HILL, Sir George Fitzgerald, 2nd bt. (1763-1839), of Brook Hall, co. Londonderry
Available from Cambridge University Press
Family and Education
b. 1 June 1763, 1st s. of Sir Hugh Hill, 1st bt., MP [I], of Brook Hall and 2nd w. Hannah, da. of John McClintock, MP [I], of Dunmore, co. Donegal, wid. of John Spence of co. Leitrim. educ. Londonderry; Trinity, Dublin 1780; L. Inn 1780, called [I] 1786; continental tour. m. 10 Sept. 1788, Jane, da. of Hon. John Beresford† of Abbeville, co. Dublin and Walworth, co. Londonderry, s.p. suc. fa. as 2nd bt. 31 Jan. 1795. d. 8 Mar. 1839.
MP [I] 1791-8.
Clerk of the parl. [I] 1798-1800; commr. of treasury [I] 1807-17; PC [I] 24 Dec. 1808, [GB] 31 May 1817; vice-treas. [I] 1817-30; gov. St. Vincent 1830-3, Trinidad 1833-d.
Recorder, Londonderry 1792-d.; trustee, linen board [I] 1801.
Capt.-commdt. Londonderry yeomanry legion 1796; lt.-col. co. Londonderry militia 1800, col. 1822-30.
Hill, who had sat for Coleraine and Londonderry in the Irish Parliament in the 1790s, was returned to the Westminster Parliament for Londonderry for the sixth consecutive time at the general election of 1820. He continued to manage the affairs of the borough, of which he was a burgess and the recorder, on behalf of his influential relations by marriage, the Beresfords. Receiving £2,265 a year in compensation for the loss of his clerkship of the Irish Parliament, from 1817 he also had a salary of £1,500 as vice-treasurer of Ireland. In 1820 Lord Liverpool’s administration noted that he had had ‘immense local patronage’.1 As an active member of the payroll vote, he of course continued to divide regularly with government, and often spoke, introduced legislation and acted as a teller, especially on Irish financial and commercial business; he regularly sat on select committees on Irish matters and frequently presented petitions from his constituency. An Orangeman, who served at least once on the committee of the Grand Orange Lodge, he remained opposed to Catholic relief, but steadily refused to sanction Protestant excesses.2
Hill commented on the need for relief after the failure of banks in Ireland, 16 June, and asked the chancellor about the scope of the promissory notes bill, 14 July 1820. He objected to the Irish master in chancery Thomas Ellis being excluded from the House, 30 June, and presented a Dublin petition to this effect, 12 July, when he attempted to point out a breach of privilege.3 He read the Londonderry corporation’s address to the lord lieutenant, Lord Talbot, on his visit to the city, 15 Sept. 1820. He moved the loyal address at a borough meeting, 4 Jan. 1821, when he justified the ministry’s record on the whiskey duties.4 He spoke and divided against Catholic claims, 28 Feb., insisted that the House be called over on this question, 2 Mar., and criticized the relief bill, 16, 23, 27, 28 Mar., 2 Apr.5 He opposed the Irish tithes leasing bill, 15 Mar., and moved the wrecking amendment against its third reading, 10 May.6 In November he complained that the Irish government had ignored his memorial deploring vilification of the yeomanry.7 The corporation of Londonderry presented him with a piece of plate at a dinner in his honour, 28 Dec. 1821.8
During 1822, partly as the result of his own suggestions, further consolidation took place in the residual Irish financial administration, and Hill became responsible, for example, for the functions of the Irish paymaster-general.9 At the beginning of that session he wrote confidentially to Peel, the new home secretary, that ‘the country gentlemen and agriculture will give rather general trouble, I apprehend, and I rather hope will consume the most time’.10 He voted against the Catholic peers bill, 30 Apr. He secured the appointment of a select committee on the Irish linen trade, 18 May, and brought up its report in favour of further encouragement for the industry, 17 July 1822, when he clashed with Brougham about the 12th of July celebrations in Londonderry.11 After the suicide of Lord Londonderry*, the foreign secretary, that autumn, Hill petitioned for and received the colonelcy of the county Londonderry militia, much to the fury of the 3rd marquess, now head of the rival Stewart interest in the county, who claimed that Hill was ‘a ruined man’ without ‘parliamentary ability, influence or property’, denounced him for his ‘jobbing and mean conduct’ and threatened to stir up an opposition against him in his borough.12 Ministers, who declined to dismiss Hill from office, put enormous pressure on him (until July 1823) to resign the colonelcy, but he steadfastly refused to do so, despite thereby incurring their and the king’s displeasure.13 He vindicated his conduct by appealing to the reversion which the late marquess had given him, emphasizing his desire to consolidate the Beresfords’ interests and promising to act amicably with the Stewarts over militia patronage and county politics.14
Defending the grant for the Irish yeomanry, 10 Mar. 1823, Hill observed that its officers had ended their involvement in Orange processions. He was among the ‘violent Orangeists’ who opposed Brownlow’s motion censuring the legal proceedings against the Dublin theatre rioters, 15 Apr., when Lord Milton complained that he was retained in office in spite of his Orange principles.15 He divided against the compromise motion for an inquiry, 22 Apr., but asked several questions during its sittings in May. On 28 Apr. he attended the meeting at Henry Bankes’s* house to hear Peel’s proposals on the Catholic question, and in May he gave Mrs. Arbuthnot ‘a deplorable account of the state of Ireland’ and predicted imminent rebellion.16 He praised the Irish viceroy Lord Wellesley’s efforts to suppress sectarian disorder, 25 June, and in August 1823, when he informed Peel of the state of unrest in the North of Ireland, he attended a county Londonderry meeting about an outrage in Maghera.17 He defended the grant to Irish Protestant charter schools, 15 Mar., commented on the linen laws, 19 Mar., and defeated an attempt to reduce the Irish militia establishment, 5 May 1824.18 He was forced to withdraw the bill relating to Derry Cathedral, 10 May, but expressed his wish that a trust might be formed for its repair, 18 May, 17 June. He seconded Croker’s motion for a return of the number of inhabitant householders and freeholders in Ireland, 19 May, hoping that it might lead to the suppression of small freeholders.19 Writing in November 1824 to his friend George Dawson, the county Londonderry Member and junior minister, he wryly suggested that he should receive the vacant Indian governorship and commented that
the Popish proceedings are more audacious every hour. Protestants stare at each other and say, what are we to expect? Shall we take a part and express our sentiments? This I have been now frequently asked. My reply has been that the House of Commons is the fit place for any exertion I can make, declining thereby to promote any public meeting by active interference. This causes speculation: ‘Is Sir George afraid of Lord Well[esley], maybe he knows that Peel and Liverpool are relaxing, etc., etc., etc.’20
Hill was, however, present at the city and county Londonderry anti-Catholic meeting, 10 Jan. 1825, when he attacked the radical Francis Horner for agitating the issue of Catholic freeholders being allowed to attend.21 He related to Peel that he had sought to prevent any aspersions being cast against the Irish government at the meeting, and in a long and unreserved letter of the 23rd he stressed the overwhelming, if currently latent, power of the Catholics and the readiness of moderate Protestants to ‘compromise for future security’, for instance on the basis of the bill which it was rumoured that Canning, the foreign secretary, would introduce.22 The following month he appealed, on the strength of his long experience, for a place on the select committee on the state of Ireland, but Peel refused on the ground that room could not be found for him and Dawson, whom he had already chosen.23 Having justified the conduct of his county’s magistrates relating to marriages performed by Catholic priests, 8 Feb., and presented the hostile Londonderry petition, 10 Feb., he voted for the Irish unlawful societies bill, 25 Feb., and against Catholic relief, 1 Mar., 21 Apr., 10 May, and the attendant franchise bill, 26 Apr. Yet, in private he was apparently prepared to seek concessions, as according to Daniel O’Connell’s* letter to his wife, 4 Mar., ‘a great Orangeman from the North, Sir George Hill, but his name should not appear in print, has just announced that a number of the English supporters of the ministry are going in a body to Lord Liverpool to insist that he should no longer oppose emancipation’.24 Amongst other legislative initiatives that year, he again chaired an inquiry into Irish linen and secured the passage of a bill to regulate the trade. After a session in which he admitted having been ‘almost a passive observer of what passed’, he reported to Peel in July that the Protestants were sulky at being deprived of opportunities to demonstrate while Catholic processions were left unhindered.25 In September 1825, forecasting sweeping gains for the pro-Catholics in the expected election that autumn and the future ruin of the Protestant community in Ireland, he lamented to him that ‘to have comfort or means of peace in Ireland you must either give up the establishment and make room for us in England or concur in your cabinet to act together in resisting the extent of concessions sought for’.26
Hill’s official duties in Dublin prevented him attending the ceremonies in Londonderry on 18 Dec. 1825, but he was present to denounce the Catholic Association at a dinner in honour of Dawson there on the 28th. He presented the city’s anti-Catholic address to the duke of York, 23 Feb. 1826.27 He brought up Londonderry petitions relating to imports of butter and Irish banknotes, 7 Apr., when he explained the duties attached to his office and defended its annual expenses.28 His interest in Dublin was thought to be useful to Croker in his contest for the University at the general election of 1826, when he was again elected for Londonderry, where his portrait was donated to the corporation hall.29 As Dawson reported to Peel from the city, 22 June, Hill was ‘doing his best here to keep up a proper feeling of attachment to the government, and a determination to be firm in supporting a Protestant constitution. Poor fellow, I wish his means were better, for he has a generous heart and affectionate disposition’.30 Underlining his regret at the success of the Catholic cause, Hill told Peel, 6 July, that he was not sanguine that the Protestants would show restraint on the 12th and that ‘the present state of things cannot be endured: the Romans are united as one man, and common safety will justify counter-association against the chance or dread of commotion’.31 He continued to believe that government would have to act against the Catholic Association, and he spoke in condemnation of its activities at dinners in Londonderry, 3 Oct., and Armagh, 5 Oct. 1826.32
On 21 Oct. 1826 Hill sent Dawson a long appraisal of the state of public opinion:
There are some republicans in Belfast and a few in Derry who have no religion and would coalesce with any mixture which would promote confusion and dissolve the Union; these are not numerous. There are a few also who wish well to monarchy and church but who would sacrifice for repose; these would emancipate (bless the term) to procure quiet. There are also some selfish dealers, who, governed by dread of losing Popish customers for their articles of sale, will not offend (as they say) by taking a part against the Romans. And I regret to add that there are a few good men, honest sincere fellows, who are persuaded that Peel and Goulburn [the Irish secretary] are playing a game which permits the manifestation of such energy, power and determination on the part of the Romans as they (P. and G.) calculate will prove to John Bull that resistance to the Popish measure is both absurd and inadmissible, thus providing for themselves and the Protestant part of the cabinet excuse nay approbation for relinquishing further opposition.
Emphasizing that ‘for 36 years I have slaved in these quarters in the North and although highly stationed officially, I have sacrificed my means to the performance of political duty’, he bleated that ‘I ought therefore to have my retirement provided for if any colour of truth belongs to a serious contemplation of our ministers to require their official friends to relinquish their Protestant principles’.33 Feeling duty bound to inform Peel of his opinions, he wrote at length on 2 Nov. 1826, beginning with what he termed the ‘common’ and ‘incontrovertible’ observation that ‘the state of Ireland under the government of Great Britain can not be permitted to remain as it is’. He expatiated on his previous analysis and, stressing that Ulster Protestants were convinced that government intended to let the situation deteriorate until emancipation became inevitable and that the extremists could not in any case impede its passage, he urged the cabinet to come to a united decision in favour of a limited form of concession in order to prevent Ireland from becoming ‘a Popish country’. For his own part he stated that ‘I will not make these admissions in public, in doing so I should be called recreant; on the contrary I will continue to act in co-operation with those who are zealous against the Roman claims’.34 He duly attended the county Londonderry anti-Catholic meeting the following day.35
In February 1827 Hill forwarded to Peel the anti-Catholic petition, which he had himself signed, from the Irish nobility and gentry, and supplied him with information about Brownlow’s censure motion on the handling of the Lisburn Orange march.36 In the House he clashed with Brownlow over a petition from the Catholics of county Londonderry, 2 Mar.37 He and Dawson were tellers for the majority of four against Catholic relief, 6 Mar. He defended the lord lieutenant’s decision to appoint a stipendiary magistrate in county Waterford, 16 Mar., insisted that the Irish government was attempting to suppress Orange outrages, 11 Apr., and denied that Irish landowners were expelling their paupers to England, 30 May.38 Having stayed in office under Canning, he divided against the disfranchisement of Penryn, 28 May, for the grant for improved water communications in Canada, 12 June, and against the Coventry magistracy bill, 18 June. In October it was known to the Goderich ministry that Hill ‘was desirous of going out of office and out of Parliament, but that his affairs were much deranged, and that he could not do so except by "commutation for some minor government"’. The Whig supporters of the administration hoped that he might be eased out in order to provide for Sir John Newport*, but nothing came of it.39 Hill presided at the dinner on 18 Dec. 1827 to celebrate the shutting of the gates of Londonderry.40
As a member of the duke of Wellington’s government, he divided against repeal of the Test Acts, 26 Feb. 1828. He presented the petition from the Irish Society against the salmon fisheries bill, 7 Mar., and was a teller for the majority for his wrecking amendment, 20 Mar. He supported the Hibernian Joint Stock Company bill as a means of increasing investment in Ireland, 22 Apr., but failed to have it referred to a select committee, 24 Apr., 2, 6 May. He voted against Catholic relief, 12 May. He spoke in favour of the additional churches bill, 30 June, and defended the conduct of the Londonderry magistrates towards Orange processions, 8 July. Aware of the state of alarm in Ireland, he returned there after the session, ‘determined to endeavour to moderate Protestant feeling’ and to urge his friends to place their trust in whatever ministers should decide to do. However, as he confided to Wellington, ‘many whom I thought I could influence reject my advice to be moderate and patient, pointedly asking me "if I too was going to betray them"’.41 Chairing the Londonderry dinner on the anniversary of the lifting of the siege, 12 Aug., he spoke in praise of the Protestant constitution, but was unable to restrain the anger demonstrated against Dawson’s ill-fated declaration in favour of the Catholics. He wrote to Wellington and Peel in mitigation of Dawson’s offence, pleading that he and Dawson had both expressed considerable sympathy with the cause of their Protestant fellow countrymen, who felt threatened by the disarming of the yeomanry.42 In a further letter to Peel, 20 Aug., he urged him not to resign if the cabinet decided to emancipate the Catholics.43 Absenting himself in Dublin on the excuse of official business, he kept his distance during the formation of Brunswick Clubs in Londonderry that autumn and missed the anti-Catholic county meeting on 4 Dec. 1828; but he did write to the press to rebut the widely held presumption that Dawson had been speaking on behalf of the government.44
Planta, the patronage secretary, listed Hill as likely to vote ‘with government’ for emancipation, and it was known that he would not quit his place.45 He duly divided for the Catholics, 6 Mar., much to the surprise of some observers.46 Bringing up the hostile petitions from the county and corporation of Londonderry, 16 Mar., he explained his own change of heart on the grounds that it had been advanced by administration as a national measure and was a step made unavoidably necessary by the need to avoid further perilous unrest in Ireland. He voted for the third reading of the emancipation bill, 30 Mar., and for allowing O’Connell to take his seat unhindered, 18 May 1829. He continued to serve ministers as a teller, although Wellington was anxious to replace him with the knight of Kerry*.47 He was reckoned to be overoptimistic in his assessment that the Northern Protestants were reconciled to emancipation, but it was thought likely he would ‘get off well’ when he returned to Ulster that summer.48 Although Hill had not always been considered a suitable figure to manage the Beresfords’ interest in the county, he drew up a detailed analysis of their support on the registers there in July 1829.49 He remained loyal to Dawson, whom the connection intended to ditch in favour of another candidate, and Henry Barré Beresford commented to Archbishop Beresford that
I feel much for him. His heart is with us if he was independent, but situated as he is with government, he endeavours naturally to soften public feeling in city and county, for of course the subsiding of that feeling is of great moment to him as Member for Derry, as also for the government with whom he acts; you of course must be aware that the people of the county through delicacy to him (for whom they all feel as I do) do not speak so plainly as to me, but he has heard plain facts to my knowledge and will hear more.50
Hill helped to prevent any overt display of Protestant anger on 12 Aug. and later that month was given a dinner with Dawson by Londonderry corporation. He repeatedly stressed to the heads of the Beresford family that his 40 years’ experience as ‘an active political agent’, centred on his ‘head quarter of politics’ at Brook Hall, gave credit to his requests for their standing by Dawson, who had government support, but in September he reluctantly broke with them altogether.51 Lord Beresford considered his arguments and behaviour ‘absurd’, and Hill received short shrift when he attempted to argue that Dawson should be found a bolthole at Coleraine or elsewhere.52 He was, however, congratulated by Peel for his efforts ‘to conciliate the good will and the support of all reasonable and well judging men’ in Londonderry in December 1829.53
Hoping for a more lucrative appointment, Hill initially reacted cautiously to Wellington’s offer of the governorship of St. Vincent in January 1830, but in March, haunted by fears of financial disaster, he resigned the vice-treasurership in order to take it up.54 In the meantime, he continued to side with administration, being a teller against Lord Blandford’s amendment to the address, 5 Feb. He voted against transferring East Retford’s seats to Birmingham, 11 Feb., and the enfranchisement of Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester, 23 Feb. He spoke in defence of the Irish yeomanry, 22 Feb. He divided against Jewish emancipation, 5 Apr., 17 May. He commented on the Galway franchise bill, 26 Apr., and voted for it, 24, 25 May. His last recorded vote was against abolition of the death penalty for forgery, 7 June, and his only other known speeches were in vindication of the conduct of the corporation of Londonderry, 23 Mar., 23 June 1830.
In expectation of his departure abroad, Hill made no attempt to stand for Londonderry at the general election of 1830. However, in daily expectation of being arraigned for debt, he even suggested to the Beresfords, who wanted nothing to do with him, that he could be returned as a locum for Coleraine, where he was also a corporator; he had hopes of a similar retreat in England.55 Barré Beresford, who rented Brook Hall as his base in county Londonderry, noticed that Hill was ‘in wonderful spirits’ in August, but in late September he commented, ‘Poor fellow. He is low enough ... What a hand he has made of himself’.56 His governorship was not gazetted until August, when he made haste to leave the country, and he thereafter enjoyed a salary of £4,000. Because she would have been left with nothing in the event of being widowed, Lady Hill obtained a pension of £467, one of the last acts of the Wellington administration.57 As was announced in the Commons on 6 Dec. 1830, his old office was absorbed into the treasury in London and made a non-political appointment. However, problems arose because his ‘desperate and unprincipled inattention to money dealings’ had extended to his official functions, and his accounts were found to be in disarray and heavily in arrears.58 Questions were raised in the House, 27 June, and on 31 Aug. 1831, on the motion to defray a charge of £5,534 relating to the office, it was revealed by the treasury secretary Rice that Hill had not sent in his accounts since 1825, that no vouchers or receipts existed for lawyers’ invoices totalling £10,000 a year and that Hill still personally owed £2,180. Other criticisms were raised and although Dawson, for example, came to his defence, he was fortunate to escape a motion for an address calling on the king to have him recalled or his salary docked. A return was ordered of his accounts and emoluments, 7 Sept., but no further action was taken against him because in October his family, with assistance from the Beresfords, finally paid off the amount of the defalcation.59 Neither did Hill escape the charge of peculation in relation to the defective corporation of Londonderry, as one of the city’s radicals, James Edwards, informed the Irish secretary, Smith Stanley, 17 Oct. 1831, that ‘during Sir George Hill’s political career he derived, although the public did not, much advantage from the manner in which the functions of the corporation were exercized’.60
Hill, who observed to Goderich, 28 Aug. 1832, that ‘I rejoice to be out of Ireland and to have abandoned politics’, was in April 1833 transferred to Trinidad, where the following year there was an uprising by the semi-emancipated slaves.61 His reputation, including his conduct as vice-treasurer, was blackened by the author of a vindictive pamphlet, in which Hill was depicted at a dinner ‘enlivening the scene by the exhibition of several acts of tomfoolery, and aiding in keeping up the disgusting revel by the spouting of his usual maudlin orations’.62 He died and was buried in Trinidad in March 1839, when comments on his ‘considerable irritability of character’ and lack of energy were again given an airing.63 No will has been traced, but his title and remaining Brook Hall property passed to his nephew George Hill (1804-45), a barrister and Londonderry corporator, who had served under him as deputy vice-treasurer of Ireland until 1830.
Ref Volumes: 1820-1832
Author: Stephen Farrell
- 1. Add. 40296, ff. 29-30; 40298, ff. 28-29; The Times, 21 Feb. 1821; Hist. Irish Parl. iv. 422-3; HP Commons, 1790-1820, iv. 196-8.
- 2. PRO NI, Leslie mss MIC606/3/J/7/21/4.
- 3. The Times, 13, 15 July 1820.
- 4. Belfast News Letter, 22 Sept. 1820, 12 Jan. 1821.
- 5. The Times, 3, 17, 24, 28 Mar. 1821.
- 6. Ibid. 16 Mar., 11 May 1821.
- 7. PRO NI, Talbot-Gregory mss D4100/3/12.
- 8. Belfast News Letter, 4 Jan. 1822.
- 9. PRO NI, Hill mss D642/162; A/22/1-28; R.B. McDowell, Irish Administration, 92.
- 10. Hill mss A/14/22.
- 11. The Times, 18 July 1822.
- 12. Add. 38291, f. 152; 38295, f. 172; Cent. Kent. Stud. Camden mss U840 C504/5; PRO NI, Stewart-Bam mss D4137/B/2/5; Norf. RO, Blickling Hall mss, Londonderry to wife, 2 July 1823.
- 13. Add. 37301, f. 232; 40304, f. 84; Wellington mss WP1/766/13; 767/2, 11; 768/4; 770/5; Arbuthnot Jnl. i. 244-7.
- 14. Hill mss A/21/1-3, 7, 12; Wellington mss WP1/763/23; 768/14.
- 15. Buckingham, Mems. Geo. IV, i. 451; H. Senior, Orangeism in Ireland and Britain, 203.
- 16. N. Gash, Secretary Peel, 411; Arbuthnot Jnl. i. 235.
- 17. Add. 40357, f. 294; 40358, f. 44.
- 18. The Times, 16 Mar. 1824.
- 19. Ibid. 20 May 1824.
- 20. Hill mss A/18/7.
- 21. Belfast News Letter, 14 Jan. 1825.
- 22. Add. 40372, ff. 189, 195.
- 23. Add. 40373, ff. 175, 177; Hill mss A/14/25; HP Commons, 1790-1820, iv. 196-7.
- 24. O’Connell Corresp. iii. 1180.
- 25. Add. 40380, f. 318.
- 26. Add. 40381, f. 208.
- 27. Belfast Commercial Chron. 2 Jan., 27 Feb. 1826.
- 28. The Times, 8 Apr. 1826.
- 29. Add. 40319, f. 171; Belfast Commercial Chron. 7 Aug. 1826.
- 30. Add. 40387, f. 212.
- 31. Ibid. f. 300; Parker, Peel, i. 412; Gash, 397; Senior, 220-1.
- 32. Add. 40388, f. 318; Hill mss 208; Belfast Commercial Chron. 11, 16 Oct. 1826.
- 33. Hill mss 208.
- 34. Add. 40389, f. 221; Parker, i. 424-6; Senior, 221.
- 35. Belfast Commercial Chron. 11 Nov. 1826.
- 36. Add. 40392, ff. 3, 5, 13, 76.
- 37. The Times, 3 Mar. 1827.
- 38. Ibid. 12 Apr., 31 May 1827.
- 39. Lansdowne mss, Macdonald to Lansdowne, 21 Oct. .
- 40. Belfast Guardian, 25 Dec. 1827.
- 41. Wellington mss WP1/947/24.
- 42. Ibid.; Add. 40397, f. 238; Belfast News Letter, 15 Aug. 1828.
- 43. Add. 40397, f. 250.
- 44. Belfast News Letter, 3, 10 Oct., 12 Dec. 1828.
- 45. Ellenborough Diary, i. 321.
- 46. See, for example, Gurney diary.
- 47. Ellenborough Diary, ii. 19.
- 48. PRO NI, Primate Beresford mss D3279/A/4/10, 12.
- 49. Ibid. A/4/14; PRO NI, Pack-Beresford mss D664/A/24, 106.
- 50. Primate Beresford mss A/4/16, 22; Hill mss 221B.
- 51. Londonderry Chron. 26 Aug. 1829; Primate Beresford mss A/4/32, 36, 39, 43; Pack-Beresford mss A/97.
- 52. Pack-Beresford mss A/98-101, 119, 122.
- 53. Hill mss 246, 247.
- 54. Wellington mss WP1/1087/3; 1090/45; 1105/4; Hill mss A/23/5; Belfast News Letter, 9 Apr. 1830.
- 55. Pack-Beresford mss A/161, 162, 170, 171, 179, 184.
- 56. Ibid. A/164; PRO NI, Carr Beresford mss T3396, H.B. to Lord Beresford, 30 Sept., 4 Oct. 1830.
- 57. London Gazette, 20 Aug. 1830; Black Bk. (1832), 543; Wellington mss WP1/1156/13; 1163/11.
- 58. Hill mss A/23/4-27; McDowell, 93.
- 59. Wellington mss WP1/1189/3; Hill mss A/23/13.
- 60. Derby mss 920 Der (14) 126/9.
- 61. Add. 40388, f. 64; The Times, 25 Sept. 1834.
- 62. S. Hodgson, Truths from West Indies (1838), 86-87.
- 63. Londonderry Sentinel, 11 May 1839; Gent. Mag. (1839), ii. 89.