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

~r of the award, free of expense, to each of the parties, if applied for. " Signed by order, "JOHN GRAY, " Chairrnan of the Arbitration Committee, " Loyal National Repeal Association. " A copy of these Rules should be posted in some conspi• cuous place in the room where the arbitrators sit." Sergeant WARREN—Look at your notes, and see have you a memorandum of the appointment of any arbitrators on the `3 7th of September for the districts of Kingstown, Dundrum, or Blackrock?—l remember that Dr. Gray made a speech on thi.t occasion in reference to the appointment of arbitrators. Sergeant WARREN—Have you a note of that speech?—Yes, I have. sergeant WARREN—Bead it.—The witness read from his manuscripts a note of a speech delivered by Dr. Gray, on the occasion in question. The substance of the speech was, that he (Dr. Gray) as chairman of the Arbitration Committee, was commissioned to inform the Association that the Committee had under their consideration the form of a testimonial in favour of such persons as they thought fit to recommend to the office of arbitrators, and he then proceeded to read the docu ment alluded to, a copy of which the witness produced. Did any appointment of arbitrators take place that day ? I have a memorandum on my notes to the effect that several gentlemen were proposed as arbitrators and agreed to. I know that Mr. Nugent, of Kingstown, was appointed, and returned thanks, and Doctor Gray moved that the Chairman should be recommended as an arbitrator for Duedrum, whereupon the chairman returned thanks. I was present at the Mullaghmast meeting. I took a note of the proceedings of that meeting, which I hold in my hand. Sergeant WARREN said there were certain extracts from that speech, as reported by the witness, which he wished to have read out. He wished to know whether the Counsel for the traversers had any objections to having certain extracts read from the speech, or did they mean to insist, as they had a right to do, that the entire speech should be read over again ? It would be in the recollection of the Court that the speech had already been read in its entirety by Mr. Hughes. Mr. FITZGIBBON—If your two witnesses agree, Sergeant Warren, in their reports of this speech, I really cannot see the use of having it read, or any part of it, over again. But if, on the other hand, you want now to give a different account of the speech from that which has already been deposed to, I cannot see how yoneairdo so, for surely you can have no right to pit one of yottf witnesses against the other. So which horn of the dilemma will you select?—( Laughter. ). Sergeant WARREN—I don't want any horn of a dilemma. I merely wish to have certain extracts read from the witness's report of Mr. O'Connell's speech, and I ask you whether you require to have the whole speech read, as you are entitled ? Mr. Ferzeraeost—We don't require anything. Take your own course. Mr. HENN—If .the two extracts correspond in omnibus, there is no necessity for reading the second, but if there be any discrepancy. I think it very essential for us that the whole of the witness's notes should be read. Sergeant WARREN—I believe that the two reports do corre spond, for I trust to the reporters ; but lam unable to say positively, for I have not examined the reports. Mr. HENN—We have no opportunity whatever of knowing whether the reports correspond. Judge CRAMPTON—You have only to state that you wish the whole speech read, Mr. Henn. Mr. Sergeant WARREN—State from your notes what Mr. O'Connell said at Mullaghmast ?—There was considerable confusion at that meeting, which inconvenienced me, and pre vented my taking some of the first of Mr. O'Connell's observa tions. I had not an opportunity of taking his first words, but he was speaking of Tara ; I put down the word Tara first, 'and then I ge on. The witness here read Mr. O'Connell's speech, which agreed as nearly as possible with Mr. Hughes's version of - it, and very slightly di ff ered from the report as originally published in the Freeman. Whenever he missed taking down a woi d, he said, " I lost the next word ." He read on until he came to the passage—" Peel has 500 colours inhis flag, and not one of them permanent—to-day it is Orange, to-morrow green—and next day it is neither one nor the ether.' One of the Scotch hi,torians, Allison, says that if Wellington got well out of the battle of Waterloo, it was by the British troops, and by their unconquerable. I have lost the remaining words of that sentence. He then came to a quotation from a song, which he introduced— " At famed Waterloo - Old Wellington would look blue, Only Paddy was there too." And I have lost the rest.—( Great laughter.) He said further about the Duke of Wellington, They had no place for him in the Cabinet, nor no 44 for him to perform, except that of a sort of inspector - of Anti-Repeal Wardens. I selected this Rath for obvious reasons to hold this meeting, for it was the spot on which English treachery, and Irish treachery too com mitted a massacre unequalled in the annals of history, except by the murder of the Mamelukes." When the witness was done reading the speech, Sergeant WARREN asked him if he was at the dinner in Mullaghmast ?—I was. I suppose you took a note of Mr. O'Connell's speech at the dinner : 0 -1 did. Can you recollect how many of the traversers were present at Mullaghmast ?—There were present, Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Ray, Mr. Steele, and Dr. Gray. Now, at the dinner who did you see ?—I saw Mr. O'Con nell, "Mr. John O'Connell, Dr. Gray, Mr. Steele, Mr. Ray, and Mr. Barrett. Did you take a note of Mr. O'Connell's speech upon the latter occasion ?—Yes. Read it.--1 will. I have also notes of Mr. Barrett's speech on the same occasion, but my notes of his speech are very in complete. Mr. M‘Dostou cm—Your Lordships, perhaps, did not hear what the witness said to Sergeant Warren. He stated that he has a very incom plete _ note of Mr. Barrett's speech. Now, we had from Mr. Hughes yesterday a very perfect note of that speech ; and I take the liberty, on the part of Mr. Barrett, to apply to the Court not to receive the incomplete note. Ido not think it fair. Sergeant WARREN (to witness) —Have you a complete note of any part of Mr. Barrett's speech? if you have not I won't ask you a. word about it. Witness (having looked over his notes)—No, Sir. Sergeant WARREN—I should be very sorry to ask you to give any statement of it. You said you had a complete note of O'Connell's speech at the dinner ; will you read it 7—The witness went on to read the speech made by Mr. O'Connell, which took place at the Mullaghmast dinner. He (Mr. O'Con nell) -asked on that occasion was there any Repealer brought betore a bench charged with any crime? Was there any of them brought before a magistrate for a breach of the peace ? No, not one. They (the Irish t eople) had made a moral de monstration which no country on the face of the earth was ca pable of producing save Ireland. They (the Irish) had met in immense numbers without the slightest violation of the laws of God or man, and yet that country and such a people were enslaved. Mr. O'Connell then spoke something about the eoldrwater cure, but I did not catch Laughter.) Mr. O'Connell continued, and said the only way to obtain the Repeal of the Union was by the peaceful working of the Irish people themselves.- They would not commit a breach of the peace. _ They would not commit a violation of the law. He weat.csti to read that portion of the speech relative to the Duke oi Wellington, in which it was stated that if a man hap pened to be born in a stable it did not make him a horse. Witness continued reading Mr. O'Connell's speech for some time longer, and the direct examination being concluded, Mr. Henn, Q. C., commenced the cross-examination. M r . HENN— you state what time you came to Ire land first?—The first time I came was in July, 1843. I was never here before. Mr. HENN—Were you much frightened at the idea of coming over?—Yes, I was frightened a little. Mr. n EN st—lsupposeyou found the alarm false'?—Why, yes. Mr. HENN—I suppose you were paid fairly for coming over ? Yes, I get 3501. Mr. HENN—Altogether do you mean? I got 501. for the Donnybrook, arid 3501 for attending all other meetings, and up to the next session of Parliament. Mr. HENN—You have found it a profitable speculation, then ?—Yes, I have. Mr. HENN—Have you ever made as much money in as short a time before ?—No, I have not ; I have sometimes done very well, sometimes not. Mr. HENN—Have you ever taken the benefit of the Insolvent Act ?—I have once. Mr. HENN—Only once ! when was that? I was arrested on the 25th of June, and my petition was heard on the 25th of think ; it was some time before I cams over. Mr. HENN—You have stated that the employment you have undertaken was suggested to you by some person on behalf of the. Government—who was that person ? Sergeant WARREN—I object to his answering that question. Mr. Mum—l have a right to test the accuracy of the witness in this way. Sergeant WARREN—This principle was decided in Hardy's case, and Lord Erskine distinctly laid it down that a witness em ployed by Government is not obliged to disclose the name of his employer, and Lord Chief Justice Eyre also said that though in general a witness may be asked such a question, yet the secrets of the Government ought not to be laid open unless in an ex treme case. In Philips on Evidence, the doctrine was also stated. Mr.. Philips says that though under ordinary circum stances the credit of a witness may be tested in this way, yet witnesses will not be permitted always to disclose the names of their employers, and it was not proper to inquire what officer under the Government had induced a witness to come forward. He quoted this from the Ist volume of Philips on Evidence. In another case Mr. Gibbs had asked a witness under cross-examination—How came you to go ? By whom were you sent-? The witness replied—lf it be a fair question 1 will • answer. Chief Justice Eyre said—lf you choose to answer the question you may ; but I will not insist upon it. The then Attorney. General said, Ido not think the examination should be permitted to go on where the delicacy of the witness is interfered' with. Mr. .Gibbs-1 don't see where the delicacy is. . Lerd Chief Justice Eyre—l do not think it proper to press this . witness, to Maivier. The nature of the connexion between the parties ought ' not to be dis closed here ; and Mr. Gibbs then added—l will not press the question. In Monaghan's case there was also an objection. Mr. Erskine's qtiestion went to test the credit of the witness ; but Lord Chief Justice Eyre held it,was a most important rule for the public that.the names of persOris Were not to be disclosed, unless they Were material- to the case, Ile referred to pages 807. and 823;,Aben Mr.; Erskine - Wished to eiamine a wit ness as to . Mformationobtained from a Orticular quarter, and asked if the. information came , from a man or woman , the Chief Justice would not allow the disclosure to be made. The rule was clearly laid down in Philips's Law of Evidence. Mr. HENN, Q.C.—There is a manifest distinction between the: principle here, and that relied on by the Crown—between questmns arising -out of . ,cross-examination and from the direct. Th i s i s ,_ a q uestlogyarislag ken the direct examination, and I wali4ather *unitised An** it ; asked in a leading form, " Was it not -suggested. tAlletit OXl.,tite. part of ,the Government?" and the.wituese answered hdthe affirmative. lam now testing his credit, and how can I test the accuracy of his answer unless al lowed to ask the question? Chief Justice PENNEFATHER—The Court are of opinion the distinction taken by you Mr. Henn, makes no difference ; the protection must be upheld. Mr. HaNN then proceeded with the cross-examination—You had a communication with a person high in office ?—Yes. Shortly before you came from England, were you in connexion with any newspaper?—Yes, the Morning Chronicle. How long in connexion with that paper?—About a year. Does it support the present Government ?—No. Were you in connexion with any other paper ?—Not at that time. Were you at any other time ?—Yes ; the Times. When did your connexion with the Times cease?—ln 1836. When with the Morning Chronicle ?—After the last session of Parliament. Since then have you been engaged by any other pape r?-- Yes ; by the 'Standard. Then, when you came here in July were you not connected with the Morning Chronicle ? Yes ; I wish to state - the reasons why I came. Mr. HiNV—Yeu have already given 350 substantial ones for coming.—( Laughter. ) Witness—lf I had not come as a newspaper reporter, I would not come for anything. Would you not come forward for 100,000/. ?-0h ! I might —( Laughter) for 75,000/. 'Why, would it be so hard to tempt you?--I was led to ap prehend some damage. Welt, i elt, now that you have come over, would you entertain the same Wraltensiou?—Now that I have seen how things are carried on, I would not have the same inehension. Having hem deputed by some g e ha ron in ici o e f6 : ce y , on an e d am wh e i t le o in the employment et the IWorntrt Ireland?—Yes. Well, to whom did you apply on you anima/ y ou "me here to report the proceedings at the meeting held at Donny brook—you could not report unless you had a place o n the platform to hear and see. Tell me t o whom did y ou apply ?—I do not know. How did you get to the meeting ?—I went there with a gentleman connected with. the Dublin Evening Post; he being well known did everythin for me, and got me a place on the platform. You said when Mr. O'Connell arrived there was great con fusion ?—Yes.. erson s coming on the platform?— That was created by p It was. There was no breach of the peace—no alarm on your part? --NO. Mr. HENN—You would not give 50,0001. to get away from it—(Laughter)—was not all q uiet and deco, ous ?-It. was. The report of what occurred at Donnybrook you transcribed from the notes you took ?—Yes. Have you that paper ?—Yes. Now, having come over in a double capacity, did you furnish a report to the Government and to the Morning Chronicle?—Yes. To the CHIEF JUSTICE-1 assisted in preparing a report for the Morning Chronicle. Mr. Mx N—Was that on the same day?—Yes, it was on Monday. Did you on that day copy the short-hand notes you took to furnish your report to the Chronicle? Oh, no ; 1 sent off by post that night, and it was not more than thirty lines ; I only wrote a portion of Mr. O'Connell's speech without referring to my notes at all. When did you write out the report for Government ?—On the next day. Is it a full report ?—As full as possible, except in those por tions to which I have referred. I understand you took a verbatim report of what you consi dered material ?—Yes. You cannot be always precisely verbal ?—Oh, no ' • and .the change of a word might often make a very material difference in the sense of a sentence. But of those parts you did not consider material you did 'not take a note ?—No. You took what you call topical notes of what took place ? Yes. But you do not pretend to say that you even gave the sub stance of what was said in those special notes?—l . do not un derstand the latter part of your question. I took notes in such a way as not to misrepresent the sense of the speaker upon those points on which he spoke ; but I do not pretend to have given the words,nr anything like them. Do you pretend to say you have given even the substance of the observations made on the various topics ?—I do not know how far the expression " substance" extends. Mr. HENN —Why substance is substance, and it is so plain a word that it could not be made plainer.—(Laughter.) Did you g ive the substance?—l gave the substance , or me a n in g of the observations? _ _ 1 -- Of all the observations ? Oh, no. What then ?—The discussions of these topics might have occupied twenty sentences; but those twenty sentences might contain but one idea, and I only put down the idea.—( A laugh.) What are the topical notes ?—The substance of the observa tions made on the vanous-topics alluded to. Now, Mr. Ross, having escaped from the savages —(Loud laughter)—and got back to London, you got courage to come back again ?—I did not come back again. Why, you were only at Donnybrook first?—Oh, yes, I came back. Were you not under the same alarm then, as at first ?—Yes, I was ; I had experience of only one meeting tnere ; but it was not in the neighbourhood of Dublin that I was afraid ; I entertained apprehensions at first. Were you then in the employment of the Chronicle?—No. Did you come as a reporter for Government?—No, I came as a reporter for the Standard. Not on the part of the Government?—Yes, on the part of the Government also. Who recommended you to the Standard ?—Myself. Were you known before ?—Every person connected with the press knew me in London. You know Mr. Bond Hughes, then ?—No, I have not the pleasure of knowing Mr. Hughes. He knows you?—Only by reputation. Did you see him here —Yes. Your reputation recommended you to the Standard ?—I did not say it in that way, but I believe it was my reputation that recommended rne. Having been thus recommended to the Standard, you came here on the part of the Standard and the Government, and with that intention you attended several meetings of the Asso ciation ?—I did. Now, you will tell me how you got access to the Association. Was it your reputation introduced you there ?—No, it wag either the gentleman who went with me to Donnybrook, or another gentleman from the same establishment. Did you tell him you were connected with the Standard ? —Yes. And with the Government?—No, I did not want to tell him that I was connected with the Government. You saw Mr. Hughes ; did he knew you personally ?—Yes ; he was, I am told, in my company about seven years ago at an entertainment given to a gentleman. Did you send reports to the Chronicle 2—l sent reports of three public meetings to the Chronicle. When you came here, did you come for the Standard and Chronicle and the Government?—Yes. . Did you send reports to the Standard, Chronicle, and Go• vernment ?—I did to the Standard and Chronicle, but not to the Government. I wrote the report out here. Did you not transmit reports to London ?—Yes, to the Standard and Chronicle. The Standard is a Government paper?—l never disclosed the fact that I was here on the part of the Government until last night. May ne you stated that you had come here for the C hronicle alone May !isit I? I never stated a falsehood my life, and it is too late now to begin. I did not state at all that I came here on the,part of the Government. There is one with whom lam connected—l mean my wife—whose wishes and feelings I always consult—(Much laughter among the ladies in the gallery, and the persons in the body of the Court )—and she was averse to my coming here as a Government reporter. I had my own feelings, too, on the matter. An artist of re putation, who had been asked to exhibit, in Dublin, a picture containing portraits of celebrated Englishmen, had refused to do so; and when a gentleman, such as he, entertained appre hensions on the matter, some allowance must be made for my having a reluctance to state why I came. Well, then, I take it for granted that you would not under take the business for 50,000/. ? You did not communicate the matter to the Morning Chronicle?—No. Now, Mr. Ross, you attended at Loughrea, Clifden, and Mullaghmast meetings. Did you send reports of the proceed ings at each to the Chronicle?—l did not send the report of the Mullagmast meeting to the Chronicle. You are acquainted with the person who represented the Chronicle t here ?—Yes. Had yon any communication with him at that meeting ? Yes; he was close to me. Oh ! then, you know Mr. Geary ?—Yes. You ale quite sure you did not send that meeting to the Chronicle 2—Yes. Did the Chronicle pay you for that meeting ?--The Chronicle paid me only for what 1 sent. Did you charge them anything for the Mullaghmast meeting? —Yes, I did.--(lndications of surprise in the Court. ) How much did you charge for sending them nothing ?-011, they got the Mullaghmast meeting. Gear: then did the whole of the meeting, but you charged for it, and got the money ?—No. What!—Allow me to explain (witness, turning to the bench, said)—l regret I must state those circumstances, but I am compelled to explain. This gentleman, Mr. Geary, wanted some money to enable him to go to those meetings, in order to send reports to London. I advanced him money on several occasions for that purpose. On this occasion, being run a little short, I wanted some money myself, and he could get no supply of money from London, and he therefore pro posed that the Mullaghmast meeting should be sent over in my name, as I should be sure to get paid for it. Did you get the money from the Chronicle for that meeting ? —I did, but I gave it to him. Having attended at those monster meetings here, way I ask you whether you have ever, in the course of your duties in England, attended at any of the great public meetings there ? Not at many, but at some of them. At any of the Anti-Corn-law League meetings?—No, _ . never reported any of them. Don't you think it very wrong that a reporter should be called upon to give evidence ?—No, certainly not. 1 think a reporter should obey the law of the country ; and I never heard that questioned until I heard it by some gentlemen here. 'Tis preposterous.—( Laughter. ) You were not always merely a reporter 7—No. You were, 1 believe, an editor ? —I was. Were you the editor of a newspaper called the Carlisle Patriot ?—I was. About what time?—ln the years 1837, 1838, and 1839. What were the politics of that paper ?—Conservative. Are those your own politics?—They are. Were they always so ?—Not alwa,ys. For the last ten years ?—The title has not existed for ten. years. But the principles might?—True enough. What were you before you became a Conservative ?—Why, if I might define it 1 only ask you to name it ?—Why, I might answer that if I may define them— " In moderation placing all my glory, The Tories call me Whig—the Whigs a Tory." been complained of (said the witness) by some of my own family, who are strong Liberals, for being a rank Tory; and I have been condemned by some of my 'I ory friends for being too much of a Liberal.—(Great laughter.) And perhaps, both were right ?—Perhaps so. I can only arrive at a mean by the assertion of opposites.—(Laughter.) lam glad you came over to Ireland to enlighten us When you edited the Carlisle paper you had no objection to tell me what denomination of politics you belonged to?—The title existed at the time, designating a body of men who enter tainei opinions in reference to public affairs, in which, gene rally I concurred with them. If you ask me what I was before that, I should say, a moderate Whig before the Reform Bill passed. Never had a touch of the Radical about you ?—Never ; I had the same feeling as all young men in favor of Liberal in stitutions, and I trust 1 shall always entertain it. Mr. HENN—And I hope you may inspire the Government with a similar feeling. Witness—l don't think it at all necessary. Were any of the members of the present Government con nected with that Carlisle paper?--Not that I know of. •You don't know who the proprietors were while you were editor?—No, not one of them (after a pause), except from their own statement. Do you remember a prosecution of a person named Taylor at Carlisle—Dr. Taylor—and giving evidence on that occasion? —No, I do not. You do not. Is that your answer?—Why, if I gave any evidence, or answered any questions, it must have been about some very unimportant matter, for I don't recollect it. Very likely : I suppose it was a topical note you took of it as you didn't consider it material?—l took no notes at all. It was just an examination before magistrates. I see your recollection is reviving. Now, I again ask you were you not examined before the Magistrates ?—I don't re collect that I was. Did not you protest, upon the high authority of a reporter, that you should not be called upon to give evidence ?—Witness (apparently astonished), Oh, certainly not. Are you sure of that?—Sure of it l I never did any such thing in my-life. Didlou.take any active part at electioni in England ?—No. Not, at all?.:—No. .. • Did,you always confine yourself to the mere drudgery of re porting?--'When? . Dttring the coarse-of your connexion. with the press 2—No. I have pgoasionally; written articles. . , Did, you everovrlte an election squib? — No t I am aware. • If. you will4how anything, of the kind 01 . te11: jou im mediately. ,• • Do you-remember an election at Carlisle?—Yee, Do you remember- . a Mr. Wentworth standing,•as *a candi date ?—No. • You do not do not, . Mr. HENN (handed up an election placard to witness)--Do you remember that placard ?—No. ,I do n rememberotl ve the nnaemer sa ftw oherh e ard candidate h whosenam name before . i s to Dito?—yoNuo Were you connected with the public press in 1841 —Yes; I was connected with the London press. And do you tell me that you, who were connected with a London newspaper in 1841 aid not hear of a contested elec tion in Carlisle at that period?--I tell you again I never heard of the names before. THE - SUN, LONDON; JANUARY, 1844. Was there a contested election in Carlisle in 1841 ?—I really do not remember. If there was an election, it made no im• pression on my mind. And you say you don't know who the candidate was?—l do not. Do you remember any election in Carlisle ?—Yes, there was an election in '39 or '4o—it was an election for the county. Look to this placard, it is addressed to the working classes of Carlisle ?—I have looked at it, but never saw it until now. may have seen it on the walls. Let me look at the date. ( Witness then looked at the date, and said he mist.ok the date; he never saw that placard before.) 111 r. Henn handed him another placard, an address to the working classes of Carlisle, and he said he never saw that either. Now, you edited the Carlisle Patriot in 1 539?—Yes. Look at this (handing him a printed document), have you any recollection of that?—l have not the slightest recollection of it. _ _ Wa3 it not publish( d in the Patriot a 3 a leading article?-1 do not know. I have no recollection of it. _ _ Can you say that that did not appear in your paper ?--I cannot say. But it may have appeared? did not. '—lt may, Sir ; I cannot say it The article to which I call your attention says—" We pro test in the most ardent manner against the conduct of the magistrates in compelling us to give evidence against the pri soners." Do you remember those words ?—I do not. Sergeant WARREN begged to interrupt Mr. Henn. Mr. HENN-I think 1 :111 entitled now to ask him will he swear that this was not inserted in the paper with his sane- tion ? Sergeant WARREN—He has already stated that he has no re collection of having seen that document before, and, therefore, you have no right to read one word of it. Mr. Just ire CRAMPTON—Certainly not. Mr. HENN—Very well. lam entitled at all events to ask him this. Will you swear you did not, when editor of the Pa triot, protest against reporters being !xamined ?—I said before I did not. - - I know you did, but answer me again ?—I did not make any such protest—even in this sentence which I have used— (Laughter)—l made no such protest. Then you did use the sentence ?—You mistake me—l did not. Were you in the habit of reporting in the House of Com mons ? Yes. I suppose you often reported Mr. O'Counell's speeches ?—I did—very often. Did you ever state that you found considerably difficulty in following Mr. O'Connell ?—Yes, I did. And that is the fact ?—Yes ; almost all reporters find diffi culty in following Mr. O'Connell. INow the . Donnybrook meeting was perfectly quiet and peaceable ?—lt was. Was it not so at the Clifden meeting ?—lt was. Was it not so at Ltitighrea ?—lt was. Was it not so at Mullaghmast?—lt was. And at Clifden you saw men coming on horses, with their wives behind them ?—(Laughter. )—I cid. And numbers of the cavalry without any saddles or bridles ?-- (Laughter. )—Yes. You were not frightened ?—No, I was not frightened at any of the meetings ; I knew that near any of the traversers I was sure to be safe, and I always kept near them— ( Laughter. ) Was it so wet at the Clifden meeting as to interfere with your reporting ?—No, we had an umbrella over us—still it was nplea. ant. Were you able to take notes fully ?—Pretty fully. But only "pretty" fully ?—Yes. Did you at end the meeting of the Repeal Association on the 4th of September ? Yes, I did. There used to be a great number of persons besides the traversers at the meeting of the Association—used there not? —Yes, there used. The room was very large in which the_Association had to meet ?—Yes, it was ; I think it would, probably, hold as many as this room. _ . Used large numbers to attend the meetings and the dinners in the country ?—Yes, the dinners and meetings were very nu merously attended. Answer me this question, Sir, if you please—Did you at any of those meetings see any of the traversers do any act inconsis tent with the duty of a peaceable eitizen?—Do any act ? Yes. Was there any tendency .to a breach of the peace at any one of these meetings ?—No, there was not ; 1 attended the meeting of the 4th September at the Corn Exchange. Mr. HENN, after cross-examining the witness at great length, in reference to his connexion with the Carlisle Patriot, and the protest put forward in that paper, whilst he was editor, against the examination of reporters, proceeded to ask him several qiie,tions, on the subject of a speech of Mr. O'Connell, made at a meeting of the Association, dur ing the course of which he read a letter from Dundalk respecting Ribbonism. The witness declared that he had taken no note. He was cross-examined in reference to a speech of Dr. Gray, delivered in the Association on the 27th, and a speech of Mr. O'Connell, in moving the insertion on the minutes of a letter from Mr. Naiier, of Loughcrew, and a letter from Lord Londonderry. Mr. O'Connell on that occasion denounced in strong and emphatic language the conduct of Mr. Conner, in attempting ,to give notice of a motion for the non-payment of rent, and moved that his name should be expunged from the list of members, which mo tion was carried unanimously. Mr. HENN here closed his cross-examination. _ By Judge PERRIN—Did not send the report of the Donny brook meeting to any newspaper; . it was very late at the time. Cross-examined by Air. H ATCHELL—Saw Mr. Ray at Alul laghmast, on the scaffold, and spoke to him there ; came di rect from London in August, by railway; took a strong inte rest in the Cumberland election of 1837; knows Sir James Graham. Mr. HATCHELL—Had you any communication with Sir James Graham in June last? . The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected, and the Court ruled that the question could not be put. Alr. HATCHED.—You may go down. The Court adjourned to ten o'clock (punctually) to-mor row morning. SIXTH DAY-BY EXPRESS. SATURDAY, JAN. 20. The Judges sat at ten o'clock precisely, at which hour the traversers were in attendance. The jury having been called over, the evidence for the Crown was resumed. The first witness called was Mr. John Jackson, the Irish correspondent of the Morning Heald. who, having been sworn, was examined by Mr. BREWsTER, Q. C., and deposed as fol lows :—I am connected with the press—with the London Morning Herald. I am the Irish correspondent of that paper, and was so in the course of last summer and last autumn. I attended at the meetings of the Repeal Association. I was in the habit of transmitting regularly to London by the post re ports of what took place at those meetings. Mr. BREWSTER—My Lords, I wish to apprise you that it is not my intention to make this gentleman go over all the speeches which the Court has already heard. I will confine myself almost exclusively to asking him who took part at the meetings. Take these documents in your hand, Mr. Jackson, and see whether they are the original notes which you sent to London ?—Yes, they are. is this paper which I now hand you your report of the meet ing that was held on the 30th of May last ?—lt is. I wish you to look to page 3of that report.—l ire it. Do you see in these notes a report of a speech made upon that occasion by Mr. O'Connell ?—Yes, 1 do. Read the first few. lines.—The witness proceeded to lead I the report. which commenced by noticing the fact of Mr. O'Connell's having directed the attention of the Association to an error which appeared in the report of the proceedings of the Longford Repeal meeting, which had been published in the Freeman's Journal of the same date. In that report he was m. de to apply the phrase '! ruffian soldiery" to the army of Great Britain; but he begged leave to state that he never used any such expression. '1 he circumstance to which he had alluded in his Longford speech had reference to the pathetic ballad of " Aileen Aroon.' He (Mr. O'C. ) then proceeded in his customary strain to —(Laughter.) Mr. BREWSTE R—That will do. _ _ _ Mr. Banwsrea.—Look at your notes of the meeting of the 18th of July. Alr. O'CONNELL—It would be well if the officer of the'Court marked these 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 entered 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 uovernment Reporter speaking across the table to Mr. Brewster. The CHIEF JUSTICE pointed down to where Mr. Edwards was 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. Frractimost said that many persons came there from cu liosity, and if they could not hold their tongues they ought to remain at home. Air. BREWSTER—Look to page 12; do you find that Mr. Ray did anything at that meeting ?—Yes, he handed in several sums of money ; I find in page 13 that Dr. Gray gave in con tributions. Mr. BeewsTea—Look to page 3, read the contents, and read - ' slowly, if you can. A juror—Hold up yourhead, sir, and raise your voice. The witness then proceeded to read an extract from a speech of Mr. O'Connell's. in which he rulogisea! Mr. Murtage, and promised to attend the meeting at Baltinglass on the 6th of August, which was his oxn birth-day. He then read a letter fry m the Right Rev. fir. Cohen. Roman• Catholic Bishop of Clonfert, enclosing his subscription to the Association. On the same day Mr. Barrett handed in money from a Protestant gen tleman of the . North of Ireland. The witness then read another extract from a speech of Mr. O'Connell's at the same meeting. It that speech Mr. O'Connell alluded to the . necessity If atterding to the muni cipal elections, and said that the Tories hac refused to pay the borough rate. He also said that Lord Bioughani had been inquiring how the money received at the ,lssociation was dis posed of ; but if Lord Brougham chose to s bscribe his pound he would be enlightened on that point—that is, if they would receive the subscription of such a man. They had invested 6,000/. in the funds already, they intendsd to invest 4,0001 more, and 1,0001. had been advanced for the building of the Conciliation Hall. Mr. BREWSTER—Look to page 12; do you see an entry of any money handed in by Mr. Ray ?--Yes, Mr. Ray handed in subscriptions fri,m different parts of England and Scotland (the witness enumerated them). Dr. Gray handed in money en the same day, and stated that the Marqnis of Downshire had . interfered to prevent his tenantry becoming Renealers. Mr. I3REWSTER—Look to your notes•of the meeting on the 25th of July, page have them before me. The secretary Landed in wormy on, that day. In page 6, I see that Mr.• O'Connell handed .in money on the same day. In page 8, I find that Mr. Duffy. of the A'ation, handed in his subscription. In page 9, 1 find that Mr. Steele and Mr. John O'Connell handed in money. Mr. BaewsTge—Look to page 6, and read the statement of Mr. O'Connell with regard to the finance details ?—illr. O'Connell stated that the amount received from the 4th of July, 1842, to the corresPending quarter its 1843. was 15,000/. Alr. BREWSTER— We will now go to the 14th day of August, as set out in the indictmeht. Look at page 2 of your menu script —,Yl.° appeseed to hive been at that meeting of the As sociation?-111r. Ray,. Dr. Gray, and Mr. O'Connell. Go to page 4, and tell me who were present at that meet ing ? --- Mr. Steele was present. Go to page 12 ?—I don't see any names there. Look again?—Oh, yes, I see there the name of Mr. Duffy, of the Nation. Mr. ‘tl lIITESIDE—We do not find any mention of the 14th of August in our copy of the indictment. Mr. ISREWSTER—It is a misprint. Mr. WHITESIDE—My Lord, be good enough to strike out that evidence against Mr. Duffy. Mr. BitewsTen—Just alter the date, my Lord, because Mr: Duffy's name comes in the next meeting. Go to page 22 of August 3, and say who were present at that meeting?-11r. Duffy, Mr. O'Connell, alr. Steele. Go to page 5, and say whose name do you find there?—Mr. John O'Connell's. Go back to page 3, and tell me did Mr. O'Connell do or say any hing that day?—lt states that Mr. O'Connell arrived seortly after two o'clock, accoe panted by Mr. Steele. He read several inters, enclosing contributions from repeal wardens, Roman Catholic clergymen, and others. Go to page 7, and tell me what do you find there?—Mr. O'Connell ream a letter from Philadelphia, containing remit tances and resolutions'read at the Association of the friends of Ireland anti Repeal, and he move(' that the letter from Judge Duran be inserted upon the minutes. Go to page 9. Did he read any document of the Association that day ? Yes, he read his plan for the renewed action of the Irish Parliament; 1 got a copy of it at the Association. The deputy-clerk then read the plan for the renewed action of the Irish Parliament. He continued to read the manner in which members were to be given to the various cities and towns, and considered the basis of representation should be the amount of population. This was taken from the census of 1831, which was prepared for a different purpose, and without reference to the report of the Union. Household suffrage, after' a certain period of occupancy. to give the right of voting, and votes to be taken by ballot. Turn to page 11 of that day? Finds no notes referring to arbitrators 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 the mode of appointing arbitrators and the abolition of the Catholic oath. Judge CRAMPTON—Abolition of what? Witness—The Catholic oath; looks to page 4; finds Mr. Barrett's name and Sir. Daniel O'Connell ; at page 5 Mr. John O'Con nell ; at page 8 Dr. Gray ; reads page 4 ; Mr. O'Con nell handed in several sums of money from various parts of America, andread letters from New York and Utica accompa nying the respect:ye sums, which he moved might be inserted on thesninutes. Witness was proceeding to read" there were high sounding --." Mr. FITZDIBBort, Q. C.—ls this your comment on the pro ceedings ?—Yes--( Laughter.) Mr. WHITESIDE desired him not to trouble them with refer ring to anything of his own. Witness proceeded—Mr. O'Connell said it was prudent to advise with the proprietors of the several newspapers as to the propriety of printing supplements, that all the letters should be published. At page 8 reads the speech of Ur. Gray, of the Freeman's Journal, proposing the adoption of the report fur nished by the Committee as to the mode of selecting and carrying into operation the appointment of arbitrators through out Ireland. Got a document that day at the Association. Has it in Court. Hands it to officer to read. The Clerk of the Crown was then proceeding to read from manuscript on very slight paper. Judge CRAXPTON—Perhaps you have it in print; it is easier to read. Mr. BREWSTER—We have it printed. The officer then read the Report of the Sub-Committee, August, 1 843, on the s y stem and a pp ointm ent of arbitrators ,31 in n n es. B Ireland, sn W re e Ed r i teb—Look to the meeting of th e 28 t h o f A ugus t, by Dr. Gray, Aur. 21, 1843. Mr j a i d s e n s e ? f A 1 S r . r Steele,. a a y d Sir. a n John yti n anything?—He o H id nett, a M i‘ e Dlr. . t Ray, n J. O'Connell yr in'air. O'Connell, and Dr. Gray. Lmoo Cincinnati, to page 7, 7 enclosing , eiing a bill on Mr. Roth sc hild f or 12. Did read a letter ?---Yes ; he read a letter from el Did Mr. O'Conn ell sa y an y thin g at that meeting ? — Yes. n osing 1131. The witness then read some observation s ma d e b y M r . O'Connell with respect to the order on Rothschild, the Arbi tration Courts, and a letter received from Mr. Barry, of Mallow. Look to the meeting of the 29th of August, at pages 3 and 5, and say who were present at it ?-111r. O'Connell, Mr. Ray, and Mr. J. O'Connell. Read the observations of Mr. O'Connell at that meeting. The witness commenced to read an abstract of the speech read by Mr. Ross yesterday, when Air. Justice CRAMPTON asked whether it was necessary to read the speech over again ? Mr. BREWSTER. said that he only wanted to have the last page read ; but the other side might require to have the entire read. The witness then read some observations made by Mr. O'Connell, to the effect that Ireland had many grievances to complain of. She was accused of being discontented, and she was so. It was said she was disaffected ; but he flung back the accusation by saying it was as false as hell. She was not disaffected, but discontented. There should be no outbreak in natural or unadvisable result. his life-time ; but when he was dead it would not be an un- The expression " unadvisable result" seemed to come with surprise upon counsel for the Crown, the Solieitor-General, and Mr. Brewster again asking him what result ? To which the witness still replied, " an unadvisable result." Mr. O'CONIVELL--I never said anything of the kind. (In the report read by Air. Ross yesterday, the words were, we be lieve, " unavoidable result.") Mr. flaewstraa—Can you say how any of those observations were received?—No . Look to page 1 of the report of the meeting of the 4th of September, and wh ich of the traversers were there ?—Mr. Ray, G Mr. Steele, and J ohn O'Connell. to page 7, and see if Sir. O'Connell did anything ?—He handed in sums of money from Roscommon, Circular Bar, Bel fast, Adelaide. New York, Boston, and other places. Did Mr. Ray make any observations?—He recommended the " Spirit of the Nation" to be circulated amongst the peo ple, instead of the trash they were in the habit of reading. As the witness read the passage very indistinctly, he was ordered to read it over again. Now go to page 16, anti see if Mr. O'Connell said anything about another-meeting. to be head?—Mr. O'Connell said that there would be a meeting in Loughrea, where three or four hundred thousand people would be gathered together, and where there would be no breach of the peace if the sub-in spector of police would only allow him to have 200 men, hardy Repeaters, to act as policemen, under the ~,command of the sub-inspector. Now go to- the -10th of Setember, and look at page . 1 . Which of the t r a versers were p resen t?—Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Barrett, and Mr. Steele.. Go to page 10, for the meeting of the 12th of September, and say if Sir. Barrett did anything ?--He handed in a sub scription of 214 Did Mr. O'C onne ll d o anyt hi ng after that ?—He addressed the meeting, an d h an d e d i n 500/. from America. He als o pointed out th a t t h e O rangemen w ere trying to give the Re peal moveme n t a re li gious character , but that it would fail , as their object was to benefit Irishmen of all classes. Now go to the meeting of the 13th of September, and say who appeared at that meeting?—Mr., O'Connell, Mr. Steele, and Mr. Ray: What did Mr. O'Connell first do.? —He read a letter from Washington, United States, and described it as a decument characterised by good sense, practical information, and con taining expressions of sympathy to Ireland. What did Mr. Ray do ?-1-le read a communication on the subject of the enumerators appointed to take the numbers of the constituency. Mr. Brewst er t h en h an d e d i n a manifold copy of the address to all British su bj ects , w hi c h Mr. O'Connell, at this meeting, said should be circulated through the three kingdoms, and placarded on the walls of Liverpool, London, and Bristol. As this document was read yesterday, he did not occupy the time of the Court with it, but simply put it in. He continued the examination of the witness by telling him to go to page 1 of the notes of. the m ee ti ng o f t h e 21st"Septemher' and to state which of the tr aversers were present.—Mr. Ray, Mr. J. O'Connell, and Mr. Duffy. Did Mr. Duffy do anything ?—He handed in subscriptions. Look at the meeting of the 27th of September, and tell me who you find were at that meeting ?—Mr. O'Connell and Mr. J. O'Connell. Witness, in answer to another question, was reading part-of a speech of Mr. O'Connellt,• but was stopped by Mr. Brewster, • who• said that he did not want to hear what Mr. O'Connell said. He only wanted to prove that he was present at the meeting. Was any other person there?—Dr. Gray. Mr. BREWSTER—The subject matter of this meeting was fully stated yesterday ; he should not, therefore, occupy the time of the Court with going over it again. He only wanted to prove the presence of the traversers. Mr. WHITESIDE—But you are not to assume that this man saw them? Mr. BREWSTER--I am not assuming anything. Look at page 2 and say who was at the meeting of the 28th? Mr. J. O'Connell and Mr. Ray. Did Mr. O'Connell state at that meeting anything relating to another meeting ?—lie made some observations in reference to a meeting at Mullaghmast. • Witness was reading the observations, when Mr. Aloorte said the coarse Mr. Brewster had to pursue Was to corroborate the evidence of Sir. Ross; he ought, therefore Go to page 6 now and read from that ; I believe you have not seen those manuscripts since you sent them to London ?—I only got them from Mr. Kemmis to initial. 'lake that document, and refer to the meeting of June 6 at the Association. I should observe, my Lords, that this gen tleman's evidence applies only to the meetings of the Associa tion at the Corn Exchange, and nothing else. Look to page 1, and see which of the traversers were at that meeting ?—Daniel O'Connell. Look to page 6, and see if there were any others of them there 2—Yes, the Member for Kilkenny, Mr. John O'Connell, Mr. Barrett, of the Pilot, and Sir. Steele. Go back to page 6, and read a portion of Mr. O'Connell's speech. Witness, reading, " He (11r. O'Connell) passed yesterday amid the scenes of Saxon cruelty, and the sanguinary Cromwellian, cold-blooded butcheries, commencing with the murder of Sir Charles Astley." (Mr. O'Connell correcting the witness, " Askell"), Sir Charles Askell, and ending with the little drum boy. Now turn to where he announces the meetings he has fixed to come off, and read.—" I will be at Kilkenny on the Bth of June ; at Mallow on the 11th ; at Murroe or Abingdon on the 13th ; at Ennis on the 15th ; at Athlone on the 18th ; at En niskillen on the 21st."—(Mr. O'Connell, " Oh, oh," and laughter.) The witness again corrected himself Ennistymon ; at Galway on the 25th ; at Dundalk on the 29th. Did Mr. Steele make a speech at. the meeting ?—Yes • Mr. Steele came forward amidst great cheering, and said that he had received a letter, stating that the Glasgow Repealers were to hold a banquet en the 29th; and Mr. O'Connell handed in a sovereign from an Englishman. who blushed for the treat ment by. his countrymen of the noblest race in the world. Mr. Ilavrc HELL, asked if this meeting was set forth in the bill of particulars? Mr. BREWSTER said all the meetings were set forth in it, but he would now turn to that of the 4th of July. Mr. FORD made an observation, which was inaudible in the gallery. Mr. BREWSTER should not tell the jury that, because, there was no such meeting. It was struck out. (Handing witness another document), Look .to page 1, and tell me which of the traversers you find attending that meeting ?—Mr. Daniel and Mr. John O'Connell, Mr. Steele, and Mr. Ray. Go to page 7. and say if there was any money received there from America ?—Yes, several sums were handed in from Ame rica. . Mr. Duffy and Mr. John O'Connell were present at the meeting which took place on the sth of July. I see page lof my notes of that meeting ; Mr. O'Connell said he wished to call the attention of the meeting to two points; he had re ceived a letter from a person in Sligo which inclosed another letter from a discharged soldier, who stated that he was em• ployed by O'Connell to drill the peasantry. He (Mr. O'Con nell) then called .the attention of the meeting to the Ribbon conspiracy which existed in the north, and said it wa: originated by the Chartists in Scotland. He ( Mr. O'Connell) spoke about Lord Cloncarthy who attempted to prevent his tenantry from going to a Repeal meeting. • Was Mr. Ray, the secretary at that meeting ?—I don't re member that. The witness proceeded to read an abstract of Mr. O'Connell's speech in which he alluded to the Marquis of Downshire, who endeavoured to prevent his tenants from going to a Repeal meeting or joining the Repeal Association. He (Mr. O'Connell) also read a letter from America on that oc casion. I see page 4 of my notes where Mr. O'Connell moved that the letter be inserted on the minutes, and that the thanks of the Association be conveyed to the writers. He (Mr. O'Connell) said there were allusions in the letter which came well from America, as the tone of it was re sponsive to liberty. The witness continued to read a por tion of the speech made by Mr.- O'Connell. He (Mr. O'Connell) concluded by moving " that the thanks of the meeting be sent to the subscribers in America." The mo tion was seconded by Mr.. Steele, and passed unanimously. I see page 10 of my notes, and observe a portion of Air. O'Connell's speech ; the notes are not in short-hand ; Mr. John O'Connell read a letter on that day from Wilmington, Delaware, which letter contained subscriptions; a vote of thanks was passed to the subscribers. The witness went on to read portions of Mr. O'Connell's speech. Mr. O'Connell said the people ought to avoid the example of 1798, and any thing like it, as it was by such means the Union was carried. He did not forget the language used by Members of the Ca binet; Wellington, in the House of Lords, and Sir Robert Peel in the House of Couirans, had the audacity to speak of civil war, but that would the march of Repeal. When they spoke of civil war, let them look beyond the Atlantic ; and if the people were attacked they had the consolation to feel they would not stand alone, but the people of Ireland looked to him, and under his advice they would never commence, but wait till they were attacked. The CHIEF JUSTICE thou/ht MT. Moore had misunderstood Mr. Brewster. What he had stated had not been done; the witness was stopped in his reading by Mr. Brewster. Mr. NlooKE—ln one instance the witness began in the middle of a speech. Mr. BREWSTER—It 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. Bay. Mr. MooftE—On this occasion Mr. '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 malting had been heard of the speech beyond the announce ment of the speech at Multaglimast. 'the CHIEF JUSTICE —You have misunderstood Mr, Brew ster, Mr. Mrio.e Mr. WHITESIDE said if they had half the sentence read they must ha , e the whole. The CHIEF JUSTICE—I shall not consider a single sentence of that ape. cli as having been read. It was not wanted, arid the reading it was merely a mistake. lie w. uld agree that it would be quite unfair for the Crown to give a garbled extract from a speech, and n t give it entire. Mr WHITESIDE—What your Lordship has said is quite enough. Mr. Brewster asked a question about a speech ot Sir. 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 the 28th of Sept. ? Look at the last page and tell me.—Mr. Steele was there also. Mr. BREWSTER (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. BREWSTER (to witness)—Look to page —, and try do you find there any other of the traversers?—Yes, Mr. O'Connell. Look at page 4?—Mr. Steele. Look at page s?—Mr. Duffy, of the Nation. Look to page 6 ?—Mr. lt,y and Mr. J. O'Connell. Link to page 7?-1).. Gray anti the Rev. air. Tierney. Mr. IlitEwsTEß—Then it appears that all the traversers were present except Mr. Barrett My Lords, as Mr. Hughes has already read out his entire report of the p oceedings of that meeting, I do not think it necessary to trouble the Court by a further reterence to the witness's report of Mr. O'Connell's speech. Mr. FerzGrenost begged leave most emphatically to protest against the Lear, ed Counsel indulging in any such remarks as ttio•e which had now fallen trom hint. It Mr. Brewster in tended not to ask his witness any further question, he might rest satisfied with his own determination to that effect, without troubling their Lordshi, s with what he did not purpose doing. Such a course was wiloily unnecessary. CHIEF JUSTICE—But, Mr. Fi zgibbon, the Court has a right to receive for their own satisfaction if they think fit, such information as nas been offered by Mr. Brewster. Mr. FITZGIBBON—NIy Lords, I most respectfully maintain that Air. Brewster has no right whatever to state to the Court, in the hearing of the jury, the reasons which have induced him to adopt su h or such a course. Mr. MOORS, Q. C.—Besides, such a proceeding leads to the inferedce that the present witness may he in a position to cor roborate Mr. Hughes's notes, whereas there is no direct evi dr rice whatever to prove anything of the kind. Mr. linnwsTE it-1 only wanted to avoid the imputation of leading the witness. To witni se—At the .everal meetings in respect of which you have given evidence, did a great number of persons attend in the room ?—Sometimes more, and some- Wawa less. —( Laughter. ) Were they generally well attended ?—Yes, the meetings were usuady 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? Judge PEKItIN—To which of the 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 Peautt4—The witness you know, Mr. Fitzgibbon, must specify a date, otherwise his evidence is oflittle value. Mr. BREWSTER—I merely wanted not to lead the witness. Witness-1 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 Mr. FITZGIBBON—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. I did not ask you, Mr. Jackson, how long you had been a correspondent. That was not my question, what I asked you was how long you had been a reporter?—l can't say lam a reporter, that is to say, I am not a shorthand writer. I 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 2-1 mean in the sense of a short hand writer, 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 newspapers ?—Yes, after a manner.—( Laughter. ) Then you were, in point of fact, a reporter ot 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 capacity ?—Three or four years ago. W ith what newspaper did you begin ?—I had been in the habit of contributing to provincial papers before I was con nected with the Herald. By reports I do not mean contributions; but to what pro vincial papers used you to send your reports ?—Principally to the Limerick Star and the Limerick Chronicle. W hat were the politics of the Limerick Star?—lt was a Liberal paper. And so, too, is the Limerick Chronicle?—No, it is not; it is Conservative. Did you send reports to both of these journals at the same time ?—No, 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 ot public interest ?—They were princi pally sketches of the petty sessions of Kilrush. Illustrated sketches ? —A little embellished occasionally. By being " a 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, I suppose, that by embellishments you mean some thing in the report which, in point of fact, did not 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 ?—.NI y 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. )—Ytat may, if you like, apply that appellation to me, for I do not mean to say I am a poet. Have you contributed art:cles in verse to any publication?— Yes, I have. Did you ever contribute to the Nation?—Never. 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 published 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 ?—I got a letter from the proprietors of the Morning Herald, asking me to come 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 if I was not the author of those sketches in the newspapers of the Kilrush Petty Sessions, and 1 said I was, and then he said that the proprietor of the Morning Herald expressed a wish that I 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 income to make nimself smooth. Pray, how do you support yourself here ? --I have 150 guineas a year from the Morning .Herald as their correspondent. 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 interest, 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 ?—Yes. Had you the privilege of embellishing those before you sent them up ?-1 had. And of course you exercised it?—No, I did not, beyond the truth. There was no truth in those petty sessions' sketches you sent? —Only in some of them. Well, 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 was probable; if I 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 mode you took of as certaining the truth or falsehood of any one of those state ments ?—Genei al 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 2 I don't understand you. You don't ?—I cannot charge my memory as to any particu lar occasion. If you were to ask the editor or correspondent to vouch for the accuracy of every thing lie 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 was the note you took for the Morning Herald?— That was my daily letter. Mr. BnEwsxga—The note you took. Sure it's a letter. to read everything of which the witness had taken notes, and Mr. FITZGIBBON (turning to Mr, Brewster)—l beg of you Mr. FITZGIBBON—Can you tell from which you copied them? not such extracts only as were deemed material. not to assume that I don't understand what I'm examining the —I cannot tell which. Mr. lifiewsmt said in some instances he had certainlyealled witness about, and it is not upon this occasion alone, but for the A Juror—Mr. Jackson, did you not swear, a while ago, that on the witness to read the speeches; in a majority of cases thee future. lam pretty nearly a Clare man myself, and I can un- all you wrote was done during the time of the meetings in the speeches had been already read by Mr. Boss, but where he derstand the Clare brogue well enough. , Exchange, and no place else ?—The majority of them were thought it desirable he had called on this witness to read them To the witness—Now, mind, I don't ask you about the sub- written there. a second time. In some instances this was not at all necessary. stance of what is written in those scraps of paper, but I ask Juror—Oh, but you certainly swore they were all. written All he wanted to prove at present was whether Mr. O'Connell you are those the identical scraps of paper you forwarded to the there, and nowhere else. announced the meeting at Mellaghtnast. Morning H , Herald?—The very identical papers. CHIEF JUSTICE—Let Mr. Fitzgibbon close his examine- Mr. MooKE—lf the witness came forward to give evidence Now show them to me. ( Witness handed them to the tion o f the witness, and then, gentlemen, you can examine him. as to any of the traversers being at the meeting, he submit ed Coun-el ; the manuscript was written on both sides of ?he Mr. Ferzcinew-l— I will repeat tie question re the juror, that he ought to give an account o f all that was dune. He would sheet.) Did you send these identical papers tor the pur- and ask did you not swear awhile ago the' you wrote a.,1 those not go the length of saying that a reporter ought not to give pthe of being set up in the office of the Morning Herald?— slip: at the meeting. and if. no other place? --To the best of evidence as to what Mr. A or Mr. B. said, or what every indivi- I did. my recollect on the majo ity Of them were written there. dual said; but it Mr. O'Connell ...e an y of the uther traversers I suppose yoe know enough of reporting to know that it is We. e all of them written there ?—Not alt, perhaps ;s me made speeches on that occasion, he had no right to mke ex _ neces sar y in sending manuscript to a printing-office that it of them were written after the meeting was over, some of them tracts fum those speeches, or read only those portions which should be written only on or.e side?—Yes. were written next day. he thought material. That is a part of th e i ns t ruct i ons o f every reporter ? Did you d o any o f t h em f rom t h e newsnee . . . _ . ?—Som it is. So that it may be set up at once. without being copied ?—Yes. W a s the paper you sent as it is now, in set aps of this kind ? —No, they were in lull length slips. After having sent these slips to the Morning Herald, when did you see them ag r.n ?—I received a letter from the proprie tor about two months ago. Don't tel us about his letter now. I ask: you; only for a date?— I never , aw them until about two months age. In whose hands did you see them on thot occasion ?—The Crown solicitor handed me a letter frorn the proprietor. Now don't tell us about your letters. s,. Witness—My Loots. in justice to m y se lf — CHIEF JUSTICE—You're not asked about that now. How did you come lido communication with Mr. Kemmis?—He -cut for me and I went to his office. Was that the first time you were in his office?—lt was the first time I es er saw him to my knowledge. Whose initials re those on that palter?—Mine. When anti where did you write them?—:n Mr. Kemmis's office, a low days alter 1 was called on by the proprietor to do so. lint was you in communication with dir. Kemmis before tha - ?—No. Dot 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 Associstion meeting, ? About eight or nine moot! s ego. For the first time ? I was off and on there before. Were you a otepoaler ?—Nto Did Sou pay a shilling going in at the door ?—I did, the first. time 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 ?—some imes they were, and sometimes bor rowed from the notes to the man near me, perhaps. Were they borrowed from the notes of the man near you? —Very freqiientiy they were ; I copied them from the slips of the man next tire. Was that a short-hand writer?—Sometimes he was, and sometime, not ; I gave the subs ante ot what he had written out, 01 course. I could not copy shorthand notes, not being a shorthand writer nsyselt. Used 3ou ever to vary the language when you copied from the mattuscript of the man next you ?—I used. In order that it should riot have the appearance of being a copy of what he transer.bed ?-I)reci,ely. 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 toe lips ot the man represented in it to have spoke. ?—Upon my solemn oath this paper (nolding up one of his sheets of manuscript) contoios the substance of what Mr. O'Connell said. Will you swear tone were his words?—To the best of my belief it is the substance ot what he said.- I never attempted to give his exact words. Now, attend to me. On your oath, did you write what is upon that slip of paper while Mr. O'Connell was speaking?— Yes. Up , n your oath, was that written down upon that piece of paper from the lips of Mr. O'Connell while he was speaking it?—Ye,, octooionallv taking a note, and catching the leading topics in his discourse. 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 spsaking ?—To the best of my recollection this (mean ng 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 iece of paper was written from his lips whil e h e was speaking—lt is in substance what he said, to the best of my recollection. Is that an answer ?-1 think it is. On your oath was it written while he was speaking, and not from a paper?—l 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. Might 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 ?—I do not recollect any particular case. Could you fix upon any one of all the slips 2—l 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 it written whilst the people were speaking ?—Yes. Do you swear that?-1 do. The whole of it?—Yes. While the meeting was going on, and in the Association room ?—Every one that refers to the meeting (of the 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 handing in I wrote out what previously occurred. Will you now turn to the speech put into the mouth of Mr. O'Connell, on the 15th of July 2 —He said he wished to call attention to two letters he had received that morning from Sligo. One was written by a discharged soldier, stating "he was employed by Mr. O'Connell." Weil now, have you the speech of Mr. O'Connell in moving the insertion in the American book of a letter received from A merica ?—I have. Mr. O'Connell moved that the letter be inserted in the American book, and not on the regular minutes, arid that thanks be conveyed to the two office-bearers named in the letter, as subscribed to their fund. Do you swear that sentence was written by yourself, when the speaker was speaking ?—To the best of my opinion it was. Was it not?—l 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. BREWSTER—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. ForzoISBON—I am not at present asking Mr. Brewster to look at what lam doing at all.—( Laughter.) lam 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 can:.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 he 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 ix evidence I will not object to it, and then you may examine him as to it. Sir. FITZGIBBON—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. Sir. BREWSTER—But that is what I object to. Judge BURTON—Why go on to prove what you have such a perfect transcript of ? Mr. FITZGIBUON—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, Ifind 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 readil ° y ,- it, unless I asked the man about it when I had hint 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 Mr. O'Connell spoke. I wilt show he is not a reporter, and that he was incapaOle of taking reports where he says lie did, and that what he asserts is false. IIA ant 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 hi. hand were written by him at the meetings. fle comes here falsely representing to the jury that fact. He did not take a note at those meetings, 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 BURTON—I see your object is very clear. Judge Citaatroots—Mr. Fitzgibbon, am I to understand that you intend to give the paper in evidence ? air. FITZGIBBON—NO, I do not. Judge Cita sirroo—Then I feel great difficulty in that case in allowing this sort of examination. Mr. lir-tows - rim—lf 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.) Let 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, Sir. Fitzgibbon. 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 netetaker's slips. Hah ! hah 1 'Fake 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 ?—I 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, I 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 you did not take all these papers from the newspapers, or from another note taker's slips? Judge Psalmist—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 note-taker's slips. 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. gem rely speaking tin y were. While the meetings were going on, were you always em ployed wetting?—Not alway —only sometimes "1 hat is, you were sttmetimes only listening?—Yes Do you recollect Alr O'Connell having made a speech upon negro slavery ?—I do; he spoke several times on that subject. 'I urn to your note of the speech he made on that subject nn the sth of July. 's ere you present on that occasion e Ye Was not the speech a long one ?—Y. s, to the best of my re- . collection. I want a positive answer ; were you present the v, hole time of the meeting ?—I rat her think I was. Is that a positive aniwer ?-- Were y tu present the whole time of the meeting ?--.I will nor swear positively. Will you swear you were there for an hour ?—Yes. For two how ?—To the best of my rt coliect I, that the only an wer you will give ? Will you swear po sitively to one hour ?—Yes. That hour may have been made up of different psi iods ; were you there more than once that day ?.--1 won't swear I was there more than once. Will you swear positively you were there more than an hue ?—I thick I was, bur I dui not torte myseif. With you swear p sittvely to half an hour.—No. 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 roem ? - I don't know. Did you tot off-r, a while ago, to tell me? Was any one in the room when you went in ?-0f course there was. When you entered the room, was it empty or full ?—I never went into the r..om but people were to it. Can you tell wh ther it was morning, noon, or night when you entered it was about mid-day. Did you hear the whole of Mr. u'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 Air. O'Connell speak there? Yes. Will you swear that Alr. O'Connell was at the meeting at two o'clock?—fie came in whilst I was there, seem ding to my note. [ The witness was still under examination when our express Lett.] THE STATE TRIALS. The read, rs of the Pilot Hill ,ee by our columns that we are faithfully re,eeming the I,ledge given in our last. We have been close, and not un .hsei want, ear and e)e wiinesses of the proceei:lngs in the C.urt of Queen's Bench spice Miiintay, and our readers shall in due time be place,) in lull possession of the resu,t. Never, certainly, va* there a stranger proceeding ; never lamer caw. From no labouring ru untant of threat e‘er erect forth a wainuter mouse of s,atetneot aria 1 .1 oot halt the farrago of the Attorney-Genera l and hi* evid‘ nre up to the ru,attent we write. On Monday we intend to publish a supplement, in which shall be given the al eechos of O'Clit,ell a. d of Mr. Ilairett, delivered at Aluilaghtna.t. or, which the Crown lawyers seem to re ly as the molt buttresses of the case. Dui ing the re.oung of O'Connell's magnific. speech a thrill of aomoat,on per vaded the Court. 'That speech ought to be, and it shal. be, re published in tuft 01 other incidents in Court we shall speak, and amongst other things we have to make the amende to Alr Frederick Bond Hughes, which we shall do with much greater satisfac tion than we tilt in assailing that gentleman. 'I he greater portion of the time to-day was consumed by the reading of documents—a work performed by Ross in a slow, teeble, and unsatisfactory manner. The Alullaghrnast speeches were read a second time.— Piloz. THE GADDESBY MURDER AGAIN RE-APPREHENSION OF MESSENGER. (From the Leicestershire Mercury of Saturday.) This atrocious murder, which has been for so long a period veiled in the profoundest mystery, has once more come before the public. It will be recollected by our readers that Timson and Hyman, the waggoner, both in the employ of Messenger, were taken up on suspicion of being concerned in this dreadful tragedy. and were detained to await the result of the inquest on the body. On the second examination, however, there appearing to be nothing which could at all implicate them, and having given what was, to the jury, a satisfactory account of hew they were engaged on the day the murder was committed, they were discharged by the Coroner. Timson and Hyman were subsequently called upon (as our readers will remember) to give evidence against their master, who was, after several examinations, eventually committed to take his trial for the murder at the last Summer Assizes. The grand jury, on finding that there was not enough evidence on which to convict, very wisely threw out the bill—WO say wisely, because by adopting such a step they left the accused in a position to be again proceeded against, in the event of addi tional evidence being obtained. Phis additional evidence, we believe, will now be supplied, but as the magistrates conceive that the ends of justice will at present best be answered by keeping the examination now holding strictly private, we are not in a position to give the evidence verbatim. However, the following particulars may, we believe, be fully relied upon : Somewhere about the time of Messenger's first apprehensio n . he discharged 'I imson from his service, and on the latter bei n g unable to find a fork belonging to himself, which he had been in the habit of using on the farm, he told another labourer that he would take one of his master's and keep it till his own vas s founii. On Thursday last, as stated under our Loughborough police head, Messenger charged Timson with stealing the fork and some other tools, and the result was that he was committed for trial. Being defended by Mr. Bell, of Leicester, Timson, by his advice, reserved his defence till his trial, and he was even tually liberated on bail. Subsequently, however, he made such revelations in reference to Messenger's connection with the murder that a warrant was immediately issued and placed in the hands of the chief constable (Mr. Goodyer) who, accom panied by Superintendent Burdett, immediately proceeded to Messenger's residence at Gaddesby-lodge. On the arrival of the officers, they found the object of their search in bed, little dreaming that he was about to be conveyed to gaol for the third time on the same charge of murder ! Of course Messenger was speedily roused, and shortly afterward' was on his way to Leicester, where he arrived in the custody of Mr. Goodyer and his superintendent about eleven o'clock on Thursday night. Timson, we are informed, states that, some time after Garner was missed, Messenger came to him while at work, and said he believed Jem (Garner) was dead, and in the wheat-field. At a subsequent period he said he was dead in the wheat-field. He then offered to give him a sovereign, or, in deed, anything, if he would bury the body. The principal cause, however, which induced the magistrates to issue a war rant for his re-apprehension was the statement made by Mrs• Hodges, which will be found below. EXAMINATION BEFORE THE MAGISTRATES. The magistrates assembled were C. W. Puke, Esq , H. Raiford, Esq., M.P., E. Dawson, Esq., and Cul. Burnaby , and it will be seen that the evidence adduced was of a most im portant character. Mrs. Ellen Hodges, of Barkby-lane, shoe-dealer, deposed that being in ill-health she was in the habit of taking a long wall' every morning, and on the morning in question, June 2, abort five o'clock, she was on the Melton road, and was overtaken by some person whom she knew in a cart, who asked her to ride. She complied with his request, aid got up, but rode somewhat farther than she had intended. When she was set down, at a distance of several miles from Leicester, she lost her road, and wandered. to the liotherby Hill, on which side stands Messen ger's lodge. The witness being alarmed at finding herself in a lonely place at so very early an hour, she began to cry. Whil e standing in a field on the hill she heard a whistle, then noise, as of some blow being struck by a heavy in - , trument, and immediately aft er t wo l ou d groans . This. course, considerably increased her alarm, which was not at all allayed by seeing a man coming in a direction from the spot where the body was subsequently found, get over a fleak in the hedge, at a distance of not mor e th an 40 yar d s . Sh e sa w lie had somathing red on his hands, and diAitictly heard him sat' " ll—n it, I've done it." She hid herself in the hedge till he had gone to some distance, and then got over the very flea k which she saw him cross ; and s h e th en di scovere d that it h a d several marks of blood upon it. On crossing the fleak she came into a field where there were several trees, and there she 0 1 r an old woman and child picking wool, and she also saw the al e man going up the hedge side. She got out of the field as quie I as possible, and the woman and child also ran off on seem this man, as if greatly alarmed. (This evidence corrobo rates that given by bitty l'aget and her child.) After walk" ing a little way she met with some person who directed her to the road, and she then returned home. Shortly atter this, on a Saturday, she was at the Crown and Anchor, Belgeave gate, and was observed to tremble very much on seeing 9031 : man in the bar, whom sh e h a d no t k nown b efore, and she t once recognised him a s th e man s h e h a d seen in this swor d with bloody hands on the day in question. s•he made no re' mark at the time, but on some man observing her emotion, b e said, " hat's Messenger," and nothing further passed. Since this Messenger had been to her stall in the Market place, under the pretence of buying some shoes, though he Int, de no purchases. The first time he went she said to ban, " Y° 111 :1 got a pretty ch ee k, Messenger, to come to my stall." He rep lie " You are m i s t a k en , my name is not Mes, , enger." This sine ... a what alarm e d hi m , an d something further was said, whe n at loud alte rca ti on ensue d, w hi c h was h ear d by severa l persons _ e the neighbou r in g s t a ll s , w h o corro b orate d h er sta t em ent. Si that time he hadr been again and had offered her some in duce" meat to • " hold her tongue." She had riot been examined by the magistrates previous er p this time,• though the chief constable had privately exaMLP_ be her upwards of three months since, when the statement . 3 r. made was hot of the same character as that now made bY . l ! te j The first discovery of her Knowledge of the facts now !r ice , was made by Mr. Charters, Inspector of the Borough in t by yesterday, who communicated them with the most p ra iseow, e4 ,,, u ltirom promptitude to base Hodgson, Esq., and she was _. 0 , 4 1 examined this day. She had, on several occasions, ear" t h a t wish to Mr. Atkins, who has a stall adjoining to her!' bo dy she should very much like to see the spot on ;thrill e a nd was found. She was taken thither with Mr. pfdAlkl" at several other persons on Thursday. They stopped i n fi She some distance from the fatal spot, and lett her alone- walked in that direction, and came up to the precise al)c"' which the body was found. it being We were not admitted to hear the examination, b re lied strictly private, but we can state that the above olnY e _ a e in i n edt on. A considerable number of other witnesses we're ,about 0 , 4 0 the majority of whom only proved that Mrs. Hodges_ , abo ut no secret of her knowledge or these facts, having ~eret till to a great many Fersons, so that she had not kept It l aminat i o n now, in hoi,e of getting the offered reward. Ihe e concluded about half-past four o'clock, the result %l e : late ly Messenger was remanded till Saturday. He w as ini ‘ conveyed in a fly to the county gaol, where he now le• talked A greater number of wild geese have pass ea the fens within the last few weeks than in any forme r year for goo,: v time past —an indication either that the frost has set in ve".!iii erely in the North, or that these birds have the wondrous fAc' of prognosticating its approach.—Norwich Mercury. GRANTIIAM.—A fracas occurred at the annual charity ball which has afforded the non-privileged much amusement. A lady, a daughter of a de ceased clergy ; mai __. refused to stand up in a quadrille with the son o f tfront u t which caused the lad's indignant papa to rese nt the a upon his son in " good set terms," there and then"' Adver a trades