Amid the proceedings of the Limerick Summer Assizes, one case in particular seized the attention of the court. The plaintiff, William Hogan, a farmer residing in Duntryleague, had previously been awarded a sum of £230 and costs by Judge Adams in the County Court. This award was in connection with a malicious incident that had occurred earlier in the year, involving the burning and destruction of approximately 75 tons of hay and a corrugated iron barn on the 9th of January.

Mr Hogan’s initial claim had sought £300 in damages, and following the judgment, both he and the Limerick County Council had chosen to appeal the decision. It is noteworthy that the County Court Judge had directed that the awarded amount should be levied on the county as a whole, leading to the Mitchelstown Rural District Council intervening in the proceedings.

The legal representation in the case included Mr Fleming, K.C., and Mr Fitzgibbon, who were instructed by Mr Dwyer, solicitor from Tipperary, acting on behalf of Mr Hogan. Mr E. M’Elligott, instructed by Mr J. G. Skinner, solicitor from Mitchelstown, represented the Mitchelstown District Council, while Mr Kelly, instructed by Mr Wm. Leahy, solicitor, represented the County Council.

During the proceedings, Mr Hogan provided detailed testimony regarding the circumstances of the burning incident. He recounted that the fire had occurred approximately half an hour after he had retired to bed, at around 9 o’clock in the evening. Mr Hogan attributed the malicious act to his actions as a District Councillor, particularly concerning the erection of labourers’ cottages and disputes over the allocation of a specific cottage. He had moved for the adjournment of a cottage scheme in anticipation of the Laborers Bill promised by the government.

Under questioning from Mr Kelly, Mr Hogan stated that he did not consider himself to be unpopular in the district. He noted that there were other guardians who had taken similar actions in relation to the matter. When asked about insurance, Mr Hogan confirmed that the property was indeed insured. The rate for insurance was set at 7s 6d per £100.

Mr Justice Madden interjected with a question about Mr Hogan’s insurance practices. The farmer responded that since the implementation of the Local Government Act and the Workmen’s Compensation Act, many farmers had taken to insuring their hay.

Mr Justice Madden clarified that while he would hear the witness’s account of the facts, he would not seek his opinion on the matter. The court, he emphasized, would form its own judgment.

In a somewhat incredulous tone, Mr Justice Madden addressed the idea that Mr Hogan had burned his insured hay himself, describing it as “too absurd for language.” Consequently, the court affirmed the decision of the court below, with the costs of the appeal.

This case shed light on the intricacies of legal proceedings at the Limerick Summer Assizes, with the court ultimately dismissing any notion of Mr Hogan having orchestrated the destruction of his insured property.

Limerick Echo – Tuesday 10 July 1906