In the next few articles, I want to look at correspondence sent to the King's County Independent in the months before the First World War by Alice Stopford Green, the distinguished Irish nationalist historian. These letters are of interest for the history of the site of Durrow and the way in which it was revered by local people. Now after ninety years and some 20 years of campaigning the State has acquired Durrow high cross, the holy well, the abbey house built by Lord Norbury and some 76 acres of land.

R. B. McDowell has written a short biography of Alice Stopford Green. In McDowell's biography, published in 1967, he stated that she was a woman of vitality and charm, who threw herself with great gusto into a very varied range of activities.

Mrs. Green was the daughter of the Archdeacon of Kells, (which was also a Columban foundation), and was born there in 1847. She died in Dublin in 1929. She married John Richard Green, the British historian - well known for his Short History of the English People, (it ran to 800 pages).

Mrs. Green was passionately absorbed in Irish affairs for the last 30 years of her life. She was an ardent nationalist and the achievement of Irish independence became her main objective. She keenly supported the Gaelic revival. She was a friend of Eoin McNeill and John Francis Bigger - the latter sharing her antiquarian enthusiasims.
The King's County Independent, as a strong nationalist paper, took up the letter of Mrs. Green, starting as follows, on 14th February 1914:-

Mrs. Stopford Green, wife of the distinguished historian, and herself a delightful writer, favours us today with a letter relating to Durrow Abbey, which should have every attention from the Tullamore District Council. The reception Mrs. Green met at Durrow is all one with many other complaints which from time to time we have received. It is a cruel irony of fate, we may say in passing, that one of the most sainted spots in Ireland and in historical association, the most venerable, should have had the misfortune to fall into the possession of the notorious Judge Norbury, and is continued today (1914) in the control of his family. [ The Toler family of which Lord Norbury was the most notorious acquired the Durrow estate in 1815. It passed out of the ownership of the family c. 1950] They, apparently, want to keep it as a kind of show place to set off the demesne, and be introduced into it when the public by one process or another are finally excluded. The most recent attempt to upsurp an ancient public right of entrance to St. Columcille's Abbey, or what remains of it, has been the closing of the fourteen hundred-year-old graveyard in which it stands. [The cemetery was closed by order of the Local Government Board in 1913]. The present owner (Mr. Toler) has given a verbal assurance he will not challenge that right - that the public may reach the famous Durrow cross and equally famous Well for the future. But the difficulties they are likely to experience are related in the personal inconvenience Mrs. Green suffered on the occasion of her visit. It is lamentable, also, to learn the state in which the place is kept. A relic of such importance, we certainly say, should not be made the mere appendage of any private demesne. It should be vested in the local Public Authority and by them preserved for the people to whom it is so dear, and to which outsiders from long distances make religious pilgrimage. We have been much impressed with Mrs. Green's letter and so, we think, will be the members of the District Council. It is up to them now to take the necessary formal steps to get control of this holy ground, and then, in exercise of their authority, to keep it in a befitting manner. Durrow, of course, is in point of hallowed tradition and great antiquity the most sacred of our shrines. There are others numerous about us hardly less associated with our past, perhaps Clonmacnoise in the same county is the most notable, which would also be the beter for a little friendly public care. All these old monuments of the past we regard as dearly precious to us, though we look after them reverently and as regularly as they need attention.

Letter from Mrs. Stopford Green

36 Grosvenor Road, S. W. February 4th, 1914

Dear Sir, - I have learned from your paper that the ancient graveyard of Durrow in Mr. Otway Toler's demesne is to be closed for interments. I noticed also that when Mr. Toler saw the parishioners were likely to cause opposition, he wrote stating that he had "no desire to prevent the people", visiting the ancient cross and well that when several members asked that Mr. Toler should put in writing a guarantee that he would not interfere with the right of the people to visit the graveyard, a verbal answer was given by the Clerk that "Mr. Toler said he was only glad to have the people going there to see the place".

This incident recalls to me a visit which I made some time ago to this ancient site. It may be of interest if I record the observations and notes which I made on the spot at this visit.

A long low ridge of gently-rising ground separates the plain in which Tullamore lies from the flat meadows and bog that stretch north to Mullingar; broken only here and there by outlines of the Esker gravels. It was on a rising ground a little island in the marshy land that Columcille set up his Monastery of Durrow. The Church, monastery and graveyard were on the green knoll, surrounded with wood. The well sprang in the marsh just below, and through the bog and wet grounds paths known to every peasant by their landmarks led to the firm land of the higher ground. It is A PLACE TO BE DEEPLY VENERATED BY ALL IRISHMEN in remembrance of the greatest of all Celtic saints, scholars and statements. Durrow, more over, is of particular interest since it marks the southern outpart of the vast spiritual jurisdiction which Columcille established from Iona - a jurisdiction which reached on one side to the Munster border and on the other to the Moray Firth and the North Sea. The site of the Monastery was bought by LORD NORBURY OF UNDYING NOTORIETY in Ireland. Our entry was difficult and disheartening. A flaming caution- board adorned the main gateway with prohibitions and a £10 award in large type. It told that we must only approach the graveyard and well by the other gate - that we may sign our names - and that the Ten Pounds would be given to such informer as would bring to justice any visitor who defaced the Cross of Columcille. And this in consequence of alleged malicious mutilation of the cross by unknown persons. This gate was open but when we passed on to the outer gate we attempted to open it in vain. It was guarded by a lawyer's lock that would only work from inside. The woman of the lodge, after some delay, reluctantlyly admitted us through this outer defence of the Cross and Well. Mr. Toler was making a new avenue and new terrace to his mansion. Close to that mansion is COLUMCILLE'S CHURCHYARD here the Irish had the right to visit the graves of their dead and to pray at the Saint's Well. Through a little wooden gate, we passed into a wilderness of nettles, set round with lofty trees. In the centre of the wilderness was the bare Protestant Church built apparently about 1710. It showed every sign of neglect. The round-headed windows were closed outside with large wooden shutters. Resting on the flat lintel of the door was an ornament strictly non-idolatrous. The nettles grow thick to the walls of the church, and thick to the fence on every side. The Protestant Church has been closed, and a new one built a mile away on the other side of the main road.

ALL WORSHIP HAS CEASED ON THE SITE OF DURROW MONASTERY. But the Catholic Irish had still the right - nearly 1,400 years old - to bury in their ancient graveyard: their dead could still pass through the defences of the Tolers. A priest's grave lies close to the west door. Tombstones, sunken, fallen, thick with ivy, press among the nettles. Fragments of the oldest form of inscribed cross slabs were there. There were two or three new-made graves of the poor without name or date, where the nettles were cut away for a space. We recalled the Irish triads - "Three tokens of a blessed site: a bell, psalm-singing, a synod (of elders). Three tokens of a cursed site: elder, corncrake, nettles."
Mrs. Green's first letter for the King's County Independent led to further correspondence and a second letter of March 1914. I will be reproducing this letter in a later article, together with completing this first letter.

ALICE STOPFORD GREEN, LORD NORBURY AND DURRW IN 1914
Part 2

Last week, I reproduced part of an interesting letter from Alice Stopford Green, concerning the old cemetery at Durrow. This week I want to continue this article by completing the reprinting of this interesting letter about events of ninety years ago and which have now come to pass with the State acquisition of Durrow high cross, abbey, well and some 80 acres. Mrs Green, the distinguised Irish nationalist historian wrote in 1914:

The cross stands opposite the west gate of the churchyard, with its background of trees - CONQUEROR STILL IN ITS MATCHLESS SOLEMNITY AND BEAUTY - symbol of the art, the dignity, the piety, which the old Irish brought into their deepest forests and wildest marshes, while the reclaimed and cleared the land for human habitation. In the name of civilisation and freedom the old worship has been cast out for the nettles, the closed church, the new terraced mansion, and the desolation of a lonely land without people.

We went to THE WELL that lies below in a swampy ground, crossing the field by a track, that in wet weather must be a mere marsh. Some field stones, and mingled with them occasional fragments of carved window mouldings from a former church have been piled over the well into a "rockery" and a slab set in this remarkable decoration has an inscription printed in Gothic characters, which along with its confusion of ecclesiatical terms, apparently claims St. Columcille for the Protestant "Church of Ireland." "St Columba used this well when he preached the Gospel and built an abbey near it A. D. 550 -
Here Angels shall enjoy my sacred cell,
My sloe, my nut, mine apple, and my well".
We might reverse the old story - not Angels but Angles."
In any case the entertainment prepared for Angels in the rockery and among the nettles is of the scantiest.

Having regard to the £10 reward we examined the cross carefully. On one panel next to the base some foolish antiquarian had removed, probably with his pen-knife, some moss or lichen so as to examine or take a cast of the figures. This act was silly but not malicious; nor did it inflict the slightest injury. Not a feature of the faces, was injured, not a curl of the hair, not anything at all. No slightest reason was to be found here for this sudden scrupulosity, among nettles and rockeries, for th preservation of ancient remains. We noticed too that fragments of crosses older than the High Cross - fragments perhaps from the time of Columcille himself - were lying wholly neglected by the anxious guardians. THE MYSTERY OF CAUTIOUS, barred gates, the warning off of intruders, seemed to need some other solution. We asked ourselves if it was possible that these precautions were only preliminary to a further development in the Toler record. The Protestants have departed from the ancient site, into their brand-new prominent church on the road side. On St. Columcille's mound the empty church we said will probably soon be condemned as a nuisance so close to the Toler house. As for the Catholics, the remnant of them in those vast empty fields in poor, scattered, voiceless, the last relics of their noble tradition being before our eyes steadily obliterated. Having regard to the new avenue and the new terrace why not (for fear let us say of outrage to the cross) bar the gates, close free access, and so quickly under the guise of excessive care, and the 1,400 years habit of the Irish to visit and pray at their fathers' shrine? The site may then be turned into one of the amenities of the Toler mansion, with no disturbance from the "natives". The rockery will no longer as now be disfigured by the few poor relics which pilgrims, undeterred by all checks, have even now tied around the fragments of stone and left to the keeping of St. Columcille.

Such were OUR FOREBODINGS noted down at the time, and they have not been removed by late events. It will be advisable and very necessary for the Celts who revere St. Columcille to watch with care his sacred memorials. No place in Ireland is better worth religious keeping than the site of Durrow. The stopping of the burials will not remedy the neglect which we witnessed. If the welcome verbally promised by Mr. Toler is to be in the future what it has been in the past, many pilgrims will return with mournful souls. The fact is that THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES should have a burial ground and a well such as this vested in themselves, and should keep it in reverent order, and assure absolutely the right of the people to pray at the old place for all time. I feel sure that the old Queen Anne Church would have better care in its ruin from a Catholic public body than it has at present.

We should remember, however, that this special instance, while very important in itself, is yet more important as an illustration of what is going on all over Ireland. Every old demesne has its burial place, many of which have been closed to th public and have been made into rockeries or "features of the landscape". Where entry is claimed by the people after long time, the greatest obstacles are put in their way. Throughout Ireland all local authorities should keep a watch on such ancient sites and should assure public access to them, even if burials have been stopped. The final control of these possessions of the Irish people cannot be allowed to depend upon any private owner, however benevolent his expressions of goodwill may be. The national life of Ireland demands the united effort of its people to preserve the inheritance of their fathers in its holy places.
I am, sir, yours faithfully,
ALICE STOPFORD GREEN

ALICE STOPFORD GREEN, LORD NORBURY AND DURROW IN 1914
Part 3

Some correspondence arose from a letter published by the King's County Independent in February 1914, regarding the old monastic site at Durrow. The writer was the distinguised Irish nationalist historian, Alice Stopford Green who advocated the acquisition of the site for the people of Ireland. Now ninety years later her fervent wish has come to pass with the State acquisition of Durrrow high cross, the holy well, the abbey house and some 76 acres of the demesne.
When her letter came up at the Tullamore Poor Law Union board meeting, it was concluded that Mr. Toler's [the owner of Durrow] letter to Fr. Callary, parish priest of Tullamore, where he stated that he had no desire to prevent the people going down to Durrow old cemetery on pattern day or any other day. The chairman of the union board concluded that the letter was a sufficient guarantee.

Mrs. Green's reply on 4th March recalls Provost Mahaffy of Trinity College, his use of language and the need to protect Ireland's historic remains. Mrs. Green wrote from her London home:-
March 4th 1914
Sir, Will you allow me very briefly to answer some points in the correspondence which has followed my letter on the ruins at Durrow.

Much indignation has been expressed at my use of the word "Catholic". As no corresponding reproaches have been used towards the Rev. Dr. Mahaffy for his repeated use in the same sense of the word Catholic, in a recent letter to the Times, (London Times) I infer that the anger against myself is of a special character. This question need not, therefore, serve to deflect attention from the main point of my letter. The essential question is evidently the care in the public interest of the remains at Durrow, and of similar remains elsewhere in Ireland.

Public Case

I made no proposal, as is stated by a correspondent, that ruins should be handed over to "Catholic" bodies. I did urge that "local authorities" should have ancient sites vested in themselves and kept in reverent order, for the people. It seems desirable that national possessions should be under the guardianship of bodies, representing the general public. Your correspondents agree that there is need in Ireland of an awakening of public conscience as to the protection of antiquities and of more general instruction on their historic value. We only need further an agreement as to the means to those ends - (1) an adequate teaching of Irish history in schools, both as regards the forbidden period before 1066 and the later times; and (2) an increased power vested in the public bodies, through which they can be made to feel their duty and responsibility to the nation. Who owns the nettles
To take the case of Durrow - who is the authority responsible to the public? I am told it is the Representative Church Body of the Church of Ireland. This Body represents 13 per cent of the people of Ireland and is admittedly not entirely in touch with the vast bulk of the population. The mass of Irishmen are not supposed to have any means of affecting its decisions. No one outside its own members can discuss or decide its policy. The Church of Ireland has not the sole claim to St. Colmcille. As regards its claim to the sole guardianship of the remains at Durrow, it is plain that the public interest is secured only so far as the Synod is truly responsible and responsible to public feeling, and guided by regard for the national history of all Ireland, not merely for its own peculiar section.

The Synod, we are told, has to work by voluntary subscriptions. Is it desirable that a site like Durrow should be maintained, or neglected, by voluntary effort with all its risks and uncertainties? And that this voluntary effort should be a mark not of national possession, but of special and uncontrolled ownership and authority.

We see in the melancholy aspect of a forsaken Durrow the inevitable results of the system. We see also the confusion which may be produced in the public mind by the circumstances which misled me. The nettles, it is evident, belong to the Church Body, though Mr. Toler doubtless had a free hand to cut them if he so desired. It would be interesting to know who offered the £10 reward for the alleged damage. Was it the Representative Body? If so, did it acquire the use of Mr. Toler's main gateway for advertisement and have it signed by the Toler representatives? Or did Mr. Toler project and carry out the plan by himself? Did the Synod make agreement with Mr. Toler that no one who signed his name in the Irish language of St. Columcille should be admitted to visit the Cross and Well? This is not, as might be supposed, the picture of an "ill-conditioned" imagination, but a fact reported in the King's Co. Independent of Feb. 14.

Durrow and the Irish people
These incidents deepen our perplexity as to where the real authority lies. They illustrate the difficulties of special and peculiar control over which the public can exercise no influence. They show how under such circumstances national relics may be controlled in an anti-national sense. They give point to the ominous suggestion by a clerical correspondent that it is doubtful whether anyone has a legal right to enter a churchyard except when public worship is being held, or for purposes of interment. By whose will have both these claims to enter Durrow now ceased? What will the next step be? The Church of Ireland has abandoned the site for prayer, and has no funds to preserve it in order. Will it make any objection if Mr. Toler assumes possession and open control? In such circumstances it is more than ever desirable to ascertain in whose hand the actual authority over Durrow now lies; and to urge on the local bodies and the public that they should be vigilant in watching developments. We may ask if Durrow does in any sense belong to the Irish people.
We can imagine a country in which the guardians, whoever they might be, of any such sacred spot, treasured by the people, would have taken thought to enlarge it from adjacent lands, so that interments could continue in the closest proximity to the holy ground sanctified by so many generations of Irish dead. The closing of the old ground would be natural and right, and the new ground would be a sort of guardian of today, ensuring respect and care for the past. Christian pieties might still have hovered round the old memorials and formed a bond of union doubly blessed.
Yours faithfully, ALICE STOPFORD GREEN

ALICE STOPFORD GREEN, LORD NORBURY AND DURROW IN 1914
Part 4

The closing of the old cemetery

Mrs Green's correspondence arose from proceedings which resulted in the closing of the old cemetery in the demesne. Whether it was part of an elaborate plan on the part of Otway Toler to privatise the demesne or a genuine concern to stop burials in an overcrowded cemetery we cannot be sure. The closing of the cemetery had the support of the parish priest of Tullamore, Very Rev. Philip Callary, and after a local inquiry, the Local Government Board (L.G.B.)

An application to close the old cemetery had been made to the L.G.B. in the Spring of 1913 and the matter came beforethe Tullamore Rural District Council in May of that year and was reported in the King's County Independent of 17th May 1913 as follows:

In connection with the application to the L.G.B. to hold a local inquiry with a view to closing the old graveyard at Durrow to further interents, which was before the Tullamore District Council at last meeting Father Callary attended…. And said: "My attention was drawn to a report in the King's County Independent last week. The points I want to draw attention to are some observations which were made at the meeting. "It is to stop the people from visiting it if they want. They want the old graveyard closed in order to stop the people from visiting the old cross. The people have a right to go to the Pattern Day of Durrow. Mr. Gorman said there would be no stoppage and wound up by saying "I know it these last fifty years, and I do not think in that time I have seen three people buried in it." The Council then taking his word expressed the unanimous opinion "there was no necessity for a closing order, as there were no interments in the old graveyard at present." There would be no necessity for a closing order if interments were not taking place, continued Father Callary. That is not a fact, I do not think I am under any secrecy, just to tell you plainly my mind on the point, that when Mr. Toler saw this in the paper he and his agent were both greatly concerned, and Mr. Bourchier the agent, wrote to me at once in these terms: "Dear Father Callary - I was sorry to see in the King's County Independent report of the District Council meeting that they are apparently opposed to the closing of Durrow graveyard. They are evidently under an erroneous impression as to Mr. Toler's motives also as to the necessity closing it. As regards the admission of the people on Pattern Days and visitors to see the Cross and Well, Mr. Toler does not wish, nor never took it into his head in any way to interfere with them, and will give a guarantee to that effect if necessary. I should like very much to see you and discuss the matter with you on Monday morning if you can manage to see me any time between 10 and 11 o'clock." Mr. Toler came in himself along with his agent, and gave me his full mind on the point, and said it never entered his head to stop the people, but he knew they had a right, but independent of their right, that any day they came there they would be heartily welcome, and he would be only glad to have them shown over the grounds and the historic nonuments pointed out to them. He wrote a letter to me which I will give to Mr. Leonard [ the Independent reporter based in Tullamore] to publish, and I will give him also a letter of my own to publish, giving my own views on it. His letter is substantially like his agent's. I could not lay my hand on it, but when I do I will give it to Mr. Leonard, because I think the public have a right to know the real state of the case. I have no axe to grind in the matter, except that if I find a place is unfit for interments, and that the bones of the dead have to be disturbed, I think it is not fair, nor is it fair to have coffins piled on top of each other so near the surface. It is against the laws of sanitation, besides decent burial. It can be stopped, and has a right to be stopped. If there are dogs about the place there is no difficulty in tearing away the foot of earth that covers the coffin, consequently that is my reason for interfering in the matter, and here is the letter I have addressed to the Editor of King's County Independent.

St. Brigid's, Tullamore
May 13th 1913

To the Editor, Kings Co. Independent.

Dear Sir, In the interests of justice I must trouble you to publish the enclosed letter from Mr. Toler in your next issue. He puts before the public and all concerned the true state of the case regarding the recent "move" made to close the old graveyard of Durrow, which was not against the visits of the people, as alleged, but against the further burial of persons there, the only question at issue.

Some members of the Council failing to see the difference between the right of living persons to visit the old graveyard where their deceased friends are buried, and the fitness of the place for further burials missed altogether the point of making the application to the Local Government board, and in their ignorance of the subject ran amock, ascribing "every mean trick to the Durrow people, the officials of Durrow Abbey, and all the Protestants there."

Whilst I do not seek to defend people - Protestant or Catholic - from every wanton attack which may be made upon them, I must say in justice to Mr. Toler, that I fully accept the assurance given by him, both verbally and in his letter today, that it never entered his head to stop anyone from visiting the old graveyard, the old cross and well, either on the Pattern Day on which there is a prescriptive right to do so, or on any other day on which they may choose to visit the old historic monuments. He is only too glad as he told me yesterday, to see and welcome the people to the grounds at all times.

The proposal, then, to close the old graveyard is not an adroit move or "trick" on the part of "the Durrow people" to exclude the public. If so, I must say for myself and brother priests we would be no party to any such stratagem, and I think we are quite as capable of seeing and sageguarding the people's rights as the highly intelligent spokesman of the Council who made the allegation at their last meeting.

Another and more ancient member of the Council, who is not living ing the parish at present, wound up the debate by stating: I know it these "last fifty years, and I do not think in that time I have seeen three people buried there." Apparently the members of the Council swallowed the words of their guide, philisopher and friend, for it is added in the report of the meeting that the Council expressed their unanimous opinion that there was no necessity for a closing order, as there are no interments in the old graveyard at present.

No interments at present. Why, I have seen myself three or four within the past two years, and the burials were such that the priests came to the conclusion that in the interests of sanitation, the laws of decent burial and respect for the bones of the dead, they could not conscientiously officiate at any other burial there. Father Lynam, who assisted at two interments there within the last year or so, assured me that one coffin was laid on top of the other, and the top coffin had not more than a foot of earth to cover it. From an inspection I made two months ago in conjunction with Fr. Nulty, Mr. Toler, his agent and steward, we say clearly that the place is fearfully congested and no longer suitable for further interments.

I have no doubt what misled the members of the Council at their last meeting and prompted one of them to ascribe motives to Mr. Toler, is the fact that twelve years ago [1901] Mr. Garvey, on the 9th June, made an attempt to stop vehicles, but not foot-people from going down to the cross and well. I know more about that incident than people think, for I had an interview with Mr. Garvey, and I gave that gentleman to understand that neither myself nor the people of the parish would tolerate any tampering with our rights, nor allow him to make a distinction between people on cars and pedestrians. Now, Mr. Toler was a minor at the time, and away in college, but if he were of age, and in control of his property, I am quite sure the incident would never have taken place. At all events, to despel all suspicion, and allay the fears of the people, a clause can be inserted in the closing order to the effect that "this order is made without prejudice to any existing rights of the people to visit the old cross, graveyard and well, as formerly, from time immemorial."
I may add that no inconvenience can be caused to anyone by the closing of the graveyard, as Mr. Toler has generously granted an additional piece of ground to extend the present cemetery at Durrow Chapel, where persons who had plots in the old graveyard can be accommodated. Fr. Nulty having interviewed these, found them quite satisfied with the new arrangement. [ This extension was opened in 1917]

Faithfully yours,
Philip Callary.
(Enclosure)

"Durrow Abbey, Tullamore, King's Co.
May 12th, 1913

Dear Father Callary - I was very sorry to see from the report of the District Council meeting in the King's Co. Independent published last week, that apparentley the members of the Council were under an erroneous impression as to my motives in wishing to close the Durrow graveyard and also as to the necessity for such a step. As regards the former, I have not, and never had any wish to prevent people coming to visit both cross and well, either on Patron Day or any other day. My sole reason for wishing to have the graveyard closed is a sanitary one, and to prevent the disturbance of the ancient graves. Now as regards the necessity for the closing, I see that it was stated at the meeting of the Council, that not more than three burials had taken place during the past fifty years, but I can state of my own knowledge, that there have been three burials in the last fifteen months, and various others during the past five years. You are at liberty to make any use you think proper of this letter. I should be glad, at any rate, if you would put my views on the subject before your parishioners, in the Durrow district, as I would not like them to impute to me such unworthy motives as were suggested at the meeting of the Council -
Yours very truly,

Otway Graham Toler

Following Fr. Callary's explanation the Council decided to ask the Medical Officer of Health to visit the old graveyard. In September 1913 a sworn enquiry under the chairmanship of a L.G.B. inspector was held for the purpose of hearing the representations to have the old Durrow cemetery closed because of alleged overcrowding and insanitation. J.H. Denning of Hoey and Denning appeared for the Council and Lewis Goodbody for Otway Toler. Among the witnesses were Fr. John Nulty, a curate in the parish for twelve years, and a person who had officiated at burials in the old cemetery. He stated that Otway Toler had arranged for an extension to the new cemetery half a mile away (opened in 1917) and all the parishioners save two (James Curnan and Mrs. Anne Sullivan) had agreed to use the new cemetery. Lewis Goodbody for Mr. Toler stated that the landlord had no objection to the public visiting the cross, cemetery and well. Mr. Denning for the Tullamore R.D.C. sought to have written into the closing order that it was without well at any time - 9th June or otherwise. There was no objection to this from Otway Toler or his solicitor. The Local Government Board communicated its decision to the Tullamore Rural District Council on 10th December 1913 and can be found in the minute books as follows:

No.50,453. 1913.

Sealed Order received from the Local Government Board closing Durrow Abbey Burial Ground.

No. 50,543. 1913.

Letter from the Local Government Board dated 10th December, 1913 encloseng Minutes of Evidence taken at the Inquiry held by Dr. T.J. Browne, Medical Inspector in regard to the condition of the Durrow Abbey Old Burial Ground, Tullamore; and stating that as regards the application made by Mrs. Sullivan and Mrs. Guinan for reservation of rights of interment in this burial ground, the Board considers that the evidence did not show that further interments in the spaces claimed by these persons could be carried out without injury to the Public Heasth, and further stating as regards the suggestion that a Clause should be inserted in the Closing Order preserving the existing right of way to the graveyard and Holy Well situated outside the Burial Ground but in the Demesne, the Board do not consider that this is a condition which can properly form part of the Order.

ORDER

The Clerk was directed to write to the Parish Priest of Tullamore and Durrow asking him to obtain a written guarantee from Mr. Toler, (owner of the Abbey) on behalf of himself and his successors in title, that there would be no interference to the people visiting the graves of their deceased friends, Saint Columcille's cross or the Holy Well.

Mrs. Stopford Green's wishes were in part fulfilled in the 1950s when the Office of Public Works took on the "guardianship" of the High Cross and three early Christian graveslabs.

In 1980 the Offaly Historical Society in a report Offaly Heritage at Risk recommended that the High Cross and slabs be moved into the old church and the site taken in charge by the State. Representations were made to the R.C.B., Offaly County Council and the Commissioners of Public Works and in 1988 Noel Treacy, the then Minister responsible for the O.P.W. wrote to the Society to say that the R.C.B. had offered the Durrow church and graveyard to the Commissioners. The decision of the O.P.W. that it had acquired the site from R.C.B., was announced in early 1994.

Proposals were then put in hand, under the auspices of the O.P.W. to conserve the site and avail of ERDF funding to develop the site for tourism. It has taken considerable representations by local politicians, the Offaly County Council and the Durrow people themselves to bring the story this far. Perhaps things will be right for the 100th anniversary of Mrs. Green's interesting and controversial letters. On a more optimistic note perhaps all will be resolved and put right at the old site for the 1400th anniversary of Saint Columcille's death in 1997.

Things did not turn out as planned in the 1990s and that story is well documented in the local newspapers for that period. The ERDF grant of almost one million euros announced in 1994 was lost as was a lesser grant of some €500,000 euros. It fell to Sheila de Valera to bring the bad news to Tullamore that the grant was being withdrawn because of the legal difficulties with access and ownership of the site. Thanks to the persistence of local people and the assistance of national figures wise counsels prevailed and the government with the encouragement of Tom Parlon and Brian Cowen have bought the Durrow Abbey property inclusive of the old cemetery, well , country house and some 76 acres for the State.

The work of Mrs Green and all those who assisted over the past 25 years should be remembered in a commemmorative booklet in due course. A new phase in the story of Durrow is now opening in which its spiritual side must be as important as its important as its archaeology and tourism. The uses for the house must be carefully considered to maximise its relevance to people today. We need not the dead hand of history but a vibrant place redolent of the prototown that Durrow was some 1200 or more years ago when the high cross was made and the cemetery the burial place of kings.