One of the first Catholic priests in Australia. Curate and Parish Priest at Ballymacoda. Convicted of sanctioning the murder of a traitor during the Rebellion of 1798. Deported to Botany Bay and then to Norfolk Island in 1801-1803, before being cleared of wrongdoing. Parish Priest of Ballymacoda, Co Cork from his return on 29 July 1803 until his death.

---

Australian Dictionary of Biography entry: https://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/oneil-peter-2524

---

Cardinal Moran mistakenly places Fr O'Neil's death as occurring in 1846:
"Rev. Peter O'Neil", Patrick Francis Cardinal Moran, History of the Catholic Church in Australasia, 1895, pp 42-52:

Among the State Papers of the Colonial Office, in London, there is a despatch of Governor King addressed from Sydney to the Home Government, in the first months of 1801, in which he sets forth, among the hardships attendant on his unenviable position, that 135 convicts had just arrived from Cork, "men," he goes on to say, "of the most desperate and diabolical characters that could be selected throughout the Kingdom." The new arrivals brought up to 600 the number "of avowed and unrepentant united Irishmen" in the colony, and, worst feature of all, the Governor adds, among those just arrived there was "a Catholic priest of most notorious seditious and rebellious principles." The clergyman thus referred to was the Rev. Peter O'Neil, parish priest of Ballymacoda, in the County of Cork Diocese of Cloyne, whose name is the third on the honoured roll of the convict priests of the Australian Church.

In the accounts hitherto published regarding this worthy priest, it is generally taken for granted that immediately on arrival at Port Jackson, his pardon was intimated to him, and that, therefore, he was never classed among the convicts, but at once returned to Ireland. These statements, however, are inexact. Father O'Neil arrived in Sydney in the ship "Anne," in the beginning of 1801, and was classed among the convicts; subsequently, under some pretence of insubordination, he was transferred to Norfolk Island, and it was there in the first days of January 1803, that the order for his release from exile was intimated to him.

Rev. Peter O'Neil was born in a wild and romantic spot in the parish of Coona, County of Cork, on the 29th of June, 1757. His ancestors had come from Tyrone, and the family still cherished as a heirloom the national spirit of the Earl Hugh and Owen Roe O'Neil. Young Peter began to taste the fountains of knowledge at a hedge school in Inch; he studied classics at Kilworth, and pursued the higher ecclesiastical studies in the Irish College of Paris. After a distinguished career as student, he discharged there, for a time, the duties of Professor of the Celtic language and literature, and it is the tradition that he had a thorough knowledge of that "language of saints and sages." After some years of missionary labour in various districts of the Diocese of Cloyne, he received from the Bishop, Right Rev. Dr. McKenna, the parochial charge of Ballymacoda. The appointment was conveyed to him in the following letter:—

"Being answerable to the great God for the choice I make to fill vacant parishes with proper pastors, as the district of Ballymacoda is now vacant, and certainly wants a pastor conspicuous for good sense, prudence, discretion, zeal and talents for instruction, we hereby assign and appoint you as pastor, whom we well know to possess these qualifications, and charge in conscience to labour strenuously in reforming and instructing said flock, as you have done in all places you have served hitherto, and charge said flock by virtue of the obedience they owe to you their pastor, and to me their superior, to show you due obedience and respect, and chargo the Rev. Mr. Dinahy to induct you properly.
MATT. MACKENNA."

There were some peculiar circumstances connected with his appointment to this parochial charge. Another priest had been appointed to it, but being refused admission to the parochial church by the parishioners who sought to have their own curate promoted to the post of parish-priest, he declined to have any further dealings with them, and resigned the charge. Father Peter O'Neil was a man of fine appearance and gentlemanly bearing, and soon obtained admission to the church. On the first Sunday that he addressed the congregation he spoke to them after Mass in their own melodious tongue, and at once won their hearts and their good-will. It appears that Paul was the name of the priest whom they refused to receive. "Well," said he, "as you have sent away Paul, you cannot refuse to receive Peter." The happy saying was taken hold of by the people, and became proverbial among them.

Father O'Neil soon gave proof of indomitable energy and unbounded zeal. He was up at 4 o'clock a.m., in all seasons of the year, and till late at night was engaged in faithfully discharging his round of pastoral duties. He built two commodious churches and provided his people with good parochial schools. Out of his slender income he supported many poor families, and it was nothing unusual to witness thirty or forty poor people waiting for relief at his door. He made every effort to stem the spread of secret societies in his district, but owing to the circumstances of those disturbed times his efforts were not altogether successful. Among the most active in enrolling the people in those secret societies was a supposed deserter from the British army, who, in reality, was an informer and agent of the Government. The suspicions, however, of this man's associates were aroused, clear proof was found of his holding communication with the neighbouring magistrates; in a few days he was murdered and his body was thrown into a deep hole in the river Fornisk. Informers were soon ready to make the parish-priest, Father O'Neil, responsible for this deed of blood. One witness stated that if Father O'Neil had done his duty the murder would not have occurred. Another improved on this by affirming his belief that Father O'Neil had presided at the secret meeting of United Irishmen in which the murder was decreed. Lord Loftus, who commanded the military in the district, declared that he would make the Popish rebel tell all he knew, and the order was given for the arrest and flogging of Father O'Neil. It is not easy for us, living as we are in an age of toleration and religious equality, to realize the anti-religious and blood-thirsty spirit which prevailed during those days of martial law that marked the close of the last century in Ireland. The fact, however, is unquestionable. Lord Holland, in his "Memoirs of the Whig Party," tells us of "the free quarters and excesses of the soldiery, which are not permitted in civilized warfare, even in an enemy's country." Lord Cornwallis, the then Viceroy of Ireland, asserts in his correspondence, that murder and violence were "the favourite pastime of the militia," and he adds, in a letter to General Ross, that "even at his own table, where he did his best to prevent it, the conversation always turned on hanging, shooting, and burning, and if a priest had been put to death the greatest joy was expressed by the whole company."

…

The account of Father O'Neil's suffering will best be given in his own words. Many accusations were made against him as being a rebel priest, on his return from Australia, and he was thus compelled, in self-defence, to publish, under the title of an "Humble Remonstrance," an authentic narrative of the cruel treatment he endured. As this pamphlet is exceedingly rare, I have thought it advisable to give such extracts from it as may serve to throw light on this period of the career of the venerable sufferer.

The full title of the pamphlet, of 11 pages, is as follows:—"To the Nobility and Gentry of the County of Cork, the Humble Remonstrance of the Rev. Peter O'Neil, R.C. Parish Priest of Ballymacoda."

There is no date nor printer's name. There was a reprint of it in 1804, added to "Correspondence between the Rt. Hon. Lord Redesdale, Lord High Chancellor of Ireland, and the Rt. Hon. the Earl of Fingall," London, printed by T. Ginger, Piccadilly, 1804. From this correspondence it appears to have been written towards the close of 1803. In this "Remonstrance," Father O'Neil writes:—" Immediately upon my arrest, I was brought into Youghal, where, without any previous trial, I was confined in a loathsome receptacle of the barrack, called the Black Hole, rendered still more offensive by the stench of the common necessary adjoining it. In that dungeon I remained from Friday until Monday, when I was conducted to the Ball-ally to receive my punishment. No trial had yet intervened, nor ever after. I was stripped and tied up; six soldiers stood forth for this operation, some of them right-handed, some of them left-handed men, two at a time (as I judge from the quickness of the lashes), and relieved at intervals, until I had received two hundred and seventy-five lashes, so vigorously and so deeply inflicted, that my back and the points of my shoulders were quite bared of the flesh. At that moment, a letter was handed to the officer presiding, written, I understand, in my favour by the late Hon. Capt. O'Brien, of Rostellan. It happily interrupted my punishment. But I had not hitherto shaken the triangle, a display of feeling which it seems was eagerly expected from me. To accelerate the spectacle a wire cat was introduced, armed with scraps of tin or lead (I judge from the effect and from the description given me). Whatever were the appendages, I cannot easily forget the power of it. In defiance of shame, my waist band was cut for the finishing strokes of this lacerating instrument. The very first lash, as it renewed all my pangs, and shot convulsive agony through my entire frame, made me shake the triangle indeed. A second infliction of it penetrated my loins and tore them excruciatingly; the third maintained the tremulous exhibition long enough; the spectators were satisfied. A court of enquiry (was) held to investigate my case the year following, in Youghal, under General Graham, by order of the Marquis Cornwallis. Before this court I was not brought; nor any friend of mine summoned thither to speak for me. It was even a subject of sarcastic remark in the prison ship, that, while I stood there among the sailors, my trial, as they termed it, was going on in Youghal. With the proceedings of that court I am to this day unacquainted. It was ordered, I know, in consequence of a memorial upon my situation handed to a distinguished nobleman, and by him presented at the castle. I was not consulted with regard to its contents. Unfortunately for me, it was penned with more zeal than accuracy. Setting forth, among other hardships, that, after my punishment, I had been left without medical assistance (on the report, I presume, of a sister-in-law, who visited me within the interval between the whipping and the apothecary's arrival), it further stated that I had been 'whipt and thrown into a dungeon,' instead of stating, as I should have done, 'thrown into a dungeon and whipt.' This inversion was fatal to me.'

He appears to have been a man of giant strength, but of the greatest simplicity of life, and often he was heard repeating to himself, like Job of old, "I deserved this suffering." Mr. Benjamin Green, the apothecary who dressed his wounds, was reported to have received from him an acknowledgment of his being guilty of the crime imputed to him, and, to add force to this narrative, it was added that Mr. Green was a Roman Catholic. The Bishop, Dr. Coppinger, at once attested that Mr. Green was not a Catholic; and Mr. Green himself came forward publicly to avow that he had made no such statement. He even presented himself "at the chapel of Ballymacoda, offering to make oath that he had not given the evidence attributed to him."

Another gentleman, whose name is not given, is also stated to have attested that Father O'Neil, after his punishment, made a similar declaration. To this Father O'Neil replies that he had no communication whatever with this gentleman after the punishment, and adds the following details: "During my flagellation he stood opposite to me, close to the triangle, with a paper and a pencil in his hand, noting down whatever then occurred to him. He asked: 'Did you not know that firearms were taken from my house? My answer was rather too short: 'Sir, I heard you said so,' but I felt at the moment, by heavier strokes, the consequence of my impoliteness. I beg leave to ask, if I had made this acknowledgment at the Ball-ally, why a certain subaltern, declaring that he had power to act as he pleased by me, should take me (naked and bleeding as I was) into a small room in the corner of the Ball-ally, and sternly tell me that, if I would not now make an avowal of my guilt, I should be brought out to receive a repetition of my punishment, and afterwards to be shot? And why he should repeat that menace the same evening in the gaol, and still more forcibly the day following? The circumstances of his exertions on that day are too striking to be omitted. After I had answered him in the corner of the Ball-ally, that I would suffer any death rather than acknowledge a crime whereof I was not guilty, he told me I should be set at liberty if I would agree to a certain proposal which he then made to me; but justice and truth commanded me to reject it. When conducted to gaol, after a lapse of three hours, I was presented with a refreshment. It appeared to be wine and water, but must have had some other powerful ingredient, for it speedily brought on a stupor. The same officer soon roused me from my lethargy, with a renewed effort to extort this avowal from me; he drew his sword; he declared he would never part me until it were given in writing; he threatened that I should be forthwith led out again, flogged as before, shot, hanged, my head cut off to be exposed upon the gaol-top, and my body thrown into the river; that he would allow me but two minutes to determine. Then, going to the door, he called for a scrip of paper, while the sentinel swore terribly at the same time that he would blow my brains out if I persisted longer in my refusal. Under this impression, I scribbled a note to my brother, (which) purported a wish that my brother might no longer indulge uneasiness upon my account, for I deserved what I got. They cried out that they had now what they wanted. His sister-in-law soon after got admittance, and, having informed him of the use made of his letter, he exclaimed: 'These dreadful threats had compelled me to write it,' which exclamation being brought to the officer, he returned next day. He called me to the gaol window, commanding a view of the gallows, whereon two men were hanging, their bodies so bloody that I imagined they were red jackets. A third halter remained yet unoccupied, which he declared was intended for me, should I persist in disclaiming the aforesaid note. 'Look,' said he, 'at these men; look at that rope. Your treatment shall be worse than theirs if you disown what you wrote yesterday,' adding that 'it was still in my power to get free.' I imagined from this that he wanted money from me, or a favourite mare which I occasionally lent him. My answer was: 'If you liberate me, you shall always find me thankful; there is nothing in my power that I will not do.' 'Do not then attempt,' said he, 'to exculpate yourself,' and so he retired. I now procured paper, whereon I wrote a formal protest against what he extorted from me as above, that, should I be executed, this protest might appear after my death."

These attempts to entrap him, and these misrepresentations becoming known to the authorities, at last occasioned his release. "Lord Cornwallis, whose discernment perceived, and whose generosity recoiled at, this questionable proceeding, unhesitatingly issued an order for my removal from the transport. The following letter announces that order to my friend in Dublin:—

"Dublin Castle, 30th June, 1800.
Sir,—I have had the honour to receive, and to lay before my Lord-Lieutenant, your letter of the 28th inst., with its enclosure, and am directed to acquaint you that His Excellency's commands have been this day conveyed to Major-General Myers, to take the Rev. Peter O'Neil from on board the "Anne," Botany Bay ship, in Cork harbour, and to cause him to be imprisoned until further orders, but not to treat him with harshness or severity.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your most obedient humble servant,
E.B. Littledales."

Father O'Neil continues:—"I had sailed before this order arrived. On the passage out a mutiny arose among the convicts, who, taking advantage of the moment when the captain was fumigating the ship, suddenly set upon, and tied, him. The sentinel, a Malay, cried out to me in his own jargon, as I was walking on the main deck, that there was war below, offering me his drawn sword in order to fortify my interference. What my conduct at that critical moment was will come better from others. I shall only say that the most prompt and athletic exertion preceded my entreaties, and rendered them effectual. How, as well as by whom, the captain was extricated, without even the intervention of an officer, he himself can tell. Another gentleman, Mr. Piper, of the New South Wales Corps, can also tell. Mr. Roberts, the surgeon, told it so circumstantially to the Lieut.-Governor, Major Foveaux, that he afterwards treated me with particular kindness. This powerfully contributed to reconcile me to my fate; I had almost made up my mind to remain there for ever; the thought of home ceased to be importunate."

In the meantime, his friends represented the case to his Government. It was investigated by the Lord-Lieutenant, Lord Hardwicke, "whose firmness was not to be warpedl by party-opposition. He listened with patience; he examined with impartiality; he decided with justice. An order from him hath set me free."

On his return, at his own urgent request, he was reinstated by Dr. Coppinger in his former parish of Ballymacoda. "A circumstance occurred upon the present occasion very trivial in itself, but which, as it gave rise to a most injurious misrepresentation, I feel myself bound to notice. Six or seven of Dr. Coppinger's clergy had been engaged to dine with him on the following day; he was pleased to ask me to join them; which, having done, I was since, in addition to my other crosses, extremely mortified to learn that this plain, private repast, was magnified into a most sumptuous banquet given in honour of Mr. O'Neil's return." He adds that a personage of high rank in the metropolis had complained that "Dr. Coppinger restored me to my parish, as a martyr in triumph, with insult to the offended justice of the laws, &c. These are Lord Redesdale's words in his letter to Lord Fingall, dated September 6th, 1803."

The letter of Dr. Coppinger, in which he refers to Father O'Neil's "Remonstrance," is dated January 26th, 1804. He says:—"The Rev. Peter O'Neil, to whom your Lordship alludes, has been urged by the obloquy which assailed him to lay the particulars of his situation before the public in an humble remonstrance forwarded to your Lordship through the post office, at my own instance, the moment it was issued from the press. It has, I trust, my Lord, fully vindicated my conduct towards this much injured man. It has, in my apprehension, demonstrated that his return was the concurrent act of two successive chief Governors; the one suspending his transportation, the other ordering him home from it. Nor this, my Lord, by way of a pardon which was never solicited, but by an impartial decision upon the merits of his case."

So telling was the effect of Father O'Neil's "Remonstrance" that the Government found it necessary to publish an official reply entitled, "Observations on the Remonstrance of the Rev. Peter O'Neil, P.P., of Ballymacoda, in the County of Cork, &c. (Dublin, 1804)." They attempt to justify the action of the military authorities by such principles as that "a part should be sacrificed to save the whole," and that "desperate remedies, though repugnant to the spirit of the Constitution, have been adopted to check the progress of desperate evils." They admit the fact, however, that 300 lashes were inflicted on Father O'Neil, and they further officially record the all-important admission that "in that moment of irritation and alarm, when martial law was proclaimed, a regular trial was not held."

A no less interesting piece of evidence is given in the Dublin Monthly Magazine, for February, 1810. Sketching the character of Lord Redesdale, Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and referring to the words used by him in a published letter, dated from Ely Place, Dublin, September 6th, 1803, regarding "a priest proved to have been guilty of sanctioning murders in 1798, transported to Botany Bay, and since pardoned by the mercy of Govemment," this Protestant periodical remarks:—"We are inclined to think that his Lordship appears in this instance to have been misled, for the Rev. Peter O'Neil, the person supposed to have been alluded to, has vindicated himself in an address—"The Humble Remonstrance"—to the nobility and gentry of the County of Cork, dated October 23rd, 1803, in which he has laid open such a scene of horror, such a monstrous conspiracy, such a terrifying recital of stupefying draughts, horrible threats, and hellish tortures, that until his account has been publicly and solemnly contradicted, we must consider him as the victim of baseness, treachery, and a degree of barbarism and injustice that makes the heart of an Englishman quiver with sensibility and indignation."

The extracts from Father O'Neil's "Remonstrance" have obliged us to anticipate, in some measure, the course of events. We may now resume our narrative. Two other priests, Father Meara, P.P. of Nenagh, and Father O'Brien, P.P. of Doone, in the County of Tipperary, were sentenced to transportation about the same time as Father O'Neil, but before the sentence was carried out the order was given for their release. Father O'Neil was kept for two years in gaol or on the hulk before he was put on board the convict ship "Anne" for Botany Bay. A few days after the vessel had set sail, an order reached Cork, not for his release, but substituting imprisonment for transportation. Mr. McKenna, and other friends, continued to interest themselves in his behalf, and to urge his pardon on the Government; but two years more elapsed before their efforts were crowned with success.

A few incidents of his voyage, related by himself in after times, have been recorded by his brother priests. The captain of the ship was a humane man, and treated Father O'Neil more as a companion and friend than as a convict; but the mate, a Cornish man, was a harsh brute. One day as they were nearing the West Indies, a convict happening to upset some vessel on deck, the mate struck him a violent blow and killed him. A few days later, whilst the captain and Father O'Neil were conversing on deck, a sailor was sent up the foremast to carry out some work. The mate, not satisfied with the way the work was done, went up also. Suddenly a rope broke, and he came on his head on the anchor, so that his brains were scattered over the deck. At Rio Janeiro, Father O'Neil was allowed to go on shore. He celebrated Mass there, and procured the Holy Oils for administering Extreme Unction. During the remainder of the voyage he was allowed to assemble the Catholic convicts for the recital of the Rosary, and to chant their sweet hymns to the "Star of the Sea." In the southern latitudes they encountered a severe storm, and what made their position perilous in the extreme, they were being driven towards a huge iceberg. The captain said there was no possibility of their escaping shipwreck; they would inevitably be dashed to pieces against the mountain of ice, and not one would survive to tell the tale of their loss. The priest assembled the Catholic convicts. Amid the howling of the winds, and the roaring of the waves, they recited the Rosary, beseeching God, whom the winds and waves obey, to free them through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin from their impending doom. The Rosary was scarcely ended when the storm began to subside, the wind veered about, and the storm passed away. On their arrival in Sydney harbour, most of the officials and free citizens came down to witness the disembarking. When Father O'Neil landed, a well-dressed lady approached with tears in her eyes, and asked in Irish whether he recognised her. She then reminded him that she was at one time a servant in his own house at Ballymacoda. On quitting that situation, she had lived with a Protestant family in Youghal, and some family plate being stolen, suspicion fell on her. She was tried for the robbery, and transported to Botany Bay. Soon after, however, the real thief was discovered, and an order was forwarded for her release. Providence had watched over her, and she was now married to a wealthy and respectable husband.

In connection with Father O'Neil's convict life for two years in Sydney and Norfolk Island, it is recorded that he devoted his attention, as far as he was permitted, to the aboriginals whose state of ignorance he constantly deplored. He instructed many of them in the great truths of religion, and led them to abandon their idolatrous practices. When he was quitting Australia he promised Father Dixon that he would use his endeavours to procure for them, and for the no less destitute convicts, some missionary aid, and in a letter addressed to Father O'Neil a few years later, Father Dixon thus wrote: "My Dear Brother,—Where is the assistance you promised me? I fear that if it does not come soon, the convicts will turn out and the natives will return to their old ways."

In the beginning of June, 1802, the brother of Father O'Neil received, through the Bishop of Cloyne, the intimation that an order had been forwarded to Australia for the convict priest's immediate release and return to Ireland:—

"My Dear Sir,—I am highly gratified at being authorised by Dr. Troy to inform you that his renewed application to the Government, in favour of your much-injured brother, has been crowned with success. He presented the memorial drawn up by you. An order from the Government was sent off last Thursday to Botany Bay, that the Rev. P. O'Neil be forthwith sent back to Ireland. The Lord Lieutenant desires that the matter be but little spoken of, and by no means admitted into the newspapers.
I am, faithfully yours,
W. Coppinger.
Midleton, June 2nd, 1802."

The first intimation which Father O'Neil received of the order of the Government for his release was in a letter from home. On calling on the Deputy Governor, he was informed that the information was correct, but for some days his departure from Norfolk Island was delayed, and it was only on the 15th of January, 1803, that he was allowed to quit that land of woe with the following certificate, the original of which is still preserved:—"I do hereby certify that Mr. O'Neil has permission from his Excellency Governor King to leave this island, and to return to Ireland.
J. Foveaux.
Norfolk Island, 15th January, 1803."

Father O'Neil, on his arrival in Ireland, hastened to resume his old parochial charge at Ballymacoda, to which another priest, Father O'Brien, had been in the meantime appointed. The Bishop of Cloyne, Rt. Rev. Dr. Coppinger, on the 29th of July, 1803, addressed to him the following letter:--

"My Dear Sir,--Though for reasons stated I intended to postpone my acquiescence in your demand till I should have the expressed sanction of the prelates now in Dublin; yet weighing the motives you assign and the hardships of your case likely to be augmented by delay, I forego my design, and hereby agree to your resuming your parochial functions in the parish of Ballymacoda, after my letter to Mr. O'Brien on the subject shall have been delivered to him in your presence by the Rev. J. Scanlon, whom I thought it necessary to depute as my express negotiator on this occasion.
I am, with affectionate esteem, yours truly,
W. Coppinger."

Father O'Neil was received with the greatest enthusiasm by his devoted people. The official reply to his "Remonstrance," published in 1804, authenticates their devotedness and affection to their convict pastor, whilst it instances, as a proof of the Bishop's disloyalty, that "he restored Father O'Neil to his parish, to kindle fanaticism in the Popish multitude, who approached him with enthusiastic zeal, and revered him as a martyr, persecuted by heretics on account of his holy religion."

For forty-three years after his return from Australia, Father O'Neil continued to labour with devotedness and zeal, the churches of Ladysbridge and Shanagarry being among the monuments of his piety and energy. On the Feast of SS. Peter and Paul, 29th June, 1846, he prepared, as usual, for Holy Mass, but, as he proceeded to the altar, he became suddenly ill. He received the last rites of religion with fervour and resignation, and next day went to his reward at the age of 88 years. He rests in the little graveyard of Ballymacoda, and close by is the Celtic Cross, erected to the memory of his nephew, Peter O'Neil Crowley, the martyr patriot of 1867.

Father O'Neil was a tall and athletic man. The mark of the lashes was never effaced, and he was partly disfigured by an unnatural bend in the back, which was caused by the terrible torture to which he was subjected.

---

See also Ballymacoda History Project, Fr Peter O'Neil, https://ballymacoda.ie/?p=716.