Star. — London, England, 1830-05-13 00:00:00

;h.- eeound Whiteboyisni decline.. I was counsel for those men, nd lam nut ashamed to say that my heart's best feelings were wer'...ly enlisted in their cause. I wish to say that Ido not mean to east the slightest imputation upon the' juries which tried those pen o:s. The first was exclusively protestant, and returned a beititet rapidly, perhaps too rapidly, of guilty against Leary. In the second jury were five or six cathohes. The major part of these were for conviction, some for more and some for lees; one mita, a catholic, was for total acquittal—he was !tepee 4by his brother catholics. but he held out for two days, when tree of the jurors became ill, and they were all dismissed.— The third tete: came on, end the Catholics were entirely ex cluded from that Jury. (hear, hear, hear.) It was exclusively Protestant, and almost instantaneously acquitted the prisoners. ettrettquence of this verdict, the other men, who had been cone:ma, were respited ; although the judge 'had inthnatcd to them the. their case was hopeless, none were executed—all were trantqs tied : and it will be a subject worthy of future considers. tien whether that punishment might not be considered incam seensurate with their ambiguous guilt. On the third trial I come to Patrick Daly, the principal witness for the crown. He swore that Leary, Connors, Murphy, and the other conspirators, had determined to murder Hood Low, on his return from the fair f Kiltiorrery ; that a death warrant for his murder was written cur, and signed by the chief conspi or sommittee-men. Mr. Baron Penefatlier handed me the Woes of this same mats, taken before the magistrates on the 29t of ibp, 1829. That was the interval between the conspiracy and hillectition. I now put it to the consideration of every member of this house, could that in. diyidual have sworn the truth when giving his depositions, and not have mentioned this fact of the death -warrant, and of the fair of Rile dorrery ? If the evidence on this point was true, the depositions must have been false. But these depositions and informations are part of the secrets of the Crown in Ireland. In England, it is true, an accused individual is informed a the details of the Cearge against ism; but, in Ireland, he seldom knows ally thing of the matter, unless by surmise, or except he be guilty. But, Sir, in this case, such was the result of the production of these depositions, the accused man was at once acquitted. And here I complain that the leading Counsel for the Crown had held in his brief that very document, and at the moment when he was seeking the capital conviction of the men who were at once exculpated by its production.—( Hear. hear.)—This is a question of propriety, hut I cannot acquiesce in the justice or humanity of withholding a fair chance of exculpation from an unfortunate wretch when trembling on the very brink of eternity. On this principle I have acted in ir.y own eases I am not often the prosecutor, but, where I am, I repudiate such evidence as I have just noticed. I could not think myself justified in seeking a conviction where I did not feel perfectly satisfied as to the guilt of the accused.—(Hear.)—lf this be the duty of a private professional individual, how much more Imperatively does it not become that of the Crown ? (Hear.) Its object should not be the infliction of punishment, but a fair ad. ministration of justice. Again, then, I complain of the suppression on the part of the crown counsel, of that which the judge thought it his duty to produce.—(Hrar.) I will do him the justice, however, to admit that he had on that occasion the assistance of three learned gentlemen of the Irish bar, whom I take it for granted were aware of the contents of these depositions. To the characters of Mr. Bennet and Mr. Green I willingly bear my testimony; mere humane gentlemen cannot exist. But if gentlemen will maintain the validity, as a practice, of this custom of regarding evidence and depositions, surely they will concur with me in introducing a bill into this house, the object of which shall be to correct so objectionable a mode of proceeding— (hear, hear). In the conduct of this trial, the learned counsel had said that he could corroborate the testimony of Daly by the production of a boy of the most unbiassed feeling and unimpeachable veracity. What was the fact ? This boy, it had been said, had been actually introduced by Daly into the tent on the occasion of the alleged con. spiracy at the fair, and had been directed by him to observe the writing and signing of the murder-warrant. Yet I ask, did Daly state this fact in his deposition ? He alluded neither to the person nor the set_ -(hear). I call, then, for the papers containing the de positions of this Daly—(hear). I call on the house to support me in my demands by the claims of humanity—by the anxiety—the suffering—the agony that unfortunate accused but acquitted indivi. dual endured in the dock, where lie so long stood on trial for the life which a perjured miscreant was swearing away. I never quarrelled with Government for these prosecutions. If the Commission was expensive, it had the effect of restorting to liberty, much sooner than they otherwise would have been, many innocent men ; I only blame the conduct of the leading iunsel respecting the depositions I have alluded to. (Hear, hear.) Such is my case—all I ask for is these depositions, and the notes of the Learned Judge who con ducted this trial. Is it intended to produce tnese documents ? 1 have been taunted on this subject (Hear, hear.) I now ask those who have taunted me,Leand those who have applauded them, whether they will now meet the question fairly, and accede to my demand ? I have asked for the notes of Baron Pennefather and here I cannot avoid bearing testimony to the admirable demeanour of that ex. cellent judge. I feel happy in paying a just tribute to the coin. panion of my youth, but who has been raised by his merits to a station far above my humble walk ; but never in any country or time has the bench been ¢raced with a more admirable union of erudition and humanity. ith his notes I should feel satisfied, but to avoid any invidious feeling, L extend my application to those of both judges who presided at the commission of Doneraile. Why do I ask for these documents ? Because I wish to have the best evidence to produce to the house in support of my state meat. I wish to 'produce testimony " omni exceptione majus" I am to be told that an application for a judge's notes is novel. I know that I have high legal authority opposed to me on this point —the authority of a man whose independence and extensive acquire ments in his profession 1 sincerely admire, though I differ from him in political feelings. But 1 beg the house to consider that in every case which occurs at the Old Bailey, or at sessions throughout the country which is laid before the Privy Council, the Judge's notes are called for and submitted without the slightest exception. If, then, these documents are at the com mand of the executive, I ask shall there be any difficulty in sub. witting them to this house? (Hear, hear.) The Judges themselves are constantly in the habit of calling for each other's notes.— When the Lord Chancellor, or the Master of the Rolls, direct an issue, they familiarly call for the Judge's notes. Why, then, should there be such difficulty when this house requires them ? And am I not justified in calling for the highest evidence in this case ? Is it fair to meet this cue by a mere canvassing of Daly's evidence, without the documents ? I submit not. I say that army member of this house should have the details of that evidence is his hands. I have been reproached with not having introduced the subject sooner. I confess I feel regret that it should be now neces sary for me to do so. I did wish that the subject might have bass burled in oblivion, with all the angry feelings to which it has gives occasion : but, as far as regards delay on my part, I have only to say, that I could not bring the subject forward with pro. piety until after the late Cork Assizes. One of the men involved in the Doneraile conspiracy was then tried, and it was not prudent to enter on this case until his fats shoald have been decided.— (hear, hear.) If I felt impelled to aerate this matter at all , it was because I had occasion to observe and to regret that certain invidious distinctions had not as yet been suppused—because I was compelled to witness political and religious differences, in some degree, papetuated. Thank GoD, however, those distinctions sin now gradtially and inevitably, and in spite of the exertions of the evil-minded, subsiding ! Thank Goo those differences which have separated man from man are fading sway before the operations of that .glorious measure to which I hope I may be considered to havecontributed in some humble degree, even though it were through thaw/ons of excitement and agitation. (Hear, hear.) Mr. O'Con. net then thanked the House for its great indulgence—for the silent attention and exceeding courtesy with which it had heard his ob . Oreations. The honourable and learned gentleman concluded by „moving for copies of the several depositions or informations sworn ~ by Patrick Daly, one of the witnesses examined at the Special • Commission held in Cork upon the trial of the Doneraile con. spirators, and also for the notes of the learned judge who presided at the said triaL The question having been put from the Chair, Mr DOHERTY said, that if the hon. and learned gentleman bad occasion to apologise to the house, and to thank them for their patient attention, he (Mr. D.) sincerely felt that he himself had sr:occasion fee their indulgence. It was with sincerity be said regretted to be obliged to go into a statement of the einem. stances of this case. If the ques tion involved only his personal &mac. ter—though never was a made more serious or mote nffeefing the character of a professi onal max that that of knowing a wit ness for the aown to have sworn falsely and to be perjured; and yet with all that knowledge permitting him to go on giving tea. timony that affected the lives of men on their trial. If this were a question altering his personal character only, he might be less anxious about it, although well justified in taking all means to repel the charge ; but here be had to defend the administration of justice in Ireland from the charges which were made against it by the hon. aid leaned gentleman. In doing that he had to go through a wide range of facts and circumstances; but he would certainly do his best to condense the case as much as possible ; and he assured the house he would keep within the limits of moderation. ( Hear hear, heat.) He would ha' !nameable if he did not, for there was nothing in this case to alter Me conduct. He was there with a just and an indignant sense of alt attempt made, for the first time, to establish an appeal from the juries of Ireland to that house, mid that without the benefit of witnesses to be called before the home, before they would printrance their vadia upon men who were already acquitted:l, . hear.) He thought the charge was against himself directly b ier conduct in the case, in having gone on with the exam of a whales, whom he knew to be perjured, in order sti set, at Ja , simats e & verdict against : r tire planes. With the Commhim h e bad nothing to do—erbetha that can was wise and expedient, or not, be was not called upon to say 4 tlt was Abe to the justice of the country J I and to the respectable denten against whose lives the conspiracy I was formed, to investigate the facts. When the Special Commission was sent down, he was also sent by the government of Ireland to conduct the inquiry. He knew nothing of that part of his country before—was never before in it. When he reached Cork, he and the respectable. Gentlemen who were with him, set themselves to work diligently for days before the trials to examine the witnesses for the Crown, and, in stating to the house the course he adopted, he should be able to show how futile and groundless was the charge brought against him. The hon. and learned gent. (Mr. O'C.) thought that the accusation of the prisoners and the principal case against them rested on the evidence of Pat. Daly, the accomplice. There were other witnesses, not accomplices, who confirmed him in every point, and the Jury, after a minute charge from the Judge, Mr. Baron Pennefather—ar.d he concurred in the praise bestowed upon that teemed person by the lion. and learned gentleman—after u winute charge from the Judge, and after due deliberation, the Jury brought in a verdict of guilty the first day,and that too, although the Judge had on the bench before him the imi ortant document, for a copy of which the hon. and learned gentleman now called What be (Mr. Doherty) was accused of withholding from the Jury was, the depositions of Patrick Daly. But he maintained, that without that deposition there was evidence enough to convict the prisoner, although emu that deposition on a :succeeding day the Judge saw enough to direct the acquittal of anoth prison; r. What were the facts ? At the fair at kathclare sonic gentlemen of the county were marked out, and decreed to be murdered. Gee teas the Rev. Mr. Lowe, fir being an active magistrate. A second was Mr. Crea.th, for bvitic a severe landlord. A third was Admiral Evans ' for having made a speech in that house against the C at h o li c .. li e forgot who the fourth was That a conspiracy should be delibe rately formed against the lives of gentlemen in this country for such causes, and that by men in good condition, too, deserving the style of Mr. would be surprising; but it was not at all surprising in Ireland—men above Burke and Leary were in that conspiracy. The depositions of Daly were not produced on the first trials. The honourable and learned gentleman took credit to himself for not having made this charge before the last assizes, from fear of ex. citing a prejudice. Any body conversant with the administra tion of justice might know that pending any trials it would be wrong to agitate a question that affected the justice of a case. But at those last assizes other persons were convicted before the saine,l judge, who was the pre s idin g j u dge a t t h e s p ec i a l comm i ss i on, and f o r ti..kt very offence. Some were aLo acquitted, and those who we , e convicted were recommended to mercy by the jury, the peace of the country then not requiring the exaiiipie of an execution. But it the hon. and learned gent. refrained from exciting pre. judice in inlaid by a speech upon this subje.:t in that house, he did not observe the eame moderation in Ireland ; for during the very aioozv. in Cork he aid not snake a seeech upon the subject at a pub.ie dinner. The honourable and learned gentleman did give the benefit of I.is talent:, to the prisoners, and he had a in. untph in their acquittal ; but what cause of triumph could he (Mr. Doherty) have in their conviction ? he who went clown norely at the desire of the Government to conduct the investigation. pie did not triumph, and he had no motive for triumph Ile, who wets now charged upon this offence, was taun t ed in t h e o p en &runs in Cork with producing, in the heads of the police for the Botrisokene affair, evidence which was favourable to the accused. The honourable gentleman here gave an account of a conversation he had with the reverend Mr. Spain, a priest, relative to the evidence that lie should produce against the police for the Borrisokene affair. The priest told him not to produce Dr. Ilessic by any means, for the people would not be satisfied ; but, after the examination of the other witnesses, he (Mr. Doherty) put Dr. Hessic in the box as he saw the whole affray, and was a gentleman of education, and without any ties—it was his evidence ultimately that worked the acquittal of the accused. And it was for that act he was openly taunted in Cork—it was for that Le was riandered by the press of Ireland, and in puLlic speeches niaie in Ireland. if ono man was convicted iu Cork, was he to blame the hon. and learned ge t. ? Then if one prisoner was acqiiitted, was it to be said that he should not have been put on his trial, aid was he (Mr. Doherty) to be taunted with calling witnesses to inquire into his guilt or innocence? Did the honourable and learned gentleman deny that there was a conspiracy at all ? Why, strike out the evidence of Patrick and of Owen Daly, and yet there was enou gh , in point of law, to s up. port the conviction. Was this conetaraty all a mere bubble?— Was not Mr. Lowe fired at? Was not Dr. Norcutt*s carriage fired at by sonic mistake, because his servant wore the same livery with the servant of one of the gentlemen whose life was conspire d against ? Was this conspiracy got up to put innocent people on their trial ? The lion. and learned gentleman then declared the evidence given of writing of the paper in the tent at the fair, decreeing for execution Mr. Law and the other gentlemen. He did not by any means ob hect to the lion. and learned gentleman preferring this charge against im in parliament. But what he did object to, and what lie de cidedly protested against, was that the hon. and learned gentleman had cast the most unfounded imputations upon him in his alb. sent* elsewhere, and attempted to excite public prejudice against him in Ireland. In that country the charge that public jus tice was not fairly administered never failed to produce fatal con sequencer.. Nothing could be more unjust than the imputation that he had shown himself callous to the tate of the prisoners at Cork. When, in cor.sequence of the absence of the hon. and learned gent. opposite, who was to defend them, they stated that they were not prepared to go to trial, be (Mr. kiherty) offered either to furnish them with two of the most eminent counsel that could be procured, or to postpone the trial till the honourable and learned gentleman might find it convenient to attend. He must now, with the per. mission of the house, advert to a memorable speech which !the hon. and learned gentleman bad delivered at Carrick-on-Suir Jaime. diately before he (Mr. Doherty) went to attend the Cork Commis sion, and at a time when the hon. and learned gentleman regarded him with no very favourable eye. (Here the hon. and learned mem. ber proceeded to comment on the speech in detail, and some pas sages of it alleged that the catholics ought at that time to look upon their opponents with double distrust, as the orangemen were are rayed against them, and wished to lead them to destruction in the same manner, as those unfortunate persons who were drawn by wretches to the gambling.table for the purpose of being ruined.) Thus (said the speech) were the cstholics drawn to ruin in the unavailing hope of obtaining justice. He (Mr. Doherty) put it to the house, whether any thing was more likely than this to work upon the passions of an easily-excited peasantry.-- The house would observe that ; in reference to the affair of Bonisokeen, the honourable and learned gentleman had told the meeting, in his speech, " This is a subject for parliamentary inquiry, and the Solicitor-General should be called upon to as for his conduct." The honourable and learned gentleman took credit to himself for not having brought forward this question at an earlier period, when the late trials at Cork were pending.— Would that the hon. end learned gentleman had abstained from ar raigning his (Mr. Doherty's) conduct before the populace, who in all cases acted more from the impulse of passion than of reason ! The lion. and learned member next referred to a speech delivered by Mr. O'Connell, at Youghal, on the Ist of Nov. last, upon the occasion of a public dinner being given to hint. The house would see, continued the hon. and learned member (Mr. Doherty), that this speech was delivered exactly three days after the trial, in which Mr. O'Connell had appeared as Counsel for the prisoners at Cork, and rue ceeded by Isis ingenuity in raising a material point in their favour. In that speech the hon. and learned gentleman, among other expres sions of a similar tendency , made use of these words s--" I shall make the conduct of the Solicitor.Oeneral an object of parliamen. tary investigation. What, I will ask, becomes his professions, when we compare with them his conduct at Clonmel, and that which he has pursued at Cork ? What, I will ask, becomes of his parade about public justice ?" In another part the hon. and learned gentleman exclaimed, " I hope in Goo what I now say will be borne on the wings of the mighty press—that press against which all the efforts of the Solicitor-General must prove unavailing."— But this was not all—the honourable and learned gentleman had represented him (Mr. Doherty) as " hallooing the country gentlemen, against the wretched peasantry." What was he, who had passed her whole life arsl/14 the people of Ireland, who had been brought up and lived in the country—was he, whose pursuits and avocations bssoght him into habits of daily intercourse with the population of Ireland, to be thus held forth as a person employed in ee hallow gentlemen against the wretched peasantry ?" In to what he had already stated, he might now ask the English gatlenut in that house what they thought of the honourable sad hmeasi gestleman In proposing as a toast, at this Youghal dinner, the beak of "the J urorJ wino dike rented front his eleven obstinate eollsagass ?" The juror have dissented upon conscientious grounds, but was be on account to be placed in direct contrast with his colleagues ran object of praise and adoration ? If such s principleis Obi was to be adopted there was an end altogether to the paw and unbiassed administration of justice. The Itnenefhle and learned member next proceeded to vindicate the mown in which the juries were constituted at the trials both in Cork end Clone, contending oi : that lie had never rejected any per s on as a juror at the of his religion. He maintain e d t hat, so kg as ragman t he trials at Cork, he could prove this fact from enimpleshable testimony, the testimony of the Crown Solicitor, a gee bettan of the highest honour and respectability, and who was at that moment within hearing of what he stated. His in. stistalias to the Crown Solicitor were, to reject no person in =11:7of religion, while, at the same time, he told him :s one half the jury should be Protes tants, and the An half Catholics. Was is at ha supposed that he, who had las Inlibly proved himself the sun.istent advocate of the Catholic ells, could, he a lave acted in the maw/ repesseand by fro hew and Weal ? In the yaw ma, new dar fysw. _ant kened 9011wasn was &eked, bone a Olennase the swans Quoins whether he thought that V be gamin wore s e wed by eememberi, any :dance would is laws be bad to the Monies of relator between Protestant sad Cadd des lenews: able meg banked gentleman answered =s Ile lignites... Why, dot, did now ad in direct to tbet and endeavour to perpetuate this invidious end Wins Lion hear.)—ln the course of some further oboes's. dons, the hen. and learned member continued his comments upon the speech delivered at Youglial, towards the conclusion of which these words occurred—" Many children yet unborn shall be taught to bless the name of Edward hlorough" (the dissenting juror).--- (a laugh.) Thus it was that Mr. Morough was distinguished from I his obstinate Mother jurors by the panegyric of the hon. and learned member for Clare. He felt bound to make his stand against the principal of reviewing the criminal jurisprudence of Ireland after conviction passed, atter sentence executed, without the benefit of evidence, and trusting only to the accident of his being in the house, and the chant: of his recollecting anything of the transaction in question. The honourable gent. complained of his (Mr. D.'s) havir.g taunted him repeatedly in the course of the session. The fact he admitted ; but that he had done it in any un. justifiable way he denied. Having been threatened with a proceeding which was to have the effict. if not of annihilating him, at least of disgracing him for ever, and perceiving towards himself, when pre sent, neither in attidude, person, nor matter, any of that daring which ought to follow up such a threat, he elt himself entitled to c4ll aloud either that the insinuations by which he was aspersed should be substantiated, or that his character should be cleared. He felt that he did no more than justice to the hon. gentleman himself when he called upon him either to repeat what he was re. pored to have said elsewhere, or to declare that he was maligned by the papers when it ass imputed to him to have said, in speaking of the subletting act, that it was the contrivance of a scoundrel aristo cracy, and that, if the exterminators did not remove it from the eta. I tote hook, so help him flop he would almost recommend the people to save themselves by becoming exterminators. The hon. and learned gentleman said, in conclurion, that whatever papers were necessary to substantiate a charge against him, the deposition of Patrick Daly, for instance, in which the omission was complained of—should be at the command of the hon. and learned member for Clare. Mr. J EPHSON spoke ftom under the gallery and was not quite audible. The only answer given to the charge by the hon. and learned gentleman was, that the depositions were before the judge from the very beginning. The impression on his mind, and he was present during the whole trial, was that the hon. and learned gentleman was in error upon this point. If he recollected rightly, an express was sent off to procure these depositions, and it was in consequence of their absence on the first trial that a verdict of guilty was returned. After hearing the defence of the hon. and learned gentleman, he must say that his conduct did not now appear to him in as favourable a light as it did before. Lord ALTHORP said he felt that he was now acting in a judi. cial capacity, and he therefore paid the greatest attention to the accu sation and the defence. The charge was, that the lion. and learned gentleman, when the trial commenced, had in his hands depositions at variance with the evidence, which depositions, if produced by him, would have led to an immediate acquittal. He apprehended at int that the hoc. and learned gentleman would not have been able to meet the charge in a satisfactory way. From the explanation, however, of the hon. and learned gentleman he now felt convinced that the impression on his mind at the time was that the difference between the depositions and the evidence was not such as to invalidate the evidence so far as could justify him in putting a stop to the trial.— If the only evidence was that of an accomplice, he would not have been justified in proceeding ; but there were many other corrobora tive circumstances which justified him in proceeding with the trial. less opinion therefore was, that the hon. and learned gent. did not deserve the censure of the house. lie was aware that the member for Clare was reported to have made certain speeches in other places, which he (Lord Althorp) certainly regretted. But when the hon. and learned gent. (Mr. O'Connell) came into that house, and conducted himself as became a member of it, he thought it undesir able to make any reference to what he might have said out of it. It was not the practice to call members to account there for what they might have uttered elsewhere. Mr. NORTH said the member for Mallow (Mr. Jeplison) coon. plaked that his honourable and learned friend (Mr. Doherty) purl sued the member tor Clare into taverns and public meetings, to': discover ground of charge against him, in place of giving a sada. factory answer to the charge brought against himself. But if calumny sheltered itself in taverns and public meetings, his hon. and learned friend must pursue it there, and answer in the only way in which he could answer it from his place in that house. Ilia honourable and learned friend's objection to the conduct of the member for Clare was, that he had one tone and ttmper at taverns and public meetings, and another in that House ; that he was all ve hemence at one side of the Channel, and all moderation at the other. Those who read these speeches at public meetings could not bring themselves easily to believe that the bon. and learned gentleman approached this question with the temperance and forbearance of which he made profession. The complaint of his honourable and learned friend was that the member for Clare so long kept this subject before the public with ou t venturing to bring it forward in a distinct shape. He gave frequent notice of it, but put it off from time to time. He tugged at the sword BO long, that one could hardly expect he would ever have the courage to draw it.— The charge was that depositions were suppressed, which, if pro. duccd, would have led to an immediate acquittal. The house must recollect that the evidence before his honourable and learned friend was, as it must be in all such cases, multifarious, from which it was his duty as a public officer to draw the best information be could, and submit it to a jury. After hearing the statement made by his hon. and learned friend, would any person now pretend to say that he did not act conscientiously on a conclusion which he drew to the best of his judgment? Would the member for Clare say that he did not so act? Would it be said that in so doing he did not act upon a sound judgment ? There was in point of fact no inconsis tency, no discrepancy between the depositions and the evidence. The sworn informations were in the hands of the judge; they were in the custody of him in whose custody alone they could legally be. Though there might be many gentlemen in that house not sufficiently conver sant in law to detect the fallacy in the reasoning of the member for Clare, there were many able members there of the profession who could tell the member for Clare, that it was not in the power of his hon. and learned Mend to produce the depositions, and that the reember for Clare himself, in the discharge of his professional duty, would have felt himself bound to resist the production of such documents. The hon. and learned gentleman was pleased to say, that Baron Penne father was the only Judge who at all troubled himself to look into the depositions. He could not hear such an assertion made, so in jurious to the character of these learned and eminent persons, with out giving it the most unqualified contradiction. It was not to be expected that he could answer for them all, but he knew that Judge Burton, Judge Vandeleur, and Baron Smith, were constantly in the habit of attending carefully to the depositions, and he believed it was the practice of every Judge. The informations being once laid before the Judge, it would be most indecorous on the part of his hon. and learned friend if he attempted to interfere with them. If indeed the was aware that the evidence upon which the case rested was to be given by a perjured witness, he did not say that under such circumstances it would not become his duty to decline proceed ing any further. There were not in the profession more high or ho nourable men than those upon whose advice and with whose con currence his hon. and learned friend acted and if the case presented any pound of charge against a high law functionary, it was against the judge who tried it, the only individual upon whom the member for Clare pronounced a high eulogium. The real truth was that this charge was never intended for the tribunal of parliament, but for the excited and too easily inflamed passions of that over-credu lous but generous people, whose misfortune it had been for many years to bedhrocted and influenced by vain, declamatory, ambitious demagogues, whose study it was toexcite discontent which might lead to turbulence, and eventually end in blood. (Cheers.) This subject was not intended originally for parliament. It was one alieniforl, intended to be brought before the tribunal of an excited and as. dulous populace, in which the member for Clare so long success fully held a brie f. (Cheers.)—Was not this evident from the man. ner in which the honourable and learned gentleman dealt with the question. He gave notice of it one day, and put it off to another— appointed a Tuesday, and postponed it to a IVedneaday—said he would bring it on before the recess, and again declined doing so till after ; expressed an unwillingness at all to enter upon the question, and with that tact, width he possessed in an eminent degree, spoke of his unwillingness to revive party feelings, and his desire to bury in oblivion all past animosities. Far his part, he did expect that the boa and learned gentleman would never have brought it befogs the house, and slue he was that they never would havelteard more of It in that !souse, bad be not been so pressed by his hon. and learned friend. The member for Clare professed great modera tion, and deprecated all irritating topics, but why was it that they found him so loud In sae country, and so low, so sunk in another, gentle almost to .tean. In Ireland be spoke with such p owers of voice, and chest, and gesticulation, as would do honour to a full. grown Irish giant. In that house his tone and manner were sub dued, meek as that of the babes whom he spoke of as lisping the name of the juror, Mr. Morough.—(Hear and a laugh.)—There he acted the lion to admiration—bere his voice was subdued, " Aggravated lika that ota meting dove." lie could assure the hon. and learned gentleman that he would find, not only here but in every part of the empire, and most of all in Ireland., body of resistance to any thing In the way of excitement which he would be totally unable to resist. There was a generous feeling springing up in Ireland,a spirit of good-will and conciliation, the Isemmary result of the wise measure of last year, and what was saddlalsd a bil e te supporters of It. The honourable and learned Reatlsasa t be assured that In Ireland society could never again be lIgW to temperature of a furnace merely that a political salawaradst oudght Ind a proper element in which to disport himself. Virus) After the triumphant answer given to this urge by his sad learned friend, it would be 'necessary for him any longer In Imps on the time of the house. lir. RIME said be sever witnessed a case so dear and simple, introduced with pester deems's. The learned member who lest addressed the House bad spoken with a of pomposity which well became his character ; but that wield have no Abet tapes his vote. He hoped the honourable member for Clue, either in lids er out of thir House, would act the lion or the puny dog as it p u , :e d purpose. Well the speech of the hon. member (Mr. O'Connell) ntio; displease the bloated frog who had attacked him. He denied that r ' WAS consistent with the practice of this house to permit allusions :0 what hal taken place elsewhere. The question before the House aas had the learned gentl e man (Mr. D o h er ty) conducted hi mse lf web propriety ? His learned friend (Mr. O'Connell) was grossly oh m , niated, and that in a number quite unbeemuipg the best interest, justice. If Mr. Baron I'ennefathcr had documents before him i the first trial, when convictions took place, and then used it in a dil -1 ferent way and manner in a subsequent occasion, then his conduct was decidedly matter of charge. 'faking the case altogether, it was One worthy of the best attention of this house and the public. lie was taunted with not being a learned man; thank Goo he WAS 1:0 lawyer, for tie never would hold a document in his hand in favour of a prisoner and not give him the benefit of it. If he said any thing out of this house he was responsible out of this house; but it, the house he would any what he dared not say out of it. because there was such a person still existing as an Attorney-General and informations. The better part of valour was discretior lie would not decline a single sentiment offered by his hon. e 1,,! learned friend, unless upon the sub-letting act. Under peculiar int. pressinus men world speak warmly and fr...ely, but after tither L. formation they might in past relinquish their original intention.- The information required was fully warranted, and it was clear 0 t. nokdicial opinion was now called for. Mr. DOHERTY explained. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that never having read ti trial, nor the speeches alluded to, he was still, after all that he ha.! heard, disposed to oppose the motion. Ile considered that the eliar i t, made by the hon. member for Clare had no foundation, and that ant vindication of it was altogether unnecew.ary. No imputation omit: rest upon his hon. and learned friend (Mr. Doherty), even ac. cording to the admission of the honourable and learned member Mt Clare. He had said he would oppose the motion in its enlargLi terms, but he could have no objection to the production of the depu. sition of the 29th of April. With respect to the production of the judge's notes, they could not be used as evidence ire any shape, h e . muse they would not and could not be legal, and therefore th e i r production could be of no material consequence. Under these cir cumstances he must vote against the motion, qualified as be had al. ready done. Mr. D. W. HARVEY said, that the production of the judg e '. notes was necessary to show the purity (it the judge and the het• and learned member (Mr. Doherty.) They were tnere to tietertnitte facts, and not to decide upon legal points. lie imputed no impro. per motives to any man ; but inquiry, nevertheless, became absu. lutely necessary. The main question at issue was one of fact, which could be best decided by the judge's notes. Upon those grounds he felt it right to say, that a tortuous course had been pursued, and the if the learned gentleman (Mr. Doherty) meant to vindicate his ir. nocence, he would not shrink front inquiry. Mr. D. CALLAGHAN said that the Solicitor-General couP not have done less than introduce the prosecution, in order to satiift the feelings of the country. He had acted with every degree of hu . • inanity towards the accused, and such ware the feelings of the juty of which he funned a member. The SOLICITOH-GEKERA L did not deny that the conduc of judges and counsel should be brought before this house; but di; occasions should be of the last importance. If the house acre favour the present motion, there was no knowing to what extent 1. would lead, and might in the end deter the officers cf the crux from performing their duty. Ile meant no imputation up:l tlie hon. and learned metnoer for Clare ; but at the same time he u.e quite satisfied that the conduct of the Irish Solieitor.General sdi beyond all blame. He was not sorry at the vindication which was made by his hon. and learned friend (Mr. Doherty), although considered it to be altogether unnecessary. In conclusion, he would merely say that he opposed the motion. Lord Of AVER said he felt regret that he should be under 0 . necessity of withholding any information connected with the cu.. but upon every investigation he had been able to give to the trans. action, he was convinced there was no discrepancy in the evidence The noble lord was convinced that his hon. and learned friend ha wide the triumph of hie reputation complete. His hon. and learned friend had vindicated himself against the slander circulated against hits in Ireland. He could net admire the taste of the hon. me i n. ber for Aberdeen, alien he declared his admiration of the speech', of the hon. member fur Clue on the other aide of the water. Th.: noble lord found himself obliged to oppose the motion. Mr. O'CONNELL, in reply, said the Solicitor-General had in. traduced his speech on the Sub-letting Act, but the concluding par of that speech was not his. He accused the Reporter of harin..: misstated what he said. The Solicitor-General had not read the depo sitions, otherwise he would not have entertained the house with soot. meets upon issuing warrants. The noble lord had found fault with hi. speeches, but that noble lord was not qualified to judge of his eser• theca In behalf of his country. He had not denied his speeches.-- They might not be pleasing to young Statesmen wh o w ere practi s . log in Ireland, u barber s apprentices were permitted to shave begpn in order to bring In their hands for better things. lie had also been lectured by the honourable member for Milbourne Port, who had been a long time mixing up all sorts of subjects. The Solidtor-General had said, that assassination was common in Ire. land. Lord Kilwarden was killed by mischance in falling in wit; &rebel mob. That Judge was in favour with the majority of the people. He was only asking for evidence, and did not go into his case. He did admit that he taunted the noble lord, because he would not al. low him the evidence he required. All he asked for was evidence; gil e him the documents, and he would prove his case. He could prose. if they did„not prevent him, a variance in the depositions. The boo. member deprecated the examination of the witnesses for the crown by counsel out of court. He could prove his case, but the noble lord was too dignified to grant him papers. The Solicitor. General was also too .sagacious to allow that evidence. All he wanted was a reference to the nuns of the learned judge. lI had been taunted to bring on his case, and all he asked t'or was the de. positions. Mr. PERCIVAL did not wish to apply himself to the argu.t meats, but to a part of the speech of the honourable member fat Clue, in which allusion bad been made to the conduct of t: noble lord who had left the House. Whatever the honourable member might think of the official conduct of that noble lord (Oiwer), he was sure it would never be said that the noble lord had lent himself to any party or measure which might increase the hostility which had so long prevailed in Ireland. He did not think the same observation could be made with respect to every member in that House. The question being loudly called for, the house divided— k or the motion Against it . Majority .. —sg Mr. OTWAY CAVE postponed his motion on the subject o: slay. O ery n the motion oftheAvvonway-Onntist. the house went into a committee on the Insolvent Debtors' Act. After several amend ments had been made, the house resumed, and the report was et. dered to be taken into further consideration on Friday. The other Orden of the Day were then disposed of, anti Lit house adjourned at a Quarter to One o'Clock. MINORITY Of 115 Members, who, on the i ith of May, voted for Mr. Hume'. Eui.ate—" That an Address be presented to his Majesty, th.: be will be graciously pleased to take into his consideration whe ther the Government of Ireland by a Viceroy is any longer rte smeary, and whether that Ake may not be withdrawn wit advantage to Ireland and to the United Kingdom." Ahhorp, Lord Foley. J. H. H. Phi'Smart, J. Anson, Hon. G. French, A. Poynts, W. S. Attwood, N. Fyler, T. B. Pryse, P. Asdey, Sir J. Gordon, R. Rancliffe, Lord Baring, F. Guest, J. J. Rowley, Sir W. Belgrave, Lord Harvey, D. W. Roberts, A. W. Bernal, R. Heron, Sir R. Robinson, Sir G. &nett, J. Headscote, R. E. Ramsden, J. C. Birch, J. Howiek, Lord Rickford, W. Reminds, Lord G. Hoy, B. Sticky, Hon. E. Blake. Sir F. Hollywood, W. P. Smith, W. Blandford, Lord Howard, H. Stuart, Lord J. Brougham, H. Howard, R. Ten yson, C Brougham,J. Hobbouse, J. C. Townsbeod, Lord C. Browniow, C. Knight, R. Thomson. P. Butler, C. Kennedy, T. F. Talton ' Hon. W. Boston, T. F. Kemp, T. R. Tynte, C. K. , Colborne, R. Labouchere, H. Vyvyan, Sir R. Coke, T. W. Lambert, J. S. Warburton, H. Calvert, C. Langston, J. H. Warrender, Sir G. Crompton, S. Letouche, R. Watchman, Ald. Cavendish, H. F. C. Lawiey, F. Webb, R. Cavendish, C. C. Leonard, T. B. Western, C. C. Cavendbls, W. Macdonald, Sir J. Wimps, J. Cholmeky, M. J. Marshall, W. Wilt, J. R. °custom, Lord Nankai, J. Wino, Sir R. Cave, 0. Marjoribanks, S. Wilbraham, G. Davies, Col. Moberly, J. Weed. Aid. Daring, Sir R. Maimoley, C. Woad, C. Dick, Q. Milton, Lord Wood. J. Denison, W. J. Morpetb, Lord Wrottesley, Sir S. Dwane, P. Mooch, J. B. Wyvill, M. Doormats', Hon. W. Ord, W. Yorke, Sir J. Donau, Hon. G. Palmer F. Hondas, Sir ft. Parnell, Sir H. IMILLEAS. lacoatbe. Lord Pendarris, E. Hume. J. Orinoco, Lord Phillips, Sir G. Rice, T. S. Mhos, C. Philips, G. Ewan, W. Ponsouby, HOG. W. rases orr. Fasalussity, J. N. Posmooby, Hon. T. Ponmar., B. B. Fermat, Sr B. Pretheroe, C. Whitmore, W. W. ; I j 'Z