The Sun. — London, England, 1844-01-22 00:00:00

Mr. 13arwsTEn—Look at your notes of the meeting of the 18th of July. Mr. O'Co x NELL—It would he well if the officer of thetourt Marked there notes. Let them be handed in for the purpose. Mr. BREWSTER—Look to page 1 of that date; do you see the names of any of the traversers ent,red there as being present? --I see the names of Mr. John O'Connell and Mr. Daniel O'Connell ; I see the name of Mr. Barrett in page 4. At this period of the proceedings there was some little noise at the table caused by the Government Reyorter speaking across the table to Mr. Brewster. The CHIEF JUSTICE pointed down to where Mr. Edwards Vas sitting, and said the disturbance came from that place. Mr. O'CoNNELL, who was sitting next to Mr. Edwards, got up and denied that it came from him. Mr. FITZGIBBoN said that many persons came there from cu iiosity, and if they could not hold their tongues they ought to remain at home. Mr. BkE WSTER—Look to pace 12; do you find that Mr. Ray did anything at that meeting ?—Yes, he handed in several auras of money ; I find in page 13 that Dr. Gray gave in con tributions. , Mr. Bit xvcsTE —Look to page 3, read the contents, and read slowly, if you . can. A juror—Hold up your head, sir, and raise your voice. The witness then proceeded to read an extract from a speech of Mr. O'Connell's, in which he eulogised Mr. Alurtage. and P,rusnised to attend the meeting at Balting,lass on the 6th of "ugust which was his own birth-day. He then read a letter fr the Right Rev. Dr. Cohen, Roman Catholic Bishop •f `-lonfert, enclosing his subscription to the Association. Oia the 9 artle day Mr. Barrett handed in money from a Protestant gen tleman of the North of Ireland. The witness then read another exti act from a speech of O'Connell's at the same meeting. In that speech Mr. "'Connell alluded to the necessity of attending t• the muni eiPal elections, and said that the Tories had refused te pay the borough rate. Ile also said that Lord Brougham had been i nquiring how the money received at the Association was dis ried of , but if Lord Brougham chose to sobs.eribe his pound e wrathd be enlightened on that point—that is, it they would receive the subscription of such a man. They had invested 600 0/. in the funds already, they intended to invest 4,000/ 'more, and 1,000/. had been advanced for the building of the Conciliation Hall. Mr. BREW iTER—Look to page 12; do you see an entry of any rroney handed in by Mr. Ray ?--Ye , , Mr. Ray handed In subscriptions from different parts of England and Scotland (the witness enumerated them). Dr. Gray handed in money sn the same day, and stated that the Marquis 1)f Downsliiie had interfered to prevent his tenantry becoming Renualers. Mr. linEwsTr K—Look to your notes of the nit eting on the 23th of July, page 2. —I have them before me. The secietary funded in money on that day. In page 6, I see that Mr. O 'Connell handed in money on the same nay. In I age 8, 1 And that Mr. Duffy. of the Aation, handed in his subscription. In page 9, 1 find that Mr. Steele and M. John O'Connell nanded in money. Mr. 13 REWSTE it—Look to page 6, and read the statement of Mr. O'Connell with regard to the finance details ?—Mr. O'Connell stated that the amount received from the 4th of July', 1842, to the corresponding quarter in 1843. was 15,tioN. Mr. BREWSTE 1: We will now go to the 14th day of August, 91 set out in the indictment. Look at page 2of your manu. script--who appeared to have been at that meeting of the As sociation?-11r. Ray, Dr. Gray, and Mr. O'Connell. Go to page 4, and tell me who wore present at that meet i"g ?—Mr. Steele was present. Go to page 12 ?—I don't sue any names there. Look again ?—Oh, yes, I see there the name of Mr. Duffy, of the Nation. Mr. 11 7 s;;;;s1DE—We do not find any mention of the 14th of August in our copy of the indictment. Mr. BREWSTEE—It is a misprint. Mr. WityrEsinE—My Lord, be good enough to strike out that evidence against Mr. Duffy. IikEWSTER—Just alter the date, my Lord, because Mr. l 'uffY's name comes in the next meeting. Go to page 22 of August 3, and say who were present at that meeting ?—Mr. Duffy, Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Steele.- 4GO te) pa .5, and say whose name..do•you find there?—Me. -- 1 1 Go back to page 3, and tell me did Mr. O'Connell do or say anythin g that day ?—lt states that Mr. O'Connell arrived seortly after two o'clock, accompanied by Mr. Steele. He read Ireral l etters , enc l os i ng con t ri b u ti ons f rom re p ea l war d ens , I tornan Catholic clergymen, and others. Go to page 7, and tell me what do you find there ?—Mr. u 'Gonnell read a letter from Philadelphia, containing remit tances and resolutions read at the Association of the friends of Ireland and Repeal, and he moved that the letter from Judge Doran be inserted upon the minutes. Go to pa g e U. Did he read any document of the Association t hatt day I—Yes, he read his plan for the renewed action of the "t s tl Parliament; I got a copy of it at the Association. The deputv-clerk then read the plan for the renewed action of the Irish Parliament. He continued to read the manner in tihich members were to be given to the various cities and towns, and conside re d th e b asis o f representation should be the amount o f population. This was taken from the census of 1831, which :las prepared for a different purpose, and without reference to he report of the Union. Household suffrage, after a certain Period of occupancy. to give the right cf voting, and votes to be taken by ballot. Turn to page 11 of that day? Finds no notes referring to a rbitrators at that page. Look at the last four lines ?—I see it there ; the meeting then adjourned to the next day, when they were to report on "e mode of appointing arbitrators and the abolition of the Catholi c oath. Judge Caamrrox—Abolition of what ? Witness—The k,atholic oath; looks to page 4 ; finds Mr. Barrett's name an d Mr. Daniel O'Connell ; at page 5 Mr. John O'Cori -14,11; at page 8 Dr. Gray ; leads page 4 ; Mr. O'Con -711 hand e d in several sums of money from various parts of 'flierica, and read letters from Nvw York and Utica accompa t)ing the respective sums, which he moved might be insetted ; I x .' the minutes. W - itness was proceeding to read" there were igh sounding " Mr. Frrzoilsos, Q. C.—ls this your comment on the pro cee'lings ?—Yes—( Laughter.) A ir. WHITESIDE desired him not to trouble them with refer ring to anything of his own. Witness proceeded—Mr. O'Cont , ell said it was prudent to _advise with th e propr i etors o f t h e severa l newspapers as to the Propriety of printing supplements, that all the letters should be PAblialled. At p age 8 reads the speech of ur. Gray, 01 the °nun' a Journal, p ro posing the adoption of the report fur nished by the Committee as to the mode of selecting ono carrying into Operatien the appointment of arbitrators through out Ireland. Got a document that day at the Association. El " it in Court. Hands it to ()dicer to read. 'I he Cie' kof the Crown was then proceettit g to read from manuscript on 'ee slight pap e r. Judge CR A3:PTON —Perhaps you have it in print; it is easier to read. Mr. BuxwsTea—We have it printed. The officer then read the Report of the Sub-Committee. 1 August, 1643, on the system and appointment of arbitrators in Ireland, signed by Dr. Gray, Aug. 21, M 43. , 111 r. BREWSTER—Look to the meeting of the 2reh of August, aoil say vrl,o were present?—Dlr. Steele, Mr. John O'Con- I nell, Mr. Ray, Mr. O'Connell, and Dr. Gray. Look to page 7, and see if Mr. Ray did anything ? —He read a letter inclasing a bill on Mr. Rothschild for 12S1. 1 Did Mr J. O'Connell read a letter ?--Yes ;he read a letter fro m Cincinnati, inclosing 1131. Did Mr. O'Connell say anything at that meeting ?—Yes. niThe Witness then read some observations made by Mr. 1 s' Connell with respect to the order on Rothschild, the Arbi. t ration C ourts, an d a l etter rece i ve d f rom M r . B arry , of Mallow. kt ,!•°ok to the meeting of the 29th of August, at pages 3 and 5, an Say who were present at it ?—Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Ray, Mr. J. O'Connell. Read the observations of Mr. O'Connell at that meeting. • The witness commenced to read an abstract of the speech re act by Mr. Ross yesterday, when Mr. J ust i ce CRAMPTON asked whether it was necessary to 'tad the speech over again t . l 4r. BREW TER said that he only wanted to have the last Page read ; but the other side might require to have the entire read. ta T phe witness then read some observations made by Mr. "linen, to the effect that Ireland had many grievances to a.,, -ra Plain of. She was accused of being discontented, and she l in. It was said she was disaffected ; but he sung back di e accusation by saying it was as false as hell. She was not br a frecte, but discontented. There should be no outbreak in a life -time ; but when he was dead it would.not be an un natural or unadvisable result. s e T he expression " unadvisable result" seemed to come with ti r Prise upon counsel for the Crown, the Solicitor-General, and fitn ess Brewster again asking him what result ? To which the itness still replied, an unadvisable result." tO lr • O'Cosuseet.--I never said anything of the kind. (In report read by Mr. Ross) esterday, the words were, we be `,le, " unavoidable result." * 4 r- BREWSTER—Can you say how any of those observations sere received ?—No. 4 1 ... , 00k to page 1 of the report of the meeting of the 4th of r‘eniber, and which of the traversers were there ?—Mr. —.l k Mr. Steele, and John O'Connell. h topage 7 and see if Mr. O'Connell did anything 7—He h anded in sums , of money from Roscommon, Circular Bar, Bell lest, Ad elaide, New York, Boston, and other places. th? i d Mr. Ray make any observations?—He recommended ‘,‘ Spirit of the Nation' to be circulated amongst the peo e. Instead of the trash they were in the habit of reading. sr p the witness read the pass a g e very indistin c tly, he was No w to rea d it over aga i n . a b ott a t ‘v go to page 16, and see if Mr. O'Connell said anything th another meeting to be held ?-- Mr. O'Connell said that h ore would b e a meeting in Loughrea, where three or four vi rMred thousand people would be gathered together, in( e re there would be no breach of the peace if the sub-in • „-;" ° r of police would only allow him to have 200 m .n, hardy treaters, to act as policemen, under the command of the -inspector N ew • h go to the 10th of September, and look at page 1 .irch of the traversers were present ?—Mr. O'Connell, Mr. '''a c n ett, and Mr. Steele. and t° . Page 10, for the meeting of the Pith of September, • aY Mr. Barrett did anything ?—He handed in a sub erlption of • 211 bid r• O'Connell do anything after that ?—He addressed p o i lt 7 . , ee ting, and handed in 5001. from America. He also De '"st out that th e O rangemen w ere trying to give the Re m:, mo vement a religious character, but that it would tail, as Now °Neut. was to bent fit Irishmen of all classes. * , }1 ,.."w go to th e meet i ng o f t h e 13 t h o f S e ptember, and say appeared at that meeting ?—Mr. O'Connell, dir. Steele, and M r. ay. 11,.W,hat did Mr. ('Connell fir,t, do ?-1-le read a letter from ell'"lngton, United States, and described it as a document taianriacterised by good sense, practical information, and con •vv:l expressions ef symathy to Ireland. sub. nat did Mr. Ray atop read a communication ea the th Pet of the enumer appointed to take the numbers of e‘l-onstituency. le.A'• Brewster then handed in a manifold copy of the address stiaillsßritish subjects, which Mr. O'Connell, at this meeting, littuld be circulated through the three kingdoms, and tis ,ea!ded on the walls of Liverpool, London, and Bristol. As 0 1.! Eleoeument was read yesterday, he did not occupy the time t 2o ttl. Court with it, but simply put it in. He continued the t he notes of the witness by telling him to go to page 1 of ~,Tt es tes of the meeting of the 21st September, ani to state 01,4,011 n oft the tr averser! wore present.-11r. Ray, M r. J. De, and Mr. Duffy. V,l3tt.Mr. Duffy do anything ?—He handed in subscriptions. wk t . • Duo Mr. at the meeting of the 27th of September, and tell me J:7),3?&unnfienid were at that meeting?—Dlr. O'Connell and Mr. ape Witnesnsi answer to anoth er quest i on, was rea di ng par t o f ech r. O'Connell, but was stopped by Mr. Brewster, who said;' th at he did not want to hear what Mr. O'Connell • He only wanted t o prove that he was present at the x aeetin g it s any other person there? —Dr. Gray. telly st 14 "waTxit—The subject matter of this meeting was ated yesterday • he should not, therefore, occupy the p"rolove.of.itee Court with ' going over it again. He only wanted to Afrlrresence of the traversers. sa w theearresinz—But you are not to assume that this man B No -2 4 1: 5 TEL—I am not assuming anything. Look at Olsodrin.e.ll andY A w i h r. o ß w a a y s . at the meeting of the 26th? Mr. J. so other Connell O'Connell state at that meeting anything relating to izeetifurneeting ?—lie made some observations in reference to x i ,. at hlulla hmast fir, Was reading • nit the observations, when es trie L°_ , said the course Mr. Brewster had to pursue was "'tug the evidenee if Mr. R 011; he ought, therefore in/ one ing THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EN ENING, JANUARY 22_ 1844. to read everything of which the witness had taken notes, and not such extracts only as were deemed material. Air. 13k EWSTER said in some instances he had certainly called on th© e iiness to read the speeches; in a majority °teases these speeches had been already read by Alr. Ross, but where he thought it desirable he had called on this witness to read them a secontl,time. 1. In some instances this was not at all necessary. All he wanted to prove at present was whether Mr. ®'Connell announced the meeting at Mullaghniast. Mr. Aloone—lf the witness came forward to give evidence as to any of the traversers being at the meeting, he submitted that he ought to give an account of all that was done. He would not go the length of saying that a reporter ought not to give evidence as to what Mr. A. or Mr. B. said, or what every indivi dual said; but if Mr. O'Connell er any of the other traversers made speeches on that occasion, he had no right to make ex tracts lions those speeches, or read only those portions which he thought material. The CHIEF JUSTICE thought Mr. Moore had misunderstood Mr. Brewster. What he had stated had not been done ; the witness was stopped in his reading by Mr. Brewster. Mr. Aloortx—ln one instance the witness began in the middle of a speech. Mr. I3REWSTER—II was the middle of apage, not the middle of a speech. The passage was the reference made to the dis tribution of " the Spirit of the Nation" by Mr. Ray. Mr. MOORS—On this occasion Mr. O'Connell appears to have made several speeches, and when he called for any of them to be read, he called for the whole. In this particular case nothing had been heard of the speech beyond theannounce ment of the speech at Alullaghmast. The Curer JUSTICE—You have misunderstood Mr, Brew ster, Mr. Moore. Alr. WniTestne said if they had half the sentence read they must have the whole. The Cuter JUSTICE—I shall not consider a single sentence of that 'pet ch as having been rend. It was not wanted, and the reading it was merely a mistake. lie would agree that it would be quite unfair for the Crown to give a garbled extract from a speech, and net give it entire. Mr. WHITESIDE—What your Lordship has said is quite enough. Mr. Brewster asked a question about a speech of Mr. O'Connell ; if he asked more than that, and wished to have any of it read, he must read the whole. Was there anybody else present at the meeting of tho 26th of Sept. ? Look at the last page and tell me.—Mr. Steele was there also. Mr. Bitewsrea (to the Clerk of the Crown)—Hand me the witness's notes of the 3d of Oct. The Clerk of the Crown handed over the document. Mr. liaewsmn (to witness)—Look to page —, and try do you find there any other of the traversers?—Yes, Mr. O'Conned. Look at page 4?—Mr. Steele. Look at page s?—Mr. Duffy, of the Nation. Look to page 6 ?—AI r. Ray arid Mr. J. O'Connell. Link to page 7?--Dr. Gray and the Rev. Mr. Tierney. Mr. BeewsTee— Then it appears that all the traverser, were present except Mr. Barrett My Lords, as Mr. Hughes has already read out his entire report of the roceedings of that meeting, I do not think it necessary to trouble the Court by a further reference to the witness's report of Mr. O'Cosinell's speech. Mr. FITZGIBBON begged leave most emphatically to protest against the Leareed Counsel indulging in any such remarks as those which Lad now fallen trim him. If Alr. Brewster in tended not to ask his witness any further question, he might rest satisfied with his own deterreittation to that effect, without troubling their Lordships with what he did not purpose doing. Such a course was wholly unnecessary. CHIEF JUSTICE—But, Mr. Fitzgibbon, the Court has a right to receive for their own satisfaction. if they think fit, such information as has been offered by Mr. Brewster. Mr. FITZGIBBON—My Lords, I most respectfully maintain that Alr. Brewster has no right whatever to state to the Court, in the hearing of the jury, the reasons which have induced him to adopt sus h or such a course. Mr. Mooer, Q. C.—Besides, such a proceeding leads to the inference that the present witness may be in a position to cor roborate Mr. Hughes's notes, whereas there is , no direct evi .dence-Whatevvrto prove anything, of the kind. Mr. BREWSTER-1 only wasted to avoid the imputation of leading the witness. To witness—At the several meetings in respect of which you have given evidence, did a great number of persons attend in the room?—Sometimes more, and some times less.—( Laughter. ) Were they generally well attended ?—Yes, the meetings were usually well attended. At any of the meetings, in respect of which I have been ex amining you, are you able to call to mind whether you heard any of the traversers say anything about newspapers? JudgC PERRIN—To which of meetings do you allude ? Mr. BREWSTER—My question has reference to any of the meetings in allusion to which he has given evidence. Mr. FITZGIBBON objected to the generality of the question. Judge PERRIN—II - le witness you know, Mr. Fitzgibbon, must specify a date, otherwise his evidence is of little value. Mr. BREWSTER—I merely wanted not to lead the witness. Witness—l have nothing on my notes in yeference to news papers beyond what I have already read from my reports. Mr. BREWSTER—I meant something additional, my Lords. I have done with the witness. Cross-examined by If r. FIT/GIDEON—May I take the liberty of asking you, Sir, what countryman you are ?—I am a Clare man. You are an Irishman at all events ?—Yes, I am. How long have you been a reporter ?—I have been for two years in the capacity of Irish correspondent to the Morning Herald. 1 did not ask you, Mr. Jackson, how long you hail been a correspondent. That was not my question, w hat 1 asked you was how lung you had been a reporter?—l can't say lam a reporter, that is to say, I am not a shorthand writer. 1 did not ask you were you a shorthand writer, I asked you how long you had been a reporter; do you mean to say you are not, and never were a reporter ?—I am not a reporter, and never was in that sense of the word. In what sense of the word ?-1 mean in the sense of a short hand v.t - iter, for the term, '•reporter " is usually applied to a shorthand writer. Then, by a •‘ reporter " you mean a shorthand writer, or stenographer ?—Yes, I do. Were you ever in the habit of reporting proceedings of meetings or courts for the purpose of such reports being pub lished in the new,papers?—Yes, after a manner.—( Laughter. ) Then you were, in point of fact, a reporter of public pro ceedings with a view to having them published in the news papers ?—Yes. That is just what I mean. When did you begin to practice in that cal.acity ? Three or four years ago. ith what newspaper did you begin ?—I had been in the habit ut contributing to provincia. papers before I was con nected with the herald. By reports 1 do not mean contributions; but to what pro •incial papers used you to send your reports?—Principally to the Limerick Star and the Limerick Chronicle V‘ hat were the politics of the Limerick Star?—lt was a Liberal paper. And so, too, is the Limerick Chronicle?—Na, it is not ; it is Conservative. Did yeu send reports to both of these journal , at the same time ?—Nu, I did not. ; I used to send reports from my own place, and not from Limerick. And of all this wide creation, Mr. Jackson, pray what place belongs to you?—(Laughter. )—Kilrush. That is your place ?—Yes, it is ray native place ; my con tributions had no reference to politics. I did not ask you anything about politics, Sir; your reports had reference to public proceedings, had they not—had they not reference to matters of public interest ? 1 hey were princi pally sketches of the petty sessions of Kilrush. Illustrated sketches ?—A little embellished occasionally. By being 't It little embellished " do you mean to convey that there were pictures in them for the purpose of embellishment ? —No; they were pen and ink embellishments. Then, 1 suppose, that by embellishments you mean some thing in the report which, in point of fact, did nut occur ? Decidedly. Something, in fact, that was not true ?—Yes. I may go the length of saying I suppose, that half of them were fictions?—There were many fictions in my sketches. And that, I suppose, is what you call reporting after a man ner ?—Yes, precisely so.—( Laughter. ) Then you commenced your career as a reporter by vending falsehoods ?—No, not exactly that ; I wrote on the same prin ciple, and in the same style, as a reporter to a magazine. Have you contributed to magazines?-1 have done so a little. And your magazine articles are embellished after the same fashion ?—Aly magazine articles were tales of imagination. Are you a bit of a poet ?—lndeed a very large bit of a poet (the witness was remarkably tall). Are you what is called in the county Clare a poetasther ? (Laughter.)--You may, if you like, apply that appellation to me, for I do not mean to say I am a poet. Have you contributed articles in verse to any publication?— Yes, I have. Did you ever contribute to the Nation?—tiever. To what papers were you in the habit of sending verses ? To the Limerick papers I have named. And your poetry, I am to suppose, bore some conformity to the principles of the paper to which you sent it ?—ln nine cases out of ten such was not the fact. But you admit that in the tenth case it might, perhaps, be the fact?—lt might, perhaps. Were the reports you sent to the newspapers similar to your contributions to the magazines ?—No, they were not. To what magazines do you contribute ?—There was a sketch of mine some time since in the University Magazine. It was a tale of fiction. Yes, but was it not intended to pass for true ?.—Yes, with those who would be fools enough to believe it true.—(Loud laughter. ) Was it not intended by those reports to convey an accurate account of what passed at the Kilrush Petty Sessions ?—Some of what was pub;islied did occur there. You intended they should all appear in the newspapers as true ?—Yes. And yet they were not true ?—Some of them were. When did you cease reporting at Kilrush ?—This month two years I came up here. How did you propose to live in Dublin ?_1 got a letter from the proprietors of the Morning Herald, asking me to °nine up here as their Irish correspondent. Who was it at 'Kilrush that introduced you to the notice of the proprietor of the Morning Herald ?—I met a relation of the proprietor of the Limerick Star in Kilrush, Mr. Griffin ; he asked me it I was nut the author of those sketches in the newspapers of the Kilrush Petty Sessions, and I said I was, and then he said that the proprietor of the Morning Herald expressed a wish that 1 should send some of them to that paper, which I did, and then I came to Dublin to be their correspon dent. Dublin is a place where a man must have a little iacome to make nimss If smooth. Pray. how do you support yourself here —1 have 150 guineas a year from the Morning herald as their corresi ondent. A fixed salary ?—Yes. What were you to do for that ?—To send a letter every day, having reference to the leading topics of political interact, and whatever the local papers adverted to. That is, you were daily to read the morning papers in Dublin, and to make a summary of that which you thought would be agreeable to the Morning Herald editor ?—Yea. Had you the privilege or embellishing those before you sent them up?-1 had. And of coarse you exercised it ?—No, I did not, beyond the truth. There was no truth in those petty sessions' sketches you sent? --Only in same of them. Weil, I now speak of those from Dublin ?—They were always true, to the best of my ability. 1 gave the news of the day as I found it. That is, you gave whatever you found in the morning papers, whether 'twas true or not ?—I gave what 1 thought ‘ias probable; if 1 saw any absurd statement, I would be slow in adopting it until I ascertained by inquiry whether it was true Or not. Tell me now, by way of sample, what mede you took of u certaining the truth or falsehood of any one of those state ments ?—General inquiry. From anybody you happened to meet ?—Wherever they were the subject of conversation, I endeavoured to find out whether they were true or false. Can you describe how you proceeded on any one occasion ? I don't understand you. You don't ?—I cannot charge ray memory as to any particu lar occasion. If you were to ask the editor or correspondent to vouch for the accuracy of every thing he writes, you would find it very hard to get him to do it.—( Laughter. ) Would you be good enough to take up the first of those papers produced, that of the 30th of May. Did I understand you to say this s, as the note you took for the Morning Herald?— That was my daily letter. Mr. BitSWSTSI....nte 1100 you took. WO it's it letter. Mr. FITZGIBBON (turning to Mr, Brewster)—l beg of you not to assume that I don't understand what I'm examining the witness about, and it is not upon this occasion alone, but for the future. lam pretty nearly a Clare man myself, and I can un derstand the Clare brogue well enough. To the witness—Now, mind, I don't ask you about the sub stance of what is written in these scraps of paper, but I ask you are those the identical scraps of paper you forwarded to the Morning Herald?—The very identical papers. Now show them to me. ( Witness handed them to the Counsel ; the manuscript was written on both sides of the sheet.) Did you send these identical papers for the pur pose of being set up in the office of the Morning Herald ? I d4l. I suppose you know enough of reporting to know that it is necessary in sending manuscript to a printing-office that it should be written only on one side ?—Yes. That is a part of the instructions of every reporter ? It is. So that it may be setup at once, without being copied ?—Yes. Was the paper you sent as it is now, in soaps of this kind ? —No, they were in full length slips. Atter having sent these slips to the Morning Herald, when did you see them again 2—l received a letter from the proprie tor about two months ago. Don't tell us about his letter now. I ask: you: only for a date?-1 never saw them until about two months age. In whose hands did you see them on that occasion I—The Crown solicitor handed me a letter from the proprietor. _ Now don't tell us about your letters. Witness—My Lords, in justice to myself— CHIEF JUSTloE—You're not asked about that now. How did you come into communication with Mr. Kemmia ?—He sent for me and I went to his office. Was that the first time you were in his office?—lt was the first time I ever saw him to my knowledge. Whose initials are those on that paper?—Mine. When and Where did you write them ?—ln Mr. Kemmis's office, a few days alter 1 was called on by the proprietor to do so. But was you in communication with Mr. Kemmis before ?-INo. Did you expect that communication from Mr. Kemmis to at. tend at his office ?—Upon my oath I did not. When did you begin to attend the Association meetinv ? About eight or nine montl s ago. For the first time?—l was off and on there before. Were you a Repealer?—No. Did you pay a shilling going in at the door ?—I did, the first line I went in. Afterwards you went in free—you went in as a reporter ? I did. Were the accounts of the proceedings you sent over from your own notes?—Sometimes they were, and sometimes bor rowed from the notes of the man near me, perhaps. Were they borrowed from the notes of the man near you ? —Very frequently they were ; I copied them from the slips of the man next me. Was that a short-hand writer ?—Sometimes he was, and sometimes nut; I gave the substance of what he had written out, of course. I could not copy shorthand notes, not being a shorthand writer myself. Used you ever to ♦ary the language when you copied from the manuscript of the man next you ?—I used. In order that it should not have the appearance of being a copy of what he transcribed ?—Precisely. And am I to understand that that was done to prevent the appearance, to your own proprietors, that you had merely copied what another man had transcribed?—Exactly. And those are the notes you have been reading here to-day? —Yes. Look to those notes you have read, and select out of them any one piece of paper which you will swear, upon solemn oath, contains what was taken down by you from the lips of the man represented in it to have spoken I—Upon my solemn oath this paper (holding up one of his sheets of manuscript) contains the substance of what Mr. O'Connell said. Will you swear those were his words?—To the best of my belief it is the substance of what he said. 1 never attempted t. give his exact words. I\ ow, attend to me On Your oath, did you write what is upon that slip of paper while Mr. O'Connell was speaking ? Yes. . . . - Upon your oath, was that written down upon that piece of paper from the lips of Mr. O'Connell while he was speaking it ?—Yes, occasionally taking a note, and catching the leading topics in his di - scow se. I ask you to fix upon any one of the pieces of paper you have in your hand, that you will positively swear that you believe was written while the speaker was speaking ?—To the best of my recollection this (meaning one of his slips) was, but I cannot be positive. Then you are not positive ?—No. What is the date of that slip ?_The 30th of May. Then you are not positive as to that ?'—Not very. Are you positive at all that that piece of paper was written from his lips while he was speaking?—lt is in substance what he said, to the best of my recollection. Is that an answer ?—I think it is. On your oath was it written while he was speaking, and not from a paper ?—I cannot swear that, certainly. Then you won't swear that itmay have been taken from a paper ?—A certain portion of itmay or may not. Alight not any person in the Court give me that answer— that " portions of it may or may not?" Must it not be either of the two things ?-1 do not recollect any particular case. Could you fix upon any one of all the slips ?—I could not. Take up your paper of the sth of July. Was that little bundle made up in the same way as the others ?—Yes. Was it written whilst you were in the Association?—lt was. Was it written whilst the people were speaking ? Yee. Do you swear that ?—I do. The whole of it?—Yes. While the meeting was going on, and in the Association room ?—Every one that refers to the meeting lof th• day was written in the room. And while each particular speaker was speaking ?—lt was. Do you swear that positively—that every one of those slips were written in the Association, and while each speaker, whose language they purport to give, was speaking ?—Certainly not. Did you tell me a moment ago they were ?—I did not. Did you tell me in any sense they were ?—I said they were. —(Sensation. ) And you say now they were not?—While the money was 'uniting in I wrote out what previously occurred. N 1 ill you now turn to the speech put into the mouth of Mr. O'Connell, on the 15th of July ?-11e said he wished to call attention to tw o letters he had received that morning from Sligo. One was written by a discharged soldier, stating "he was employed by Mr. O'Connell." Well nosy, have you the speech of Mr. O'Connell in moving the insertion in the American book of a letter received from merica?—l have. Mr. O'Connell moved that the letter be insert, d in the American book, and not on the regular minutes, and that thanks be conveyed to the two office-bearers named in the letter, as subscribed to their fund. Do you swear that sentence was w ritten by yourself, when the speaker was speaking ?—To the best of my opinion it was. Was it not ?—I can't be certain. NOW, listen to me while I read from this paper (Freeman's Journal) a report of the same speech you have been reading to us—" Mr. O'Connell said it was better to take up each of the American letters by itself, and therefore moved that the letter should be inserted in the American book, but not on the regu lar minutes of the association, and that the thanks of the associa tion be conveyed through the two office-bearers that were named in the letter to the subscribers to that fund." Now, is not that verbatim with what you have read from your slips. Mr. 13REW: , TER—I beg your pardon, and 1 will take the opinion of the Court whether I am right or not. I have no objection if Mr. Fitzgibbon puts this newspaper in evidence, but I object to his reading any quantity out of a newspaper he pleases, and then asking the witness—Does that correspond with something he has in his hands? Mr. Fizzc niaox—l am not at present asking Mr. Brewster to look at what I am doing at all.—(Laughter.) I am at pre sent testing the credit of this witness ; and I contend for my right to show the jury that by any human means I cam.ot, without having that paper before my eyes, repeat one word or syllable that is in that paper. Mr. BREWSTER.—It is not to the newspaper I object, but to the mode of examination adopted by Mr. Fitzgibbon. I object to the mode of his examination, because he reads from a newspaper the exact words of the witness's notes which be sent over in his correspondence. Mr. FITZGIBBON—I don't read from the paper at all. I'll read from my brief now, I tell you.—( Laughter.) Mr. BREWSTER—If you offer the newspaper in evidence I will not object to it, and then you may examine him as to it. Mr. Ferzcreeox—Here is my brief ; will you have it in evidence ?—( Great laughter.) Mr. BREWSTER—It is not competent for you to read from your brief or any other document, and then ask the witness if what is read agrees with notes he has taken. I say it is not competent to do so unless you put the document in evidence. Mr. FITZGIBBON—I will take up this paper, and see if I don't read a report of every word the witness says he sent to the paper. Mr. RitewsTEß—But that is what I object to. Judge BuitzoN—Why go on to prove what you have such a perfect transcript of ? Mr. FITZGIBBON—The course I am taking is infinitely more fair to the witness than the course alluded to on the other side; it is the only fair and legal course which I am at present adopt ing; if 1 did not take this course, I would be stopped from reading the document, if I did not examine the witness, as to the fact, before he left the table. In the paper of the next morning,l . find a verbatim report of what the witness says he sent to London, and if I did not ask him about that I would have been stopped from reading it, unless I asked the man about it when I had him on the table. Here is a man who comes on the table to tell the jury that he is a reporter for a newspaper, and as such attended the meetings of the Association, where Alr. O'Connell spoke. I will show he is not a reporter , and that he was incapable of taking reports where he says he did, and that what he asserts is false. 1 want to show what he says is absolutely, and morally false, and a fabrication from beginning to end, and that he is now speaking to the jury what is false, when he tells them that the documents which he holds in his hand were written by him at the meetings. He comes here falsely representing to the jury that fact. He did not take a note at those meeting s, nor had he the ability of taking notes, and, therefore, I want to show that what he did do was copied verbatim from the morning papers of the next day, and sent off by him, al though he tells the jury he wrote the pieces of paper at the meetings. Judge Buarow—l see your object is very clear. Judge Canatrzori—Mr. Fitzgibbon, am I to understand that you intend to give the paper in evidence ? Air. FITZGIBBON—No, I do not. Judge CRAMPTON—Then I feel great difficulty in that ease is allowing this sort of examination. Mr. BREWSTER—If he puts in the newspaper as evidence I will withdraw my objection, but unless he does so I must press it. Mr. Fitzgibbon may tell me he will not read from the paper but from his brief, and I object to that also, for how am I to know but that brief might be a copy of what this gentle man sent to the Morning Herald.—(Laughter.) Lc t him put in the newspaper as evidence, and I will withdraw the ob jection. Mr. FITZGIBBON—I am here at present to —, but no, I will get it in another form. Come, Sir, turn round and answer me ?—Yes, I will, Mr. Fitzgib bon. Will you now, Sir, take on yourself to swear, on your solemn oath, that you did not copy these slips of paper from the morning paper of the next day, and then send them off as your own report ?—To the best of my recollection—l cannot say. I might have copied them either from the paper, or a notetaker's slips. • Hah ! liah I Take that down. I will repeat the question, Sir, (question repeated)?-1 might have copied them either from the paper, or another notetaker's slips. Well, did you do that while J. O'Connell was speaking ? I can't say that. One way or other ?—No one way or other. Did you do that on the same day of the meetings or the day after ?—I can't be positive as to that. Not positive?—No, not positive. Did you see the report in the morning papers of the next day ?-1 might have seen it. Then, you might have copied your report from the papers? —Some of it I might have copied. You might have copied it all ; eh ?—lt is possible. Did you ever copy from the morning papers at all ?—Yes, 1 used to copy some, and cut out more from it. I sent the slips which I cut from the papers over whenever I adapted them. And you sent them to London?-1 did, possibly. On your solemn oath will you venture to swear yon did not take all these papers from the newspapers; or from another note taker's slips? Judge PERRIN—Come, Sir, speak up, and let us hear you, as it will save a great deal of time to do so. Witness—For all I can tell, I might have copied them from the newspaper or the nog-faker's slips. • Mr. FITZGIBUON—Can you tell from which you copied them? —I cannot tell which. A Juror—Mr. Jackson, did you not swear, a while ago, that all you wrote was done during the time of the meetings in the Exchange, and no place else ?—The majority of them were written there. Juror—Oh, but you certainly swore they were all written there, and noishere else. CHIEF JUSTICE—Let Mr. Fitzgibbon close his examina tion of the witness, and then, gentlemen, you can examine him. Mr. FITZGIBBON—I will repeat the question of the juror, and ask did you not swear awhile ago that you wrote all those slips at the meeting, and in no other place?—'l'o the best of my recollection the majority of them were written there. Were all of them written there ?—Not all, perhaps ; some of them were written after the meeting was wicr, some of them were written next day. Did you do any of them from the newspapers?—Some of them. I ask you again did you not swear that they were all written at the meeting?—The majority of them were written there, or, at least, generally speaking they were. While the meetings were going on, were you always em ployed writing ?—Not always —only sometimes. That is, you were sometimes only listening ?—Yes. Do you recollect Mr. O'Connell having made a speech upon aegro slavery ?—I do ; he spoke several times on that subject. Turn to your note of the speech he made on that subject nu the sth of July. Were you present on that occasion?— Yes. Was not the speech a long one ?—Yes, to the best of my re collection. I want a positive answer ; were you present the whole time of the meeting ?—I rather think I was. Is that a positive answer ? Were you present the whole time of the meeting will not swear positively. Will y.O swear you were there for an hour ?—Yes. For two hours?—To the best of my recollection. Is that the only answer you will give ? Will you swear po sitively to one hour ?—Yes. That hour may have been made up of different periods ; were you there more than once that day ?—I won't swear I was there more than once. Will you swear positively you were there more than an hour ?—I think I was, but I did not time myself. Will you swear p,,sitively to half an hour ?—N.. Will you be positive to one quarter of an hour ?—Yes, and more. What hour of the day did you go to the meeting ?—I don't know exactly. Who was on his legs when you entered the roam ?—I don't know. Did you not offer, a while ago, to tell me? Was any one in the room when you went in?—Of course there was. When you entered the room, was it empty or full ?—I never went into the room but people were in it. Can you tell whether it was morning, noon, or night when you entered it ?—lt was about mid-day. Did you hear the whole of Mr. O'Connell's speech ?—I did not hear the whole of it. You say you went there about twelve or one o'clock ?—Yes, to the best of my recollection. And you swear you heard Mr. O'Connell speak there?— Yes. Will you swear that Mr. O'Connell was at the meeting at two o'clock?—He came in whilst I was there, according to my note. Will you swear, from your own living memory, that you saw Mr. O'Connell coming into the Association on the sth of July? —I either saw him coming into the room, or he was there be fore me when I went in'o it. And that is your answer from the county of Clare ?—Yes ; and I am not ashamed of it.— ( Laughter. ) I believe that the Atlantic breeze hardens people's faces very much ; does it ?—it may ; but it has not hardened mine, at all events. Will you swear that the Atlantic breeze, or anything else, has not hardened your face ?—I don't know that it has hardened me in particular ; but I think I will prove before 1 leave this table, if I am allowed to explain (as in jus tice I ought to be) that it has not. Now, turn to your note of the 4th of September, and mind, don't lose sight of the ques tion between us—namely, that you are to prove to us, before you leave the table, that you are not a hardened man. Will you find for me the passage of Mr. O'Connell's speech which you detailed to us to-day, and in which it is stated, in your report, that he said, " No tumult should take place in his day ?" Also read the passage in the report of his speech which has the word " advisable" in it. The witness then referred to his note of the speech, but it appeared that it was spoken, not on the 4th of September, but en the 29th of August. After reading his report of the speech of Mr. O'Connell on the occasion, the cross-examination was resumed. Were you that day present when Mr. O'Connell was speak ing that speech, of which that purports to be a report ?—I was. Ycu heard him begin it, and end it?—l did ; 1 was writing at the time. Arid that is the report you were writing ?—lt is. I wrote it out while I was there. Did you write out the identical thing that you read here to- day, while Mr. O'Connell was speaking ?—I did. On those very iden tical pieces of paper ?—Yes. As the words fell from Mr. O'Connell's lips ?—I do not say I have the very words he said, but 1 took the substance of the speech. Then you did not take it from any other report or from any newspaper?— Positively not. I wrote it while Mr. O'Connell was speaking. On your oath, you swear that Mr. O'Connell that day used the words " It would not be an unnatural or unadvisable result" which you have just read ?—To the best of my recollection he did. On your oath, will youlsvrear he used the word " unadvis a ble ?"—On my solemn oath I believe he did. Will you swear it positively ?--I would not put it down if I did not think he used it. I want you to state positively, did he use it ?—To the best of my belief he did. You will not give any answer except qualified in that way ? —On that occasion I will not. Who was sitting next you on that day ?—I can not remember. Was any person sitting near you?—Some of the reporters. Can you mention the name of any one re porter who was sitting near you ?—The reporters of the Freeman's Journal and the Saunders's wher e there. Name any particular reporter.—To the best of my belief that gentle- man there, Mr. Edwards, was present. Are you certain?— To the best of my belief he was. Can you far certain name any gentleman ?—I think I could swear Mr. Edwards was there. Oh, I think you could swear it too. Then you cannot name a single reporter who was present !—I cannot; the usual corps of teporters were there, but I cannot swear to any one reporter in particular. Let me put a simpler question to you. Can you name any single person who saw you in the Association rooms on that day ?—Any one that was there might have seen me. Mr. O'Connell or Mr. Ray might have seen me. I had not the honour to speak to Mr. O'Connell that day, and I can not say that I expect to have that honour hereafter. 1 cannot name any others who might have seen me. And you know Mr. O'Connell and Mr. Ray are traversers and cannot give evidence. Can you name any single man who opened his lips there that day to you ?—At this distance of time I can not. It is only the 29th of August last. 1. id you speak to any one ?-1 cannot say. Can you name any one man, woman, or child who spoke to you that day ?—I cannot, ex cept those two gentlemen. \V hat two gentlemen?-51r O'Con nell and Mr. Ray. But you have not positively sworn that even they spoke to you. Who was in the chair ?—I cannot re member. \% as Mr. John O'Connell there ?—I cannot say with out referring to my notes. The witness, after looking through his notes, said that he perceived Mr. John O'Connell was there. I took notes of those three gentlemen, because one always mentions the leaders. One cannot play Hamlet, you know, with the part of Hamlet left our. Did Mr. John O'Con nell say anything ?—He did. I have here, that " Mr. John O'Connell thought it would be better if the matter was first submitted to the committee." 1 certainly did not take this from the newspapers. I cannot swear how long Mr. O'Con nell was speaking. He was probably speaking for nearly an hour. Ido not think there was an y o th er sn eech except that of Mr. O'Connell made on that day. There was no lung speec h made except Mr. O'Connell's, but there might be a few short observations. And yet yen read your report of that long speech, which was the speech o f t h e d ay , i n three or four minutes ?—Do you swear tho se wor d s were use d, " he would not say that such would bean unnatura l or una d v i s able result ?" —I think those were his words precisely. Do you swear they were his words?—On my oath, t o th e b es t of my belief , they were. How near Mr. O'C onne ll were you at th e time?—As near as I am now to the corn er w h ere t h e A t t or ney-General is sitting. I did not pay a shilling to get in, as the porter ad mitted me. Then the porter knew you to be the reporter : did you look at any gentleman's slips there ?—I cannot say. There were shorthand reporters there that day. The majority of the reporters wrote shorthand notes. A shorthand reporter could decidedly take a more faithful report of what Mr. O'Connell said than I could. Cross-examined by Mr. WHITESIDE, Queen's Counsel, on the part of Mr. Duffy.—l think you mentioned the name of Mr. Duffy?—You are quite right. Now draw on your me mory for facts, and not on your imagination. Did you see Mr. Duffy at the meeting of the 6th of July ?--I cannot say without referring to my notes. Or on the '2sth of July ?-1 must refer to my notes. And th ese no tes you told Mr. Fitz gibbon you sometimes copied from another repor ter, and s ometimes from the morning papers of the ne xt da y . You have a taste for eloquence ? Not the slightes t. Do you not deal in " thunderbolts and tarnation fine things ? You are, I see, a literary person, and contribute to the magazines.— (Laughter.) I have a curiosity to see the pap er in which — those words appeared,?—l will make you a present of it. Thank you. Does that kind of writing suit t he London market ?—lt goes down with them. They are v er y g ullible, I believe?-1 cannot get the extract for you without having the slate. I cannot remember what Mr. Duffy said without my notes. I did not take down everything he said. Don't you know he spoke about Napoleon Bonaparte and your friend the Duke of Wellington ? Did Mr. Kemmis ask you the way in which you took down your report?—No ; I did not think he would have called upon rise at all. Mr. Kemenis wrote to me requesting me to come to his office. I did so, and he handed me a letter from the proprietors of the Morning Herald, stating they had kept my letters to them. I did not ask you the contents of their letter. Have you all those valuable efforts of yours that you sent to the Morning Herald now in Court?—Oh, no, not all of them. Look to your notes with reference to the songs in the Nation, and see, in the meeting of the 4th of September, what allusion was made by Mr. Ray to those songs ?—Mr. Ray said—Stop Sir. Did you not say that he made some observations in the nature of a speech ?—I did not ; I said it was a mere casual observa tion. To the best of my recollection he made those observa tions, and to the best of my recollection I was present, but I can't say positively. I will not swear that it was not copied in my report from another paper. Will you swear that he did not say, that he had got a letter statir.g that some ballad-singers had been taken up for tinging seditious songs, and that Mr. O'Connell approved of the conduct of the persons who took them up ?—My notes were but running commentaries on the pro ceedings taken quickly to be in time for the post, and I do not undertake to swear to their verbal accuracy. I will not swear ' that Mr. O'Connell did not sta nd u p arid move a v o t e of thanks to the person who arre sted the ballad-singer. You gave evidence of Mr. O'Connell s having rea d an a dd ress en the 27th of August about the Irish representatives. Now, did he not comment upon that address on that occasion? —He did. Did he not fully comment on it, and was it not a detail of grievances under which the Irish people suf fered ?—lc was such a detail, and he commented upon it. Did it not set out all Irish grievances , whether civil or politi cal ?—Yea. Did you ever consider what would remedy them ? —Never.—(Laughter.) Did not Mr. O'Connell say that the people were not disaffected ?---He did. Did h e not say t h at the people were affectionate to the Queen and loyal to her per son ?-1 frequently heard him say so . Did you not hear him speak of the French Constitution, and:allud e t o L ou i s Phili ppe ? —I did, more than once. Did he not speak of it as not being a fair and true Constitution, because the Haute of Lords was what he called a " mockery ?"--Ile did. Don't you remember Mr. O'Connell saying that he would correct an error, in repu diating all newspapers as being organs of the Association ?—I think 1 heard him say so several times. Are yen not sure ? lam sure, and I have beard him mention the Nation. Do you recollect the day upon which the plait for the renewed ac tion of the Irish Parliament was read ?--I do. You wrote about those matters according to the literary palate of your readers ?—I did ; I made them up to make them spicy, by adding a little fun.—( Laughter.) Has the Morning Herald changed hands of late?—lt has. Was it since that occurred that you got directions to call on Mr. Kemmis, the Crown solicitor, from your proprietors ?—No, but it was very sh or tly b e f ore . were any paper said ?—I quite surprised at Did not Mr. O'Connell say that he would not, or t h e Associa otitotnenwhsiTaltdd nut, be sa y r responsible n ble supposefor you anything u seeing thosemanuscript papers of yours handed to) ou ?—lndeed I was. Mr. WHITESIDE having told the witness that be might go down from the table, Mr. Jackson said he wished to Make one or two observations in vindication of hi; character, Mr. FITZGIBBON objected, because the witness, if he wished to explain, should hove done so during his examination. Mr. Jackson—l merely want to make one observation, my Lords, to vindicate my character before the public. Mr. FITZGIBBON—You shall nut, Sir. The CHIEF JUSTICE—Let me hear what you have to say, witness. Mr. Jackson—Those manuscript documents, my Lords, were given h 3 the proprietors of the Morning Herald to Mr. Kern mis, the Crown solicitor, and, so help me God, I never saw them, or knew he had them, until he proc:uced me the letter of those gentlemen, s'ating they had furnished him with them and requiring me to initial them. I considered it was due to my character before the world to make this plain explanation of the truth. Cross-examined by Mr. MoonE, upon behalf of the Rev. Mr. Tierney—l have my notes of the Association meeting of the 3d of October. I took those notes upon that day. I took them at the meeting. I did not know the Rev. Mr. Tierney. I did not even known his person. I mentioned his name as being present on that day. I did so, not from my knowledge of his person, because from some of the reporters' positions at those meetings they could not see the speak-ms. I never saw him before or since, to my knowledge. I thought on your direct examination that you swore he was present at that meet ing ?—I heard a gentleman make a long speech whom I un derstood was Mr. Tierney. Did you not swear that the Rev. Mr. Tierney made a speech ?—I can't say that I did. If you swore it would it be true ? I believe so. Will you swear that he was at that meeting ?—To the best of my belief he was. At all events, you would not take upon yourself positively to swear that he was there ?—I would not; but he made a long speech, and that snakes me remember it. Mr. MoostE—A Mr. Tierney made a speech?—Yes. The witness was then allowed to retire. Mr. MoonE (having communicated with the Crown coun sel) said, that as he had applied to them, and they refused his application, he was obliged to make it to the Court, namely, that his client and the other traversers should be furnished with one copy of the notes of the witnesses examined upon the previous day and Thunday, in order to conduct their defence. 'lose extracts were very long, and they (the traversers) would not have copies of them but by their hieing furnished ; so he hoped the Court would grant his application, which he consi dered very reasonable. The CHIEF JUSTICE said that he did not know that the Court had power to make such an order. Mr. WHITESIDE—We will pay for them. Mr. MooaE—l am sure even if the Court had not the power of making the order, that if there was any difficulty felt by the officers of the Crown, it would be removed if their Lordships saw no objection to allow them to be furnished. Judge CRAMPTON-If you had no means of having copies, it would be very reasonable perhaps, but you have your short hand writers. The CillEF JUSTICE—What documents do you ask for ? Mr. Mootty—Copies of the documents read by the witnesses yesterday and the day before. We will pay for copies, and we could not have them transcribed from shorthand notes since the previous day. Mr. FITZGIBLON—They have read those documents in their case. The witnesses read every single word of them. They are here as documents. They are in the possession of the Crown as documents. The ATTORNEY-GENER•L-SUCh a course never has been adopted until the present time, and I entirely object to it, and I do so the more, because I cannot fail to recollect the course that was adopted towards one of our witnesses. They have every meeting as to which they require documents ro-• ported by their O'All shorthand-writers for their newspapers. They had the simplest and plainest course to adopt for ascer taining the documents which they now call for. Ido riot wish to state here some matters, hut certainly under all the circumstances which have taken place with respect to one of our witnesses in some newspapers, it will prevent me from de parting from the usual course, and I shall not give copies of the documents. Mr. Moons, Queen's Counsel--I am bound to say that after what has been just said by the Attorney-General I must not call on the Court to make any order on the subject. Mr. FITZGIBBON-I now submit to the Court that the whole of the evidence given by Mr. Jackson ought to be struck out. He was produced here as a witness to tell the jury what he had heard and seen done at meetings, and read notes which he said at first were taken in a particular way at particular meetings. I submit that from his own showing it is as clear as possible that the whole of his evidence ought to be struck out. The CHIEF JUSTICK —Don't you think this is not the occa sion f..r making this application Mr. FlTSalmnoti-1 rather think I am just in time. It is when a witness goes off the table that such an application ought to be made. The CHIEF JusricE—He has been cross-examined by three gentlemen. I don't think the Court can accede to the proposi tion that you make. It may be very well deserving of consi deration at another period, but not now. John Browne examined by Mr. HOLM ES—I reside in Nassau street, and carry on the printing and stationery business. I have been tong carrying on the business. It is at No. 36. 1 know Mr. Ray. I have known him for several years. I have heard of an Association in the city of Dublin called the Loyal National Repeal Association of Ireland. Mr. Ray holds the situation of Secretary to that Society. I was employed to do some printing work for that Society. The Association gene rally, through Mr. Ray, employed me. I have been four or five years doing work for the Society. I have been paid for the work I have done, except a running account now. I was paid by Mr. Ray, and sometimes by a clerk in his office. Have you received much money from time to time for the business you did ?—I have. Could you mention how much ? Be under the sum. Mr. WHITESIDE objected to the question. He did not see how this could be evidence against the traversers. Mr. HOLMES—I will ask my own questions. Mr. WHITESIDE—Of course you will, and I will object where I see fit. Mr. HOLMES (to witness)—l now ask you to state, what amount you received from time to time?—l could not say. Oh, be under : have you kept any account-book ?—I have. The account was sometimes about ‘201., and— Mr. WIIITESIDK—I object to any evidence of the contents of this gentleman's books, because they ought to have them here. Mr. lloLmEs (to witness)—Havo you not been served with a duces tecum?-1 leave. Mr. flor.mEs—Well, now we will gratify Mr. Whiteside by getting it read from your books. Do you knoo;what amount you received from Mr. Ray from time to time for printing? Mr. Justice PERRI Within what period? Mr. HOL3lEb—Within the last two years. Mr. WIIITESIDE.--I am obliged to your Lordship for putting me in mind of that. 1 submit this is not evidence; tho first thing in this indictment is stated to be on the Ist of March. Mr. Justice CitAsirroli—l don't see, for my own part, the relevancy of the inquiry. Mr. lior.3rEs (handing a document to the witness)--Did you print that document ? I did, and for the Repeal Associa tion. I printed it in the year 1843. The Deputy Clerk of the Crown read the document, which was the plan for the renewal •f the Irish Parliament. He also read documents headed—" In.tructioris for the appointment of Repeal-wardens and collectors," and " Form fur the appoint ment of Repeal- ardens," and others, which he admitted having printed for the Association. The witness was then examined as to the printing of " the Address of the Repeal Association to the inhabitants of coun tries subject to the British Crown," " Rules to be observed by arbitrators in districts," " Arbitration notices," and others, all of which he admitted he printed. He said-1 printed 4,000 or 5,000 copies of the paper called 0' Calluyan's Letter ; 1,000 or 2,000 of the notices for the sitting of the Arbitration Courts; 200 of the rules to be observed by arbitrators ; 2,100 or 3,000 of the address of the Association to the British public; and about 2,000 or 3,000 of the summonses for those Courts. I printed all these for the Association, and I was paid for doingso. I printed some of them from manuscript, and others from ex tracts from newspapers. I was served with a subpoena to produce the manuscript. I searched for it, but I found ve ry little. I f oun d t h e paper which I produce, hea d e d " Lim iter for Repeal." Mr. HOLMES.—Did you print any from that?—l think 1 did. Mr. W HITESIDE—Thinking will not de; are you certain that you did ?—I cannot swear positively. Mr. WHITESIDE—That answer kill not do. Mr. HOLMES.—Have you any doubt that you did ? Where did you get the manuscript ?—I got it or the printer's office file. I thi n k i t pro b able that something was printed from tin my office, but I urn not sure. Mr. 1101.34E3—Y0u have your account-books here ; look at them, and see if you have any entries of having printed from it ? Mr. WHITESIDE—The entries in his book:naay be very cor rect, but they cannot be evidence here. The CHIEF JUSTICE—He can look at his book in order to refresh his memory. Mr. HoLst ES—Well, witness, have you any entry of that do cument ? Mr. FITZGIBBON—I object to the question ; any entry he may have cannot be evidence. Mr. HOLMES—The fact is, these young men think 1 am not able to stand out, but I am.—( Laughter.) Wilr.ess, I se• peat ray question, have you any entry there relating to that document T-1 have two entries relative to the Mullaghmast meeting, but I cannot say whether they have reference to this document or not. Mr. WHITESIDE.—YOU must not read them. Mr. HOLMES—WiII you swear you did not print that docu ment entitled " Leinster for Repeal?"-1 have a printed bill here with the same heading, of which I printed about 2,000 for the Association, and I was paid for it. The newspapers, 1 believe, called the Mullaghmast meeting a " monster meeting." I printed documents in reference to other monster meetings which took place about Dublin. I have none of those docu ments here. I think I printed some in reference to the Donny brook meeting. The documents I have with me I brought in consequence of a subpoena I received desiring me to do so. And all the documents that are here did you print for the As sociation ?—I think I did. And you were paid for them?— Yes. It was rather a good thing altogether, eh? Mr. WHITEME—I object to that. Mr. lioLltEs—Why, it was merely an observation. Mr. WHITESIDE—Yes, it was an observation, with a great deal of point in it. Mr. lioLmEs—lf I attempted to stop you in half the obser vations you make which have nothing to say to the case, I should have something to do.—(A laugh.) Mr. WrirrEsinx— Ilat might be true, upon the cross-ex amination, but you forget your position ; you are examining upon the direct. Mr. lioLlsxs (to witness)—Look at that (revision of the jury list), and say, did you print them or not, for the Associ ation ?—Yes. Were you paid for it or not ?-1 don't know whether I was paid for it or not. Cross-examined by Mr. WHITESIDE—Did you print these eleven documents ?—Yes. Did you print these three documents (headed " To the people of Ireland," &c.) P—Yes. Mr. HOLMES here rose to ask the witness a question. Mr. Wtilirstnu—l object to your asking the question unless it arose from anything which fell from me on the direct. Mr. Ilot.itEs- . --I.omitted to ask the witness aquetion. Mr. Wityrastnr—i-flabject, then, to your asking it now. 11r. H is the only legal objection you have made. '1 he Learned Counsel thin railed upon the Clerk of the Crown to have the documents handed to the witness read seriatim. . . • . Mr. WHITESIDE submitted that none of the documents could be made use of against the traverser!. Mr. litmus - Ai said every one of the travorsers was a member •f the Association. The documents were printed for the Asso ciation. The traverser! attended meetings of that Association, some of whom made speeches there, and the documents were clearly evidence against them all. Mr. WHITESIDE—They are no evidence against Mr. Duffy. Mr. llomstEs—The documents are printed by the desire of the Secretary, one of the - ,traversers being the Secretary, and were paid fur by the Association. Mr. WurrEsinz —As to Mr. Duffy, the only distinet evi dence against him is that given by the gentlemen who saw him one day at Culvert's Theatre. The. CHIEF JuSTICE-1 beg your pardon. Justice CRAstrroN---This is not the time to make these objections. The CIIIEF JUSTICE—It was proved that Mr. Duffy at tended meetings of the Association, and handed in subscrip tions. Mr. WniTzsinE—The evidence given to-day is net worth a rush. The SOLICITOR-G ENERA 7—This is a question for the jury. The ATTORNEY- GENERA L—This is not the time for a com mentary on the evidence. We will, when the time comes, show the clearest evidence against Mr. Duffy. The CHIEF JUSTICE—The Cuurt are of opinion that the documet.ts are properly read against all. WIIITESIDE said h• did not contend that it was not evi dence against a traverser for a witness to say that he got a cer- tain document from him ; but there was no such evidence in that instance, therefore he made the objection. Judge Bu ICI:ON—All the traversers are members of the As. sociation, and the publication is by the Association. Ju ige PERRIN said that the charge on the indictment was, that a number of persons assembled for a particular purpose and a particular object, and the preparation and printing of cer tain documents was surely evidence of the object of the Asso ciation. The documents should be read against one of the tra versers, and the gueA was whether the evidence was against his (311.. Whiteside's) client) ? Mr. l'imunsorr said, that the only evidence about the do cuments was, that Browne printed them for the Association, and was paid for them ; but when he printed them had not appeared, with one solitary exception—a thing in the shape of a book, said to have been printed some time in 1843, while all the overt acts relied upon by the Crown as showing a conspiracy arose since 31arch. There was not a single act charged in the indictment against a defendant, except acts occurring in March last. Could it be said, that acts done by the Association four years ago ought to be now read in evidence of a conspiracy said to be proved by acts done since March, 1843? The CHIEF JUSTICE asked, what the Learned Counsel would say with reference to the document tinder date the 3d of October, 1843 Mr. Irrzcianes; said, that the date was no proof that the document was printed then. The Deputy Clerk of the Crown then proceeded to read a number of documents, one of which was " Instructions for the appointment of Repeal Wardens." Mr. itl'DeNoGsr then rose to object to the reading of the documents as against his client ; and proceeded to read the several matters enumerated in the bill of particulars, to show the wide range of evidence selected by the Crown, and he contended that if these books were not included, it was quite plain that they ought to he now, on every principle of justice, excluded. To show that the Crown could not be allowed to wander out of the bill of Particulars furnished, he referred to the case of " the King against Hamilton," 7 Carrington, and Payne, page 453. In that ease the prosecutors added to the end of the bill of particulars furnished by them a notice that they intended to produce further evidence not therein specified, and Mr. Justice Littledale said that it would be for the Judge at the trial to decide whether that further evidence, which was not included in the bill of particulars ; should be received. In the present case, no such notice as that referred to was attached to the bill of particulars, which was most minute and ample in its details. He submitted that the point should be decided— not in reference to the magnitude of the present trial, but according to the general principle of law ; aad, confident that that was in his favour, he objected, on the part of Mr. Barrett, to the reception of the books in evidence. The CidiEr JUSTICE—When was the bill of particulars fur nished ? Mr. M‘DoNoc u—On the 13th of November, 1843. The ATT•KNET-GENERAL concurred in the observation of Mr. M'Donogh that there should, in the decision to be made, be no distinction between this and any other case. He denied that the principle relied on by the opposite side was admissible. They were not bound by any rule ef law in cases of conspiracy to enumerate all the evidence they intended to give. They were only bound to specify the nature of the charge. That was the principle established in all the recent decisions upon this subject, as the Court would find by an abstract of the cases bearing upon the point which their Lordships would find in Phillips upon Eridence, p. 492 (the edition of 1838). It could not for a moment be contended that the Crown was Galled upon to furnish is the bill of particulars the evidence upon which the charge of conspiracy was to be based. Judge Buicronr—The bill of particulars does not purport to give or to state any of the evidence that might be adduced. The ATTOENRY..GICNEKAU said not, and referred to a va riety of authorities in support of his position, and submitted that the documents now proposed to be read in evidebee, as showing the general nature of the conspiracy with which the traverserd were charged, should be admitted. Mr. Mooag, Queen's Counsel, followed on the same side with Mr. M'Douogh. He said he was not aware that Mr. Browne's evidence went further than that at some time •r other he printed those documents for the Association, and was paid for them by the secretary. Judge BUXTON said, he thought the question to be argued was, whether these documents, as given in evidence, were admissible, as not being contained in the bill of particulars ? Mr. MoomE said, that was the question for the Court to decide, but he wished to show, in the first instance, the na ture of the evidence given. He would submit that, as there was nothing to show these documents were adopted at any of the meetings at which the tiaversers were present, they did not come within any of the three classes of evidence referred to by Mr. M'Donogh. The SOLICI I - OK-GENERAL, in reply upon behalf of the Crown, said that, as he understood the Counsel on the other side, there were two arguments put forward by them in support of the motion ; one of which was, that the evidence offered was not set out as an overt act in the indictment or bill of par ticulars, which it was the duty of the Crown to have given, if they intended to prove it. Now, he (the Solicitor-General) would say, that such an argument was a misconception of the law upon the subject, for it would be a most extraordinary doc trine to lay down, that the Crown was to furnish a prisoner er defendant with the evidence to be brought forward against him. The CHIEF JUSTICE pronounced his opinion. He lead been first greatly struck by the arguments of the traversers' coun,el; but, considering the nature of the charge against the traverser., he conceived that the Crown was not called upon to embody in the bill of particulars the precise evidence to be given ; the ob jection urged by the Learned Counsol for the traversers was, therefore, untenable, and the documents should be admitted. Judges BURTON and CRAAIPTOY concurred with the Learned Chief Justice ; and The COURT ruled accordingly in favour of the Crown. The Court adjourned till ten o'clock on Monday (this) morning. THE STATE TRIALS. The readers •f the Pilot w ill see by our columns that we are faithfully redeeming the pledge given in our last. We have been close, and not unobservant, ear and eye witnesses of the proceedings in the Court of Queen's Bench since Monday, and our readers shall in due time be placed in full possession of the result. Never, certainly, was there a stranger proceeding ; never a lamer case. From no labouring mountain of threat ever crept forth a lainuter mouse of statement and proof than the farrago of the Attorney-General and his evidence up to the moment we write. On Monday we intend to publish a Supplement, in which shall be given the speeches of O'Ccnnell and of Mr. Barrett, delivered at Mullaghma,t, on which the Crown lawyers seem to rely as the main buttresses of the case. During the reading of O'Connell's magnificent speech a thrill of admiration per vaded the Court. That speech ought to be, and it shall be, re published in full. Of other incidents in Court we shall speak, and amongst other things we have to make the amend. to Mr. Frederick Bond Hughes, which we shall do with much greater satisfac tion than we felt in assailing that gentleman. '1 he greater portion of the time to-day was consumed by the reading of documents—a work performed by Ross in a slow, feeble, and unsatisfactory manner. The Mullaghmast speeches were read a second tinze.—Pilot. ebtrti IZtittion THE FUNDS-(CLOSING PRICES.) BRITISH FUNDS. Bank Stock 3 per Cent. Red. 3 per Cent. C0n5...... 97A 'Ditto Old Annuities — 3i per Cent. Red lO2l !Ditto New Annuities.. New 31j per Cent lOll Ex. Bills, 1,000/. lid. 67 pm New 5 per Cent. Long Annuities to expire , Ditto 5ma11..... 65 pm Jan. 1860 Oct. 18'69 Jan. D6O FOKEIGN FUNDS. isu..•rran, 5 per cent..., 114 Portuguese, 5 per cent. 73 ISelgian, 5 per cent lO6 Ditto, New Ditto — liraailian 80nd5.......... 77 Prussian, 5 per cent.,, — Pl.l,!tiGS Ayres6 per cent Russian, 5 per cent ll7 Cnilran, t per cent. — Ditto, Metallic ..... 42o.,tioltian, 6 per cent... Spanish, 5 per cent — oitto It-24 — Ditto, 3 per cent... — Cu'ia Bonds, 6 per cent lli Ditto, Deferred.... ~ , I:2i Danish, 3 per 'ent — .French, 5 per eent. —I. —c. Greek, 1825, 5 per cent — Exchange ...... ...• —f. — C. Alexican, 5 per cent 33 French, 3 per cent. —f. —c. Ditto, 6 per cent. 1837 Dutch, 211 per cent. 54i Peruvian, 1825,6 perct. = Ditto, 5 per cent.... 101 SHARES. - Bristol and Exeter (70 paid) Eastern Counties (23 paid) lo* Ditto New Shares (25 paid) Edinburgh and Glasgow (50 paid) 59 Gravesend, Rochester, and Chatham (21, p) 21 Great Western (75 paid) ••• 110 Ditto Half Shares (50 paid) London and Brighton (50 pa d)... . London and Blackwall (161 131 4d paid) London and Birmingham ( paid).. ..... 243 Ditto New Quarter Shares ( 2 paid) 3O London and Greenwich Railway (12/15s 4dpd) Ditto Preference, or Privilege ... J 74 London and South Western (41/ 6s 10d pd) 741 London and Croydon Railway ( Trunk) ... 16 Manchester and Leeds (70 paid) Norwich and Brandon (2 paid) ..... Northern and Eastern (45 paid) North Midland (100 paid) Ditto Half Shares (40 paid) 46 . .... ..._ ... South Eastern and DOvei (50 paid) ...... .. 35i THE WILL FORGERIES MANSION-HOUSE.-(THIS DAY.) Mr. CHAMRERS (in continuation from our Afternoon Edition) said—He demanded, therefore, that the evidence should be com pleted or a valid excuse made upon oath, for the apparent negli gence of the prosecutors ; and, secondly, that copies of the de• positions should be granted to the prisoners. Mr. HUMPHREY ' the solicitor to Fletcher, made so me com munication to the Lord Mayor. The LORD MATOR—The depositions have not yet been taken. You demanded copies of the depositions. The exami nations alone have been taken. Mr. BALLANTYNE reminded the Lord Mayor that those very examinations were depositions in point of law, and that it was the duty of the Magistrates to have the depositions, as they were called, made out at the close of every examination. The Learned Couwiel then proceeded to animadvert ♦ery severely on the conduct which had been pursued in relation to Griffin, who had been virtually told by the prosecution that unless he chose to say something that should be agreeable to the prosecution, he should be committed. He entreated the Lord Mayor to bring the matter at once to a conclusion. Mr. CLARKSON—As far as regards the three first charges he was willing that they should at once be committed on them, so as to enable the prisoners to have copies of the depositions. With regard to the last charge he asked for a remand, but he begged that if at the trial additional evidence should be ad duced: in relation to this charge, he hoped that he should not be taunted with producing evidence which had not been produced before the magistrates. Mr. CHAMBERS characterised the offer made as pretended candour, but real oppression. He demanded that Mr. Barber should be made acquainted with his real position. He should not have fresh evidence started upon him at his trial. What he desired was, that, from time to time, copies of the deposi tion should be furnished to him. The Loan AlArox—No opposition has ever been made on the part of the prosecutors to your having copies of the deposi tions. Mr. WILKINS again complained of the conduct pursued by the prosecution in relation to Griffin. The counsel for the prosecution had held out an implied premise to him, which was at once an appeal to his hopes and his fears. He pro tested against this delay, as calculated to bring forth a host of such witnesses, and to break the spirits and hearts of the accused. !he LOAD MAYOR--I will state at once that lam prepared to commit the three prisoners on the three first charges, and to remand them on the last. 1 remand them until Friday en all the cases; and when brought up they will have the evi dence, in the first threw cases read over to until. I re mand them until three o'clock OA Friday. SIT ter , The prisoners Barber, Fletcher, and Mrs. Dorey wilre removed. A person named Packham, who had been a clerk to Mr. Barber, wished to state that he had not been given anything for the use of his name. Ntr. Alderman m NIERY—What is your Christian tiatne Mr. Paidshatn—Robert. _ Mr. Alderman 1 - 11:1IPIIERY—Then you are not lihrr run. The Christian name given w 55 Clarence. Thomas Griffin w..,s then placed at the bar. and the dtposi of Mr. I'ott and of Daniel Forester were read over t• rim, and be %vas asked it lie had any questioi.s to put to those witne=ses, to %%inch he replied that lie had been taken by surprise yester day, and had no questions to ask. Forrester amended his deposition, by stating that he had mre!e inquries in Duke -street, Oxford-street, and in addition he Stated that he had told Griffin that he had sought after him for making an affidavit in the ease of Eliza Stuatr. he stated that he had done so, and would state all that he knew about it. I then told him that I had a. warrant. He then made a statement, which Mr. Wear took down. Mr. Wear-- lam a clerk in the office of Mr. Freshfield. I was present when Forester apprehended the man Griffin. Fe rester had some difficulty in meeting with him on Sat urday. I therefore accompanied him on Sunday morning and knocked at the door. I asked if a tailor named Griffin lived there, the person who came said " Yes," and that she was his wife. At this time Fore,ter came in ; I said I was sure Griffin was in the house, and I should insist upon seeing him. Forester asked which was the room, and she opened the door, and we ssent in to gether. She knew Forester and said her husband had done nothing wrong. She went oat and brought hint down to us. I asked him if he knew a Mrs. Stuart, and he said yes. I asked him if he knew Mr. Stuart; he said no. He said Mr. Stuart had lodged in the same house ss ith him twelve or thirteen years ago in Poland-street. I asked him for how long a period, and he said, about a twelvemonth. I asked him whether he had any thing to do Mrs. Stuarts' affairs, and he said he had signed a bond to the Stamp-office, and gut some letters by him in which he w as a goo d deal alarmed. Either Forrester or myself then said there was a charge against him for having sworn to some paper. Then he appeared desirous of saying all that he knew about it, and was proceeding to state what he knew, when I asked him if I might take his state ment in writing ? He said, " Certainly ;" and Forrester sent out for some writing paper, and I took it. I produce the statement. I took it from his month. I read it over to him. He put his name to every sheet of it.—(The statement was then read. It declared that he had lived in Poland-street twelve years ago, with some persons named Sanders, and Miss Richards, an old lady who he an derstood was the mother of Miss Richards, and Mrs. Sanders. Sanders was a fishmonger, and afterwards went to Bristol to take his mother's business as a fishmonger. In 1640 the old lady called upon him, and asked him to become security to the Stamp-office on account of some property left her by a brother who had died in Berkshire. He agreed to do it and she promised to pay him fir his time. She said she lived in Southampton-terrace, Camberwell, snd would send to depo nent. She afterwards sent word, and they met in Paul's chain, arid went to Potts, the proctor. The old lady had a person with her, who had advanced her money. De ponent signed the bond. He met her again after and she was accompanied by her scliciter. He was called on to sign a paper which he understood was the same as before. He signed her name, and kept a book. That was at a different office. He got a sovereign each time from the old lady. He afterwards had letters from the Stamp-office respecting the duty. He made inquiries of Pots, and was directed to Fletcher, to Barber, and to Mrs. Stuart. He then saw Grorgiana Richards, who said her mother was dead. She ul timately gave him a letter to Barber, who said he knew all about it. that he was in treaty with the Stamp-office, and I should hear no more about it. Examination continued—l then read over the affidavit to him, and he said that he should never have signed his name : to it if it had been read over to him so as that he could have - understood it. The prisoner Griffin said he had no questions to ask, and he desired him to procure a legal adviser. The prisoner was then remanded until F r id a y next . H e was immediately removed i n custody. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DIY. GLOBE.—The Irish State Trials continue to progress at the same :nail-like pace which marked their commencement, and of which the heavy, lumbering opening speech of the At torney-General was an appropriate precursor. The whole of Friday was taken up by the cross-examination of Mr. Charle Ross, a well-paid agent of the Ministry. This gentleman, by his own account, undertook the special mission of a Govern ment spy ; while he, most impartially, acted as the corres pondent of the Morning Chronicle, and received payment for his communications at the regular rate. He also transmitted similar communications to the Standard ! Whether the matter transmitted to the latter journal was in cluded in the suns Mr. Ross received from the Treasury, or was a separate item in the list of solid advantages he derived from his special commission, does not appear. We hope, for the honour of the press, that few of its members would have consented to act in this treble capacity. The exhibition which Mr. Ross made in the Court of Queen's Bench, Dublin, on Friday, will, we trust, operate as a caution rather than as encouragement to the profession— a beacon to warn, rather than as a precedent to be acted upon, under similar circumstances, in time to come. Saturday was consumed to little purpose. But one witness of any moment was examined. This gentleman was a correspondent of the Morning Herald, rather than a reporter-- of the art of reporting, strictly speaking, he seems to have known little er nothing. He was rather a collector of scrape of information; which, to use his own expression, he dressed up with the aid of fiction, for the amusement of " fools," whose credulity induced them to swallow the creations of his fancy as veritable facts. This industrious, but not very accurate chronicler, was emplo)ed by the Herald to inform the public, through its columns, of what was passing in the repeal meetings at ]he Cern Exchange ; and, in due course, was pounced upon as an important witness by the law officers of the Crown, whose evidence would assist the Government in its crusade against O'Connell and Repeal. Small assistance did Mr. Jackson give the prosecu tion I The admission he was compelled to snake—first, of his own incapacity to report with anything approaching to accu racy—secondly, that the greater part of his communications to the Herald` was derived from the short-hand notes of others, or from the printed reports of the Dublin journals—rendered his evidence of no advantage to the prosecution, while, in many particulars, it materially served the defendants, One circum stance deserves to be mentioned to Mr. Jackson's honour—he seemed heartily ashamed of his position in the Court. Before he left the table he requested permission to make one remark, as essential to his own " character before the world." STANDARD.—We have expressed our determination to abstain from all comment on the evidence given on the Irish trials, and great as is the temptation which the indecent Whig press in regard to it would seem to offer to us to deviate from such a resolution, we have neither the intention nor disposition so to do. We cannot, however, refrain from deprecating the atrocious attempts which are making in and out of Court to retard the ends of justice, and the insolent dicta tion of certain Roman Catholics of Dublin, who hate met to denounce the composition of the jury as an insult to " all the Roman Catholics of Ireland." The conduct of these personshas, has, however, been completely out-Heroded by the Morning Chronicle, which, not content with ridiculing the infirmities and ailments of such members of the jury as attempted to get excused on their account, hinted very significantly to the coun sel to the traversers, that if they can manage to protract the pro ceedings some five or six weeks, they may hope to break down the energies of some one or other of that body. A few days ago we were told by this abstinent observer of the pro ceedings, that the Law Officers were about to swear in their packed jury, and on the ensuing day it endeavours to inti midate that jury, assuring them that they are not merely trying Air. O'Connell and the other traverser', but the whole country !—and there is no alternative but a compromise or civil war ; and if the jury do their duty, the result " must discredit jury trial altogether, and with it our whole system of egal jurisprudence." The daily recurrence of these libels on these gentlemen, increasing as they do, would lead to the belief that the Repeal conspirators have little to expect from the merits of their case ' and look to every stage of the prosecution as confirming them more and more in this impression. The Morning Chronicle, aware of its deviation from all ordinary usage in such cases, and that after having been the foremost to deprecate any comment on the evidence during the progress, has been compelled to attempt its its justification by charging the impropriety of which it has been guilty on the Conservative press, and whilst it abstains ' however, from specifying the name of any particu lar journal being justly chargeabse with such an indecorum, has the hardihood to declare that it will abandon the course which it had prescribed for itself, and of which " decency and justice" alike prescribe the observance. DEATII OF MR. iionLEa.—We regret to state that the venerable Mr. nobler, who was Clerk at the Mansion.honsa for 54 years, died this morning at his rosidence in Queen's.row, Pen. tonville. Ile was in his 60th year. He had only recently retired, and his portrait had within a few weeks past been hung up in the justice.room at the Mansion-house, as a mark of respect for Iris long services. DREADFUL ACCIDENT.—On Friday night the fol— lowing frightflsl accident occurred on the Uxbridge-road, mar Shepherd's-bush :—About half-past ten o'clock, as Mr. Pattison, Jun., of the Hippodrome stables, accompanied by two friends, was riding on horseback in the direction of Notting.hill, Mr. Pattlion, who was ahead of the other two, rode with great violence against the point of the shaft of a cart belonging to a Mr. Hannon, 'thigh was proceeding in a contrary direction. He was instantly thrown with great violence to the ground. Upon being carried to an adjacent public-house Mr. Bartell, a surgeon, was sent far, who din covered that Mr. Pattison's left knee was frightfully fractured, in addition to other injuries. Mr. Pattison was afterwards removed to his father's house, and Mr. Liston, the eminent surgeon, was called in, who immediately amputated his leg. Sone idea may be formed of the rate at which Mr. Pattison was riding, from the statement of a policeman, that subsequently to the accident he had, by the light of his lantern, picked up in the road pieces of bone and flesh forced from the rider's knee. The horse proceeded unhurt to Notting.hill. Upon inquiry last night it was stated that Mr. Pat. tison (who is about 21 years of age) was In a •ery dangerous state, but no unfavourable symptoms had appeared. , . THE POOR-LAW.—Lastly, we will consider the overseers of the poor, who sometimes literally oversee or overlook the cases of distress requiring assistance. The poor.law of Eliza. beth has been superseded by a much poorer law of William the Fourth, the one great principle of which is to afford the luxury of divorce to persons in needy circumstances. It also discountenances relief to the able.bodied, a point which is effected by disabling, as far as possible, anybody who comes into the workhouse. The poor. law is administered by three Commissioners, who spend their tine in diluting gruel and writing reports—trying experiments how little will suffice to prevent a repeal of the union between the soul and the body.—Punch. SCIIOOL OF DESIGN, SOMERSET-ITOUSE..---A report having obtained extensive circulation, to the effect that the school for the instruction of ladies in drawing and engraving upon wood had been abandoned, we made inquiry, and find that the rumour was justified, in part, by a suspension of the operations of the school, but that such is, by'order of the committee, again open. The temporary closing of the school is to be attributed to the efforts of several wood ergravers who twice memorlalised the council, and obtained a hearing by deputation; the deputation insisting that the formation of a school for the education el ladies in the arts would materially interfere with the profes sion of wood engraving; reducing the income of its fol. lowers by an increase of qualified persons ; and, moreover, withdrawing from those who have position and standing the chance of obtaining premiums with pupils, while the necessary knowledge could be acquired at so small a rate as that charged by the Sehoel of Design. It was urged, on the other side, that artists , drawing equal d masters, design draftsmen, and other professions, gi propriety ut t every a d branchran o the o f same ivar u r c e t reasons, n s, which an i d if , such wTwh ;p, presenteui r g r e t u e e te it r,, r , t ul a mt i h u b e es d or , l much good, must be altogether aban doned • of pupils in all branches is about :140 'LIB KING or SAXO. "banner of his MR jesty the King of S axony ( w ho was invested with the insignia of e n in g . the October, Garter 184 b King y the Earl at on Arms) has just been placed over the stall of his Majecty, t oget h er a r w ith the crown, crest, seord, mantle, &e., in St. G eorge ' s Chapel, Windsor. The stall of the Saxon Mo narc h i s s i tuated of o r dwe Wilton l r l o to t n the and Gar t er,sir Ch arles pes es d Y en You ng, on the prince's, or north side of the choir, between the stalls of the King of Wirtemberg and the reigning Duke of Brunswick. The only stalls now vacant in the chapel of St. George ars those of the hts Duke of Dorset and the Alarqui3 Welletley.