The Sun. — London, England, 1844-01-18 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY. GLOBE.—If the Anti-Corn-law Leaguers are not tilways tolerant of those who do not go all lengths with them, the Corn-law Leaguers are lustily following their example, at the expense of the Ministry. In fact the Government will have two cereal combinations on its back, instead of one. Out of the alligator jaws (de picted by IL B.) of the Anti-Corn-law League, the Luckless Sir Robert sinks in the boa-constrictor gripe of The landed protectionists. The chairman of the Suffolk Leaguers thus denounces the policy of the present Go vernment, as having betrayed the constituency to whom it owed its effective majority : " They were well aware that at the last general election the majority expected by the friends of the present Government was 20, or thereabouts. By the exertions of the yeomanry and of the agricultural interests generally, a majority of 100 was secured.—( Hear.) Yet what was the result ? In the very first session after the present Government were placed in power Sir Robert Peel brought in his Corn Bill, which les sened the protection given to the agricultural interests. — (Loud cries of Hear. )" One of the spokesmen of the Surrey Leaguers cha racterises, as follows, the wisdom of the country gen tlemen, and charges the Minister of their choice with a highly flattering aptness to being frightened : " When they aaw an unconstitutional body coming forward, and exercising such a powerful influence against them, as was exercised by the Cotton Lords,' as they were termed, it would hardly be supposed that the lords of the soil, who, although they might be pos sessed of vast quantities of land, still had very little wisdom, would have come forward to assist that body in their attacks upon the agricultural interest. Such, however, was the case; persons in high station, win ought to have supported them, had, for political purposes, turned their backs upon them, and gave their support to those who desired to destroy them.— (Hear.) This being so, it was high time for them to come Yorward themselves in support of that interest, which was not only attacked by the Anti-Corn-law League, but also by those who ought have been amongst its chief supporters—(Cheers)—but who, on the contrary, had of late thought fit to second the endeavours of its most determined opponents.—(Hear, hear.) He did not wish to enter into a political discussion, but he must say that the agriculturists, by their apathy, had allowed the Government to make concessions, which, if they had exerted themselves, he was quite sure would never have been made ; and he called upon them now to resist the endeavours of the Anti-Corn-law League to frighten their friends into furthet' concessions." But perhaps the most unkindest cut of all was that of Lord Henniker at the Suffolk meeting:— " The arguments used by the anti-corn-law advocates to prove that the free importation of foreign corn would produce no disarrangement in the agriculture of England, reminded him of an anecdote. It was once asserted by some very grave philosophers, that if an eel were put into a vessel filled with water to the brim, the vessel would not overflow, as none of the water would be displaced. Well, a tub was brought, and it was filled in the presence of the philosophers. A country gentle man, one of the stupid country gentlemen, as they were called, however, told them to take care lest the eel should splash them. --(Laughter.) He was disbelieved ; the eel was put in, and it was soon found that it splashed the water about in all direc tions. Now he warned the agriculturists that, if free trade were adopted, they would get splashed in like manner." This variation of the old story of Charles the Second and the Royal Society is most maliciously calculated to illustrate the result of putting in Peel. We beg, how ever, to make one slight variation more ; and the parallel will be complete. In the modern Eel or Peel instance, it was not the " grave philosophers " who asserted that, if the Eel, or Peel, were put in, the vessel would not overflow—" no disarrangement would be produced in the agriculture of England." The grave philosophers predicted precisely the contrary. We ourselves, who have sometimes ironically been said to cul tivate the philosophical, emphatically warned " the stupid country gentlemen," that the Eel, or Peel, would " splash them." It wag those same " stupid country gentlemen," whom Lord Henniker drags in, head and shoulders, that were bent on trying the en philosophical experiment of a Peel Government. Accordingly the Eel, or Peel, was put in, and " the water was splashed about in all directions., It was impossible to furnish a happier illustration of the slippery champion chosen by the country gentlemen ; or one which carne more infelicitously; or more in sidiously, from the lips of a senator, who took some pains to declare that he wished to support Government to the utmost of his power. The landed, as well as the manufacturing League seem to repose their hopes in Sir Robert Peel's squeezableness. Between them he will most assuredly have the peine et forte duce to un dergo. " It was desirable," said a speaker at the Suffolk meeting, " that Sir Robert Peel should know, and that it should go forth through the land, that the yeomanry were ready to support the laws and the institutions of the State, and that they were not content to allow themselves and their children to be injured to enrich Mr. Cobden." We never heard that Mr. Cobden had devised any artificial legislation to injure anybody ; or any series of measures with regard to a great article of commerce, each successive one of which has produced disappointment to every interest consulted, or not con sulted. But what we are most edified by in these Landed League proceedings is the sudden adoption of the " unconstitutional" modes of action of the Anti- Corn-law League. Lord Rendlesham said at the Suf. folk meeting, " They were not to rest satisfied with petitions only. They should come forward with sub scriptions, and if the League raised 100,000/. they ought to raise 200,000/.—( Vehement cheers)—and thus con vince the world that though the League be a great fact,' the agricultural interest was still a greater fact." At the same meeting Mr. Gross said, that as tenant farmers, they would tell their enemies that they were ready for the fight. They would stand in the breach, and nail their colours to the mast.--(Hear, hear.) How was it possible for the farmers of Suffolk to compete with the farmers of Poland ? There is a beautiful mixture of metaphor and interrogation here. To " stand in the breach," and " nail their colours to the mast," are each gallant operations ; though they are not commonly con sidered capable of being performed at the same time and place. However, as Sir R. Peel's Constrictionists mean to raise 200,000/. for the League's 100,000/., it is possible that they can do two things at once, in all manner of ways. It ap pears, however, that, though they can stand in a breach, and nail colours to a mast, each of which are deeds of des perate daring—one of which seems enough at a time— there is another thing which they can not do ; or, at least, Mr. Gross pathetically asks, How can they ? " How was it possible for the farmers of Suffolk to compete with the farmers of Poland ?" Why per haps not, while they are standing in breaches, and nailing their colours to the mast. Suppose they tried a less showy process—viz., putting their shoulders to the wheel ! A correspondent of last evening's Standard actually founds a plea for protection on the fact that the farmers won't put their shoulders to the wheel, and adopt even tried improvements ! Others might derive from his observations, which seem those of a practical farmer, the strongest possible argument for stimulating improvement by competition. But " how are they to compete ?"—they can "stand in the breach," and " nail colours to the mast"—but " compete" they cannot. " She didn't mind death, but she couldn't bear pinching." STANDARD.—One of the most common complaints of the Anti-English party in Ireland is, that Parliament, in legislating for the empire, does not study the character nor endeavour to suit " the genius" of the Irish people. What this much-talked-of genius happens to be, it is very difficult to discover, as it bas remained hitherto unsuited by every attempt of Par liaments, native or Saxon, but most of all by the com mon law of England, as far as respects trial by jury. The proceedings which took place on Monday in Dub lin, at the commencement of the trial of Daniel O'Connell and his fellow-agitators, present still further proof of this fact, if after the previous trans actions in the case, such proof were at all required. When every pretext for delay which the notorious in genuity of Mr. Pierce Mahony could devise, or the plen tiful affidavits of the traversers partisans support, had been exhausted, Mr. O'Connell and his friends were at length brought to bay by the Attorney-General upon Monday morning. To imagine, however, that the calling over of the jury would have gone off in decent gravity, and the Attorney-General have been allowed to open the case for the Crown, according to the practice of the matter of-fact and un-mercurial Saxons, had been to do the agents for the traversers, the greatest injustice. On the contrary, no sooner had the counsel taken their places than Mr. Ford's grievance-discriminating eye marked a piece of negligence on the part of the under sheriff's' lowest official, and with becoming solemnity moved the Court" to place the chair for the witnesses a little to one side • a motion which, to do the audience justice, they received with laughter, and which was granted by the Court without the customary dissent of Mr. Justice Perrin. This important matter being disposed of, Mr. Ford proceeded to give an unmistakeable proof of the sincerity of his desire, and that of the party which ho represents, to have a jury without any political bias whatever, and of the value which they attach to the oath of jurors, that they will be guided by evidence alone. A Mr. Benjamin Eaton, ono of the special jury panel, sharing, it seems, in the general and not unreasonable desire of avoiding a service of many days upon the trials, claimed exemp tion upon the ground of ill-health, to which Mr. Ford, with much candour, replied that it was quite impos sible for the traversers " to lose the chance " afforded them by Mr. Eaton's being upon the jury. This plain and candid reference to hopes grounded upon the chance of the political feelings of a juror was made, the reader will remark, by the representative of a party which has been vapouring about the integrity of trial by jury, as though the entire weight of saving the Constitution had devolved upon them. Amongst Irish patriots, however, there is always to be found in acts a wholesome commentary upon professions. The historical a ind"' C on of Mr. Wyse, the well-worn rhetoric of Mr. Shell ' the poetical , fervour of Mr. Thomas Steele, a n d even thefami familiar-faced jokes and periods of Mr. O'Connell himse , are less va luable as a test of sincerity than hi he lfh of Mr. Ford to - 'lose the chance" of refusal of retaining Mr. Eaton. Such incidents these seem ex tremely odd to those who are accustomedwis t e o i b h elieve that the spirit of the English la supposing jurors to decide by the ev id ence that laidin so before them, and by that alone. We a re net yet enlightened as to use the popular lan guage of our Irish neighbours, who talk of " carrying agitati on into the Queen's Bench." And certainly, even with their example before us, and with all the knowledge of legal politics which they have been of late imparting to us, carrying agitation into the jury-room is still a novelty on this side the Channel. The calling of the jury being got over, the traversers made one further attempt to gain time by chal lenging the array on the ground o f the omissions in the list, the consideration of which had occupied the Court on the previous Friday. By the application one further day was gained, but no further advantage, as the Court decided that the Attorney-General's demurrer to the challenge should be allowed, Mr. Justice Perrin being swain " under the disadvantage of not concurring with his brethren." As to the ridiculous proceedings of the por tion of the corporation of Dublin, which masqueraded through the streets on Monday morning, in attend ance upon Mr. O'Connell, they are only to be taken in the same way as Mr. Ford's declaration—as so many proofs of the truth of Roman Catholic pros ssions of neutrality, and must have been, no doubt, gratifying to those who saw so little harm in handing over to Mr. O'Connell, and his followers, the Protestant co ora tions of Ireland. FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAY. TIMES.—The French Legitimatists betray considerable signs of confusion under the attack which has been made upon them by the sage Government of Louis Philippe, as any party will do when skilfully pres sed from with out, and unsupported by any definite object or clear and understood principle of coherency within. The adhe rents of the Duke de Bordeaux have at present neither the one nor the other. They have no definite object ;tfor it is impossible that they can nourish any real expectation of replacing " Henry V. on the throne of France. They have no coherency of principle, else we should hear of no coquetting with Republicanism. The more able among them must repudiate the one—the more honest must abhor the other. With the influence of the nobility extinct, with the commercial and trading classes wholly given to the dynasty of Louis Philippe, with the students and artisans rank republicans, the army devoted to the power which pays it, and even the clergy, in whose cause the elder dynasty fell, and among whom, therefore, the spark of old-fashioned loyalty might be expected at least to linger—with even the clergy in its younger and more vi g orous part, too deeply tinged with the wild doctrines ofLamennais to present any firm basis for Royalist principles—with all these things against them, it is, indeed, difficult to suppose that any man of ordinary forethought, who mixes with the world, or who even reads the daily papers, should cherish the hope of a second restoration. There are no visible materials for success—no locus standi—no point of con tact between Royalism and the French people—no body of ancient and familiar prejudice—no national want to which legitimacy is the necessary correlative—no still existing remains of a feudal interest—there is nothing, we will not say to encourage the expectation, but even to keep alive the most distant hope of the most modified triumph. The revolution of the last century, of which the present state of France is a development, was not the mere prostration of a party, it was the extermination of a whole mass of principles with every thin.. that ad hered to them. The entire soil which had been im pregnated with the traditionary feelings and ideas of Royalism was swept away in a torrent of blood, and the dry stone left bare below. We have now a fresh formation to deal with—a new people, held together (so long as it is held together), not by habitual regard for any form of authority, but by a ra tional dislike of anarchy—owning no allegiance and experiencing no reverence towards ancient associations —and regarding those who still cling to such romantic ideas as intrnders into a century which does not belong to them—relics of a bygone age, whose uncongenial pre sence might perhaps be mischievous to modern institu tions, if it were not so palpably impotent. No mind has sprung from the ruins of the 18th century—no able enthusiast has survived the storm in which it passed away, capable of transmitting its feelings or of infusing its prejudices in the succeeding generation. The dynasty of the Restoration—representative as it was of the line of ancient monarchs—stood amidst young France, during its short existence of fifteen years, like an alien con queror, maintaining itself by the mere advantage of pos session against an unfriendly and unapproachable popula tion. No impregnation of principles—no amalgamation of interests, had taken place. The Bourbon race was torn up and thrown aside after a short trial, and almost without an effort, like a sapless slip which has not put out a single fibre to grasp the chilly and barren soil which surrounded it. Such as it was such it remained, ignorant of and unintelligible to its generation. Is it conceivable that it should regain the position of power which, when in possession, it was wholly unable to preserve ? France, it is true, contains elements of confusion in plenty. Visionary aspirations—rude and dangerous theories—a rankling jealousy of restraint, not confined in its expres sion to the closet or the parlour, but avowed and acted on with a certain individual recklessness which marks a wild reality—these are, indeed, omens of change—omens which make us dread the moment when the vigilant eye and firm hand by which they are at present kept in check shall be removed. But amidst all these aspirations, and theories, and jealousies, what spot of firm ground can the Legitimatist place his foot upon ? There is none. Even were the French Henriquiste, like the Spanish Aloderado, to purchase a momentary triumph by a coali tion with his own bitterest enemies, nothing short of the genius of Napoleon or the sagacity of Louis Philippe could retain the dangerous supremacy. King Henry V. would not hold his ground a week, and this his wiser friends well know. It is this necessary hopelessness— this absence of any real and practicable purpose — which makes it, and must ever make it, impossible that the French Legitimatists should form a compact and united party ; and it is this necessary want of unity which has been exposed by the Ministerial attack, The Duke de Fitzjames declares, in the Quotidienne, his readiness to repeat before a French jury the bold expres sions uttered in Belgrave-square. M. de Larey tells the Chamber of Deputies that his oath of allegiance binds him to "obey the laws of the country and no more." Meanwhile the abler M. Berryer, representing, we should suspect, a more considerable portion of those who once composed the Royalist party, disclaims the notion of a plot against the existing Government, appeals to " the loyalty and sincerity which the Legitimatist party had evinced during the last thirteen years," and assures the Chamber that " the Legitimatist leaders who went to London told the Duke de Bordeaux salutary truths on the condition of the country, and the past faults of his family," and now only desired " to serve France, to ex ercise their political rights, to avoid everything tending to kindle civil war, and to unite with the rest of their fellow. countrymen in repelling foreign invasion, even were it undertaken in the interest of their own cause." Some at least of these leaders would scarcely thank M. Berryer for his disclaimer, Those who saluted the Duke of Bordeaux as the " King of the future," can scarcely be disposed to relish that able orator's protest against civil war, and his unthankful rejection of the Irish brigade, to whose possible services Mr. O'Con nell seems to ascribe so much present offers on the young Prince's fortunes. But whether M. Berryer refers to the liberal efforts of the Hibernian potentate (who might be supposed to have enough on his hands at home, without carrying his operations across the Chan gip, or to the less avowed, though perhaps more sub stantial friendship of the Courts of Eastern Europe, he is certainly right in supposing that neither by internal conflict nor external aid can " the heir of a long series of Kings" hope to occupy to any purpose the throne of his progenitors. If he will but thoroughly impress that conclusion upon his party, he will do France a service, save them from a most mischievous delusion, and earn forgiveness for many such silly expeditions as that to Belgrave-square. ADVERTISER—The State trials did not after all commence until Tuesday. Monday was spent in arguing for and against a motion made by the traversers' counsel, having for its object to set aside the jury, as illegally constituted. The motion was refused by the Court, Mr. Justice Perrin dissenting from his three brother Judges. But though the decision of the Court was adverse to the parties arraigned, the discussion raised on the question has proved, in a moral sense, most damaging to the prosecution. Mr. Fitzgibbon demon strated to the satisfaction of every one, except the Court and the Attorney-General, that it was an act of manifest unfairness, if not decidedly illegal, to try the traversers with a jury constituted as is the jury impa nelled to try Mr. O'Connell and his alleged co-con spirators. This is the universal impression without the walls of the Court, and the impression is shared by one of the most enlightened Judges, either in the Dublin Queen's Bench, or in any other Court in the empire. Were there, therefore, no other damaging circumstance connected with these ill-advised prosecu tions, this fact alone would be sufficient to divest a conviction, supposing it to take place, of all moral in fluence. But when, in addition to the more than suspicious circumstances under which the sixty-three names were omitted from the list, we remember the various previous mishaps and ugly occurrences connected with these proceedings, we unhesitatingly say, that of all the ill-judged measures of the present Government, this will be found to be the most injudicious and most injurious. Even, as just remarked, assuming a convic tion to take place, we cannot conceive the possibility of Sir liobert Peel ever allowing the parties to be brought up for judgment. The public mind already revolts against these prosecutions ; should they be followed by the infliction of punishment (always assuming a convic tion to ensue), a feeling of indignation will be created in the public mind which will overwhelm and destroy the Government of Sir Robert Peel. If there be one thing more than another which the people of England hold to be essential to the integrity of the national character, it is, that no susTacions attach to the proceedings in our judicial courts. Englishmen of all classes, and of all shades of political feeling and opinion, abhor anything in our courts of law which could be construed into an act of harshness or unfairness. In the present case, should a conviction take place and punishment follow, public sympathy in favour of the traversers will become alarmingly strong' and general—alarmingly so, we mean, for the Govern ment. Even those who are most opposed to Mr. O'Connell, would, in the supposed case, consider him a political martyr. Need we say what would be the pro bable effects in Ireland should O'Connell ever come to be so considered ? We will not attempt to describe these effects ; we leave our readers to exercise their own ima gination on the subject. Sir Robert Peel must by this time be convinced that, even supposing a conviction were ensured, no eclat whatever could accompany that result. Whatever moral weight might have attached to these trials, under other circumstances, none whatever can attach to them after what has occurred,. Theirs has been a strange eventful history indeed. It seems as if Fate and the Irish Attorney-General were sworn enemies, and that Fate had resolved to punish the Learned Gentleman in every imaginable way. We do not know if Mr. Smith bo given to cursing ; but if he be, he must have given many a hearty curse to the mis haps and mortifications which he has had to encounter in every successive stage of these proceedings. Next to the learned official, Sir Robert Peel is to be pitied. ',Ye are inclined to think that others, of whose names we have heard but little in connection with these trials, have had much more to do with them than the Premier. Be this as it may, the odium rests exclusively on him. The guilt and responsibility of the whole matter, so far as public opinion and public feeling aro concerned, attach to Sir Robert. No one knows this better than himself. If there be one act of his ministerial life which ho regrets more deeply than another, it is, we are sure, that of ever having sanctioned these prosecutions. His usual caution and worldly wisdom must have forsaken him, when he gave his consent to the in stitution of proceedings against Mr. O'Connell and the other parties associated with him in this in dictment. The difficulty with the Premier now is, how to get out of the predicament into which he has brought himself, without making his Government the laughing stock of the civilised world, and drawing on himself the contempt of friends as well as foes. He is indeed in a pretty pickle, Lie is afraid to retrace his steps; he wants the moral courage to undo what ho has done, by putting an end to the proceedings. And yet he cannot look forward to a conviction, even supposing he were certain to obtain it, without fear and trembling. His only hope, we take it, lies in the possible circumstance of some legal defect being yet discovered in the proceed ings, which will have the effect of stopping them, and consequently relieving him from the position of painful perplexity in which he is placed. He will be a lucky man if he be suffered to escape in that way. If he has friends, this is the time for their prayers. Ile has much need that one and all of them earnestly pray that Heaven may send him a safe deliverance. POST.—Whatever may be the ultimate result of the State trials in Ireland (the result, for so far, has unques tionably been most salutary), the grand debateable point will still remain—namely, the cause of Ireland's back wardness in all that should distinguish civilised life. 'We shall still have to inquire how it happens that under the " liberal and enlightened" Government of Great Britain —with laws similar to those of England—with a soil generally superior, and a climate certainly not inferior, so large a portion of the population of Ireland continues, from year to year, in a state of beggary and barbarism. Our readers know that we have often glanced at this question, and that our opinion is, that it is mere delusion to suppose that the evils ot Ireland are to be cured by such political changes as her agitators contend for. The schemes of Whig economists and Reformers are not less delusive. The very long article of the Edinburgh Review, however ingenious in its speculations, and bold in its recom mendations of sweeping political and ecclesiastical change, we regard as just so much trash, so far as re gards the practical amelioration of the state of the people. 'What signifies it to the tillers of the ground— the savage and half-destitute millions—whether the establishment of the Anglo-Catholic Church be territo rial or congregational ? How would the condition of the peasantry be affected, either for better or worse, by the endowment of Maynooth, or the mortgaging of the lands of the Established Church for behoof of the fund of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners ? That which the people want is a more comfortable way of living, and that (except in the north) is at present forbidden by the bad habits of the people—by the circum stances under which the land is overburdened by a pauper tenantry—circumstances which exist in de fiance of the law, and which nothing' can cure but some system of close superintendence to compel an observance of the law. At present there is a close and watchful superintendence, but it is that of the Ro man Catholic clergy, who do not respect the law, and who very often have an interest in making arrange ments, or causing arrangements to be made, - „which are at variance with the dispositions which the law, if exe cuted, would have made. In short, without denying that, in many respects the Roman Catholic priest is often found to be the friendly adviser, and the comfort and stay of the poor people in their affliction, it must be admitted (by those who know and respect the truth) that as a superintendent and guide in civil and social affairs, he often leads the people into courses unfavour able to social advancement. Our own belief is that poli tical reforms on a large scale will do nothing for the re moval of Ireland's social grievances, and that this can only be brought about by the establishment of a superintendence as close as that of the Romish priest, but devoted to very different objects, and carried on in strict conformity with the law. On a former occasion, when speaking of the circumstances under which land is held by the swarming population, we cited the evidence of the late Judge Forster, whose knowledge of the country, and whose integrity no one could doubt, whatever might be thought of his some what heavy and pedantic manner. He said that the oc cupiers of the soil were barbarised by a habit of gavel kind, and by tenancy in common and at will. This is what every one who has practical acquaintance with the subject must be convinced of. The con tinual subdisivion of the land is the monstrous oil. Not that we are advocates for the huge holdings of land which are common in England, We think there are evils in farms of three thousand acres, as well as in farms of ten, seven, and three acres, which may often be found in Ireland. The possession of any portion of land—a mere potato garden—seems to the Irish peasant a justification for taking to himself a wife, and producing a family. He knows there is a rent to be paid, but he trusts something to his pig, and much to Providence, for the means of paying the rent. In the meantime, the potato garden (provided the crop do not fail) will give him enough of the lowest kind of food to sustain life ; but if the crop should fail, then God help him and the children, for there is literally nothing between them and downright starvation. They know all this well enough, if they would but exercise their reason, and be guided by what they know. But they will not. It is not their habit. They are ready to encounter any risk, however dreadful, for the sake of setting up for themselves with a bit of land. They ought not ,to be allowed to do this. If the law were respected, they would find it impossible to ob tain the land ; but it is not respected. Men who have not any legal right to divide and distribute their holdings, nevertheless do divide and distribute them, and the hordes of peasant paupers increase. Twenty years ago all this was clearly explained to committees of both Houses of Parliament, but the public have forgot all about these Parliamentary inquiries, and now there are new inquiries into the very same thing. CHRONICLE.—Every stop in the progress of the State trials in Ireland, serves more deeply to convince us of the correctness of the opinion, which we have already so frequently expressed concerning the impossibility of those proceedings being followed by any advantage what ever to any party or any interest in the State. If a verdict of guilty should be the result, it will be impos sible for any mortal out of the jury-box to form any conjecture as to what portion it refers of that ocean of circumstances and occurrences which are the foundation of the charge. If the jury should acquit the prisoners, it would be unwarrantable in reason to infer, from the . verdict alone, that the twelve men in the box were of opinion that all the public proceedings of the repealers have been in conformity with the law of the land. With regard to the only other possible contingency—namely, that the jury should not agree in opinion about the case, and be discharged without finding any verdict at all, it is, of course, obvious that such a result would leave matters no clearer than it found them. Such is, we think, the conclusion at which every intelligent and impartial person would arrive upon considering nothing more than the nature of the charge, as well as that of the facts of the proceedings, of the conduct and of the conversations upon which it is founded ; together with the prodigious length and illimitable multifariousness of the act of ac cusation. But this view of the case has been infinitely strengthened by the occurrence of a fact, about the existence and particular nature of which all doubt has been removed by the discussion which took place in the Irish Court of Queen's Bench, on Monday last. It is now admitted by all parties, that of the whole number of individuals from whom the jury for the trial of Mr. O'Connell was to be selected, according to law, about one-tenth have been excluded from the possibility of being selected fur that purpose. The list of special jurors delivered to the sheriflcontained about GO names less than it ought, and accordingly, when the foreman came to the book to be sworn, the defendants' counsel presented a challenge to the array, upon the ground of its having been fraudulently and illegally composed. Lax logic, trivial topics, and a want of decorum in demeanour appear to be so much the characteristics of Irish tribunals, that we do not feel surprised at the ex hibition, upon the present occasion, of these usual attend ants upon the workings of Hibernian jurisprudence. The law officers of the Crown objected that the chal lenge did not state the name of the individual by whom the fraudulent and illegal omission of sixty names from the panel had been actually perpetrated. As if it was to be reasonably presumed that the defendants must be as well acquainted with the person who performed a clan destine operation " in the innermost room of the clerk of the peace's office," as they wero with that of the crier of the Court. The Attorney-General refused to take issue upon the averments of the challenge, and opposed its reception upon the ground that it did not communi cate a fact which there was no oth er j u di c i a l way o f as certaining than by allowing the challenge, which was opposed on the part of the Crown. The Attorney- General contended that the challenge did not allege that Mr. Shaw himself was guilty of the fraud and illegality complained of. But the only way in which this could be ascertained, was by examining Mr. Shaw and the other officials who were present; and this examination was rendered impossible, by the course which was pur sued by the Attorney-General himself. But of what earthly importance to the defendants or to the public was it by whom the fraud was committed? The Solici tor-General said, that if it had been alleged that the Sherijf had committed the fraud, that fact would con stitute a fair ground of challenge. This distinction, which was adopted and sanctioned by the Court, gives rise to the gravest considerations. We do not mean to make any personal imputations upon the integrity of any of the officials engaged in the conduct of the pro ceedings. But if—alio tenipore, alio consule—there should exist, as there has existed, a party in power determined upon ensuring, per fas et nefas, the conviction of a po litical or other antagonist, they have a reasonable as surance of being able, with perfect impunity, to prac tise the " art of packing," if they will only take care t o act upon the intimation thrown out in the case of the Queen v. O'Connell, and to perform the operation of mutilating the jury list before that point of time at which the Sheriff intervenes in the proceedings. It is a very trite observation, but one which never can be too often repeated, that every member of the community has a deep interest in the purity of every proceeding con nected with the administration of justice, which, with even a superabounding caution, ought to bo kept free from any liability to the smallest degree of impropriety or even of suspicion. We believe that we make no ha zardous assertion in stating that, independently of all the other considerations to which we have already adverted, the proceedings in the Court of Queen's Bench on Mon day last would be alone sufficient to prevent the candid and impartial part of even the anti-repealing community from being satisfied with a verdict of guilty, obtained from a jury selected as they have been in the present case. The strik ing off, in Mr. Beurne's office, of all the Catholics upon the reduced list of forty-eight, taken in conjunction with the omission which has been the particular subject of the present article, has had the effect of preventing a single member of that persuasion from being empa nelled for the trial of the case which, partly in conse quence of the omissions which we have been discussing, has now began to assume the appearance of a religious prosecution. The feelings which are likely to be ex cited in such circumstances amongst the vast majority of the Irish population, are of a very serious, or rather, of a very dangerous character ; and as all the attempts which have been made to induce the Attorney-General to consent to the removal of such legitimate causes of I Irritation have wholly and uniformly been rejected with petulance as well as pertinacity, we can only again ex press our most earnest hope that some unexpected occur rence may bring to a premature conclusion a prosecution, the effect of which must, as we believe, be in every sense injurious to the public welfare. THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EN ENING, JANUAR ':- GENERAL JACKSON. TO THE EDITOR Cl' niE TisiEs. Sir,—ln your City Article of Monday appeared fill extract from a letter of the correspondent of an Ame rican paper, giving some account of a personage of 30111 e celebrity—one who has hitherto been to the English an object of no ordinary respect—l mean the famous An drew Jackson. We find him there described as showing signs, I re gret to say, of the advance of old age, but " the lightning tire of former years yet flasaing in his eye., ;" and he is said to be of opinion that it will be long ere the disgrace inflicted upon his countrymen by the hard cider humbug can be wiped off. This letter is va'ry gratifying, on more accounts than one. First of all, it manifests to all the world the exquisite sense of honour inherent in brother Jonathan. To a sensitive mind such as his, the disgrace of the hard cider humbug must be a thing quite insupportable. Thus we have clearly demonstrated to us the malice of those who would insinu ate, that because he does not pay his debts, therefore he is not a man of honour. What, however, is more import ant (for no one, I believe, ever seriously doubted Jona , than to be a man of honour), this letter seems to promise 1 the means of getting at what I, amongst others, have long been desiring to know —namely, what may happen to be the sentiments of such a person as General Jackson on the subject of public faith, the obligation of paying one's debts and the like. It must be borne in mind that there are two sides, a " yea" and a " nay," to every question, and it may hap pen that the General's opinion on both these points may be in the negative. Hitherto, however, he, as well as all other public men in America (with the solitary exception of Mr. NVebster), have, owing no doubt to the characteristic modesty of the Americans, with singular unanimity kept their sentiments upon these subjects to themselves. No one can suspect the hero of New Orleans of a lack of moral courage to speak out whensoever and whatsoever the good of his country calls for. It must be remembered too, that in dignation, when excessive, is apt to make the tongue cleave to the roof of the mouth and render dumb. On this subject, therefore, information is wanted ; and I should like to know whether any fire or lightning is seen to flash from the General's eyes when he hears talk of IP.Nutt and repudiation ? He is said to take a vast interest in the elections of New York. Pray what does lie think of what is now going on in the adjoining State of Pennsylvania, where they are said to be dili gently paying off both principal and interest of the floating (that is domestic) debt, whilst the funded (or foreign) creditor is treated with paper in satisfaction of his dividends ! The General has been for some years removed from the sphere of active politics, and free therefore from the trammels of party politics ; precisely therefore the character from whom, considering his vast in fluence, it was expected and desired that we should hear a strong denunciation of what is regarded here as the fully of his reckless children. This expectation may, however, have been founded in a misapprehen sion. It may be that the mode of thinking which seems to prevail pretty unanimously on this side of the Atlantic, that debts ought to be paid, that contracts are obligatory, that public faith ought to be kept, that for either an individual or a State to borrow money which at the time they have not good reason to know they can, and which they do not seriously intend, to repay, is what is vulgarly called swindling, and that swindling is a trade of infamy ;—it may be that our mode of thinking differs from his. He may look upon all creditors, public creditors especially, as Jews and jobbers ; and it cannot be denied that Jews and jobbers are very detestable animals, and fit subjects for pillage. Swindling he may consider as a necessary ingredient in a democratic constitution, and therefore to be tolerated if not encouraged. in any case it appears highly desirable that the opinion on this subject of such a person should be publicly known, in order that it may be tried whether anything can be done towards reconciling the apparent discrepancy in the morality of the old and the new world. To you, therefore, I address this, in the hope that it may be deemed worthy of a place in your columns, which may chance to bring it to the eye of the " cor respondent," or some other person capable and willing to enlighten us on this interesting matter. Jan. 16. ANTI-SWINDLE. BOMBAY TRADE WITH CHINA. A private letter from Bombay has the following : " Since the settlement of the tariff by Sir henry Pot tinger, the trade with China is improving. Who would have anticipated, a few months back, the calm ai:d good feeling that now prevails between the Chinese and English ! I doubt, however, if we shall be able to get tea, sugar candy, &c., any cheaper by the arrangement that has been entered into: these articles are at pre sent much dearer than they were before the war: I allude to Bombay. How the good folks in England manage to dispose of tea at the prices published in the newspapers, is an enigma to me. We have at this time three American vessels in the harbour, bound to China, to convey and form the escort of the American Envoy to his Celestial Majesty, in order to negotiate for a free trade with the United States ; but I am told that the treaty entered into by Sir Henry Pottinger comprehends " all European Powers," placing them on an equal footing as regards trade. Such being the case, it was whispered to the worthy Ambassador, that the High Commissioner would not, probably, condescend to receive him, which seemed to raise his choler. The opium trade is as flourishing as ever ; the prices given for the drug are enormous ; ships leave this for our new settlement, Hong-Kong, laden with nothing else ; it is, therefore very clear that our Government wink at, if not countenance, the trade. Sir Henry Pottinger has, indeed, declared that if any opium should be seized on the coast by the Chinese, he will not interfere, nor will her Majesty's Government be answerable for the value of any opium so seized—thus leaving it entirely to the parties to traffic to any extent they please." ALARMING FIRE" AT IPSWICH. Yesterday morning, between the hours of twelve and one, the inhabitants of Ipswich were aroused from their slumbers by loud and continuous cries of "Fire!" and most urgent appeals for h e lp. B e ll s an d k noc k ers w ere suddenly and violently soun d e d t o g i ve th e alarm, while a lurid flame lighted up the atmo sphere, and painfully i added wei g ht t o th e cry— " The White Hart s in flames !—for God's sake get up and help us !" On proceeding to the spot, at about a quarter to one o ' c l oc k , we f oun d a range of stabling, runn ing para ll e l w i th the b ack of the dwelling. house, and nearly eighty feet in length, rapidly .being consumed by the fiery ele ment. At this time one engine only (the Tower) was playing. Contiguous to the north end of the stabling are Mr. Ray s ex t ens i ve prem i ses, built in this place of slight lath and plaster—these were soon burnt through in several places ; at the south end the stabling joined M r . H oo k er ' s ( chem i st) warehouse, containing large quantities of inflammable materials ; Mr. Smiths premi ses an d ot h ers, c l ose l y sur rounded the burning mass ; and the all but cer tainty of there being a fearf u ll y extens i ve conflagra tion stared everb?dyin the face. Shortly after two other engines arrived, ,, the S u ff o lk Fire-office and the .1_ the s A r it e h e s t t. a cb n yi l \rde Clement iy o i tsi Ray's slg(e,ini principally e also p ower f u ll y co - opera t e d privateivel Pa yh s el l i g m e et ‘ l va i y n , the flames ; St. Clement's. he hose of th e f ormer was t a ken through in Tavern on the gable end of Mr. Ray's premises, while the T ower eng i ne was em ployed in preventing , the igniti on o f M essrs . S m i t h s, Hooker's, and Conde! s premises. Providentially there was scarcely any wind at the time, and after about two hours persevering exertion r all fear of further calamity was rem oved. The authorities of the town, and many of its most influential inhabitants, were early at the scene of danger, and assisted materially in check ing the progress of the flames—indeed all present, from the Mayor to the humblest artisan, lent their aid with such earnestness and hearty good-will, in their different stations, as to do credit to their hearts. Thanks to them that a much more widely extended conflagration—of the extent of which it is fearful to contemplate—has not visited our town. We are sorry to state that 16 coombs of corn, 2 tons of straw, chaff engine, &c., were consumed. The cattle and harness were happily saved. Mr. Roby, landlord of the White Hart, is fully insured. The building destroyed was the property of J. Cobbold, Esq. Many of the inhabitants of the endangered premises hurriedly sought safety in the neighbouring houses ; a great quantity of goods was also removed into St. Lawrence Church, and other places of safety. The fire was first discovered by Mr. Brownsmith, a person living on the premises, who, on entering the yard, perceived some straw on the ground floor to be in flames, which immediately set fire to the lofts above. It has not been ascertained by what means the straw became ignited. In the hurry and excitement some rather severe falls occurred. Mr. Franks, master of the Blue School, sustained some injury) but there was no casualty of a serious character. We cannot close this notice without an expression of regret that the authorities of St. Mary Tower do not keep the hose of that engine in a better state of repair. A very consi derable time elapsed before anything could be d one with it, it being necessary to bind it with list, and have other contrivances, before the engine could b e brought into work. The other engines, particularly the Suffolk Fire Office, were immediately ready for powerful action.—lpswich Express. A SENSIBLE FARamt.—A few days ago, a farmer, resident not far from this city, was spoken to by his land lord, on the necessity of supporting - Sir Robert Peel and the corn-laws. "No, no," said Mr. Hodge, "no corn law humbug for me ; the corn-law means high rents and high rates, and just such prices as I can get, which happen to be always low after har vest. I would rather have low rents and low rates, and then I will take my chance as to prices." In the course of further conversation, it appeared, that in his grandfather's time, the farm in question was just one third the present rent, and though not protected by a corn-law, prices averaged equal to the range of the last three years ; and taxation was less, for wu had not to pay the penalty of;., war.—Chester Chronicle. Messrs. H. 'gander, May, and Thomas Plume, are appointed by " The National Animals Friend Society." of Exeter Hall, London, to visit the principal towns of Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, and Yorkshire, during the months of February, March, and April, for the purpose of holding meetings, to dissemiaa.te the important ob jects of the Society, and aid the great movement now being made enormities in inflict puttin won g a the s h top arm t l o ess tlio d s u e mb b , a t ri p te r i e s and ytile ut /la these counties.—From a Correspondent, IRELAND. THE STATE TRIALS. (FROM OUR OWN REPORTERS.) DUBLIN, TuEs D A COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. THE QUEEN V. DANIEL O'CONNELL AND OTHERS. The proceedings of yesterday did not advance the case at all ; it was a repetition of the preliminary skirmishing that has already given such active occu pation to the Crown lawyers. It was, however, fully ex pected that to-day the case would be fairly commenced by the swearing in of the jury, and the immediate opening address of the Attorney-General. The Court assembled at 10 o'clock, and there was a very full attendance within the building ; but outside the Four Courts there was much less of bustle and excitement than on the previous day. The arrange ments were precisely the same, and proved equally efficacious in securing order. Their Lordships having taken their seats, the tra versers were called in the usual manner. Mr. O'Connell answered to his name, but Mr. Barrett and Mr. Duffy were absent. The names of the jury were then called over to take their appearances; they all answered with . the exception of Mr. Stephen Parker. Captain Edward Roper applied for an exemption on the ground of age, being 72 ; and Mr. Benjamin Eaton on the score of ill health. I3oth the applicants were told by the Chief Justice to wait. On the names of Mr. Barrett and Mr. Duffy being again called, Mr. Gartland, solicitor, said that Mr. Duffy had been obliged to quit the Court on the preceding evening, from severe illness, and applied for an in dulgence of a few minutes for his appearance. Mr. CANTWELL (for Mr. Barrett) said that this gentleman could not appear for a short time, and asked if the case might not proceed in his absence, he (Mr. Cantwell) appearing as his attorney ? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was requisite in a ease of this kind that everything should be con ducted with the utmost regularity and order. If a traverser were absent for ten minutes on the first day of the trial he might be absent on another day for a longer period. It might be very inconvenient to individuals, but without the consent of the Crown, a traverser could not appear in this case by attorney. If he appeared by attorney in an early period of the proceedings, there might be some difficulty at a later stage in iden tifying them. It had been decided in England that unless the consent of the Crown was given, parties in a case of this kind could not appear by attorney. Mr. O'Connell said he did not think that the tra versers could be considered as included in those de scribed in the indictment as persons unknown. — (Laughter.) The Court waited a few minutes, when The CHIEF JUSTICE said it was now twenty mi nutes beyond the hour to which the Court adjourned. Mr. CANTWELL said Mr. Barrett resided four or five miles from town, and, probably, might have been delayed by some accident. The CHIEF JUSTICE said the indulgence as to time was one not in the power of the Court to grant. Mr. CANTWELL then asked for only five minutes longer, which the Court granted. During the interval Mr. Henn, the counsel for Mr. Barrett, entered the Court, and made the same offer on behalf of his client, that had been previously made by Mr. Cantwell—namely, that the case should proceed in his absence. In, a case of misdemeanour there could be no objection to this. The CHIEF JUSTICE said the Attorney-General had already signified that he could not allow this to be done, on the ground of the difficulty there might be in identifying the traversers. It was the Attorney- General who had to be satisfied on the point, not the Court. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said had the application to appear by attorney been previously made, he should have been prepared to show that the traversers had no right to appear by attorney. All the parties named in the indictment were bound under recog nizances to appear in person, and during the present trial he should be under the necessity of insisting on their personal appearance every day. Mr. O'Connell said, that would subject them to a series of accidents that might detain them two hours every day. The CHIEF JUSTICE said that was not likely to happen. The name of Mr. Barrett was again called, and he had not arrived. The Clerk of the Court then ordered Timothy O'Brien, Esq., and James Rooney, Esq. (Mr. Bar rett's bail) to be called, and required " to produce the body of Richard Barrett." Precisely at this moment Mr. Barrett entered the court, and his exceedingly opportune arrival excited great laughter. Mr. Barrett apologised for his absence, stating that it arose from his residing at some distance from town. The CHIEF JUSTICE said that was no reason at all for his not attending the hours of the Court. If such a thing occurred again the Court would be compelled to enforce the recognizances. The COURT then proceeded to swear the jury. The first sworn was Mr. James Hamilton. Captain Edward Roper was called, and then again claimed his exemption on the ground of age, and handed in an affidavit setting forth his age. The CHIEF JUSTIOE—Pass him over for the present. Mr. lIENN objected to the withdrawal of the name of Mr. Roper. The plea of age should have been made in the Recorders' Court ; he submitted that it could not be entertained here. The affidavit was handed across the table, and Mr. O'Connell having read it, said that it was only a de claration of age, not an affidavit of any incapacity. Mr. Roper said it was six years since he had served on any jury, and he thought he was exempt from age. The CHIEF JUSTICE said he would have been so had he taken the proper steps in October last. Mr. MAcDoNouGn objected to the exemption,, and grounded his argument against it on the judgment delivered by Mr. Justice Crampton on the previous evening. That decision asserted, in the strongest and most emphatic manner, the finality of the Recorder's list. One of the qualifications for being placed an that list, was being of a certain age; the Recorder had adjudged on that qualification, and the Court had itself asserted, in emphatic language, that such adjudication could not be reversed by any tribunal ; Mr. Justice Crampton had expressly said that it could not be inquired into. Mr. Justice CRAMPTON said the Court did not in tend to pass over the name of Mr. Roper. Mr. Henn would also permit him to say that his argument was not ad item. His judgment was given on the array of the whole jury panel, and he had given no opinion as to the qualification of any particular juror. The CIIIEF JUSTICE said the name of Mr. Roper had been returned, and he was now on the list ; so far the Act of Parliament had been complied with.. The next question was, whether Mr. Roper was enti tled to be passed by. As far as he had yet gone he had heard nothing to induce him to say that Mr. Roper had established an excuse. He rather thought that no such sufficient reason had been shown to the Court, and he was of opinion that the juror ought to be sworn. Mr. Roper was then sworn as one of the jury. Stephen Parker was then called, and handed in a medical certificate from Surgeon Kirby, stating his inability to attend. Mr. Vance, a licentiate apothecary was called and sworn. He said he knew and attended Mr. Parker. He was labouring at present under great nervous ex citement.—(Laughter.) In his (witness's) opinion, he was not in a state to attend to the present case. He thought it would be fatal to him to attend. He had had apoplexy twice. Cross-examined by Mr. MAcnortouGH—ls of opi nion that Mr. Parker could not attend. He was in a state of great excitement. I heard him called yester day. I went home with him, and I saw him after dinner. Mr. MACDONOUGH—Wras he in a state of excite ment then ?—(Laughter.) The ATTORNEY- GENERAL said he did riot think there Wad matter for laughter or ridicule in the case at all. 18, 1R44. Mr. MAcnoNouGn--Many things occur in this Court which are matter for ridicule. The CIIIET JUSTICE —We must excuse Mr. Parker. Edmond Clarke was next called and sworn. Benjamin Heaton, architect and builder, was the next juror called. He begged to be excused, in con sequence of incapacity to serve, from severe bodily pain with which hewf by reason of a hurt he received in falling from a scaffold, tlx pur suit of his business. He had a certificate from Sur geon Hart, stating his inability to serve, and he was sworn to that effect. He was excused. Francis Faulkner was next called and sworn. John Cook was next called and sworn. Henry Flynn was called and sworn. • Henry Thompson was called and sworn. Anson Floyd was called and sworn: John Rigby was next called. He asked the Court to excuse him, as he had been summoned as John Rigby, his name being John Jason Rigby. A few questions were put to him, which identified him as being the proper person, and he was accordingly sworn. Robert Hanna was called and sworn. William Longfield was called and sworn. William Ord was the last person called and sworn. The following persons were then called over and answered to their names :—James Hamilton, Upper Ormond-quay, Foreman ; Capt. Edward Roper, Upper Eccles-street ; Edward Clarke ; Francis Faulkner, Grafton-street ; John Croker, North Great Georges-street; Henry Flynn, William-street; Henry Thompson, Eustace-street ; Anson Floyd, Wellington Quay; John Rigby, Great Brunswick street ; Robert Hanna, Henry-street ; William Long field, Harcourt-street ; William Ord, Cork. street. The names of the several traversers, Daniel O'Con nell, John O'Connell, Thos. Steele, C. G. Duffy, Rich. Barrett, John Gray, and the Rev. Mr. Tierney were then called over and placed upon their trial. Mr. NAPIER then opened the pleadings, setting forth the nature of the case as stated in the opening of the Attorney-General. There were eleven counts in the indictment, to which the traversers pleaded not guilty. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then rose and addressed the Court and jury. He commenced by saying, that the jury had been impannelled on the present occasion to perform the duty of deciding on the guilt or innocence of the several traversers, and it would not be necessary for him to impress on their minds the necessity of giving their anxious and undivided attention to such a mo mentous cause. Mr. Napier had told them the nature of the charge against the several traversers, but to impress it on their minds, and that they might be able to understand the cause as it proceeded, he would call their attention to it again. The traversers stood indicted for having conspired together and confederated to create discontent and disaffection among her Majesty's subjects, and to excite them to hatred and contempt of the Government nod Constitution of the realm as by law established, and to stir up hatred and be tween the different classes of her Majesty's subjects, particularly in Ireland ; to excite discontent and dis affection in the army ; and to cause large numbers of persons to meet together at different times anti places for the unlawful purpose of obtain ing, by means of the intimidation thereby created, and by the exhibition of great physical force, changes and alterations in the law and Constitution of the realm as by law established, and particularly by these means, to bring about a dissolution of' the Legislative Union ; and by means of seditious ad , dresses, publications, and by intimidating Parliament, to bring about changes in the law of the realm, and to bring into contempt and hatred the tribunals for the administration of justice, and to diminish the confidence of the Queen's subjects in the admi nistration of the law therein, and to assume the pre rogative of the Crown with regard to the administra tion of justice. Having thus brought under the no tice of the jury the charges upon which the defendants stood indicted, it would be convenient and proper for him to make a few observations with regard to the law of conspiracy. The law, however, they would take from the Court and not from him. Conspiracy was a crime created when persons combined or agreed to do some illegal act, or conspired to do a legal act by unlawful means. Such was the law laid down by Lord Denman, Mr. Justice Parke, and Mr. Justice Pattison in the 4th volume of Barnewall and Alder son, page 349. The same principle was laid down in this Court in the case of Forbes, reported by Mr. Greaves. The same doctrine was laid down in the case of the Queen v. Murphy, in the 9th volume of Carrington and Payne, page 310, by Mr. Justice Coleridge. If they believed that the several defendants had been engaged in a common design to obtain the objects they had in view by the means pointed out in the indictment, in that case the acts and words of any one became evidence against the others, though they had not committed those acts or spoken the words themselves. The Learned Counsel quoted 6th Term Reports, page 527, Watson's case, reported in the se cond volume of Howard's State Trials in support of this position. In the case reported in 9th Carrington and Payne, page 275, a case not unlike the present, two defendants were found guilty. 'The same view was held in the case of the King v. Redhead, otherwise Yorke, reported in the 25th volume of the State Trials, page 1,004. There was a very important case in the 3d volume of Starkie's Nisi Prius, page 76, namely the case of Redford v. Birley, to which he wished particularly to call the attention of the Court. and Jury. It was an action of trespass brought against some persons who dispersed a meeting in Manchester. The trial took place before Mr. Justice Holroyd, and a verdict was given for the defendants, thereby esta blishing the illegality of the meeting. The case was then brought by motion before the full Court, consist ing of Lord Tenterden, Mr. Justice Bayley, Mr. Justice Holroyd, and the present Lord Wyn ford. They refused the motion, and established the law as laid down at the trial by Mr. Justice Holroyd. In the course of their judgment they gave their opinions with regard to unlawful assemblies. (The Learned Gentleman then read the opinions of Mr. Justice Holroyd and Mr. Justice Bayley relative to what was an unlawful assembly.) On a motion being made for a new trial in the same case, in banco, Lord Tenterden, in giving judgment, said the cir cumstance of the professed object of the meeting being peaceable, was not to be taken into account, for unless that was its professed object the meeting could not be held. The real object of the meeting was the matter to he regarded. Again, said his Lordship, others might go to the meeting intending mischief at some fu ture period, when those who had been drilled up to that time without arms had arrived at a further stage of military discipline. They would be told in the course of the defence that those meetings had ended peace ably. Why the intention was that they should dis perse peaceably. That was one of the most danger ous purposes of those meetings. If they had not done so, the conspiracy would have been broken up earlier. Besides, the hour of action had not yet arrived. As one of the traversers had said, the hour of England's infirmity was Ireland's opportunity. The time to call upon them had not yet come. The part of the con spiracy was to effect a complete organisation from north to south, from east to west, before the signal for action was given. Therefore it was that the meetings had dispersed peaceably. Others might go to these meetings, too, as Lord Tenterden had said, intending mischief at some future period, when those who had been up to that time drilled without arms had arrived at a further stage of military discipline. But he (the Attorney-General) denied that these meetings were peaceable, or any thing like peaceable, since they were assembled under the control of one man, who might give them one order or another order, as he chose. Such assemblies were, he would show by high legal authority from the Bench, inconsistent with the law of the land. Lord Wynford, in giving his judgment, said it ap peared to him that the meeting was not innocent, and if it were not, what, his Lordship said, was it ? They had, he said, the key to it in the evidence of one of the witnesses; their object was, by exhibiting their numbers, to induce others to join them, that they might thus be able to overcome the Government. Now, such he would prove was the course adopted with respect to the meetings now in question. There was another case, which he would cite, as applicable in the present instance; it was the case of the Queen v. Holland, Carrington and Payne p. 460, an iadict ment for seditious libel. The subject of it was on a resolution to the effect that the people of Birmingham were the best judges of their own right to meet in the Bull-ring, and were the best judges of their own power and resources to obtain justice. Justice Little dale, in summing up, said it was no sedition to say,that they were the best judges of their right to meet in the Bull-ring or anywhere else, but that the words " the best judges of their own power and resources to obtain justice," were seditious. There was one remaining authority which he would lay before the Court, it was that laid down in 4 Alderson, p. 178, in the case of the Queen v. Burdett, and it illustrated strongly the principle which he (the Attorney-General) had al ready laid down, viz., that the act of one conspirator was, in point of last, the act of all. The Right Hon. Gentleman having read the case went on to say that haying called attention to the lAw applicable to the - ---- ---- greater portion of that extraordinary case, ho would now proceed to open the f!;.ets of it. It might first,. however, be convenient to advert to the position o the repeal question at the time of the constitution f the Repeal Association. The Right Hon. Gentlem an here gave a short history of the various socictie, their names, objects, Scc., which had been formed 11 Mr. O'Connell, from the period of Catholic Etnanci; pation in 1829 down to the formation of the- present' Repeal Association early in the ~ , e t, r 1840. 111 , a Association had changed its name iWice, and in Jti 1840, it received the name of the Loy i t still s Repeal Association of Ireland, which name retained. The general nature of the constitution 0 that it consisted of associates, members, and vtd, ll ; i i ; teers. The bond of union between those val . ' ° "„ parties was with the view that some such as the ass"' ciaties should be liable to a very small subscriPtil in order that the organisation might be eff ° , et t e e g ansong the poorer classes. Accordingly the ass Those paid ls. on obtaining his card of admission. n . cards, one of which he now held in his Ilan"' t he swered all the purposes, without coming within.oo, express words of the Act against passports or sle or Parties holding them would by exhibiting them s i ll t o who were connected with the Association, a n : he what extent the organisation was effected. Loyal Nation,, top of this card was a shamrock, with the wei -s t be " Roman Catholic, Protestant, Dissenter." Nea r p o t bottom was the date 1782, also a view of the Pr es ' " Bank of Ireland, with the w ord s , " It was , it shall bet)', The next class consi s t e d o f " mem b ers " who scribed 20s. An " asso c i a t e " a l so , w h o collected a'6o paid in 205., was entitled to a member's card.o one corner of this ca r d w as th e wor d " ClO nta „ %' sit e with the date 23d o f Ap r il, 1014 ; on the O PPO ° side the words " Benburb, sth of June, 1645;tett the bottom an Irish word, which, being tra nsi3 oth signified " The mouth of the Yellow Ford, ; o il of April, 1598 ; also th e wor d " Li mer i c k," A n bi o e; 1692. These names a n d d a t es were those of P' a i and times at which the Irish were successfa 0 battle either over the Danes or the En lish, ft g „ they were now called, the " Saxon foreigner. no d were the cards of an association which, in peace disc tranquillity, never, forsooth, meditated exciting of content and difference between different clasSe g d her Majesty's subjects. Th ose cards were f oroe fp and engraved thus with the view of endeavouri n g e bi rake up transactions of centuries past, and & r oe exciting hatred against the " Saxon foreigner. - battle of Clontarf was fought against the Da nes o l 3 the Irish under Brian Boru.---(Laughter.) Ile,p e p - fote not see what it was that ex cited laughter. I 'oo those trials were concluded it would be see n V there was anything but cause for laughter. ote Learned Gentleman here went at great lengtuvesl the history of the battles referred to, and then n. dit); on to show that one of th e c hi e f me a n s of ar e i - sien the doctrines of the Association was the transit)" t he of repeal newspapers to districts according t , ° ol l amount of rent collected in e ac h, and contendeeeo,i, the press was the most powerful means of d iss a to nating the seditious doctrines which he attribu te ert ed the Association throughout the country, and r e f solir to the effects produced in France during the % e dit tion by the newspaper L' Ami do -I el l e and in Ireland, about the year 1798,.., 11 ,,, well-known newspaper called the Press. next call attention to an address to the repea' 4 l dens, which had been publi s hed in the Nation P ci the paper. The Right Hon. Gentleman having r et/ o isie address, p rocee d e d t o s h ow th a t th e p er f e ct orgttootr, tion of the repeal-wardens had its origin in tha r t i ti b°' went. They h a d a ll h ear d o f th e J aco bin o n France and its affiliated societies. No one e ver t1) 0 templated the O l consequences that flowed fr ein Society. Yet it overthrew the Government ft time, and was succeeded by a despotism that ss l io tea the country for many years. having further P°, oll o out the evils of this organisation, he said he s ; o ie now come to the first meeting of the Repeal -A - 10 6 0 tion, which was held on the 4th of Feb., 184 3 .,,c0v. of ie traversers were present, Mr. Ray, Mr. u $O4, nell, and Mr. Duffy. A statement of accoun ts ', was read by Mr. Ray, many of them consisting 501 the distribution of these very newspapers 7,0 alluded to. At that meeting was also produc e bo scP was now judiciously called a diploma. It wasr. n el f , somely engraved document, and by it it woul d qjeo,' that it was considered possible that the repeal•• 0 01 might have other duties than their ostensible °fles h ', tY would hear one of the traversers inquiring' v i lf od people could not follow a repeal-warden as w ell as t was called by the name of a sergeant. The Itig h o Gentleman also quoted a very long extract fee o ,bic speech of dr. O'Connell at the same meeting, ',n o e l he spoke of the relation of England with foreign '„ge ll , 4 of the internal distress of England, of her ar!" og strength and real weakness, and asking if that ° DO') the time for Ireland. He also alluded to the c re le, made by Napoleon in not sending an army te a instead of to Egypt, to the martial character of t - 0 1 1, people, to the military advantages of the c ount 1 , 1 1 1 00" concluding with expressing his conviction that r Ire were to pour out her vast strength upon the soil eu se veS land, the people might, if they were true to thete at iefi !rive the invaders into the sea. He (the A t n ,, t ' e rl General) contended that though Russia was 113 : ti eli t 'il was England that was intended, she being fr e ll :poken of as the oppressor of Ireland. He wel l ,t, bring under their notice a publication, of wil l- c al' I3arrett, one of the traversers, was the edit or, the Pilot, one of the papers which ° k e re t/t il t ; peal Association so industriously circulated the p, out the country. Mr. Barrett had taken 0 1,,F, in all these proceedings, and had endeavors Oct far as he could, by means of his newspaper, to t e W ft dissatisfaction. The publication he should quo dated the 10th of March, 1843, and containediestsesoi of a repeal meeting held at Washington, Unit e n c les t o At that meeting Mr. Tyler, the son of the Pres' d the„' the United States, was present, and he should r,e h n ,li) an extract from his speech on that occasion. . I , ‘ „, v- hie„k h . o and Learned Gentleman then read the pasage; - the well-known one concluding with these wordsl;l o ou' t libation of freedom mus t some ti mes b e quaffed i n i e d i l Ile furth e r rea d th e remar k s conta i ne d in 9 ' pe e m article on the subject of the same meeting. Th s e s tri v n i of Mr. Tyler w a s ca ll e d " a b o ld an d statesn l a b o y - speech." These were the publications which til e , l e 'rei lj o connected with this Association thought they , s a 0% 4 tified in circulating, so that they might be red many persons as possible ; this was the poise n t oty was infused into the minds of the Irish people, /: obedient to the laws if they were permitted too or, these mischievous agitators, who, for the sake biti f,il l o r, ing out their own purposes, deluded an na t ha t° o people. This was one of the means by which, ', l „ t ioS, h 'e of the late Ministers of the Crown called a reve 4 "a te e !! the empire was to be established, which wouldi,e‘ l oo l ,o forming of a republic in Ireland, of which Mr. u n of would be the chief. He used the language of n-e coil s 'y late Ministers of the Crown. The next step in th e e ate o 0 racy to which he should call their attention, was t ", - s y ing of large bodies of persons from great distantago orders issued to them, that they might beconi c . ) t h stmt tomed to assemble in these great bodies, not ke pt in their hands, because everything was to be • b e of and tranquil till the organisation was COroP e . o e t° l l l when that time arrived—when that organissti complete—when the - hour of England's iefirra i ., t T e d have arrived, then would the people have seq . o o 0 habit of meeting and marching at the word of in military array. There was nothing new i n s pilol would be found,. that for every stage of this en, n r teu v there was precedent. The same course was a",. ° o f 1797, before the Rebellion. This was a flistt e ' rt ol o o' tory. He then quoted a passage from the Rer" o rt , Committee of Secresy, appointed by the Hour vioPjef icons to inquire into the causes of the Reu e r ,tl o g otY which the asse m bli ng o f th e p eo pl e i n t hi s flastin - 0 0 0 ,1S . various pretences, was d escr ib e d. Th e first h , t s meeting was held at Trim, on the 16th of g i .a re ostlfett Three of the traversers, M r . O'C onne ll, N r ' ss and Mr. Steele, were present. A dinner v‘ribvi l the same day, at which Mr. Bar re tt return ed le te l o for the toast of " the people." He urged the Pel e e t o tranquil, to be well organised, and when they At o g Ireland had wily to stamp its foot to be free. a l' i he same dinner Mr. O'Connell spoke. He qun t , c „iaetl e d extract from the speech then made, which eoll"'d declaration that nothing could be hoped fof Iret / e t, an English Parliament. It was a remarkable - t it; f 'eS during the whole of last session not a single P e %; - ii I° „ e is presented from Ireland in favour of the ni n- ti t 1 ' . 4 repeal. This was not to be wondered at, hen meetings the,people were told that nothing b u "„ l e re 0 , was to be expected from it. But now they 11 0 . that, since these prosecutions, there had 51 3 , 1% ; t S great demand for parchments. These meet ° ,soiii not well be held without some pretext, and - en,l' pretended that they were held for ° e d i ct' 0 ) 4 tutional purpose of petitioning. li e b - ieb luded to the establishment of the paper ''',,, r iete,"ll4 were aware was called the Nation, the pr O r e which was Mr. Duffy. This was also lie vl°o4 papers circulated by the Association. Nowlgife, I d if o the saying had passed into a proverb, " I W ill oril`,ll o the making of the laws of the country if Y' r tl O- r oe me the making of its ballads." It was singtO s ot so/ 0 0 writing of seditious poetry, as a principles wii lt e coO s i tied out for the first time in this country t he n or circumstance was mentioned in the Report 'in t w as dle mittee of Secresy, already alluded to, and 1 , t heP e alr twain thought advisable to pdison the minds f te by such seditious songs. This poetry ha",,l r it ° , r set,t fished in a small volume, entitled the "a ic; eV' Nation," and from this work he should rea f J; 1P it being the song called the " Memory 0 - • d it The Hon. and Learned Gontleman then rel l lows : Who fears to speak of Ninety-Eigh t ? `Who blushes at the name f 'When cowards mock the patriots' fat e ' Who hangs his head for shame ? He's all a knave, or half a slave, Who slights his country thus; But a true man, like you, man, Will fill your glass with us. We drink the memory of the brave► The faithful and the few — Some lie far off beyond the wave/ Some sleep in Ireland, too; All—all are gone—but still lives on The fame of those who died; All true men, like you, men, Remember them with pride. Some on the shores of distant lands Their weary hearts have laid , And by the stranger's heedless haws Thar lonely grayek Were mho; roc Ili tai sp, sit, 1 01 ink Vva 111 e ta ( WI ) te l pre us, an, tne orp th a the wii