Of the populous and prosperous commercial centre and port of Newry, straddling the county boundary between Armagh and Down at the head of Carlingford Bay, John Curwen* observed that it ‘has the appearance of opulence, and in the pursuit of trade and business many appeared to be earnestly engaged’, while another traveller, Henry Inglis, noted that this ‘respectable-looking town ... enjoys the rare distinction of having no wretched suburbs dragging their miserable length from every outlet’.
Since the Union, General Francis Needham of Mourne Park had re-established his family’s dormant electoral interest and, although Thomas Oldfield commented in 1816 that it was ‘not sufficient to command the return’, he was subsequently recognized as the sole proprietor.
In July 1821 over a third of the Newry yeomanry resigned in protest at being forbidden to parade with Orange colours; the following month the town agreed a loyal address to George IV on his visit to Ireland.
At the general election of 1826 Lord Newry withdrew in favour of his brother-in-law John Henry Knox, a younger son of the 2nd Viscount Northland, who controlled the representation of Dungannon. Knox canvassed on the Kilmorey interest and one possible challenger, the young barrister Hugh Marmaduke O’Hanlon, son of Patrick O’Hanlon of Narrow Water Castle, issued an address from London declining to offer despite his dismay at the reduced state of the town. The disgruntled merchants and traders held a meeting on 12 June, when criticisms were voiced of Lord Newry’s inattentiveness and Kilmorey’s stranglehold on the representation, in hopes of choosing a candidate with commercial expertise. An approach was made to the Liverpool merchant John Gladstone*, but he had already started for Berwick, and the mercantile interest settled for Knox on receiving assurances that he would attend to their affairs in Parliament. The radical inhabitant William Henry McWherther in the end declined to poll against Knox, who was introduced by Trevor Corry of Abbey Yard, cousin of the former Member and Irish chancellor of the exchequer, Isaac Corry. Knox was therefore returned unopposed, but the anti-Kilmorey mob caused considerable uproar during the election.
The petition from the chamber of commerce for repeal of the coal duties was presented by Knox, 9 Mar. 1827, and tanners’ petitions against the leather duties were brought up, 2 Apr. 1827, 14 Mar. 1828.
Repeatedly depicted in the Telegraph as the pattern of a diligent man of business, Knox offered again at the general election of 1830. His reputation was enhanced by his arrival with documents, expedited by Anglesey, now lord lieutenant, allowing the local navigation to be transferred to the Newry Canal Company, which formally took place on 26 July. That day Knox also attended a town meeting which called for the banning of party processions following the ugly disturbances there on the 12th. Isaac Burke Bethel, a Dublin barrister, offered to stand on the interest of the ‘humble and honest fellows’ who opposed the proprietor, and Kilmorey thought it prudent to be resident in case of a contest. In fact, his son-in-law was again returned unopposed as a ministerialist at the election, when Kilmorey’s £10,000 contribution to the improvement of the canal was praised by Knox’s seconder Isaac William Glenny, son of the seneschal, Isaac Glenny of Littleton House.
Following a requisition headed by Maguire’s name, a reform meeting was held on 22 Mar. 1831, when unwarranted fears were raised about the disfranchisement of the £5 householders under the Grey ministry’s reform bill. The petition agreed that day was forwarded to Grey, who brought it up in the Lords on 12 Apr., and Knox, who appears not to have presented it to the Commons.
On the hustings, 3 May 1831, Knox reiterated his new-found liking for the bill and a letter from Anglesey, who had been primed by O’Connell, was produced in his support. At least in the Tory press, he was given credit for his commitment to the town’s commercial concerns and his conscientious insistence on retaining his right to act as he thought fit over reform. Maguire, whose cause was tied in with the inhabitants’ desire to liberate the borough franchise, advocated reform but refused to be drawn on more radical measures or repeal of the Union. He kept almost level with Knox until the seventh day, when the margin was 96-1 against him and he therefore resigned 112 adrift, with Knox claiming that he still had another 60 to 80 electors unpolled. He blamed his defeat on Kilmorey’s influence, including over the ‘commoners’ resident in the rural districts, of whom about 70 voted for his opponent and only three for him.
The petition of the Newry mechanics for reform and repeal of the Union was brought up on 24 June by Lord Shrewsbury in the Lords, where Downshire presented one from the inhabitants for the introduction of poor laws to Ireland, 28 June 1831.
With 2,550 houses, of which 820 were valued at £10 a year, there were reckoned to be about 700 qualified electors under the Reform Act, together with 300 or 400 reserved rights electors whose houses were worth between £5 and £10.
the only drawback, that we know of, on his truly excellent character, arose from his political predilections and his hankering after boroughmongering. The representation of Newry had been a thing of trade before it came into his hands and, like most people with similar views, he tried to make the most of it.
Northern Whig, 29 Nov. 1832.
The penurious 2nd earl, as Lord Newry became, decided to abandon the borough, which he later claimed had cost his father £3,000 a year. Knox retired and Kilmorey stifled the approach made to his younger brother Colonel Francis Henry Needham. The seat was apparently offered to the Conservative leadership as a fallback for William Holmes* or William Mackinnon*, neither of whom found a seat, but it was Downshire’s brother Lord Arthur Marcus Cecil Hill† who, having thrown up his attempt on Downpatrick, entered as a Conservative and defeated his Catholic and radical opponent in a fierce contest.
in £5 householders
Number of voters: 554 in 1831
Estimated voters: about 600
Population: 10013 (1821); 13369 (1831)
