The Express.
London, England, 1848-10-21 00:00:00

purpoise or object, and that purport' Amid he the very pur-
pose mated in the indictment. If the jury did not i.ct upon
that rule 01.1...• they would Rive a virtual denial to the first
principtee 00, Attlee, and violate the law they had sworn to
administer. an
d what; would ask them, W4l the prisoner
at the bar diere,a4 with ? With levying war against the
Queen. The tear7;ea
...resident= then gave his views of the law
of high treason, and Ruin the lame acts of parliament which
bad been so freguent
esieed during the commission. How
(he continued) did the AtOrney-General seek to establish
that Mr. Meagher, whom be au..slatted he could not prove to
have been in company with Mr. o.2lrien from Monday even-
ing until the following Friday, was giaa:V of the offence of
levying war against the Queen? Why, by charging him
with baying at one time marched with a nOnher of armed
persons to Ballingarry—with having at another time ereeted
a barricade at Killenaule—with having on a third day as-
saulted the police at Mullinahose ; and, upon a f oarth day,
with having attacked a body of police at lArrinrory—net one
of ell which things his client hidden*. From the begins*/ to
the end Mr. bleacher was never charged with eunspirscy ;
but with this only, that Le levied war against the Quern at
the several places pecified in the indictment. It was not
alleged that other persona did it, and that he misted them,
but that he himself did it at all the Olive Le had mentioned.
Now, levying war was the crime charged, and the mode by
which it must be proved was this : by being arrayed in arms
and =reeling *Kunst the Queen. War, in short, must to
levied—it must be levied a,tainst the Queen, and it must he
levied within her realms. The means by a hieh the crime
was to he effected were set out in the indicuni an, and termed
overt acts—that was, the acts committed by Mr. Meagher in
person in the furtherance of his treasonable intent. The At.
torney•General stated that a certain conspiracy bad been
formed in Dublin at a given time, and that a general dinar.
sive end vague unterstanding was come to at a !nadag
of the alleged conspirators, which he termed a
.• council of war," between the prisoner and other
victuals, and that, having shown the connexion of Mr.
Me ether with tines piths, he (Mr. M. Wiry) 'mould be
held accountable fur every act done by hi. former coin
pardons at any time, and in every locality in Irela..d. The
Attoraey-General's CUM was this. He did not allege that
hie client levied war in person ; but still he insisted that he
must he eonvicted of having levied war, ler the very absurd
reason that be did no' I. vy war. All the prisoners already
convicted at that commitmon had been found guilty because
toey had levied war ; but this prisoner, strange to say, we'
vibe convicted because he had not levied it. Su that whether

or not he did appear at Mullinehene,orKillenaule, or Farris-
vary, he was, according to the Attorney-tiameral, equally guilty
of having levied war—in Mot, take the matter up in any point
of view, and he must still be gentry. The Attorney-Geueral
assumed that the c'.arge would be bronitht home to the pri-
soner as clear u light; but the act el parliament he had re-
ferred to stated that the crime mast Le moveably established
nt,ainst the accused ; and when he talked of a general plan
in the minds ot cement parties, it was in ord• r to inidsad
the jury, for it was necessary to prove the prisoner guilty. ot
the very crime laid in the indictment, money, the levying
of war. The crown was unable to do this, and the prisoner
was not bound, in his own defence, to explain, or answer, or
justify anything whatever he bed said or done. Now, atter
all that had been sail to these, and given in evidence by the
crown, ho would be much nurpiand it the jury had not been
led to think that if the pis-liter had epeken now and yen
somewhat impropeily, they mast find him guilty of high
treason; whereas, on the authority of Lord Ilan:,
which he quoted, no words whatever, however
strong, could bo held Ito amount to treason. Nut
on one oceasson was the prisoner shown to have touched
arms—ining lteecith;safaMirn.
'M pistol,s
aepr mairgtt state its cnib
that noted one
the indictment to his charge had been proved agaiust him.
The learned gentleman then gave a history of his client's career,
which the Attorney-Oeueral desired by this prosecution t,
close for ever. It was four years since he left the coll. ge in
which lie had been educated, in which several of the mod
distinguish d men at the bar had been edumted. He came
over Irons Ennead at the time that Mr. O'Connell was agi-
tating the country by means of monster meetings, and was
admired by Mr. O'Connell for his talents. He hid one vice,
namely, a determination always to avow his principles : and
in 1845 he got into a difficult position by his opennessand
tirmnees of purpose, by advocating the education of the
youth of the country trrough the meant, of colleges to le
established in Ireland. He was charged with infidelity, and
the great man to whom he alluded was the person who got
up the storm sgeinrt him. Counsel here reed the speech
made by Mr. Meagher on that occasion in which he advo-
cated mix d educatien' and observed that difference of
political opinion ought not to separate men in private
life. He also desired that by native city might be pros-
perous, and social happiness and civil freedom prevail in
it. In February, 1846, he became an active member of
the Am elation ; and upon no occasion did he shrink
from avowing natlandity in strains of enthusiastic eloquence.
Counsel also read another speech, in which Mr. hieagner
uttered very liberal sentiments, and advocated the general
rights of his fellowecitiaens. His theory, right or
wrong, was this—aced be had done a lastng but& to'
the coentry.by it—namely, that without the union of all
classes nattoeality could nut be achieved. The next
epoch was the intere sing period when the whips came into
, other. A discussion arose in the association ; the question
was whether repealers should hold office, and his opinion
was government patronage was desirable and of the two
parties he objected most to the whip, who could be induced
to confer place upon repeaters by a little safe agitation. The
next occurrence WWI the ropo.ition by him to oppose the
return of Mr. Shell for Uungarven; he was overruled, and
pronounced to he en impracticaole per, in. Next followed
the celebrated peace resolutions ; he refused to agree to the
resolution that in no event was resbtatme juentieble, an
absurdity proved by the very exist, nre of the Queen upon
her throne ; be was accordingly expelled, and he afterwards
wrote letters and essays miming his opinions. In one of
these he warned the people against the destruction of
the aristocracy, describing them as the patrons of the arts,
end these who were beneath them. In January, 1847, the
Irish Coufeieration was formed, and Mr. Meagher moved a
resolution condemnatory of places and place hunters. (The
counsel here read the opinions of Mr. Meagher.) Ho thence-
forward regularly attended the oonlederalon, mid avowed
his sentiment', which were in favour of the rights of pro-
perty, and the preservation of the different eiders of the
state, maintaining, however, his opinions, that the ancient
and rod constitution of his country ought to be restored.
The next transaction in which he figured was at the Gal-
way election. At that time Mr. O'Flatierty was opposed to
the Attorney• General, and he (Mr. Meagher) did take an
active part against him. He next became a candidate for
Waterford, and addressed the constituents in terms full of
sentiments of civil and relaieus lib. rty, and re-
probation of bigotry. Upon that occasion he was
not choun a member of parliament. If the in-
dictment against his client were for a conspiracy, a peron
could undeistatd why such speeches as those which
the counsel relied upon should be admitted in evidence, bat
the charge against him was the actual levying of war.
Cancel then cited the speech of Mr. Meagher upon the 15th
of March, a few days after the election at Galway. It was a
neonatrou s proceeding to take • speech which was -sly seditious
when spoken, but had now grown into treason, to establish
the highest crime, though when spoken it could not sustain a
smaller one. With deference to gentlemen who talked
about revolutions mid the "meteor flog," and at-
tempted to fasten treason on his 'client by detached
sentences, there were revolutions that were justi-
fiable, where injustice in tribunals, at the judgment
mat in the court, and the right of expressing opinion was
denied to the people. led to revolutions which could not he
sesosaplished otherwise. The bent men he had ever known
In his early career had talked the same thing about the me-
teor flag, Lamartine, and each subjects; and he would not
give • rush for the young man who did not, at some time or
other, hope to restore the departed gloried' of Greece and
Rome. And was it not monstrous that a young man, in
spired by clank enthusiasm, and inflamed by a high imm
ideation, was to be arraigned snd put on trial for his life for
the utterance of such sentiments as them ? lithe jury did
find him guilty, they should write themselves slaves with
the same pen that they signed the verdict. A jury would
not convict him on a seditious speech, the utterance ot which,
bad he been convicted of it, would have been followed only. by
imprisonment ,• and now the speech was to be used against
him on a trial for his life! But the Attorney-Getieral
said that the prisoner had an idea in his mind, •
visionary intent, which he afterwards intended to carry
into effect. He had books cf reports of the trials alter
the old revolution in England, in which such speeches,
rugs, and sentiments were introduced mallet the
prisoners, all which ware r, jetted by the jury. He would
not read the speuh in which the deadly vine of the entire
of the sp. aches was concentrated —ramely, that in which
the prisoner used the expression, " that if the delegates were
refused the demand of an interview with the Queen they
should peek up their ccurt decrees, and the next time the y
appeared at the court of St. James's, it would be es the acere•
dited agents of the Irish republic, &a." What did they
think of the liberality oldie Attorney-General, who, having
failed in a prosecution for sedition :or that very spe ch, now
indicted the prisoner f r Masan ? He ;night have tried him
a second time, but because one jury dioagreed he did not
again bring the case before mother jury, but now he brought
the charge of treason before a Tipperary jury. Counsel
then referred to the speech delivered by the pri-
soner up o the 15th April, 1848, and to the
set of parliament which came into force upon the
22nd of April, 1848. The speech was delivered in the
month foleowis g, so that the act was in full torn. The mo-
ment that apiece was delivered the Attorney-General might
have prosecuted Mr. Meagher. He had a certainty of
flicrng u:ou him a reasonable pia:sham:cent—not that of
death—but he lay by, and ecru sought to enforce the law. lie
had enforced it sersiest five, hot did not enforce it againet the
prisoner. He drew the attention of the jury to the nature of
the act of Tertian's', which required • written information
within six days after the words were spoken, a warrant
within ten dare, •ud two witnesses ; amid be contended that
nothing could have been • greater el- lotion of the polies
and spirit and intent of t. e act than to heard lip
speeches for months, and then construct treason out ot
them. The act of parliament was passed to purists a
person who compassed war. He had the speech betere tens,
and why had he not prosecuted under it ? Because hr knew
well it wan not evVence of a compacting of war. Counsel
then detailed the circumstances w hieh led to the convicti.n of
Mr. MiteheL The premier felt the mode of that trial to he •
grievance. He did not object to the jury who were train
himself, but he was indignant, upon public principles, that •
trial should have been so coeducted. He might bre.) been
wrong in leis opinions, but tem, a Gould not punish him foe
his conscientious opinions. The speech delivered by Mr.
Meagher, on the emaion of his eppraing the plan of Mr.
Mitchel, and repudiating the notion ot an insurrection as
impracticable enamor to he frustrated, was next referred to.
They had heard proved by Mr. Hodges its, document
celled a report of w h.JI, let to the ClOiritti,ll of Mr.
Mitchel. This Mr. Megle r felt to he a grieve-lee,
or no insult, which wee • erre, aid he obj. Med to tee con-
stitution of the jury who tried hi-friend. He (Mr. White.
side) protested siminst the Of 4114hee of Mr. Meagher beiteg