The Express.
London, England, 1853-11-09 00:00:00

IRELAND.

THE O'BRBNNAN AND CALLAGHAN CASE.
DEPUTATION TO THE LORD•LIEUTENANT.
Duman, Nov. 8.
A rib putation waited on the Lord-Lieutenant yes-
terday, at the Viceregal Lodge, for the purpose of
presenting a zsemorial on behalf of a meeting of the
Protestant Assocslation, praying fur the dismissal of
Mr. O'Callaghan, (mos of the mag:strates of Capri-
street Police-office, bec,„:ise of his decision in a case
ributor of protestant
in which a Mr. O'Brents:n recently preferred •
will be in the charge of assault against a die:
handbills. The facts of the ease
recol-
lection of the public:
O'Brennan said that the tract distribt;tor " thrnat the
paper into his band," and that such conduct TM calculated
to provoke him to a breach of the peace.
The magistrate Mr. O'Callaghan, said, in giving his
judgment—lt strikes me, to say the least of it, to be ex-
ceedingly indiscreet and improper for any man, whatever
may be his religious so thrust them upon another
man, who, as in this instance, is of a different way of think-
ing. If a paper put into a person's hand contains anything
that is likely to make hint angry, or t.. disturb his feelings,
it is, in my judgment, calculated to provoke a breach of the
peace, and it is the eroviace of the magistrate (who is
termed a justice of the peace) to take care that it is effi-
ciently preserved. I cannot entertain a doubt that conduct
such as tt.e prisoner has been guilty of is greatly calculated
to lead to a breach of the peace ; bat, as no actual breach
has occurred in this instance, I sill only require the pri-
soner to enter into his own recognisance to bu of good be-
haviour for the future.
Prisoner—l have no witness to speak for me ; hut, as
sure as I stand before your umallip, I did not •. thrust"
the bill into Mr. O'Brennen's hand. I simply offered it,
and be took it without the least pressure on my part.
Mr. O'Callaghan—l am a justice of the peace, and lam
determined to preserve it so far us I can in all thesel eases
You must eater into bail, or be committed fur fourteen
days.
The pri oaer accordingly entered into the required bail,
and was discharged from custody.
The deputation to the Lord-Lieutenant com-
plaining of these proceedings consisted of Mr. John
Martin, Mr. 0. Bonsai, Mr. Litton, J.P., and Major
Bryce. The Attorney-General was present with the
Lord-Lieutenant.
Mr. Martin read an address to his Excellency. It
contained the following passages:
Your meinorialists submit to your Excellency that the
judgment thus at•ributed to the magistrate would appear
to be natural and suitable if pronounced in S;.ain by an
alguazil, corrigidor, or inquisitor, or in Turkey by a basha
or vizier, but that it was w scrip unconieitmoonal, tyracid-
cal, and intolerable, from the mouth of a magistrate in the
administration of English law. That it compromises the
liberty of the press, the liberty of publication, liberty of
c.,nscierce, and the liberty of the British subject. That
protestauts would not complain of soy papers thus circu-
lated, however much opposed to their religion, end such are
in rant of fact frequently circulated, without complaint of
1 ;ivy sense of insult on their part whatever; Mr that if the
papers thus circulated are untrue, they (the pro-
, testants) feel required to explode them ; whereas,
if they be true, they may learn wisdom from them.
That we submit to your Excelieitcy that the usagisuste
was bound to tell the complainant in this case that, as a
guardian of public liberty, of the rights of conscience, and
of tho cherished rights of British subjects, he could nut
mako his unreasonable and contemptible sensitiveness the
ground for trampling upon the rights of freemen; that if
the handbill told false hoods he should laugh at it or shearer
it, and it it told truth he should learn from it; but that he
should not presume to think that the tribunals of British
majesty could be made the allies of silliness and intolerance.
That, howevee, instead of this, Mr. O'Callaghan suds-
ciou.ly, daringly, unconstitutionally, bigotedly, lent hint-
-6,1t to sustain the intolerance of a bigot, and to crush the
rights of British subjects, which rights were bought with
the blood of their fathers, and shall never be surrendered
but with their own. That we, therefore, in the exercise of
constitutional prerogative, come thus befora your Excel-
lency with oar complaint, and do roust humbly pray
that your Excellet.cy may be pleased to cause official
inquiry to be made into the premises, and if you find
them to be true, and that this Mr. O'Callaghan has yielded
to the suggestions of hie Romanist principles, and severely
dealt with an humble critizen for praiseworthy zeal in.
stead of, in the spirit of noble and free England. rebuking
• narrow-minded and intolerant bigot, your Excellency
may forthwith dismiss him from an office which he is dis-
qualified to fill, and thus teach society in general that the
British government will not, directly or indirectly, become
the supporter of tyrannous, enslaving, and unconstitutional
tolerance.

The Lord Lieutenant then read the following re-
it':
GUNTLEMEN—I have listened with much pain to this me-
morial. It is a matter of deep regr, t that the meeting on
whose behalf you present it should have sanctioner the use
of language which appears to me to be inconsistent with
Christian charity, and to be calculated to prejudice in pub-
lic opinion the light of free Liscussion.
The memorialists impute to the magistrate gross miscon-
duct in his office. They say that he " audaciously, daringly,
insolently, and bigotedly lent himself to sustain the into-
lerance of a bigot, and to crush the rights of British sub-
' jthts " They describe the judgment pronourced by him as
Wits " utterly uncoustitutional, tyrannical, and intolera-
ble, ' and they suggest that in pronouncing it he was actuated
17 improper motives. Having thus stated the case they
pray me to institute an inquiry into the facts of it.
I will not advert further to the language of this memorial,
bet will proceed at once to remind the teens,rialists that if
the charges which they prefer against Mr. O'Callaghan be
well founded his office can afford him no protection, that
Ito is amenable to the law, and that the Court of Queen's
Bench, which is open to all aggrieved persons, can inquire
not only whether thejudgment was erroneous, but also whe-
ther the motives by which the magistrate was actuated were
improper. That tribunal can correct an error, and it can
punish an offender.
For these reasons I must decline to comply with the
prayer of the petition.
Mr. Martin said this reply put the refusal to comply with
the prayer of the memorial upon the ground of redress else-
where, but the memorialists bad been advised by competent
legal authority that no redress could be obtained in the
Queen's Bench where the magistrate did not commit the
party, the man charged in this instance having given bail.
The Lord-Lieutenant here turned towards the Attorney-
General, who said, I offer no opinion on that subject, but
it is quite plain the eaecutsve government ought not to be
e illed upon to invade the prerogatives of the Court of
Qaeen's Bench, because of an error committed by the party
on whose behalf the memorialists called for its interposition.
Mr. Martin—With great respect, no error was committed
by the party who called fur 1. gal interposition. The person
charged before the magistrate was necessarily& very humble
citizen, having been employed to distribute certain notices,
and he could not be supposed to know his rights. At the
time he was held to bail he protested against the proceed-
ing. If he went to prison he would have had redress, but
failing in that we come to your Excellency.
The Lord Lieutenant—Has any application been made to
the Court of Queen's Bench, and has what you state been
laid down as the law ?
Mr. Martin—No application has been made. We were
advised we could not, and consequently we took the more
constitutional course of coming directly to your Excel-
lency for redress. I may observe that this is not an
isolated case. Repeated attacks have beet made upon
such persona in all parts of the country, which must
' be known to your Excellency, and the protection of law
Is not given.
The Attorney-General—l am sure you must be greatly
misinformed. I know something about what takes place is
the country, and no such case has occurred.
Mr. Martin—l may state a case within my own know-
ledge that I am sure the Attorney-General is not aware of,
In which a scripture reader was assaulted, and the magis-
trate before whom the ease was tried said the conduct of
parties engaged in such proceedings was calculated to pro-
voke a breach of the peace.
The Attorney-General—lf a party commits a breach of
the peace he cannot be protected; but the greatest protec-
tion is given as far as the constituted authorities can give it
to every person, no matter what has religion or politics may
be. Sometimes large crowds of people may overpower for
the time the authorities, but it is not the fault of the execu-
tive, which does all it can to ensure free discussion.
Mr. Martin—l am glad to have that satisfactory war-
ance from such high authority. But partieeezeretsarg the
undoubted prerogative of free discussion and of free citi-
zens throughout the country are open to every kiwi of
violence.
The Lord Lieutenant—Ras any person cwalsittisg such
violence not been prosecuted ?
The Attorney-General—l have prosecuted in every case
brought forward.
Mr. Martin—This is not an appbeation fax redress in the
case of a party assaulted.
flee Attorney-General—lt appears to nth that what yox
have been laying about the south se not ',100m% to the
matter you came here about. Yes come teeth to complaZa
of the decision of a magistrate. The cases in the south,
wl,ich you refer to, are cases in which acts of outrage have
been committed by one set of p eople against another.
Mr. Martin said that in cases . in the country A bad teen. I
complained that adequate prat ection was not given.
Mr. J. 0. Bonsall mentione d the town of 'loam.
The Lord Lieutenant—The Attorney-General has stated
that he his not omitted to pr osecute in every case in which
the party charged with th e t ,ffence could be ideutitiod, and
in which there were !raffle se at grounds to warrant a prose