of the marriage already had and solemnised between the said Vesey Colclough, and the said Catherine his wife, and for in consideration of the sum of £4,000,to the said Vesey Colclough in hand, paid on the perfection hereof by the said John Grogan, her father, in full of all and every portion and portions whatsoever, provided or intended for the said Catherine, as one of the younger children of the said John Grogan, by virtue of any article, or settlement whatsoever, or otherwise, the receipt and payment of which said sum of £4000, the said Vesey Colclough doeth hereby acknowledge, and thereof and every part thereof doeth acquit, release, and discharge the said John Grogan, his heirs, executors , administrators and assigns for ever, by these presents. And for settling upon, and making, and providing for the said Henrietta Colclough a competent jointure, and maintenance for her life, in lieu of all and every jointure, and claim and demand  whatsoever, which the said Henrietta hath, or might have or claim against all, or any of the lands, tenements, hereditaments, hereinafter mentioned. And for providing and making a provision for the payment of the debts and incumbrances which now affect the lands, etc., And for providing a competent jointure and provision for the maintenance of the said Catherine Colclough in case she shall survive the said Vesey her husband.  And for settling and assuring the Manor, lands, tenements, and hereditaments hereinafter mentioned, upon such trust, and to and for such intents and purposes and under and subject to such provisions, limitations and agreements, as are hereinafter mentioned, expressed and declared, of and concerning the same. And for and in consideration of the sum of 10/- sterling, to the said Vesey Colclough, in hand paid by the said John Carroll, at or before the ensealing and delivery of these presents, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, and for divers other good causes and considerations, him the said Vesey Colclough thereunto moving. And for and in consideration, of the annuity, yearly rent, or sum of £600 sterling hereinafter given and granted to and for the use of the said Henrietta Colclough for her life, in full of all jointure, dower, or thirds which she hath or claims, or might otherwise have or be entitled to, out of all or any of the lands, etc., hereinafter mentioned, by virtue of, or under any other deed, articles, or settlements whatsoever, for or on account of dower, or other demand whatsoever, they the said Vesey Colclough and Henrietta Colclough, have and each of them, according to their respective estates, right, titles, and interest, hath given, granted, bargained, and sold, released and confirmed, by these presents do, and each  of them as aforesaid doeth give, grant, bargain, sell, release and confirm unto the said John Carroll (in his actual possession now being) by virtue of a bargain and sale to him thereof made, by the said Vesey Colclough, by his indenture bearing date, the day next before the day of the date of these presents, in consideration of 5/- for the term of one whole year, and by force of the statute for transferring uses into possession, and to his heirs and assigns. All that and those, the Manor of Tintern, with the appurtenances in the County Wexford, and the scite, circuit, ambite, and prescient of the dissolved Abbey, Monastery or religious House of Tintern, and the town and lands of Tintern,  Castleisell, Castleworkhouse, Newtown, Saltmills, Ballygarret, Cappaclauane, Gibstown, St.Keirins, Garrycullan, Tallaghe, St.Leonards, Ballyhackby, Curraghmore, Miltown, Dunmain, Ballyfleming, Ballytarsney, Garryduff, Booley, Yoaltown, Cheristown, Scartdown otherwise Owenduffe, Tobernassen, Ganestown, Kinnagh, Cooleroe, Ballycullane, Ballingtown, Ballybought, Grange of Kilmore, Castletown, Bannow, Mocorry, Ballyinrock, Coolree, Coolevane, Wheelagour, Coolerin, Kiltealy, Duneen, Knocknemilll, Curraghduff, Tincurry, Ballybrine, Ballynemenanagh, Rossard, Glaslackin, Clonbrien, Keile, Mandoran, Bowlyusk, Keintighe, Tumona, Skahanah, Coolena, Coolacarney, and Ballynecoola, in the County Wexford aforesaid, and also two parks of land, one garden, twenty four Burgages, and the fourth part of a  Burgage lying in St. Johns Street, in or near Wexford aforesaid, and also the fourth of the town and lands of Mangan, in the County of Wexford aforesaid. And one moiety of the town & land of Ballylosky, Shroughmore, Ballynecullagh, and Tomcurry, in the County of Wexford aforesaid, and one third part of the towns and land of Ballytrany, Ballydorrogh, Ballynevocrane, Rylanemore and Rylanebegg, otherwise Rylands, Castlekirk, and Killmeeshil in the County of Wexford, aforesaid and one sixth part of a third part of the said town and lands of Rylands, Castlekirk, and Killmeeshil, aforesaid. And the watercourse and ferry of Bannow in said County, and one yearly rent of £100 sterling issuing out of the town and lands of Moynart, and one chief rent of £40 sterling issuing out of the whole territory of the Duffry in said County, and also one other chief rent of £1 sterling issuing out of St. Johns street in the town of Wexford, and one other yearly rent of £1 sterling, issuing out of the village and lands of Coolbeck, and Ballywilliam otherwise Ballylean, and one other yearly rent of 5/stg issuing out of the rectory church or Chapel of Killay, in said County, and also the Rectories and Churches of Tintern, St.Keiran, St.Leonards, Nashe, Owenduff, Dunmane, Coolemane, Kinnagh, Bannow, and Kilmore in that said County. and also the great and small tithes of Tintern, St.Keirans, St.Leonards, Nashe, Owenduff, Dunmane, Clonmaine, Kineagh, Bannow, and Kilmore, in the said County, and all that and those, the Rectories of the church of St.Molins, and all the tithes great and small issuing, and growing, and renewing out of the town and land of St.Molins, in the County of Catherlagh, together with all and singular the right members, and appurtenances to the said manor, town, lands, tenements, rents, tithes, hereditaments, and premises  belonging or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, yearly and other rents, issues and profits of the said manor, townsland, tenements, rents tythes, hereditaments, and premises herein before mentioned, to be hereby granted and released, and of every of them and of every part and parcel thereof, and of all the estate, right, title, interest, trust, property, profit, claim, challenge, and demand whatsoever, of them the said Vesey and Henrietta Colclough, of in, to, or out of, the manor, towns etc., to have and to hold, all and singular, the said manor, towns etc., unto him the said John Carroll, his heirs and assigns for ever, to such uses, upon each trust, and to and for such intents and purposes, and under and subject to such provisos limitations and agreements as are hereinafter limited, expressed and declared of and concerning the same and to no other use, intent or purpose whatsoever. That is to say, as to certain parts of the lands and estates (named and described) to secure an Annuity of £600 to Henrietta Colclough, for life in favour of Dower, with powers of distress and entry on non payment. And as to the said Manor, and all and singular, other said towns, lands etc., to the use and behoof of the said Vesey Colclough, and his assigns for the term of his life, without impeachment of waste, and with full liberty to commit? waste, (note: this last clause he certainly carried out B.H.C.), and after the death of said Vesey, to the intent that Catherine Colclough should receive an annuity of £500 for her life in bar of Dower . Then to the use of and behoof of Caesar Colclough, only son of said Vesey and Catherine his wife, and the heirs male of his body, and for default of such issue, then to the use and behoof of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and every other the son and sons of the body of the said Vesey, on the body of the said Catherine his wife, to be begotten, severally, successively, and in remainder one after an other, as they and every of them shall be in seniority of age and priority of birth, and of the several and respective heirs male, of the body and bodies, of all and every such son and sons lawfully issuing, the elder of such sons, and the heirs male of his body issuing, being always preferred, and to take before the younger of such son and sons, and the heirs male of his and their body and bodies issuing, and for default of such issue, then to the use and behoof of the said Vesey Colclough, his heirs and assigns for ever. Declarations of trusts, first, to secure said Henrietta and said Catherine in their annuities, then in trust for raising a sum of £3000, for said Vesey, to be at his disposal by any writing under his hand, or by his Will, and also if said trustees thought fit, for raising the further sum of £3000,for said Vesey Colclough, and also out of rents to pay the interest of the incumbrances then affecting the premises, and also the interest of the said sums of £3000, and also, by sale or mortgage, of said premises comprised in said term, to raise money to pay off the several incumbrances, then affecting the premises, Trustees receipts to purchasers to be valid and sufficient, and with a clause of indemnity to trustees, and a power to charge the Estate with a sum not exceeding £10,000, as portion and portions for younger children. Clause conferring a leasing power on said Vesey, with covenant to levy a fine, and suffer a recovery for the uses and purposes aforesaid, with covenant for further assurance. 
 Vesey Colclough.    Catherine Colclough.  Henrietta Colclough.  John Carroll.   Thomas Colclough.     Adam Colclough.    John Grogan. Witnesses present. Alexander Hutcheson, Andrew  Galbraith, Garrett Drake.

a random addition

I do mean to keep going but it could be a full time job, so if there are daily posts you'll know I've finally fully retired, I have managed to get work down to 3 days per week...

Anyway I was looking through some random trawling of the ether I'd done a few year ago and thought this would be of interest, I've lost the link so apologies...

John

1766

29 May Deed of Transfer of Borough of Enniscorthy between Vesey Colclough of Tintern Abbey and Adam eldest surviving son of Caesar Colclough of Duffry Hall dcd. by which Adam surrenders his burgessship to Vesey as also do Rev Thomas Colclough brother of Adam, Richard, also brother, and Caesar eldest son of Adam; and Vesey is put into quiet and peaceable enjoyment of the .Borough of Enniscorthy by Adam for the sum of £3,000. Witnesses included Thomas, Henry & Richard Colclough. By the above deed the Borough was transferred from the Duffry Hall branch of the Colclough family to the Tintern Branch who disposed of it to Lord Lismore and Sir Wm. Gleadows for £13,000 in March 1800 The sale is mentioned in a letter from John Colclough to his brother Caesar dated March 1800. For dealings in pocket boroughs see Lecky, vol. iv. Some account of the Duffry branch of the Colclough family connected for so many years and by so many members of the family, with this town may be acceptable. The extent and bounds of The Duffry do not appear to be precisely known. As far as we can make it out it was an extensive district lying between the Rivers Urrin & Glasha, including most of Monart with parts of Templeshanbo and Killan, and the Northern part of the forest of Killoughrim.. It was bounded in the North by Mount Leinster and in the South probably included the site of the Anglo-Norman town of Enniscorthy, which was the high land on the right bank of the Slaney. It did not pass to the other side as the river was its boundary to the east. Sir Thomas Colclough of Tintern appears to have been the first of the family to acquire land in this district. The following is an extract from some mss of the late Caesar Colclough " The Duffry estate appears to have been acquired partly by private purchase and partly by grant from the crown. In 1603 Sir Thomas purchased several townlands from Sir Geo. Carew, Kt. On 20 March 1627 Sir Dudley (son of Sir Dudley) had a confirmation from the crown of right and title to the Castle, town and lands of Moynart and divers other lands in the Duffrie, all of which had been previously acquired by Sir Thomas, paying to the Crown a yearly rent of 15s and on 15 Dec. 1685 Patrick (son of Sir Dudley) got a grant of about 40 townlands for ever at a. yearly rent of £60.00 (note 40 townlands about 7,800 acres). Whether this comprises the whole of the Dufrrie or only the part held by the Colcloughs or whether it describes all that the Colcloughs possesses in the Duffrie is uncertain. Duffry Hall close to Kiltealy in Templeshanbo Parish is marked on the O.S. map. The Urrin River separates them. Under the heading Irish Life 120 years Ago notices of this place and the Colcloughs who lived there appeared in The People, a local Wexford paper, in July 1899 and December 21 1901. An Evening in the Duffry in the same paper August 16 & 30 1902 and Nov. 28 1903 also describe it. It is stated 'to have been built early in the 17th century for the heir of Tintern to reside there while waiting to succeed to his inheritance. A fine massive mansion with accommodation for a large family beside a great number of guests with their servants and attendants. It could not have been built before 1655 or it would have been shown on the Down Survey map. It may have been built after 1685 when Patrick Colclough got his large land grant. and was probably intended either as dower house for Tintern or as a separate residence for the Mocurry branch of the family.

Another letter

The internet is sporadic to say the least where I am at present but I will try posting this John 30 January 1795. Letter from John Colclough, Dublin, to Caesar Colclough, Lausanne, Switzerland. He expresses relief that the reports that Caesar Colclough has been executed in France were unfounded, and goes on to discuss Enniscorthy borough. ‘...I am happy to find what was done at Enniscorthy pleases you, particularly the appointment of Rock. You may guess I did nothing without the approbation of my mother and all my uncles, though there was one of your burgesses who did not approve of filling up the vacancies at all, to whom I had written (in answer to a most extraordinary letter of his) my reasons, which were unanswerable; and I think, that his own judgment be what it was, he should have admitted to the united wish of my mother, my uncle and myself at a juncture when yours could not possibly be known. But this however he did not think proper and though he would not be at the trouble of attending himself, send his veto by Pat Colclough who, with the most consummate assurance and villainy, proposed the Councillor, who was rejected by a majority of seven. I have deferred mentioning the name of the burgess who sent his veto because I know it will hurt you to find the world so deceitful. It was no other than William Harvey in whom all your friends join me in opinion that you were deceived but I trust will be for no longer-at least it shan’t be my fault if you are. In addition to his extraordinary conduct as above, I must inform you that, though even Portrieve, he never attended but once (as well as I recollect) since you left this kingdom. ...’he adds that Harvey, as well as being a false friend, is an incapable lawyer. ‘... I have been thus elaborate on this subject, lest you might think it extraordinary my employing Waddy to dissolve the custodiums and do some other necessary law business for you, consequent to my father’s death. I had tried him before, and find him exceedingly clever, expeditious, cheap and successful. He is now esteemed one of the first attorneys in Dublin, and though not of the same political interest as us, he does not pretend to be so, and you will find him a much more moderate man than the other. Out of 38 custodiams, he got consents to dissolve 34... William Sutton... you may truely call a friend and you may thank for now having the borough of Enniscorthy, as will you find hereafter. I pay Waddy 50, which went but a little towards dissolving the custodiams, for each of which I should have told you there was 10 shillings a year King’s silver paid off of the estate, which is now done away, beside no rents could be received or anything done till they were all dissolved. I sent two bills, one to Copenhagen, the other to O’Reilly at Basle in Switzerland, for your use, that amounted to £65. The reason I sent so little was because I was certain they would never reach you, and I believe I conjectured right. I paid my mother £100. I sent last Sunday to Stuck(?) Scimon (?) for Morres’s £108. I paid for my father’s funeral (by his dying request I was obliged to bring him to Tintern) and for his debts contracted for the necessaries of life during the four last months of his life (for, having sold his employment, he must have starve) £240, and there are still some unpaid. This is only a rough sketch. The items are too many to be contained in a letter, But, however, when you come over, you can see this account along with all others since our last settlement before you left this, and then you will find that that unfortunate unpunctuality was not entirely owing to me, and I trust that for the past, present and to come and you will find me not an unfaithful steward. I do not recollect whether in a letter sent by Copenhagen I mention my father’s having made a will some short time before he died, which was kept a profound secret from me till afterwards. The worthy Counsellor was the person who had it drawn. I am left £8,000 on the particular condition that I should not hinder or prevent the other bequests, which were £1,500 to Mrs Harrington and to the boys, £500 to Parson Dudley. But this you know is all fudge. The rental of the estate at present is but £1,600. You see, you must therefore live with prudence and economy for only two years, then I will engage, if you will be guided by me, to increase it £1,200 per annum, and every tenant who lives on the estate have their land cheaper that what they now pay for it to those beasts, middlemen, who have always been the destruction of this country (perhaps you would hardly believe that Richards has set Ballyvoane at 20 shillings and 6 pence an acre all round-your rent is 4 shillings and 3 pence- and the man he has set it to has set the greater part of it for 30 and the remainder of it for what he pays himself, 2 shillings and 6 pence(sic). In what a state must these wretched under-tenants be, you can very well imagine. In such a case as this (and there are many such on your estate) it is a duty you owe your tenantry and yourself to break such leases. Dear Caesar, you must be landlord of your own estate, and suffer no one to intervene between you and your tenants. You can then serve them: at present you cannot. As these were always your sentiments, and I believe you have not changed them, I hope you will not be displeased at my having led off the dance with Mr Richards, having served him with ejectment prior to the receipt of your letters. I am sure he will bring it to a trial next Assizes, when there is not a shadow of doubt of your succeeding, and he is cast, I think all the rest will submit at discretion. So that if I had said one, instead two years, I don’t think I would have been much out. This one farm will rise your rent roll £200 per annum and abate the rent £60 per annum to the under - tenants by which means 15 or 20 poor families will be able to live in comfort. The other farms that are to increase £1,200 are circumstanced exactly similar, and you must allow it would be unreasonable not to punish those rascals whose carriages have been so long oiled with the sweat of your poor tenantry, and therefore, my dear Caesar, you must not prevent me from finishing the task I have began, and for God’s sake, don’t let a word of your dislike to law escape you. If it did, you would be involved in litigation all your life. Leave these matters to my management. You shall have no trouble, nothing to do but re-set your lands. I will attend terms and see everything done right. All I ask is for you not to hinder me, and that you leave the conducting of the business to me; and therefore when there are applications made to you (of which there will be millions) both for your lands and law business, you will refer them to me. I will take all on my back. You know you are unacquainted with the situations of your affairs, and let them apply to me, which is I think a much better answer than Uncle Corneys, ”I’ll consider of it”. Now as I have already engage in less that 2 years to increase your income to £1,200, so I will now engage the same conditions that you never shall be involve in any law suit in which you will not succeed. You may think I speak with too much confidence, but you will find I do not... There can be no rent received out of the estate till after next Easter term, when there will be an agent appointed by the Court of Chancery, to which my mother and I applied for that purpose last November. This is much better than an agent of your appointment to act, because your agent’s receiving would confirm leases, etc, etc. The Chancery you are in no way answerable for. The rents I can hand over to you... ‘ He urges Caesar Colclough to stay away and leave everything to him, and on no account to trust anything to Harvey. John Colclough is also to be watched carefully, for though a good fellow he now has nearly as good an income as Caesar Colclough himself. John Colclough (the writer of the letter) has given a small sum of money to Mrs Harrington, to keep the boys and her from want, and will continue to do so unless Caesar Colclough countermands the order.

fanad

On my annual pilgrimage to Fanaid having some time to read in the soft wet Donegal rain. Here looking out over Mulroy I can see over to the woods where the long un-lamented William Sydney Clements (look him up!) 3rd Earl of Leitrim (1806-1878) met his demise, maybe it was not his fault, contemporary evidence would in these times be taken as signs of mental ilness, low self esteem, paranoia and megalomania, this gentleman set up groups of baliffs, under baliffs and bum baliffs to watch the locals and each other. Every April he would issue eviction notices to all, yes all his tenants, this saved him time as after 6 months he could scatter anyone with a notice. A local schoolmaster Hugh Dorian documented an invaluable piece of social history of Fanaid (The outer edge of Ulster) in the mid to late 19th century, Clements would be a divisive but unignorable figure of this time.
What has this got to do with Colclough's? Well it's to do with half of me, and there was a schoolmaster, folklorist and social historian Patrick Kennedy, among other books produced Evening's in the Duffrey 1875, which as I noted earlier painted a kinder picture of landed gentry, but I'm willing to bet the16th century Cavanagh clan might not have been so complementary.

Some connections to the Pigott name

In belated response to some comments:

 Sir Thomas Colclough’s daughter  Martha, married John Pigott  eldest son of Sir Robert Pigott of the Dysert, Queens County, Knight she had  issue.

So the Pigott name remains close to Colcough in 1684 Sir Caesar Colclough of Tintern Abbey, third and last Baronet of this family who died unmarried at Tintern September 22nd  1687 (no will proved or administration, obtained in Ireland). He was succeeded in his estates by his sister, in 1687 Margaret Colclough, who became heiress to his fortune. She married, 1st marriage licence, Ferns 2nd October 1673, Robert Leigh of Ballybrittas alias Rosegarland Co. Wexford Esq., and afterwards of Tintern in right of his wife. He took the name of Colclough, and dying without issue, May 1695. Margaret Leigh Colclough married secondly 1696, as second wife to her cousin Councillor John Pigott of Kilfenney, Co Limerick, who also assumed the name of Colclough. He died 8th May 1717 and was buried in Saint Paul’s in Dublin where a Tablet erected to his memory by his widow may yet be seen. His will was proved 7th June 1717.   Margaret Pigott Colclough died without issue the 23rd April 1723. Her will was proved in Dublin 2nd June 1723, and she was succeeded in the Manor of Tintern by her cousin and male heir Caesar Colclough of Duffry  Hall Co. Wexford, (Col Caesar)

All the above is taken from Beauchamp Colclough’s documents discovered by Bernard Colclough and collated by Gay Conroy.

Easter

Happy Easter.
Last time I had some thoughts on documents, their availability and their purpose. For the Colclough family there were not inconsiderable lands, prestige and dare I say it money! Proving lineage was of great profit potentially. Thus family trees produced by both Patrick Sarsfield and the defence are valuable sources, as are letters produced in the Rossborough Colclough efforts. Hore's four volumes use primary sources it seems. The papers discovered by my mighty Uncle Bernie in Dublin written or rather collated by Beauchamp Colclough give a fascinatng insight into early mid Victorian morality and politics, the undercurrent of all the landed Wexford Colclough's spreading their largesse and genes among the locals could be turned into a film, a film which would certainly have been banned in 1940's, 50's, 60's or 70's Ireland on the sayso of the Dublin castle bishops.
John

underway again

I have been neglecting my blog, so to reinvigorate it and me, here I go again. I think our names are our memories, fundamental to who we are, is that stating the obvious? So my mother and father married, a Kelly to a Colclough, tradition has it that the eight of us, the product of that union are, were Colclough's, the two girls are now a Webb and a Kinder their children are diversifying there is aready an Ellison, a name appearing in my nineteenth century Colclough documents. Tradition gives me my name, but names as I noted are what we are, our identity, it doesn't seem a great leap to move from say: John son of John, to John son of John from Stafford, to John son of John with red hair from Stafford, to want to create a short hand and a surname in English. The ancient languages are better adapted to lineage, witness 'Mac' 'O' 'Ap' etc. Part of my fascination is where Colclough which you might see as 'col-cluff' is really 'coke-lee'.
     How to find out?
The requirements of the industrial age, increasing populations, taxation, wars and the general need for order means that births, deaths and marriages have been recorded for almost everyone for 150 years. So as the digital age matures and the Irish diaspora searches, more records are becoming available, I can find good information on my Logue, Kelly and Arrigan ancestors and relations but looking much earlier than 1800 is difficult, things like the hearth tax and flax growers lists help but can be arcane.
Looking at my Colclough ancestors is a little easier now I know where to look. It's easier because documents exist. Documents are available from Tudor times because Colclough's had land, land meant manpower, meant money, meant influence, meant power. Preserving all this needed provenance from the dead, but also needed continuity and heirs from the living.
The interest in this blog shows the exponential nature of families, over 4000 page views, views from over 20 countries and from every continent, all Colclough's? It's a source of amazement to me...
Get in touch if you can, if you want to...

More to follow, more history too.
John

Some more offerings

A few more offerings to peruse, and because this is done through the ubiquitous 'Google' I thought I would try a Colclough Family community in 'Google' which in a flash of inspiration (notwithstanding this centenary year of Dylan Thomas' birth) I have called the...
Colclough Family



From original letter, Sarsfield Colclough to the Beauchamp Henry Colclough...
       Castlelawn Douglas, September 24, 1851.   
My dear Beauchamp,                                   
I received your letter and lose no post in answering it. I give you an extract out of a pedigree I have of our family, and will add a few remarks of my own.  “Henry, (your great great grandfather) married Margaret daughter of John Beauchamp of Ballyloughan, Co.Carlow Esq., subsequently, wife of Caleb Barns, Co.Carlow, her third Husband. She was sister of Mr. James Harvey of Killane Castle, Co. Wexford, and of Mr Walter Bagenal of Dunleckney, Co. Carlow. She had 4 sons and 1 daughter. 1st Dudley, died unmarried, 2nd Beauchamp married Bridget Mc Carty, and had 2 sons and 1 daughter, 1st Henry married Anne and 2nd Beauchamp married Catherine, Daughters of Crawford Esq. and nieces of Lord Dorchester. Henry’s other 2 sons were Patrick and Caesar.”  There appears a kind of contradiction about your great-great grandmother. She is in the first place stated to be Miss Beauchamp of Ballyloughan, 2nd to be sister of Mr. James Harvey of Killane Castle, and 3rd of Walter Bagenal. That she was and that nearly related to them all I have no doubt, and believe her maiden name was Beauchamp, that she was married three times also- 1st Henry Colclough, 2nd Coll . Harman, 3rd Caleb Barns. That she was nearly connected with Harvey I know from this reason your grandfather's brother Henry got some property somehow I don't know how, but he had to divide it with some of the Harveys, also that she was closely connected with the Bagenals for my Father in law and the late Beauchamp Bagenal were I believe first cousins, but by the above I think you can ascertain what you wish to know. Xxx  I know of no other way any of the Colclough family were connected with the Beauchamps, and it is by your branch of the family the connection arose, yours still retaining the name. If this is not sufficiently clear, let me know and if I can make it more so I will. The girls not at home, at Col. Cox’s.                               
  Yours very sincerely,  Sarsfield Colclough.
 P.S.  It strikes me, Mr. John Beauchamp had two other daughters beside Margaret, one married to Walter Bagenal, and the other to James Harvey, Esq., both brothers in Law to Margaret wife of Henry Colclough, a younger brother of Col.Caesar Colclough of Duffry Hall - she married Henry Colclough in 1729, and I believe was alive as Mrs Barnes up to about the year 90.  I hope you are progressing favourably, and successfully.                 
Sarsfield Colclough. Beauchamp Colclough Esq.  Care of Captain Colclough, County Inspector, Wexford.
Note (1870's by BHC) JC 2014: Margaret Beauchamp was only married twice: 1st to Caleb Barns and 2nd to Henry Colclough, after whose death, and with the object as I suppose of distinguishing her from her daughter in law Mrs. Beauchamp Colclough of Bohermore, she was known in the family as Mrs Barnes, hence the mistake as to her. I think her son Bartholomew Barnes married a daughter of Colonel W. Harman. 



 Leading order of 31st January, 1852, for trial of issue.   Lord Chancellor.
Between John Thomas Rossborough and Mary Grey Wentworth Rossborough his wife.   Plaintiffs. and Thomas Boyse and Jane Stratford Boyse otherwise Colclough, his wife, Defendants.
This cause coming on, on the 13th day of January 1852, and this present day to be heard and debated before the Right Honourable Lord High Chancellor of Ireland in the presence of Counsel learned on both sides, and the pleadings in the cause being opened, upon debate of the matter, and hearing the original will of Caesar Colclough, bearing date 6th day of August 1842 (Depositions of sundry witnesses).  The wills of said Caesar Colclough bearing date 5th August 1842  and the 8th of July 1824. (Depositions of sundry witnesses) and what was alleged by the Counsel on both sides, (and the  defendants Counsel not objecting)  His Lordship doth order, that the said parties do proceed to a trial at law, and accordingly that a writ of summons pursuant to the provision of the Act 8th and 9th Victoria, entitled, “An Act to amend the law concurring Gaming and Wagers “ be sued out of one of the Courts of law in Ireland, according to the form of the statute in such case made and provided, to which the defendants at law are forthwith to appear gratis and admit all matters of form, so that the parties do proceed to a trial by a special jury of the County of Wexford at the next Summer Assizes, to which end the Sheriff of said County of Wexford is forthwith to lay before Edward Litton Esq., the Master of this Court in rotation, the Grand Panel of the said County, and he is therefore to name 48 and thereupon each party, plaintiffs and Dependents, are to be at liberty to strike out 12, and the remaining 24 are to be the jury upon the trial of the following issue, namely, whether the paper writing in the pleading mentioned, bearing date of the 6th August 1842, is or not the last will and testament of Caesar Colclough deceased in the pleadings named, and it is further ordered that the defendants in this cause be plaintiffs at Law, and the plaintiffs in this cause be defendants at Law, and that depositions of any witnesses examined in this cause who shall on such trial be proved to be dead or unable to attend to be examined, be read at the trial, and it is further ordered that the judge before whom such trial shall be had, is to certify to this Court the verdict which shall be had upon such issue, and on the return of the judges certificate, such order shall be made as shall be just.   
  (Signed)  1st June 1852 H. Sugden A.R. 

Extracted from “The Wexford Independent” July 10th, 1852.    
Great Will Case, Record Court, Wexford. July 1st.  The Court opened shortly after 10 o'clock before Baron Penefather, when the important case of Boyse v Rossborough was called on. This great and important trial was a subject of intense interest in the County, and during the five days that it lasted (from Thursday morning to Tuesday evening) the Court was crowded to excess in every part, including the gallery, which was set apart for the exclusive accommodation of Ladies, and was fully occupied on each day by the female rank and fashion of town and county. The case was an issue from the high Court of Chancery, to try whether “the paper writing bearing date 6th August, 1842, is the last will and testament of Caesar Colclough” and the following special jury was impannelled to try the case. John Colly Pounder, Foreman, Richard Owen, Solomon Richards, William Toole, Edward Turner, William Bolton Jr, Robert Tyndall, Robert Doyne, Loftus A Brogan, Henry H Jones, John Whitney, and Henry Bolton Esqs.   The property staked on the issue of the trial was very large, the rental of the estate so stated by the agent being £7000 a year, besides which the personal property in estimated to be worth £4000 to £5000 more per annum. Mr. Lawson opened the pleadings for the Plaintiff. Mr. Brewster followed on the same side, and the examination and cross examination of witnesses for Plaintiff having closed. The Solicitor General (Mr.Whiteside) addressed the Court on behalf of the Defence and the examination and cross examination of witnesses for the defence having closed, and Mr. Martley having been heard in reply, his Lordship proceeded to charge the jury  “The jury retired, and after remaining in deliberation for about two hours returned a verdict for the defendant with costs thus invalidating the Will, and transferring the Colclough Estates to heir at law.  Counsel for Plaintiff,  Brewster Q.C. Martley Q.C. Lawson, Penefather, and Reeves. For defendants, the Solicitor General, Rolleston Q.C. Lynch Q.C. Armstrong, and Ryan.

Warrant, page 180. By the Lord Lt.General and General Governor of Ireland. 
St. Germains.
In pursuance of HM letter bearing date the 3rd June 1853, these are to direct and require you to register and record in your office, HM’s  Royal Licence and Authority unto John Thomas Rossborough of Tintern Abbey in the Co of Wexford Esqr., and Mary Grey Wentworth, his wife, that they and their issue may take the name of Colclough, in addition to, and after that of Rossborough, and bear the Arms of Colclough in the first quarter of their Armorial Bearings. Provided that H Majesty's concession and declaration be recorded in the Office of Ulster King of Arms in Ireland, to the end etc.,   Given at H Majesty Castle of Dublin this 13th of June 1853.  By her Excellency’s Commission.        
 Signed,  Larcom. To Ulster King of Arms in Ireland. 
 
Grant Book E.  page 430      
 To all and singular to whom these presents shall come, I Sir William Betham, Knight attendant on the Most Illustrious order of St. Patrick, Ulster King of Arms, and
principal Herald of all Ireland, send greetings,  Whereas, (Recites Queen’s Letter 3rd June, inst. and his Excellency’s Warrant 13th June, inst.)  Know ye that I the said Ulster King of Arms, in obedience to said Warrant, have caused the said Royal Licence to be Registered and recorded in my Office accordingly, and by the authority to me given by H Majesty's Royal Letters Patent, under the Great Seal of Ireland, and by authority of the same, do by these presents grant ratify exemplify and confirm to the said John Thomas Rossborough and Mary Grey Wentworth Rossborough his wife, now John Thomas Rossborough Colclough  and Mary Grey Wentworth Rossborough Colclough, and their issue, the Arms following, that is to say,  Quarterly 1st and 4th Argent 5 Eaglets displayed in cross sable, for Colclough, 2nd and 3rd Azure on a Chevron, or, 3 Roses Gules, seeded on barbed vert, for Rossborough, For Crest 1st A Demi Eagle displayed Sable, gorged with a ducal Coronet, or, for Colclough, 2nd on a Dexter Hand in fess, a Dove Close, with a branch of olive in his beak proper, all for Rossborough. For motto---Blank--- The whole as above is more clearly depicted, to be born(e) and used by the said John Thomas Rossborough Colclough, and his said wife and their descendants for ever, according to the laws of Arms without the let, hindrance, molestation or interruption of any person or persons whatsoever.   In witness whereof I have subscribed these presents, and affixed hereto my official Seal this day of June, in the 17th year of the Reign of our Sovereign Lady Victoria, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, and so forth in the year of our Lord 1853.        
 W. Betham, Ulster.


Extracted from  original letter Richard A. Colclough to BHC     
 Montgomery, Alabama. February 10th 1854.
My dear Cousin Beauchamp,                            
 Your truly welcome and highly esteemed communication of the 14th of December last reached me a few days since. I assure you it was welcome with heartfelt gratitude, exiled and expatriated from my infancy as I have been from all collateral kindred, and feeling in my present dissolation something akin to the “Poor Sparrow on the House Tops” in perusing the affectionate sentiments yours contained- I welcomed it as the “Cool spring to the thirsty traveller in the desert”.  I may say I have almost lost the last years practice in the time and attention I was compelled to give to my father's family, but I am truly gratified to think that as it never again will be in my power to contribute to the dear departed objects of my love, it was my happy privilege while they were living with me, to be able to provide them with every possible comfort.  You say you are a Canadian- in your next letter will you please state if you are the grandson of Major Beauchamp Colclough who emigrated to Canada, or the son of Henry Colclough his brother. The South Carolina family referred to – the Junior members of it who I have spent some time with, were unable to give me much information respecting their ancestry who emigrated. There was but one, of three brother's living named John, who was the son of a John Colclough who came to this Country shortly after the Revolution. He had a brother named William, who died without issue-this old man possesses some of the family characteristics for eccentricities, is very wealthy, and sometimes very crossy, had three sons, two of whom have died, one named Ashby, and the other, Henry, has a natural son now living, named William. They all insisted that there was no doubt as to my being a near relation of theirs. While I have been writing, I have been several times disturbed by the unwelcome hard fisted Democracy of our land, enquiring after their cases, etc., I trust you will make all due allowances and write me soon- be sure to give me all particulars you have in relation to the Rossborough  Colclough suit, how it progresses etc. Sister Catherine sends her affectionate love to cousin Mary and says she will soon write, and unites with Martha and myself in our most affectionate love to you,                                                               R A Colclough.



Extracted from the Kilkenny Journal February 22nd 1854. Rolls Court Wednesday, Kenny v Colclough, (Patt)
  Mr. Deasy  Q.C. applied on the part of the defendant, that the receiver in this case might be discharged, he having been appointed contrary to good faith, and being an unfit person to fill that office. It appeared that the bill in the case was filed in 1847, for the purpose of raising an annuity of £100 a year, granted to the plaintiff by the  defendant, Patrick Sarsfield Colclough, who was tenant for life of the lands charged with the annuity. It affected only his life estate, and the inheritance subject to that life estate was vested in his son (Adam Vesey Colclough) -no proceedings was taken in the cause until January 1852. When a decree pro confesso was pronounced, and by that decree it was refined to Martin Lyle to appoint a receiver for the payment of the arrears of the annuity then due to the plaintiff, and Mr. William Corbett was appointed receiver after some opposition on the part of the defendant. On the 26th April 1853 the defendant served a notice of motion for his discharge, which appeared to be grounded on his alleged unfitness for the office. The Master of the Rolls then delivered judgment. He said he had no difficulty in refusing the motion with costs. If there was any bad faith in the matter, which he did not believe all the circumstances were within the knowledge of the defendant in the month of September. He was perfectly aware in that month, that Mr. Mooney, his Solicitor, with whom he was in communication, had proposed his own son (Adam) as receiver on the 20th August, and it appeared by his letter of the 20th of September that he knew of the order of the 25th of June for the appointment of the present receiver, yet he now came forward to set aside the appointment as contrary to good faith, though there were, even according to his statement, upwards of two years annuity due to the  plaintiff.  It was as singular a case as ever came before the Court. He did not understand the motion at all.  The foundation of it was to discharge the receiver on the ground that he was not a proper person to be appointed, but Mr. Deasy had prudently and very wisely declined to go into that part of the case. The affidavits in relation to the objection made to the receiver personally were not opened and he was satisfied that they were not opened because they ought not. Mr.Colclough sought to throw the costs on the estate, but he could not do that, for the effect might be to put the amount out of Mr Kenny’s pocket, if Mr. Colclough died before they were paid. He repeated it was a most singular case, Mr Colclough must be labouring under some strange delusion. He changed his Solicitor every day, and probably he would have another tomorrow. If Mr.Ferguson did not consent to take the affidavits off the file, he also might be changed, but parties should recollect that there was such a thing as an action for malicious proceeding, they should consider that before they make such an application. He would discharge the motion with costs.  

Early Colclough - Cokeley

Because my surname is pronounced 'cokely' and by common consent this is the pronunciation of that branch of the family connected to Wexford, here are a few miscellanea...

John

Full text of "The manors of Suffolk; notes on their history and ... WA Copinger.…amongst Abbreviation of pleas in 1292 is a judgement in favour of William de Cokeley on finding that he had not ‘disseised’ … Robert de Ludham ( owner of Cookley Manor noted at least in 1285) for a meesuage  including land, woodland, meadow and pasture…

The History of Framlingham, in the County of Suffolk: Including Brief ... p337. Robert Hawes, Robert Loder

William de Cokeley was anciently owner of Cokeley  in the manor of Framlingham Suffolk.

 

 https://archive.org/stream/cu31924092579550#page/n47/mode/1up   accessed 04/01/14

November 10^th 1389

Grant with the assent of the great council for 800(shillings?) paid for the kings use to John de Hermesthorp one of the chamberlains of the Receipt of the Exchequer, by John bishop of Salisbury, George de Felbrigge knight, Thomas More, clerk, Robert de Asshefeld, Robert Grigge, Thomas de Wroxham and Thomas Fulmere to them their heirs and assigns, of the reversion of the manor of Huntyngfeld Co. Suffolk with the avowances of the priory of Mendham abd the churches of Huntyngfeld and Cokely, Co Suffolk…

  http://sdrc.lib.uiowa.edu/patentrolls/r2v4/body/Richard2vol4page0157.pdf Accessed 04/01/2013.

    'Index of Entries: S', Petitions to the Pope: 1342-1419 (1896), pp. 728-739.

Maximo, Francis de, archdeacon of Suffolk, 294, 303. -, Paulo, Baldwin de, knt., ..... Sterman, William son of William, alias de Cokely, 54. Sternfield, Sternefeld

The under-written clerks. For the office of notary public:—Richard, son of William Lerveton, of Tykhull, in the diocese of York. Stephen de Marthingho, alias de Combemartin, in the diocese of Exeter. Robert de Skipton, in the diocese of York. Roger Fraunceys, of the diocese of Salisbury. Robert de Swalfield, in the diocese of Lincoln. William de Neuton, in the diocese of Lichfield. Robert son of Richard de Torphankere, in the diocese of Lincoln. Nicholas de Wharroum, of Wartre, in the diocese of York. Adam de Hilton, in the diocese of Lichfield. Conrad Trowrede, of Kingston-on-Hull, in the diocese of York. William, son of the late William Sterman, of Walpole, alias de Cokely, in the diocese of Norwich. John Bronclade, of Coliford, in the diocese of Exeter. Geoffrey Jolif, of Canoligi, in the diocese of Exeter. Granted, if they be found sufficient. Avignon, 14 Kal. June. From: 'Volume V: 2 Clement VI', Petitions to the Pope: 1342-1419 (1896), pp. 54-75.

 URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=92355&strquery=de cokely  Date accessed: 05 January 2014.

More research to connect the above with the below, when I get some time...
 

Colclough’s and 14^th 15^th century MP’s in England

Richard Colclough (d. by 1385) of Newcastle-under-Lyme MP 1360

John Colclough d 1420/1

Eldest son of Richard Colclough (d. by 1385) of Newcastle-under-Lyme, and bro. of William (see below). Married  by Easter 1408, Margery ...

Offices Held

Bailiff, Newcastle-under-Lyme Mich. 1377-8, 1379-81; mayor 1384-5, 1386-7, 1388-90, 1394-5, 1400-1, 1402-5, 1406-7, 1408-9, 1410-11.2

 

The Colclough family enjoyed considerable influence in Newcastle under Lyme in Staffordshire  and its environs From the mid 14th century probably before. John’s father represented the borough in the Parliament of 1360, and subsequently held office as both bailiff and mayor. Over the years he established himself as a local landowner of some consequence, for besides acquiring land in Newcastle and the neighbouring village of Wolstanton, he was able to purchase the Staffordshire manor of Hanley from Sir Richard Peshale. However the manor came with litigaon and Sir Richard Peshale's widow.

 John had served his first term as bailiff of Newcastle in 1377, and on at least four occasions over the next ten years he went surety for his successors in office. At some point before October 1379 he took on the lease of additional holdings in Wolstanton, where he appears to have been farming his father’s property as well. In 1380 (while he was again acting as bailiff) he witnessed a deed for the prior of Trentham, who had strong connexions with the borough, and may, indeed, have been his feudal overlord. According to a lawsuit heard many years later, Colclough paid £15 to one of Thomas Lichfield’s receivers at about this time. No other burgess could rival his record of 12 terms as mayor, which were served over a period of 27 years. His two returns to Parliament were both made when he was in office; and on each occasion he sat with his younger brother, William, whom he engaged in 1393 to be his attorney in his lawsuit with Joan Peshale )see above), and who eventually made him his executor. Even when he was not acting in an official capacity, Colclough played a prominent part in municipal life. In 1396, for example, he ranked as second among the senior members of the merchant guild, and in 1410 he attested the minutes of that body.

Much of Colclough’s time after 1385 was taken up with the administration of his late father’s estate, and, together with his fellow executor, John Keen, he was obliged to bring a number of lawsuits for the recovery of debts owed to the deceased by such persons as the Newcastle burgess, William Thickness, and Joan, widow of Sir John Swynnerton. In 1397 Colclough joined with Roger Longridge  and the influential landowner, Nicholas Bradshaw, in purchasing property in the Staffordshire villages of Walton near Stone and Great Chatwell. Five years later he and Bradshaw obtained a royal licence to settle most of this land on Stone priory. Other endowments were to be made by Bradshaw’s brother, Roger, so it would appear that Colclough was acting as a feoffee-to-uses rather than a direct benefactor of the priory. During the Easter term of 1408 the MP and his wife either sold or conveyed land in Chorlton, Staffordshire, to a local man. That Colclough earned at least part of his income as a farmer is borne out by a case heard at the Stafford assizes in March 1414 involving the theft of two of his oxen. The death of his younger brother at about this time involved him in yet more litigation, notably as defendant in an action for debt brought in the following year by Sir William Newport. Following a long-established family tradition, Colclough’s son, John, was already active in municipal affairs by then, and it was probably he, rather than his father, who became mayor of Newcastle in 1418, and stood surety for John Mynors at the parliamentary elections held there in the following year. Both men were being sued for a debt of £20 by Margaret Delves a surname noted in various Colclough family trees, during the Hilary term of 1420, although since John Colclough the younger was alone ordered to appear in court during the summer of 1421. The elder was probably dead by this time.

Sourced:  History of Parliament