77 / 432
GAZETTE
B O O K
R E V I E W S
M
W H
APRIL 1994
Murder at Marlhill - Was
Harry Gleeson innocent?
By Marcus Bourke, published by
Geography Publications, 1993,123pp,
softback, £6.95.
Harry Gleeson
was hanged on 23 April,
1941 for the murder of
Mary (Moll)
McCarthy
whose body had been
found on Gleeson's uncle's farm near
New Inn in Co. Tipperary on 21
November, 1940. In all probability, as
Mr. Bourke's book contends, Harry
Gleeson was innocent and was framed
by the real culprits and was the victim
of a conspiracy of silence in the
locality in the lead-up to his trial
and in the period immediately
following it.
This is a very readable and illuminating
account of an event which is now all but
forgotten. Mr. Bourke has delved deep
into the records of the case and has
studied with great care the transcripts of
the depositions and the trial as well as
the proceedings in the Appeal Court. He
has very skillfully highlighted the
inconsistencies in the evidence, the very
circumstantial nature of the case against
Harry Gleeson, the rather partisan
treatment meted out at times to the
defence by the trial judge and the
generally unsatisfactory nature of the
case against the accused. Gleeson was
defended by
Sean McBride
who was
then a relatively inexperienced junior
counsel having been called to the Bar in
1937. His leading counsel was
James
Nolan-Whelan,
SC, whose performance
at the trial did not enhance his
reputation. Gleeson's solicitor in the
case was
John J. Timoney
who was born
in 1910 and qualified as a solicitor in
1935. Timoney's association with
McBride during the case lead him,
subsequently, to join Clann na
Poblachta and he went on to become a
member of the Dail for that party
between 1947 and 1951. Both Timoney
and McBride worked tirelessly in their
defence of Harry Gleeson and, up to the
time of his death, Sean McBride
believed absolutely in the innocence of
Harry Gleeson.
The book is interesting, not just for the
light it throws on the details of the case
itself, but for the insights we get into the
Ireland of the late 1930s and early
1940s. Moll McCarthy, the victim, was
an unfortunate woman who lived close
Harry Gleeson's home (on his uncle
John Caesar's farm) near New Inn. Up
to the time of her death, she had had
seven illegitimate children all,
apparently, by different fathers and,
naturally, her presence and her lifestyle
were a cause of scandal in the locality
and generated local hostility. Mr.
Bourke related how, in 1926, some
fourteen years before her death, there
had been an attempt to bum her out of
her dwelling house. The identity of the
fathers of the children was apparently
the subject of much gossip in the
locality and no doubt there were,those
who would have had good reason for
wanting their associations with the dead
woman kept quiet. The picture that
emerges of the Ireland of that time is
one of a rather backward society, the
rural population of which, whatever
nefarious activities were engaged in
privately by some of them, did the
bidding of their local clergy. Indeed,
the Church itself, in the character
of the local parish priest, Fr. James
O'Malley, does not come out of this
sorry tale with great distinction. Mr.
Bourke's account makes it clear that, on
the basis of the information given to the
priest, he must have had reason to
doubt the guilt of Harry Gleeson but
does not appear to have put himself out
to help. The Garda Siochana is also,
unfortunately, shown in a rather poor
light and some very serious
questions are raised about the handling
of the case by certain members of
the force.
naive, uneducated Irish farm labourer.
He seems to have been a man of
simple faith who believed injustice and
who seems to have thought that,
because he was innocent, somehow or
other the truth would win out and he
would be vindicated. Alas, that
was not to happen. I have no doubt,
having read Mr. Bourke's account, that
if Harry Gleeson were put on trial
today on the basis of the evidence
against him he would be acquitted.
That, of course, is not the same as
saying that he was innocent of the crime
but I believe Mr. Bourke has
demonstrated that in all probability he
was. Miscarriages of justice are, of
course, rightly regarded as very grave
matters and to deprive a person
wrongly of his liberty is the very
negation of justice. The terrible
finality of the death penalty made
it all the more vital, in those days,
hat convictions for murder were right.
In the end, the possibility of
miscarriages of justice in capital
cases was one of the reasons that led
to the abolition of the death penalty
for murder.
Mr. Bourke is to be commended for the
excellent work he has done in putting
this book together. The reader might
very well ask whether anything can be
done at this stage to reopen the case of
Harry Gleeson. Could the proposed
new machinery for reopening cases be
invoked to re-examine a case so far
back?
Mr. Bourke dedicates the book to
Mary Gleeson,
a surviving sister of the
unfortunate man, who is now in her
105th year and living in South
Carolina. She, as well as others who
are still alive and remember the events
of that time, remains firmly of the
view that an innocent man was
hanged.
Harry Gleeson appears to have been a
Noel C. Ryan
53