The Sun. — London, England, 1848-10-07 00:00:00

IRELAND. DUBLIN', FRIDAY MORXING.— At length the "monster trial" approaches a termination, and there Are most anxious speculations as to the result. You 'will receive by this dispatch a full detail of the im polAtint proceedings yesterday from your reporters, *ith a letter from your correspondent at Clonmel. have, however, seen private letters written last sigh~, one of which anticipates a verdict of guilty, whilst *nether states that an acquittal of Mr. Smith O'Brien is possible—that a disagreement in the jury is highly probable. A third letter says, " You may rely upon it there will be no verdict." Any opinion on the subject must, however, be purely speculative. Clonmel correspondent of the Cork Conetitu- Sion, writing on Wednesday, after the close of the east for the Crown, gives the following very curious atatem t : " The Crown has closed its evidence against William Smith O'Brien, although one-fourth of the witnesses subpoenaed have not been examined, many of them being persona to whose appearance the public looked ft)rward with anxiety. Egan, a man in gaol under charge by indictment of high treason, was originally one of the most material witnesses for the prosecution. He swore en information which was pregnant with facts, but when required to go before the grand jury declared his inabi lity to give any evidence, having completely forgotten all he hilt previodsly proposed. No exertion would re fresh his gaemory—it was a complete blank; and the Vac rfey-General, finding he could not avail himself if his tesetmony, put him into an indictment, and he slow kes in the county gaol for prosecution for high trossson. " The Widow Cormack, when sent before the grand fury, announced that she would tell them nothing, and completely put them at defiance. Her demeanour was evidently advised "Yesterday the galleaies of the court were three parts filled with ladies, while it was the first day iisinee the opening of the Commission that the Countess of Donoughmore vacated her seat on the bench. " Sinith O'Brien appears very much the worse of anxiety. Yesterday his altered appearance was re- Worked by every one in court. He was extremely nervous, and throughout the day wrote in a confused manner questions to his counsel to put to theseveral wit "lessee. At the time it was sworn he ordered the police to be slaughtered he was greatly excited. There is reason to believe that he was not, the person who uttered the expression, but that it was a follower, who, through , ut the affray, sought to wrest the command from him. It is said that during the night Smith O'Brien stopped at Glacken's, at the Commons of Boulagh, previous to the affray at Widow Cormack's, he paced the room in tears, not knowing how to relieve himself from the des perate position into which he had plunged." ARREST FOR HIGH TREASON. On Wednesday night Sergeant Luke Prender, of the detective force, arrested Mr. Edward Trouton, at, his residence, Besborough-terrace, North Circular road, on a charge of high treason. The warrant for his apprehergion was signed by Colonel Browne, Commissioner of Police, and he was committed to .Newgate on the above charge. It was in reference to him that the approver Dobbin swore, at the special faAmmission,__he attended a meeting on the sth July, 'where Mr. Trouton was present, and stated that he had been in England to organize the people; that there were two towns in England from which 500 armed men would come over at a moment's notice when the insurrection would break out ; also that they had twe swivels ready to come over. THE STATE TRIALS. CLONMEL, THURSDAY, OCT. 5. The Court sat at half-past ten o'clock, and some time before that hcur Mr. Whiteside and Mr. Fitzgerald, the prisoner's counsel, and Sir Colman O'Loghlen and Mr, a% H. Barton, the assistant counsel, took their places in court. The Crown officers were also in attendance. Mr. WurrEsinE, on the arrival of their Lordships and the jury, resumed his address on the part of the prisoner. He said—Gentlemen of the jury, in the vourse of what I addressed to you yesterday I endea voured to convey to you the principle on which the case of the defendar:t rests; and I stated to you more than once, that 6y the law, as it exists, supposing Mr. O'Brien was convicted in Dublin when he was tried, and was sentenced to prison, to break into that prison and rescue hire out of it would not be high treason ; and much more strongly must it appear that an endeavour to escape -arrest dos not fall within the crime of high treason. On that point I shall call y our attention to a decision of Lord Hale, Ventria' Reports, p. 257. A captain of the Guards arid the sergeant of his company were brought into court on the prosecution of the sheriff of London for rescuing a soldier of the regiment who had been arrested for debt, It appeared that while the prisoner was being conveyed from one prison to another the ser eant, by the captain's command, took thirty goldier3 nr‘d rescued the prisoner from the sheriff's officers. Loma Hate, on hearing that ease, said, "If men took upon themselves to rescue all the soldiers who are com mitted, they may be within reach of high treason, in 'consequence of the universality of the design, but this keing One case it is not high treason, but it is rank mis demeanour." In that case the soldiers made as embus r. de and relcued- the prisoner, but the Learned Chief justice of England says, " that is not high trea son," because it referred to a particular individual. :Th,erefore, the acquittal on this charge follows as a mat- Iter of course. I loft off yesterday at Carrick-on-Suir, and called attention to the evidence given with respect to the speech of Mr. Meagher, which was said to contain langaage so gross that it was not likely that gentleman ever used it respecting judges of the land. In many ' cases evidence of' this kind has been attempted to be given to swell out the charge of high treason. I may refar to one memorable case, in which the Attorney- Gen oral of t:,at day acted very differently from the colt] se adopted at present. There was a society in Lon don. which Lord Eldon thought might be prosecuted, and he arrested every man of them. He ten ap plied for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus, in re spect to the persons so arrested, and any others that might fall within the same rule. He proceeded to try them for the same offence, of which they were acquitted. Amongst the papers there used were many documents of this description—calling the House of Commons a scoundrel house, and villifying the House of Peers; and in Hardy's house a document of this kind was found, written in verse:— Why should we vainly waste our prime, Repeating our oppressions; Come, rouse to arms, 'tis now the time, To punish past transgressions. 'Tis said that Kings can do no wrong; Their murd'rous deeds deny it; And since from us their power has sprung, We have the right to try it. Chorus—Come, rouse to arms, &c. The starring wretch who steals for bread But seldom meets compassion; And shall a crown preserve the head Of him who robs a nation? Such partial laws we all despise; See Gallia's bright example, The glorious sight before our eyes, We'll every tyrant trample. Chorus—Come, rouse to arms, &c. Proud bishops next we will translate Among priest-crafted martyrs; The g uillotine on peers shalt wa it, And knights we'll hang in gartirs. These despots long have trod us down, And judges ire their engines; These wretched minions of a Crown Demand a people's vengeance. Chorus—Come, rouse to arms, &c. Our juries are a venal pack, See justice topsy-turvy ; On Freedom's cause they've turned aback, Of Englishmen unworthy. The glorious work but once begun, We'll cleanse the Augean stable ; A moment lost, and we 're undone, Come, strike while we are able. Chorus—Come, rouse to arms, &c. The golden age will then revive, Each man shall be a brother, In peace and harmony we'll live, And share the world together. In virtue trained, enlightened youth, We'll love each fellow -creature ; And future ages read this truth, That man is good by nature. Chorus—Come, rouse to arms,'&e. There were many documents of that kind; and how did the Attorney-General (Lord Eldon) then proceed? He pat the books of the society on the table, and gave its true history4 li itlc is perfectly true that the m em b ers of it said and to many things that ought not to be said or written, and which were gross and scandalous libels, as dll the allusions to official bodies in England were. Still their advocates succeeded in satisfying the jury that it was not high treason. A curious thing is recorded of that trial. The Attorney-General took five days to make out his case, and one of the jury said, " Never while I live will I convict a man of high treason, when it took the Attorney-General a week to prove it." Gen tlemen, the next stage in the transaction is when he %rived at Mullinahone, and that is an important stage, for you will recollect that in the statement of the Attorney-General he said " the levying of war" com menced in Mullinahone. Three witnesses were exa mined with respect to the transactions there; namely, Williams, Wiggins, and O'Sullivan, an ex-policeman. It is worthy of observation, with respect to what is said to have taken place at Mullinahone, that not one being from that town has been produced to prove it. No inhabitant, or resident, or shopkeeper, or house holder, is produced. The evidence relating to Mul linahone consists of two particulars; what is called the marching in the town, and the visit to the police barrack. Evidence was given with respect to a conversation be lween Mr. O'Brien and the Rev. Mr. Cahill, the priest, 'but it is very remarkable that the priest is not called as:a -vitness: It is remarkable, also, that this class of gentle- Teen always appear for an instant on the scene (as if to protect the civil power, and save them from destruction), and then vanish. However, it appears that the chapel bells were sometimes rung, which one would think might awaken their reverences, but yet they are never called upon to give evidence of what occurred. No , doubt that such witnesses would be faithworthy, but they rely upon a less agreeable sort of witnesses—they rely upon the testimony of the constabulary, some of - whom swore their informations as to words, just eight 'weeks altar he transactions occurred. One of the wit nesses, Williams, swore that Mr. O'Brien said to the people, " By no means take advantage of the police;" and then he said " there would be another form of government in six weeks;" but the witness further said, " that is not in my information." Now, supposing those words to have a criminal meaning, the man, when he made his information on the 6th of Sep tember, should have stated the fact. The witness said that Mr. O'Brien followed up that expression by ano ther' namely, " that all vacancies should then be filled up by Irishmen." Gentlemen, that would be a happy day, whether we regard the poor-law, or the other esta blishments of the country; and I don't think, gentlemen, you will be of opinion that that expression means high treason. He merely said, that when there was an Irish administration (which he always contended for), the in stitutions of the country would be filled by Irishmen. The evidence of another witness showed that the phrase used by Mr. O'Brien was, " Irishmen shall hold their own situations as well as Englishmen," in which ex• pression I am sure Mr. Attorney-General will most cordially agree.—(Laughter). But what is there said about the form of government, or as to whether there should be a monarchy or a republic; or what is there said about a republic at all? But that which was upper most in the mind of the prisoner—the fear of being arrested—is referred to. But, I think, there is no book or dictum to be found in which a case of that kind was held to be the exposition of a treasonable intent in the mild of the prisoner. One of those witnesses describes the crowd in the streets as one consisting of 5,000 per sons, but the other two witnesses say there were only 2,000. And when you find a man in one particular ex aggerating so much the facts of the case, it is possible that he may exaggerate in another. It is said that armed people were about Wright's house, but it appeared that they were merely a guard to protect Mr. O'Brien from being arrested. Now we come to the transaction of the visit to the police barrack. It is a transaction which Mr. Attorney-General thought of a very serious nature. Now, observe that the case here is, that the prisoner was bent upon revolution. Now, a man when once engaged in revolution must be bold and daring; his actions must be well conceived and sudden if he desires to ensure success; it is not by civil speeches and politeness he can succeed— there is no instance of it in the history of the world. Mr. O'Brien is represented to have had a large body of men at Mullinahonee—according to the Attorney-General's statement, a sufficient force to effect what he wished; and the argument is, that having the power he had the wish, but the fact is, that having the power he had not the wish. The whole force in the police barrack was six men, and four only were in the house, but only two are called, and I am sorry the Attorney-General did not call a third, to see if one of those men was in the police barrack at all, which is very doubtful. At all events the barrack door lay open ; there was no obstruction to pre vent any one going in; the police were not alarmed by what occurred the night before, for they left the door open. Does this appear like a levying war in Mullina hone t It is impossible for a rational man to believe it. It was said Mr. O'Brien was dressed something like a military officer ; and what is meant by that is, that he had on a cap, but that form of cap was worn by many persons in Dublin. The late Mr. O'Connell wore a cap, and it was said he was to be crowned at Tara; but that was not generally believed to be true. It is no treason, gentlemen, to wear a cap. If any of you choose you may wear a cap in preference to a hat, and even gold on your coats; but that will prove nothing against you except you do something to bring you within the law. The policeman tells us that Mr. O'Brien had a stick with a spear-head on it in his left hand, and that the other parties with him had guns. The policeman told Mr. O'Brien, I cannot comply with your request, we would sooner part with our lives than with our arms. Mr. O'Brien said to them—" Did you not see the display of last night; you had better follow me to Callan sad I will place you under pay." Then he said that a barrack would be attacked that day with 600 men in it. Now I asked other policemen if they ever knew a police barrack in the county containing 500 men in it, and one and all of them answered that they did not know of any such. But this i 3 a matter within their own knowledge; they all know this better than we do ; and they state that six to eight is the number of policemen in the :out-stations, and forty is a large number in a populous town. Now, do you believe that Mr. O'Brien would tell a policeman such an improbable story as that, which the plie ernan to whom he told it must have known to be a pure fiction ? If you desire to impose upon a man wnom you wish to persuade, you must tell him some thing which he is likely to believe, other wise the effect upon his understanding is ex actly the reverse of that which you wish to produce. But, according to the policeman, Mr. O'Brien says, " Follow me to Callan." But he was not going to Cal lan ; he did not take a single step on the road to Callan, which the policeman knew very well, and therefore he might as well have said ho was going to Cork. I mean no reflection upon the veracity of many members of that valuable body, the police, but it show. that a mut de posing to words six weeks after he heard them must be listened to with great suspicion. The policeman goes on to say that Mr. O'Brien told him he would give him an hour to consider the matter, and that within an hour he would return with 300 men. That is the allegation ; let us now compare the conduct of Mr. O'Brien with the statement. The policeman remained in town four hours after this ; and this sanguinary re volutionist, who was to have raised the kingdom within a w,ek, forgot his promise to come back for the four muskets. But this is not all ; they afterwards marched along the road for hours together, and nu hostile party attacked, or even met them, and they reached their place without molestation. The whole transaction in the barrack lasted two minutes. The levying of war was begun and ended in two minutes, and those two minutes were sufficient, it seems, to place the title and crown of Queen Victoria in imminent jeo pardy. Remember, gentlemen, that appearing in arms is nothing—having arms is nothing —marching with arms is nothing, else every Orangeman in the north might be indicted and tried for high treason—it is levy ing,' war against the Queen that constitutes guilt; and do you believe that war was levied oe the queen in the course of these two minutes? It appears, turther, that Mr. O'Brien indicated his treasonable intentions by trailing his pike-head on the ground. It was not thus they levied war in France. It was in a very different mariner indeed that the pikemen there carried their weapons. There was also a question about a flag. Now, I admit evidence as to a flag would be important and pertinent, and my Learned Friend would be justified in referring to it if the evidence bore it out. But what was the kind of flag sworn to in evidence? This was another case of perverting innocent circumstances into guilt, like the ascending of the round tower. The wit ness said this flag was a Scotch shawl. The ATTORNEY- G ENERAL—A sash. Mr. WHITESIDE —I beg your pardon; it was a Scotch shawl. Chief Justice BLACKIIIIRNE—We have got " sash " on our notes. Mr. WHITESIDE—Very well, my Lord, let it be a sash. It was a Scotch sash, then, and it was worn to denote the hostile bearing and intention of these parties against the Queen. And what was this sash ? The witness said in his cross examination that it was such as he had often seen worn by gentlemen. Such was the style of this prosecution. Innocent facts and circumstances were coupled together to give to other facts a guilty intent, which their intrinsic meaning could never bear. But it is not a satisfactory thing that the Crown has not pro duced the other two witnesses who were in the police barrack, as a single word here might have been of great importance in this case. One of yourselves then asked the witness, did he say what he wanted your arms for? To which the witness said no, he did not. Then it is plain that the purpose for which he wanted them might have been innocent, and you will infer innocence rather than guilt. Then some witnesses, who were very obscure, deposed that some gentlemen got upon a car, and after driving about the country, they came to Ballingarry. Now if this evidence refers at all to Mr. O'Brien, it leads me to make one observation—the crowd which the witnesses say met Mr. O'Brien were not with him. They came to meet him, they were n:t under his control or authority. Having brought Mr. O'Brien to Ballingarry, there were two witnesses whose evidence he would direct their attention to, Egan and Burke. Egan was an inhabitant of the town—a resi dent there, and therefore his evidence is important. At first Egan saw no arms in the crowd. It appears to me that all through the armed men only appeared when it was necessary to protect Mr. O'Brien from arrest. He gave us a report of one speech, and what was its pur port ? It was the same thing over again. In fact, the speech he made at Enniscorthy might have been stereo typed for the whole. What proof is there here of gene ral design—of general treason—of revolutionary objects or plans? A man does not embark in treason without having some general notion of what he is going to do. But, in this case, Mr. O'Brien in his speech only asked for twenty men or thereabouts to guard him. Did you ever before hear of a man who, being bent on a treasonable design, tells the people that he does not ask for assistance, but that all he wanted was twenty men to guard him ? Accordingly there are twenty men 'who do guard him for the night ; and :it appears that Mr. O 'Brien went t o b e d. Wh y , gent l emen , heroes of a revolution do not sleep !—they watch, they wake, they plan, they concoct what armies they shall rout, art(' what towns they shall storm. But this man speaks of no drilling—no military manoeuvring, though the man li - tree in the town, and must have seen all that passed. It is then proved that on leaving town Mr. O'Brien dismissed his army, and whether that indicates anintention to levy war I leave it to your judgment to decide. But the.witness Sparrow deposes to the drilling. He said there were about 500 people in the street, but not more than thirty bad firearms, and that the others had pikes, pitchforks, scythes, &c. Why those are just the weapons which the peasantry would especially seize when they rushed out, moved by a sudden impulse. I don't say that their conduct was legal ; but certainly it is not high treason. We says that the men were two hours drilling ; but after they wa re drilled, a n d th e army was ready for action , Mr. O'Brien got upon a com mon car and drove off. The army followed him as far as Baron's Cross, when the army that was to revo lut i onize the state dispersed and returned , and Mr. O ' Br ien went on his say. The third witness, Burke, spoke to the drilling, but in such a way as to be altogether different from the account given by Sparrow. He speaks to shots being fired by the people, but on a cross-examinationit appeared that the shots were fired by the for people afte r they ha'l dispersed from protecting Mr. O ' Brien, it appears that the 20 men who constitutedhis body guard only accompanied him for a certain distance; having done that they returned, and fired shots on dispersing. Mr. O'B r i en proceeded to the next place, where he ex pected assistance. As far as we have gone there has been no act done —no levying of war—no de monstration of hostility to the Queen —no mo lestation of property—no interference with the rights of a single human bein g . M r . O' Br i en ' s fi rst id ea i s a wish to escape arrest. Now, let us see what is his conduct at Killenaule. The Attorney-General thinks he has proved his whole case by what occurred at Killenaule. I agree with the Attorney-General that , if there was any doubt in the case before, it is made perfectly clear by what occurred at Killenaule, and I am sure it is impossible that twelve men should say that that gentleman meant to commit the crime of high trea son ; and remember it is all intention that you have to try. We are now, at the 27th of July, on the eve of the close of the whole transaction, and I ask you, so far as we have yet gone, where is the evidence of levying war ? I appeal to your reason—l appeal to nothing but your reason—l have no right to appeal to anything else, and I ask you, where was the army to levy war Where is it ? It is gone—dispersed—scattered ; and the leaders go away on a car, and come to a hotel, where they sleep that night. His object evidently was to move about from one place where he was known to other places where he was not known, in one corner of this country, verging towards the colleries, where he thought he would be most safe from arrest. Now, this is the real truth of the case. On the next morning after they had come to Killenaule, a discharged police man, named Matthews, saw four pikemen. This was the army, I suppose, that was to make war upon the Queen. And now occurred a matter which makes it impos sible—utterly and absolutely impossible—to convict Mr. O'Brien of the guilt of high treason. The wit ness saw two officers pass through the town, and at that time there was no barricade. But after the officers passed then the barricade was erected. Does Mr. O'Brien de sire these barricades to be erected? Does he say, now we have an opportunity for fighting? He says not a single word. He does not direct the people to make the barricade. He is seen by the witness at the door of the hotel while the barricade is erecting at the lower part of the town. Now, why was the barricade erected? Evi dently because the people were afraid that Mr. O'Brien would be arrested; and that the Attorney-General says is high treason. I deny that. I deny that barricades hastily erected—thrown up on the impulse of the moment —amount to thigh treason. It was certainly a very wrong thing to do. But what followed all this? Twenty minutes after the witness saw the barricades down, and the officer was cheered through the town. Now, consider this: treason consists in the guilty intent to make war on the Sovereign. But what is the in tent shown here? The partial and personal object of protecting Mr. O'Brien from arrest; and when that was accomplished, the army dispersed and returned to their own homes. That is the evidence for the Crown— the best they can get, after rummaging the country with the whole police at their back. Then there are the two soldiers who made sworn informations of the facts; and it shows the danger and the madness of relying upon words sworn at this distance of time, that in the sworn informations they make no mention of the words used by the crowd, " Kill the bloody soldiers"—and there are no such words in the information. I appeal to you, therefore, to put aside theso words as if they never had been used. What was the evidence of Captain Long mere? That gentleman swore—and he gave kis evidence with all the frankness of a British officer—that when he was on his march he encountered a barricade at Kille naule, behind which a number of people, armed and un armed, were assembled; that he was asked by one of the people whether he had a warrant for the arrest of Smith O'Brien, and on his replying in the negative, the barricade was instantly taken down, and he and his troop were allowed, unmolested, to proceed on their march. I thank the Attorney-General for bringing forward this part of the case, as it puts him completely out of court—it completely exonerates my client from the charge which has been made against him—namely, that he had conspired to levy war against the Queen, to resist her authority, and destroy her troops. That was not the manner in which Frost acted; he fired on the troops, and actually shot several of them. The object of the Crown was to prove that Smith O'Brien had been engaged in war and rebellion against the Sovereign; but what is the fact? A body of troops are cn their march—they encounter a barricade, and resistance seemed determined on. A question is put to the officer in command: it is this—" If you are on your ordinary business we will not interfere with you; we are not making war on the Queen or against her troops, nor are we contending against the Queen's authority, but we are prepared to prevent the arrest of Smith O'Brien. have you, sir, a warrant for his apprehension?" On the officer replying in the negative, the barricade was removed forthwith. In an instant the entire transaction is over—the whole affair did not last twenty minutes. Not a trigger was pulled—not a stone thrown—not a pike or a bayonet raised! And in our indictment, which does not even charge that those troops were marching on the service of the Queen, it is alleged that O'Brien is guilty of high treason, because he happened to be in a hotel in the adjoining village. That was on the 28th of July. I have one more day to ac count for; and so far as the case has gone, I con fidently appeal to you for your verdict, satisfied, as I am a living man, that you will decide as if you were twelve rational Englishmen in that box, and that there are not twelve men of that magnanimous nation that would hesitate one minute in acquitting the prisoner at the bar. They would naturally ask, what is that man charged with?—High treason. Let us see, how do you prove it? Oh, we prove it by an overt act committed at iNfullinahone, and another at Killaraaule, where the re sistance and obstruction I have just mentioned were offered. Would the evidence on these points, I say, satisfy that jury of Englishmen ? I emphatically say, " No." Does it occur to you that Mr. O'Brien intended to shoot down one man? Do you not believe, if he had spoken a single word, that the man behind the barri cade, who was armed with a rifle, would not have shot the officer? Do you believe that Mr. O'Brien wished to hurt one of her Majesty's troops, or shed one single drop of blood? lam sure you do not. Idu not deny, however, that those people might not be indicted for a riot or a serious misdemeanour. My argument entirely rests on this, that there was no levying of war against her Maje.ty Queen Victoria, and I do assert that her royal name and authority were just as safe and powerful when the barricade was up as when it was down; and, further, that the intention to save Mr. O'Brien from arrest was the solo object and motive the people had in view. I deny, in the most emphatic manner, that one thought ever crossed the mind of Mr. O'Brien against the authority or name of the 4deen, and I defy the Learned Attorney-General to point out one single sentiment contained in any speech delivered by him, even in his most excited moments, at variance with that respect, courtesy, and deference which is due t 2 the royal lady whom wo are all bound to esteem, venelate, and love. No, gentlemen, not even in the many speeches reported by the policemen who were examined on this trial has there been seen one scintilla of evidence to show that he used ono expression which could be tortured into disloyalty. I am done with Killenaule, and have now arrived very nearly at the close of these trans actions. The Learned Gentleman then commented on the evidence of the witnesses who deposed to the trans actions which occurred at the collieries, and argued that the conduct of Mr. O'Brien there could only be accounted for on the hypothesis that he was anxious to protect himself from arrest. I now come, continued Mr. White side, to what appears to be the most important part of the whole case; I allude to the affair at the widow Cor mack's; and let me say I do sincerely believe that the whole cause of that affray arose from the anxiety of Captain Trent to effect the arrest of Smith O'Brien. The whole of this gallant gentleman's military glory appears to rest on the achievements of that day, and I am told he drew up a dispatch on the subject which might take its place beside Gurwood's dispatches of tho Duke of Wellington. I am even told he com menced it with a poetical phrase of a martial cha racter,— " Who takes the foremost foeman's life, Himself shall conquer in the strife.". —(Loud laughter.) Having briefly adverted to the cir cumstances which occurred previous to the attack, and stated that it would require a microscope to discover the injury clone to the house by the people, he said, when an account is given of such transactions, the jury and Court should desire to know the amount of injury done by those malignant assailants of the police. It is true that Mr. Trent bore his blushing honours thick upon him.—(Laughter.) He was wounded, but not killed, for I saw him to-day.—(Laughter.) He cannot say where he was wounded, but some policeman said to him, " Do you know what, captain, you are wounded, al though you don't know it?"—(Laughter.) I asked him did he go into the bed, and I am not quite sure that he did not take a nap.—(Laughter.) I don't think the valiant inspector was in the thick of the fight, but up stairs while the firing was going on, and when all was over he was most indefatigable in gathering up the trophies of the campaign. —(Laughter.) But where were the pikes or the bullets? I say this was a mere irruption of the people, of an illegal kind, but cer tainly not for a treasonable object, and if the police acted like men of sense there would have been no con flict at all, and when the police did commence the firing they had it all to themselves. No proof was given that a bullet was found, except by the evidence of a witness who was not there at all. Even General M'Donald, when examined, did not seem to know any more of the bullets than Inspector Trent. The police were opposite the open window, but there is not a scrape on one of them; very unlike Mr. Frost's case, where the officer and the magistrate, Mr. Philips, who was knighted, were wounded. You should also recollect that Widow Cor mack has not been examined; also th a t t h ere were women and children in the crowd; and men don't go to levy war against the is Queen with men a n d women along with them. Thereone piece of evid ence with respect to which I desire to vindicate the h onour of my client. Itissaid them he cried ai out;but u to t thesethe people, w o rds were n ever uttered "Slash a wa y, b oys; slaughter by him; and I should observe that no acc ount w h atever was drawn up of that transaction next morning, which is a remarkable thing, there being magistrates nex t door to them. The jury should view with the gre a t est accuracy the consistency of the evidence given by th e police on this point. One policeman did not sw ear that Mr. O'Brien used the words, and two swore he did ; but there was another policeman present who was not examined. It would appear from the evidence, that in consequence of Mr. O'Brien's position at the time it was said he used these words—if any person fired either inside or outside, Mr. O'Brien himself would be shot dead. Can it be believed that he would make use of such language, when the effect must be, that after making use of it he could not survive for one mo ment. Recollect that one of the police, named Moran, who declared he used these words, also said that at the time he had his bayonet on his carbine, within six inches of Mr. O'Brien's breast. Yet he did not fire at him ; and when I asked him why he did not fire when the words ware used, he said, " I did not hear him make use of --" and he then stopped. and would not say a wold more. By an o th er w i tness, w h o swore M r . O'Brien used the expression, the words are varied, and it was said by him that the words used were—" Slash away, and we have them all." That discrepancy is of importance, particularly wh en yen. recollect that another of the policemen present was not examined at all ; and the keeping back of a witness on a question able point is of more consequence than the produc tion of twenty witnesses, I would remind you of the kind of man who said Mr. O'Brien used these words. I refer to Moran; and you will recollect he said, if ne cessary, he would shoot the very women. I appeal, gen demon, to the best pauions of your nature, not to believe the man who would say he would shoot even the women who came there perhaps to rescue their husbands and children from death. He would shoot every woman in the crowd—cruelly, remorselessly, relentlessly, with pleasure—(Applause)—and I ask you not to believe that man. I now come to the evidence of Sergeant M‘Do nough, who, though he was sent up to Dublin to give in formation to the Inspector-General, never told him that Mr. O'Brien used these words. I call on you, therefore, to disbelieve those words, which are so inconsistent with the whole character and conduct of the prisoner. I now call your attention to the evidence of the policeman Carroll, and with reference to him, Mr. O'Brien (who is represented to have used the words "slaughter away") says it would be unmanly to attack an unarmed man. Carroll then says he gave an advice to Mr. O'Brien, con taining an allusion to the fact that h e wou ld no t b e supported by the priests, who, of coarse, are always introduced. Carroll tells him his object could not be effected except by blood; and the reply of Mr. O'Brien is, that he wanted no blood. Therefore yon cannot entertain a doubt that the interpretation I have given you of the transaction is the right one. Gentlemen of the jury—there are several documents in this case; one of them is a map, which I have been called upon to explain. I decline to do so, and I shall leave it to the Solicitor-General to make out the guilt of the pri soner from the possession of this map, or of the Ordnance map, or of any other map. But there is a document, the importance of which Ido not mean to deny. I mean the document given to Mr. Cullen, of the Mining Company. The letter is dated the 29th July, 1848; and, as the Attorney-General asserted, was written on the eve of an intended conflict. But as I think it has already ap peared from the evidence that the conflict which actually took place was purely accidental, it i s i m p oss ibl e that it could have been wri▪ tten with reference to an expected or believed resistance. I don't know whether you ob served from the evidence or not, but it is the fact, that by this time Mr. Meagher had left the company of Mr. O'Brien. Nothing could be more remote from their con templation, therefore, than the idea that they should en gage in a conflict. The letter was written from the col, lieries, and is dated on the 29th of July; and in con struing this letter, you must take the whole of it together, Mr. O'Brien stated in the document that he felt the col liers ought to be encouraged for the noble stand they had made in affording protection to him. It is plain, therefore, that he wants that the colliers should not be put out of employment, as several had been discharged about three months before. But does he say that they had as sisted him to overturn the constitution, to levy war upon the Queen? No, but there appears the same personal matter all through, the protecting himself from arrest. Then he goes on to remark that the price for the raising of coal and culm should be paid by contract; but this is anything but a revolutionary prooeeding, beesuse he proposed that the men should continue at work, and that they should be paid by contract, as, in point of fact, I am informed that that practice has been since adopted. Men who are engaged in revolutions do not begin by settling the price of coal; next, he makes a suggestion which shows that he did not contemplate the destruction of the bonds of society, for he recommends that a brisk demand should be encouraged by lessening the price. Mr. Smith O'Brien—By lowering the price. Mr. WEITENDE—Oh, yes, it is by lowering. It is a most singular document, I admit, but it is plain that it does not contemplate anarchy if the company did not comply with this request, but would distress the pei ple, then Mr. O'Bri e n wou ld i ns truct the colliers to occupy and work the mines on their own account. I admit that this is quite an unjustifiable threat, but still it was a mere local and partial outrage. Then follows the un justifiable statement, that if the Irish revolution should succeed—if the company distressed the people, their property would be confiscated ; that, on the contrary, if they observed neutrality, then their property would be protected. Now, in construing this document, you must :take the whole of it, and if you find that Mr. O'Brien's object was to frighten the company into bene fiting the men in their employment, that will be a natu ral interpretation to its meaning. But it would be ab surd to apply it to levying war upon the Queen, for if it did the letter would never have been written at all. Emmett never talked of the price of coals when he planned his revolution, nor did the men who talked of killing the Lord Lieutenant. I admit that he meant to frighten the company into employing the colliers and paying them, but that was all. In Lord George Gordon's case he gave l e tt ers of protection to several persons, and th e y were protec t e d, but this was not held to be high treason. So there was a letter given in the case of Watson proposing to attack the Tower and the Bank, yet Watson was acquitted. That Mr. O'Brien used the word "Irish revolution" I admit; but the words have been used a hundred times to mean a moral revolu tion; and, therefore, there is no proof to show th a t this was a bloody an d a cr i m i na l revolution. I admit that he has assumed here that which he had no right to assume, but that is not high treason. This is the inter pretation of the letter, and this is the grand document, be it remembered, on which the Crown relies. Then there was a document found in Mr. O'Brien's portman teau; and I ask you if that is to be used as conclusive evidence against Mr. O'Brien? I admit that the last letter was important, but I am not at all troubled as to this. There is not a public man in this country who has not received a number of letters which he never troubled himself to answer, nor condescended to notice. The letter has no date; it has neither cover nor envelope; it was not said to be sent by post, nor delivered by messenger, nor is there any explanation how it got into the portmanteau. How is one man's guilt to be inferred from the letter which another man writes?' The only thing by which you could in the slightest degree infer that he approved of it at all is, that he kept it. But surely that would not be conclusive in a case like this. Having read Mr. Duffy's letter, he continued: This is, in fact, a letter stimulating the person to whom it is addressed to engage in a course which the writer believes the other does not heartily assent to. When it was written, or what was the object of the writer, we do not know. I only say, on the part of my client, that he has betrayed nobody, and that he accuses nobody. The same remarks apply to the document from America, and the address from the Enniscorthy Club, and in the letter addressed by Mr. Meagher to him, dated Cahirmoyle, there is absolutely nothing. There is, gentlemen of the jury, one piece of evidence still remaining, and I am not here to gainsay its importance—the evidence of Dobbin. I have reserved it to the last. After having taken you thr oug h th e trans actions of the Confederation and the League, through the whole conduct of the party accused, I think I have proved to you that no c r i me o f treason h as been committed, whi▪ ch, I admit, has nothing to do with his trial or his punishment for any other offence— which has nothing to do with his crimes against the public peace, or the public authorities—it would not pre vent his prosecution for these Crimes to-morrow, though I admit it would not take away his life. Mr. Dobbin appears in the character of a spy ; that is clear. To use his own phrase—" I went there to plot—they were plotting, and I went is never to co unter-plot. " We have a rule of law which neTer departed from, that when a witness comes forward in this c a p ac i ty, t h ere must b e some important part . of his story i n w hi c h h e i s con firmed. My first ob j ect ion to his evidence is, that there is not a particle of it confirmed, from beginning to end. Ho says that he was a memb er of the Red Hand Club, and that, in his capacity of member or president of that club, he attended three meeting s of the Irish council—on the lith, on the 19th, and on the 21st of July. Now, abstracted from the balloting papers , which I shall speak of afterward s , what part of his evidence is confirmed? I wish I h a d him now upon the table. Now, I know that he was an engineer —that he ceased to be an engineer; and what he stated upon the table is true—he descended into the capacity of an attorneys clerk. I should like to have got from him the reason why. I admit there was a meeting held on that day ; but I insist, as I shall be able to prove, that it w a s a public meeting, where certain reso lutions were adopted and publi s h ed—couched in audaci ous language , I admit. I don't deny that. It was an audacious agitation—to be sure it was; it was conducted on the most approved principles on which this country has so long been so misgoverned. But nobody saw Dob bin there. How was it that none of the constabulary k who were outside were call e d to prove that they saw him go up 1' There was not a meeting called in the city of Dublin which the police—and very rightly—did not watch in order to preserve the public peace. Yet not a man of them was called to say that they saw him enter the:meeting. D o y ou thi n k t h e C rown forgot t o give that? Do you think that th e a bl e , an d astute , an d exper i enced Attorney-General —do you thi n k th a t the Sol i citor- General, General, who is, perhaps, m ore ex p e rienced still in cri minal matters—do you think that they forgot that? No, depend upon it ; but th e n w h en n o evidence can be h a d, why then nothing can be made of it. Then again as to the secret meeting of the 19th, we have no confirma tion of it; but on the co n t rar y we have the evi▪ dence of the respectable reporter here (Mr. Hodges), w ho did not falsify a single word, and who has sworn to Mr. ll O'Brien's speeches, in which he repeated ly . denounced . a secret meetings. It would have been vital e w vid . e . nce if a him walk policeman could have been brought who up stairs. Do you think they din n ot . know s the value th of it ? Why gentleman, since this trial commenced, thatey have sent to Dublin for two policemen who d ep ose d they had seen the title of the " Red Hand Club" th window of a house ; and yet they allowed these n police men to go down from that table without . asking the m i Did you observe they had ever seen Dobbin enter it. that ? I did ; and it is most significant witness.Thereis not i I then a particle of evidence to corsdr a What was to prevent him from "Yin % nd Mr. thisl behind saw w e jury at th ese me eti ngs , an d they sto od O'Brien's back ?If anything tends to t he acq uittal of the prisoner, it i s th ose ver y balloting papers. Those papers have not been proved to have been found on the person of blr . Lalor, but because they were p roved to have existed th e y were produced. But who proved them ? Th e i n f ormer . Wh ose was the story? The in former's. But how was that information confirmed ? I admit there is the handwriting of a great ma ny others upon them. B ut w h o has proved t h e ir handwriting ? No one—the Crown has adMitted it could not prove them; but I hold they were bound to prove it, and it was per fectly possible to do so. They were aware of the ne cessity of corroborati ng the the testimony of the witness, and yet no attempt was made to produce any such evi dence. I h o ld, t h erefore gen tlemen, that as consi▪ der able doubt exi sts , w i th regard to the genuineness of these balloting papers, I call on you, in conformity with the great principle of our law, to give the benefit of that doubt to my c li ent. The informer swore that when they went to th e b a ll ot to elect a " war directory," it was agreed that no clergyman should be vote . d . for. Now that was as distinct, as clear, it was as posqlve as any statement that ever came from the lips of a witness in a court of justice. Notwithstanding that there appear to have been eight votes given to one clergyma n (the Rev. Mr. Kenyon), and one f or another (the Rev. Mr. O'Mal ley). Now, if there was any criminality attached to that proceeding, which I deny —the fact being that the di rectory was elected to conduct the affairs of the clubs—l ask this question: does the Government expect to convict the Protestant gentleman in the dock, whilst the Roman RDAY EVENING, OCTOBER 7, lB4B. Catholio priest walks abroad at liberty, in all the freshness of health, strength, and vigour, administering to his flock, and fulfilling his avocations? I call upon you, gentlemen of the jury, to vindicate the Crown, the Attorney-General, Lord Clarendon, and the British Minister, by returning a verdict of acquittal in favour of my client. Father Kenyon was a leading man—a prominent man—and I say ho was an honest man; but if guilty, the Crown, by prosecuting that gentleman at the bar, who is not so guilty, for he had no vote at all, has been guilty of the grossest perversion of justice. If you expeet we are to have impartial liberty in this country, I call upon you to take your stand on behalf of the entire people of this realm. Let the Protestant be convicted if guilty; but unless you mean to live under the basest despotism which ever disgraced free-born men, resolve to have an inflexible and impartial admi nistration of the law. Gentlemen of the jury —I have spoken to this case. I have gone through the entire case of the prisoner, and it is for you to say if the charge preferred against the prisoner is made out against him. That charge is high treason, compassing the death of the Queen, and levying war against her. I have explained to you the principles on which his case rests, and unless he has cosamitted high treason within the indictment, you are bound to acquit him. Gentlemen of the jury, I have observed upon the evidence, and have simply to submit to you, in conclusion, that however you may condemn certain acts of Mr. Smith O'Brien—however equivocal you may think some observations made by him in any letter, yet if you are satisfied that his guilt falls short of the tremendous crime of treason, you are bound by the solemn duty you have undertaken, irrespective of every consequence, to acquit the prisoner. Well I know the weighty difficulties I have had to encounter—well I know how incompetent my feeble powers are to grapple with and master them—well I know that prejudice has blocked up the avenues to some understandings—that calumny has done its work, and that it is said by many the impracticable politician must perish at last. Had he been a hypocrite—had he been a selfish trader in politics —had he said what he did not believe—had he un-said to-day what he said yesterday, he might live to enjoy individual prosperity, after trading with tact upon the miseries of his country. But however wrong he might have been in the opinions he imbibed, he has adhered to them consistently and steadily, and he now suffers for being consistent in what he honestly believed to be true. He has been hunted—he has been re viled—he has been caricatured—he has been slandered in his native country—he 'has been pursued from one extremity to another as a traitor—covered with obloquy and with calumny ; and where is he to look for justice—where is he to hope for a temperate consideration of his whole political life? Where, but in that palladium where the law has placed his safety—the honour, discernment, and humanity of a jury of his country? A rampart of defence that jury ought to be between him and his prosecutors, if his crime, consisting of the intent of the soul, has not been suffi ciently established. Judges must be unbending. Juries may regard the frailties of human nature—juries should cast the broad shield of their protection around the man whom they believe, however equivocal his conduct, has not in purpose, in heart, in soul, transgressed the law. Such is the high office assigned to you by that con stitution whose foundations were laid in the deepest wisdom, which, in a succession of ages has been ce mented by the patriot's blood, and consecrated in the martyr's fire. It is for you to say, as between the Crown and the prisoner, whether his guilt is established or not. The law of our country—wise, just, merciful—has declared that if there be a doubt, that doubt must be given in favour of the prisoner— that doubt must be given in favour of him whose life is sought to be affected. 'therefore, I say that now, if you have a doubt, stand between the prisoner and his grave. Review his life—the feelings of patriotism he imbibed from his mother's breast ; the passion grew by a father's example, I admit, to a dangerous excess. That father recounted to him how, on the last memorable night of our national existence, Grattan, and Plunkett, and Bushe had spoken—how he was convinced by the gravity of their arguments, persuaded by their eloquence, and borne away by patriotic ardour. The son, I admit, has caught up those lessons he was taught, and has prac tised them to his peril to-day. He was taught to believe the Union was carried by corruption, and should be re pealed by honest men. To restore Ireland to her Par liamentary existence has been the labour of his life—a delusion, I admit ; but is not death on the scafford a terrible punishment for believing that Irishmen have the capacity and intellect to rule the affeirs of their native country ? Would to God, gentlemen, that in this case Mr. Smith O'Brien was my only client. The happiness of an ancient, an honourable, a loyal family, is at stake this day. The church, the bar, the senate have furnished members, though they differ from him in politics, to give him brotherly consolation on this melancholy day. Should you send him to the scaf fold, they must labour on hereafter with broken hearts through a cheerless existence, suffering in sorrow in the land they love. A venerable lady, who lives amidst an affectionate tenantry, amongst whom she has lavished her fortune—on whom she confers blessings—awaits with trembling heart your verdict. If that verdict con signs her son to death, that heart will shortly beat no more. Six innocent children also wait to be told by you whether they are to be stripped of the inheritance which has deseended on this family for ages—whether they are to be thrown beggared and fatherless on the world through a barbarous and cruel law—whether they are to be restored to life and joy, or plunged into:the uttermost depths of dark despair. There is another—another who clings to hope, may it be blessed I—in you. Her heart's blood she:would give to save the object of her youth ful affection. Do not, except commanded by conscience, send her to an untimely grave. Even in this case Ido not ask for pity in a wailing spirit—l will not blame you if you convict my client, nor will he—the last accents of his lips will breathe a prayer for Ireland's happi ness and for Ireland's constitutional freedom. The sad moments that shall precede his mortal agony will be consoled if through his suffering and his sacrifice some system of, government shall arise—which has never existed yet—wise, impartial, just, and, above all, consis tent, which will conduct his country to wealth, pros perity, and greatness. Gentlemen, in the great com pact between the people and the Crown, her Majesty swears in an oath, framed by wise and just men, to ad minister in all her judgments justice in mercy. That justice administer—no cruel, remorseless, sanguinary code—but justice in mercy. A verdict in accordance with those divine principles, which here ought to shine out in glorious perfection between the prisoner and the Crown, will not be a triumph over the law, but a triumph of the law, and as you expect justice tempered with mercy, so administer it here to-day. In nothing can mortal mars—though immeasurable the distance still— approach so near to the ,Almighty attributes as in the administration of justice. Divine justice will be tem pered with mercy, or dismal will be our fate. As you expect it, so administer it. Remember that the last faint murmur on your quivering lips will be for mercy, ere the immortal spirit will take its flight to another, and, I trust, a better and brighter world.—(The Learned Gentleman concluded, amidst loud expressions of appro bation, his very eloquent address, and shortly afterwards withdrew from the court.) The prisoner shed tears towards the conclusion, and on the faces of many long accustomed to the most trying scenes that-criminal courts present, the same evidences of deep emotion were visible. William Hamil examined by Mr. FITZGERALD—I know an association called the Irish Confederation. I have been secretary to that association, and am ac quainted with its rules. The rules of the body were handed to the witness, which he identified. I was pre sent at a meeting at Radley's Hotel when they were agreed on. That was a preliminary meeting, but they were afterwards submitted to a public meeting held in September, where they were adopted. Mr. Smith O'Brien was present at the preliminary meeting. I think the rules were printed at the time of that meeting; they were also in manuscript, and were adopted at the meet ing at the Rotundo. The pamphlet I hold in my hand is a lecture "On the Use and Capacity of Confederate Clubs," by Charles G. Duffy. ATTORNEY- GENERAL—I really must object to those documents being given in evidence. Mr. FITZGERALD—Just wait a moment, and you will see what they are. Witness—This other pamphlet I hold in my hand is a discourse on the organisation and government of con federate clubs. I have been summoned here as a witness on the part of the Crown, but have not been examined. Cross-examined —The Confederation was formed on the 15th January, 1847. Amongst the original mem bers of the Council were Smith O'Brien, Gavan Duffy, Devin Reilly, John Martin, Doheny, Mitchel, and others, but I am not sure of Lalor. Re-examined —There were two Roman Catholic cler gymen in the council of the Confederation—the Rev. Mr. Meehan and the Rev. Mr. Kenyon. Dr. Gray sworn and examined by Mr. FITZGERALD. ATTORNEY •GENRRAL—I must request that any wit nesses intended to be examined for the defence leave the court. They were ordered to withdraw. Witness proceeded—l am proprietor of the Freeman's Journal, and was present when the rules of the Irish Confederation were adopted. These rules handed to me are they. I was a member of the Repeal Association, and the document I hold in my hand purports to be a speech made by Smith O'Brien in the House of Com mons, on the causes of discontent in Ireland. This do cument I hold in my hand is the letter of Smith O'Brien on joining the Association. I was not present at the first public meeting of the League. I have known Mr. O'Brien since 1844, and have had frequent conversa tions with him on political subjects, but never heard him express sentirar nts of disloyalty to the Queen, but I did on the advantage of constitutional agitation. The ATTORNEY- GENERAL objected to that line of examination. After some conversation between Counsel on both sides, and the Court, Mr. Justice MoortE inquired what line of examination Sir Colman O'Loghlen intended to pursue? Sir COLMAN O'Locneee—The line of examination we intend to pursue, my Lord, is this, that the witness, although he had been on terms of intimacy with Mr. O'Brien, had never heard him express sentiments of disloyalty to the Queen. It is a similar line of exami nation that was followed in the case of Horne Tooke and Hardy. Juago MOORE.—Yes; in Horne Tooke's case a letter from the Duke of Richmond was allowed to be given in evidence. After some further interruptions the examination of the witness was resumed. He deposed: I heard Mr. O'Brien say frequently that he would rather retire from public life than be a party to a line of unconstitutional agitation. I recollect a dispute having taken place be tween Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Mitchel. That occurred in May last. I remember speaking to Mr. O'Brien on the subject of that dispute, and heard him express a strong opinion on it. SOLICITOR-GENERAL-I object to Dr. Gray giving any evidence relating to that dispute, as ho does not know anything about it of his own knowledge. Sir COLMAN O'LoanLEN—We will be able to prove afterwards what the dispte was about. Examination resumed—l remember Saturday, the 22d of July last, and also recollect having received on that day an intimation by electrie telegraph from London, stating that the Habeas Corpus Act was about to be suspended, and that a warrant had been issued for the arrest of Smith O'Brien. A placard announcing that fact was exhibited at my office. Mr. Dillon and Mr. Meagher called on me in reference to it, and I showed them the original telegraph. The witness was also ex amined at some length on the proceedings of the Con federation, and the League, and with reference to the amalgamation of all sections of Repealers, and the grounds of that union. John Maher, Esq., sworn and examined—l am a Deputy Lieutenant of the county of Wexford, and have been Member for that county. I have been acquainted with the prisoner for many years, and remember' his being at my house in July last. It was on Saturday, the 22d. He arrived at Enniscorthy at half-past five o'clock in the afternoon, and came with me to my house in my carriage, where we arrived at from seven to half past seven o'clock. He came to me in consequence of an invitation given to him a long time previously. A letter was handed to the witness; it was a letter of invitation. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—This, my Lord, is One of the documents found ia the portmanteau of Mr. O'Brien. Witness—The invitation was given in April, 1848. He had received an invitation a long time before that, but it was renewed subsequently, in July, the week before he came down to me. Mr. O'Brien remained at witness's house that night, and left about ten, or half past ten, next morning. A servant came to witness's bed-room in the morning and said Mr. O'Brien wished to see him. He went to Mr. O'Brien's bed-room and found him dressing. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected to this evidence being received. Mr. FITZGERALD contended that he was entitled to show by Mr. O'Brien's own declarations what were his motives for leaving Mr. Maher's. Chief Justice BLACEBURNE—We cannot admit this evidence, as nothing was brought out as to this matter iu the evidence for the prosecution. Mr. Smith O'Brien—My Lord, I beg pardon for in terrupting the proceedings, but I ask, in common fair ness, whether every speech which was made by me, and which was reported in such a fashion as I believe was never reported before—by common policemen—is to be given against me as evidence of my intent ; while the remarks I made to a friend as to my objects are not to be received in my favour ? It is the most monstrous thing that was ever heard of'. After a pause, he con tinued in a muttering tone—You had better give up the defence, Mr. Fitzgerald—this is a perfect farce. Ile then continued in a loud tone—Mr. Fitzgerald, I call upon you to give up my defence. Let the case go to the jury as it stands. lam quite content that it should. I hold that this is a substantial violation of all the prin ciples of justice ; and I call upon my counsel to give up my defence. This is of a piece with the evidence about the round tower. Mr. FITZGERALD—I beg your Lordships' pardon, but I should wish to send for Mr. Whiteside. Your Lordships know that this a case of very heavy import ance to me. Justice -Moonz—Oh, yes, certainly. Mr. FITZGERALD—In the mean time I shall ask two or three other questions, which will not be objected to. Examination continued—Mr. O'Brien left town from ten to half-past ten o'clock. The two gentlemen went with him, but witness did not. Witness had been ac quainted with Mr. O'Brien since 1835, and believed him to be a person attached to the Queen and constitution. Mr. O'Brien dined at his house on the day he arrived, and witness told Mr. O'Brien that he would invite Dr. Sinnett, the President of the Catholic College at Wex ford, to meet him next day at dinner. Mr. O'Brien--My Lord, I must appeal once more to the Court, to ask if this conversation is to be received or not? Justice MooßE—We are waiting, Mr. O'Brien, for Mr. Whiteside. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—My Lord, as this matter seems to press on Mr. O'Brien's mind, we have no ob jection that the evidence be received. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—At the same time, my Lord, I must protest against this matter being drawn into a precedent. Chief Justice BLACEDURNE—Our impression is, that with regard to any transaction which has been brought forward by the Crown, Mr. O'Brien has the fullest right to adduce counter evidence; but in this matter, as to which the Crown has given no evidence, the prisoner has no right to give any. But as the Crowe has waived its right we have no objection. Mr. FITZGERALD—Now, Mr. Maher, state what passed.. Wilitess' said he went to his bed-room, when Mr. O'Brie* laid , " You have two other guests in the house for whom I think you are not prepared. Meagher and Dil lon arrived this morning, and bring the news of the sus pension of the Habeas Corpus Act, and that a warrant for my arrest has been issued, which they think may probably have come down by the mail last night." He then said, "My dear Maher, I did not come down to your house to disturb its peace—get us some breakfast, and send us on our way. Ido not wish that any arrest should take place here; send for a car that we may go to Kilkenny, where we have some friends that I would wish to consult on this crisis." Witness told them they should have his carriage to Enniscorthy, and that he would send forward a man to get a car ready for them. They breakfasted, and left in an hour. Mr. FITZOEKALD—Had any appointment been pre viously-made for the next day? Witness—Yes. I had arraajpect next day to take him to the harbour of Wex ford, And,the land which is in the act of being re claimed there, which Mr. O'Brien had expressed a wish to see. Cross-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Wit- ness was not present when Mr. O'Brien first came to Enuiscorthy, on his way to witness. Did not hear him make any speech. Mr. O'Brien had a large portman teau with him. Witness did not expect to see either Mr. Dillon or Mr. Meagher that morning. Henry Coulter, reporter of the Freeman's Journal, was examined by Sir C. O'LOGHLEN—Was present at the meeting in the Rotunda, when there was a dispute be tween Mr. Mitchel and Mr. Smith O'Brien, and reported a portion of Mr. O'Brien's speech on the oecasion. Mr. O'Brien also moved a resolution, to the effect that, as certain letters had been published which might com promise ilre League ' it was advisabl e t o p u bli s h t h e ori ginaPtegolutions. Mr. Mitchel moved an amendment, and the debate lasted fur three meetings. Witness at tended the first and the last. There was a division on the last day, and Mr. O'Brien's resolution was carried. Before the division Mr. O'Brien replied in a short speech, reiterating his former opinions. Witness also identified the report of a speech of Mr. O'Brien's, made on the 13th May, 1847, portions of which had been read by Mr. Whiteside in the course of his ad dress. Mr. Richard Barrett, editor of the Pilot newspaper, examined by Mr. F I TZGERALD—Was u member of the 'B2 Club, and so was Mr. O'Brien. It was not connected with the Confederated Clubs. The first time he saw Mr. O'Brien was in 1844, when witness was in prison with the late Mr. O'Connell. Mr. O'Brien was in pursuance of an object which involved attachment to the Queen and Constitution. The uniform of the 'B2 Club was a cap with a gold band. Sir David Roach, Bart., examined—l have been Member for the city of Limerick, and have known Mr. Smith O'Brien for many years; from the various con versations I have had with him I have no reason to be lieve he has been disloyal, but I do not think he is at tached to the present constitution, that he is an advo cate for a repeal of the union. I know that he is not in favour of a republic. He is a man who would not prac tise dissimulation. I believe he is a man who would be determined in carrying out his opinions. I never heard him speak disrespectfully of royalty. I had a conver sation with him early in the present year on the line of conduct pursued by Mr. Mitchel and the Confederation, in which he expressed his intention of separating from that society. _ _ John Bolton Massy, Esq.—l am grand juror of county Limerick for many years. I know th e pr i soner for many years, as the greatest intimacy existed between our families. I never could collect anything from him that would lead me to believe ha was opposed to royalty. He certainly is a Repealer, but I believe him to be in favour of Queen, Lords, and Commons. Sir Denham Norreys, Bart., examined—l am M.P. for Mallow, and was so in 1843; am acquainted with Mr. O'Brien, who was M.P. at that time. The report of the speech delivered by Mr. O'Brien in the House of Com mons in July, 184,3, and which has been handed to me, is a correct report of that speech. It was Mr. O'Brien who drew up the address to the people of England, in July, 1843. From my knowledge of Mr. O'Brien, I had al. ways known him to be attached to the Queen, Lords, and CoMmons, and the opponent of anarchy. Never heard him speak against the rights of property. I do not believe him to be a man who would dissemble his opinions. - William Fitzgerald, Esq., examined—ls a grand juror of the county Clare, and had known Mr. Smith O'Brien for many years. Never heard him express senti ments of disloyalty or of a republican character, and believes him to be humane and peaceable, and the enemy of bloodshed or violence. The Hon. Cornelius O'Callaghan sworn and examined —I am a deputy-lieutenant of this county. I was a Member of Parliament at the same time with Mr. O'Brien. I have known him fur five years, and I believe him to be attached to the Queen and constitution. William Maunsell, Esq., M.P. examined—l am the colleague of Mr. O'Brien, whom I have known since I was a child. Constantly heard him express himself in favour of social order, and against anarchy. To the ATTORNEY-GENERAL - Never heard Mr. O'Brien speak on the questions of moral and physical force. The handwriting of Mr. Reding , ton, under-secretary, having been proved to certain documents, Mr. FITZGERALD proposed to call Major-General Napier, with reference to the history of the " Reform" agitation in England. Counsel for the Crown objected to the evidence. The several documents given in evidence on the part of the prisoner were then put in and read by Sir Colman O'Loghlen. Major-General William Napier was then examined by Sir COLMAN 01ocamEN—He was the author ofthe "His tory of the Peninsular War." Ho recollected the sgi. tation going on in England in 1831 on the Reform Bill. He had heard of the Birmingham Political Union, but was not a member of it, neither was he a member of the London Political Union, and he did not know that body was divided into sections. He never was present at any of their meetings. He remembered when the Ministry were beaten in the House of Lords on the Reform Bill. He received many letters at that time. He knew Mr. Thomas Young, the private secretary of Lord Mel bourne, then in the Home• office. He was once intro duced to Mr. Parkes, of Birmingham, for about two minutes. Did not know if Mr. Parkes was a member of the Birmingham Political Union. Witness had two letters from Mr. Young now in his pocket. He had bceu subpcanaed to produce them, and he how produced two of Mr. Young's lettersclcitre - ortliem - ligliehWed - was the one they wanted, which had only Mr. Young's initials on it—the other was a private letter, but he brought it to prove the handwriting. He knew the initials "T. Y." and "H. 0." These initials stand for Thomas Young, of the Home-office, and it came in a Home-office frank. Witness received it on the 26th June, 1832. Witness had taken a great part in political agitation at that time at Bath and Devizes. He was an advocate for the Reform Bill. Witness replied to this communication. Sir COLMAN O'LooHLEN—Now will you state what that communication was? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected to this question. No statement had been made of this evidence to bim— it had not been opened by Mr. Whiteside; and he thought a private correspondence with Mr. Young, which occurred sixteen or seventeen years ago, had nothing to do here. Chief Justice BLAciunrrE—l don't admit it. Mr. FITXGERALD—But, my Lord, this will be a matter of history. Sir COLMAN O'LOGHLEN—qIIIOII MO to remind your Lordship that in the case of Horne Tooke the Duke of Richmond was called to give evidence as to a letter, in which he advised the very course which the prisoner took. The present is evidence of a similar nature, to show the acts done in similar cases by public men. Chief Justice DOHERTY—But was not this letter written on the very question for which the prisoner was tried? The SOLICITOR-GENERAL —ln the very case, my Lord. The COURT then over-ruled the question, and the witness was directed to withdraw. Mr. FITZGERALD intimated that the evidence for the prisoner had now closed. - The Court adjourned about half-past six till ten o'clock to-morrow, when Mr. Fitzgerald will be heard for the prisoner. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. LAMBETH. Yesterday being appointed for the further, and, it was supposed, the final examination of Mrs. Linfield and others, charged on the coroner's warrant with having caused the death of Eliza Wil son , th e ccurt was crowded to excess. When the case was called on, however, Mr. Norton was infor ed that the prisoner, Mrs. Dryden, was so seriously ill at Horaemonger-lane gaol as to be unable to undergo an examination, or indeed being re moved from that prison, for the present, and under the circumstances, the magistrate remanded the prisoners to a future day. Mr. Games applied for the liberation of the prisoner, William Linfield, on bail. His Worship, he said, had consented, on the last examination, to admit that per son to bail in two sums of 50/. each, but he could not find persons to undertake for so large an amount, and he, therefore, hoped his Worship would lessen the amount. Mr. NORTON consented to reduce the sum to 201. each, which was the lowest sum he could think of. The prisoners were then remanded. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS. BRISTOL, OCT. 6. STOCK EXCHANGE. —The market was very dull, and the only transaction was in Great Western Quarter Shares, which were done at 4% dis. LIVERPOOL, OCT. 6. STOCK EXCHANGI2.—The share market is less active to day, and prices are rather lower. The sales are—Birken head, Lancashire, and Cheshire Junction, 311. Shares, 91. I Is. 3d. dis.— Ditto (late C. and B.), 121/6—East Lancashire, 251. Shares, 10 dis.—Great Northern, 12t dis.—Lancashire and Yorkshire, Fifths (late M. and L.), 4 1 / .' 2 dis. Ditto (late West Riding Union), Fifths, 6 dis.—London and North. Western, 108 4 c.—Ditto, New Quarters, 11. 3s. 9d. dis.—Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, Eighths, No. 2, 71. Bs. 9d. dis.—Ditto (late Great Grimsby and Sheffield), 30 1 4—Midland Stock, New Halves, 10/. 16s. 3d. dis.— - North Staffordshire, 64 dis.—South-Eastern and Dover, No. 4, Thirds, 6% dis.—York, Newcastle, and Berwick (G. N. E. Purchase), 21. Is. 3d. dis. MANCHESTER, OCT. 6. STOCK ExonexclE.—The sales are—Birkenhead, Lanca shire, and Cheshire Junction, 221. Shares, 9 1 ,4 dis.—Leeds, Quarters, 7 dis —Huddersfield and Sheffield, 17 dis.—Leeds, Preference, 1-16 dis.—Old Grimsby, 30 dis.—Sheffield, Pre ference, 9 3 / 4 Oldham Alliance, 6s.— South-Eastern and Dover, No. 4, 6 11-16—Sheffield, Eighths, 7 11-16 dis. Sheffield and Lincoln, 14 dis—North Staffor2shire, 6 dis. —Preston and gyre, 3 p.—Huddersfield, Thirds, 7. BIRMINGHAM, OCT. 6. STOCK EXCHANGE.— There was little animation in the market to-day, and prices had a downward tendency. The sales are—North Staffordshire, 6/. ls. 3d. dis.—Shrewsbury and Birmingham (A), 71. 7s. 6d. dis.—Bristol and Birming ham, 1 15 3 4—Shrewsbury, Preference, 2s. p. YORK, Oar. S. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The business transacted t•-day was as follows : Great Northern, 4 5 4—York, Newcastle, and Berwick (G. N. E. Purchase), 6i. 3s. 941. TIIE LATE FIRE IN ST. SWITNIN'S-LANE—Yes ter day morning Mr. Payne, the coroner, held an inquiry into the causes of the fire which occurred on the morn ing of Sunday last, on the premises of Mr. George Newell Hussey, hairdresser, of No. 7, St. Swithin's-lane. It appeared that between two and three o'clock on the morning of Sunday last, sparks and volumes of flame were discovered by the policeman on duty proceeding from the chimney of the premises, and as it was noto rious that no fire had been in any stove in the house since ten o'clock on the preceding night, and as no per son slept on the premises, some curiosity was excited as to the origin of the fire. Mr. Fogo, the foreman of the Fire Brigade, now stated circumstances which fully ac counted for the accident, and which at the same time should act as a caution to householders where flues have been arched or otherwise blocked up. He said that at the back of a cupboard in the shop there had originally been a flue communicating with the basement, and also with the very top of the house. That flue had been cut away to form a cupboard, and the place where the flue from the floor above joined in had not been properly blocked, up. His opinion was, that lighted soot had fallen from the first floor flue into the cupboard, which containee, essential oil and other inflammable substances. Hence the origin of the conflagration. After hearing fe.rther evidence, the Coroner summed up, and remarked upon the necessity for giving publicity to the causes, of these ' frightful accidents, in order to act as a caution to the flues public. The proper construction of th i fl of es then Learne d a dwell ing-house was a matter of with fthe theutm utmost importan ce . T he jury found, in accord ance Coroner, that the fire was the result of accident. THE LATE FIRE, HENLEY• ON-THAMES. •-• On Thursday morning a jury was assembled at Lashbrook, before Mr. J. H. Cooke, one of the coroners for Oxford shire, to of the inqu two ire into the circums tances attending th e deaths unfortunate persons, whose li ves were sa crificed by a fire i n a cottage on L as hb roo k Farm. After hearing evide nce, the jury returned a ver di ct off accidental death i n each case. PERSEVERANCE REWARDED.---About the beginning of last week, a poor unemployed weaver, residing in the country, went out to try his fortune with a basket of eggs, which having been speedily disposed of realised the sum of 4s. 9d . On his way home he expended his money on small wares, which next day, having sold to advantage, tripled the original amount. Encouraged by his success, he again spent his money on a lot of old books, amongst which were the works of Shakspere, Burns, and Milton, for which alone he received nearly 2/., and his whole stock cleared about 31. 12s. A third time he hazarded his money in the purchase of light trinkery, and in the course of six days, from a few dozen eggs, he carried to his distressed and impoverished family the handsome sum of 9L We have occasion to know this poor but honest weaver, who, urged by sheer indigence and a spirit of assiduity, gives to the world a bright example that perseverance may be rewarded._ Glasgow Examiner. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—A Gentleman Regained the Use of his Limbs by the Effect of Holloway's Ointment and Pills. —Mr. John Cock, a highly respectable gentle man residing at Madron, near Penzance, has been con fined to his house for a considerable period from a fear ful attack of paralysis. He had recourse to the best medical aid but to no purpose,'as in such eases the usual treatment never does any good, he then resolved upon using Holloway's ointment and pills, and to the surprise of all who knew his deplorable state, these wonderful medicines alone have restored him to perfect health and the complete use of his limbs. These valuable medicines. are sold by all druggists, and at Professor Holloway's establishment, 244, Strand, London. BIRTHS. On the 2d inst., a t Elm-villa, Chepstow, Mrs. William G. Owen, of a son. On the 3d inst., at Woolwich, the wife of Captain Ingle field, Royal Artillery, of a son. On the 4th inst., at Battramsley-lodge, Hants, the lady of Captain Charlewood, of a daughter. On the 4th inst., at Cadogan-place, the wife of W. Trevor Parkins, Esq., of a son. On the 4th inst., at Donnington Priory, Berks, the Wife of T. Hughes Esq., of a daughter. On the 4th inst., at Brighton, the wife of G. Drummond, Esq., of a son. On the sth inst., at Portman-square, the lady of Charles Wynne, Esq., of a daughter. AfAtia. On the 3d inst., at St. John the Baptist's, Coventry, John son Bourne, Esq., of her Majesty's 17th Reghnent, to Hannah, the second daughter of the late Joseph Howe, Esq., of the said city. On the 3d inst., at Blaenporth Church, Cardiganshire, Lieutenant E. W. Lang, R.N., son of the late R. Lang, Esq., of Moor-park, Surrey, to Lucy Ann, eldest daughter of the Rev. W. Lewis, of Westbourne-terrace, Hyde-park. On the 4th inst., at St. James's Church, Taunton, Lewis J. M. Mason, Esq., of Upper Holloway, to Jane, third daughter of 11. Trood, Esq., of Tonebridge• house, Taunton. On the sth inst., at St. Ma r y Abb ott ' s, Kensington, T. Melladew, Esq , to Frances An ne , w id ow of A. Bromilow, Esq., and youngest daughter of the late Admiral Sir Ross Donnelly, DIED. On the 3d ult., at the island of Cephalonia, Captain. Creighton, o f h er Majesty's :36th Regim en t. A. 0. On the 20th ult., at Rue Montaigne, Paris, the Rey. G. Lefevre, aged 77. At Leamington Priors, on the 2d inst., Margaret, relict of the late Major-General Wilson, aged 78. On the 3d inst., aged 20, Eliza, second daughter of H. Maitland, Esq., of Abchurch-yard. At Highgate, on the Ist inst., aged co, Mary Elizabeth Grignon, only daughter of the late 0. Grignon, Esq. On the 3d inst., at Bristol, aged 85, Christopher Thornhill Thornhill, Esq., late of the Cape ( , f Good Hof 6 e. On the ld i ns t ., at l‘fordan, Wiltshire, aged 3, Elizabeth, relict of th e l ate M r. Robert Peaks, of Gloucester-place, Regent's -park. On the 4th inst., P. Laurentz Campbell, Esq., at Chester square. Oa the 4th inst., Matthew Harrison, Esq., of Cornhill and. Highbury park South, aged 76. On the sth inst., at Compton-street, Clerk enwe ll , H enry Ambridge, Esq. aged 78. iondon: Printed and Published by 11.1UKDO I MING, at No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun °flies, Ni. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county of Aliddleaoz, Saturday, October 7, 1848. ' . I R