The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-03-31 00:00:00

intE nORTHERN TIMES.—LIVEIRPOCI" MONDAY, MARCH 31, me

Mr. Kenealy : I suppose you, as a Catholic, hold that the
Pope in council is infallible. Do you believe in the
iifalli-
bility of your church ? I do, sir.
Do you hold yuurself bound by the ordinances of your
church ? I do.
Did you take any oath on entering the Customs' to bear
allegiance to her Majesty ? I did.
Did you swear never to do any act to weaken the Protes-
tant re.igion of this country ? I don't recollect that being
in the oath. (Laughter )

walked into the . trap laid for me in the invitation.
I ssked no such question, because it would be ludicrous
in me to do co. We know very well—we have it in

history—we have it in the statutes of their creed, that
mental reservations and equivocations are allowed to
every member; and what answer do you suppose I could
have got under such c.rcumstanees, it I had asked the
plaintiff if he were a subject of the Pope of Rome. I don't
care whether you are Catholic or Protestant. If you are
Catholic I shall be better pleased than if you were Protes-
tant, and I will tell you why. Because every Catholic in
that jury box will he able to tell his brother jugular' that
his allegiance is due to the Pope of Rome betore any other
potentate; and that when he gots to a public dinner, he
drinks the health of the Pope of Rome first and the Queen
last, thereby indicating, by a simple act, where his heart
lies and where his allegiance is due. My learned friend
commented with great indignation upon the use made
of the document which he read in evidence. He said
it was dishonourable in any editor of a newspaper
to publish that document—he appealed to all your feel-
ings, as men of honour, upon the subject, and I saw that
that appeal was not without effect. But if you believe, as

Mr. Keneali: Oh, yes it is.
The Court : I do not exactly see how he could use any of
his privileges, as tide•waiter, to that end.
Mr. Kenealy : Do you consider yourself bound by the
notes published in your New Testament
The Court did not think that question should be put. It
was an enquiry into the private faith of each individual.
They wou d all be in some difficulty if their characters were
to be canvassed in newspapers upon matters so remote from
ordinary life. _ _ _ _ •

Mr. Kenelly : I with to shew that the doctrines con-
tained in the notes co the Testament are of a tendency to
subvert the British constitution.

The Court : Then you must put in the Testament in
evidence, and let us see what it is you allege. It would
be qoite intolerable if a person sueing in any action could
be iiiterrog ttei in this manner, on matters entirely and
only between him and his Cori. _ .

Mr. duseley believed, that that Was a treasonable docu

ment,—if any of you believe that a. man in the service
of the Crown of England was the servant at the same time

of a potentate whose interests arc averse to those of th it
Crown,—and if any person brought to you a'' document,
proving the fact, which had dropped from the p,cket of

. _
Mr. Kencal) Oh, my lord, I submit with great respect—
Court: But I overrule the question, Mr. Keneaiy. I
shal. nut hear any argument upon it.
Mr. Keuealy : You overrule my question as to the
religious b.,liet of this g :utleman ?
Court : Yes, I have taken it down, and I overrule it;
you have your remedy atter, if I am wrJug. I entertain
too decided au opinion ou the point to allow of its being
discussed. There are some matters wh oh ought not to be
discussed here.

su h person, I then leave you to say—with all respect fur
my learned friend, whose notions of h nour ate so high—
whether, if you believed that man a traitor, it would not
be your duty to publish the treason to the world It was
acing under that bona
.fide belief—for which I shall, I
thick, show you presently good grounds—that Mr. Ouseley
published it. There was no malignity to Mr. Darby, for
he had never seeu him. We have the plaintiff in the action

imputing to Mr. Ouseley the grave crime of havillg called
him an idolator. You will see, gentlemen, when this docu-

Mr. Kenealy : I propose to ask him whether he conceives
himself bound by toe notes to the New Testament.
Court : I have your question down, and I overrule it.
Witness re-ex.imined by Mr. Serjeant Wilkins. When
I say I am bound to obey the decrees of my church, I only
mean in religious and spiritual matters, not worldly matters.
There has been no combination or subscription whatever
on my behalf.
Mr. Serjeant Wilkins : My lord, I beg to say, that if Mr.
Ouseley will now, for my client is a poor man, whose
only object is to maintain his reputation, retract what has
been said, and hold this man harmless, I shall withdraw the
action.

meat is placed before you, whether Mr. Drroy, the plaintiff,
worships the God of Heaven, or wheArer he does not offer
up his adoration to some idol of his own imagination. My
learned friend told you that in the centre of the document

there was an engraving of the Virgin Mary, but he took
good care not to record the device which surrounds it—

Thou alone hast destroyed all heresies throughout the

world " There is the gentleman who complains of having
been called an idolator. " Thou alone !" Why, here %e

have the Virgin Mary. placed in the position of -God: She

alone the destroyer ()f heresy throughout the world ! She
also is the lady to be prated to in this document by the
gentleman who is so horrified at being called an idolator.
" Pray then daily, though it be one short Mary !'
for the return of our fellow countrymen to the one fold of
Christ." That is the first direction given in reference to prayer

Court : Now, Mr. lienealy, that is an offer. That is
the olive branch certainly. „ .

My lord, Mr. Ouseley defends this action

Mr. Kenealy
upon principle.
Court : Then he declines the offer, upon principle ?
Mr. Kenealy : lle declines to retract what has been
said, because he believes that it is true.
Court : Very well. Then let us proceed.
Mr. Quinn, father-in-law of the plaintiff, proved
purchasing the paper, and seeing the placards.
Mr. Joseph Allan and Mr. John J. Yates proved the
letters mentioned in the case written by Mr. Yates,
plaintiff's solicitor, and by defendant.
Mr. S. P. Edwards, collector of customs, deposed that the
plaintiff had been several years in the customs, and that in
consequence of instructions received from London, regarding
a certain anonymous letter, an enquiry was held into
plaintiff's conduct, which, however, ended in his acquittal.

in this document to the zentlemanwlao isso guiltless of idolatry.
Gentlemen, the words " damnable and idolatrous,' upon
which my learned friend laid much emphasis, and which he

flung into the jury-box with mach tone, and accent, and
manner, where do they come from ? From the statute books
of England. They are not the inventions of Mr. Ouseley—
they have not originated with the defendant. No ; they
have been framed by some of the wisest men that Engla id

ever had—men who knew the whole history of the Papal
Church, and who were convinced that the creed and its
teachings were damnable and idolatrous. Here we have an
association existing in Liverpool for secret purposes, or, as

they say, for the conversion of England to Catholicity ; and
yet we can't get any information as to the working of the
society, or how members are admitted. That, gentlemen, is
open to very grave suspicion. Either the gentleman is a
member of the association or he is not. I asked him to ex
plain to me the words " special way," the way in which the
conversion of England was to be brought about—but he would
not tell me. Don't these words imply more than is
expressed ? If he has been told the " speclal way," he
does not choose to reveal it. Suppose he has not,—suppose
there is some " special way" behind which it does not suit

Mr. Kenealy then proposed to put in as evidence a copy
of the Liverpool Herald, containing an article headed
" Popish Paseeutions, ' and referred to an authority jus-
tifying this course.
the Court : I must see whether this be admissable, in
justice to other suitors, as well as in mercy to the defendant
in this case, for the admission of this article would now
appear to be throwit g oil upcn the flame.
Mr. Kenealy : It' your lordship uses a strong expression
of that kind

the concoctors of the association to tell their members, then

The Court: Ido so, indeed. This article has nothing to
do with the plaintiff. It is, to my mind, a summary of the
exciting topics by which Protes'ants are worked up to
hatred of the Roman Catholics ; and if we had all the
exciting topics upon the other side, hen we would have fit
preparation for persecution on both sides. Now, I don't
wish to make a court of justice the means of, or the
aid to the advancement of, such hateful ends.
I don't apply my observation to you, Mr. Kenealy ;
I apply it to the subject, and that is my reason for
excluding this article. The only effect which it
could have would be to work up the minds of the
jary to hale on either aide; or to cinsider it—to take the
most sensible view of the matter—as mere empty bombast.
Iu the latter view, the admission would be irrelevant, in the
other it would be hateful. That is my reason for excluding
it.

;9-Mr. thrby acting on a principle of sincerity when hesays

he ekes not know the

special way ;" and that '• soeci-al

way" may cover some of the most enormous iniquities that
were ever perpetrated is the name of religion. My learned
friend was anxious to represent to you that this was an

association for prayer. He said, " What, are you going to
prevent prayer ?" With all the meekness he assumed for
the occasion, "Is it possible you are going to prevent prayer
in England?" But my learned friend did not allude to the
" special way" which was specially marked out for members
of the association to at+empt the conve:sion of England ?
What is the " special way ?" Why is it concealed ?
Have you not read history, and are you not justified in
coming to a conclusion as to what that special way may be ?
You have a gentleman who says he is bound by the canons
and decrees of the Church of Rome. We shall see what
the " special way" is then. I can have no doubt in my
own mind that a great deal is answered in that term
"special way," —that it may mean infinitely more than it
would be safe to reveal to the would,—infinitely more than,
under present circumstances, it might be expedient to reveal
to the members of this association. If I can show to you
that Mr. Darby is nothing but a mere instrument in the
hands of others in carrying on these proceedings; that he
is a tool in their cunning, artful hands, in striking at the
liberty of the press of this country, which would gloriously
serve the Church of Itome, then I hope, looking at it in
the magnitude of the question presented to you, that you
will pause long before you say that any damages, or, if any,
more than the smallest coin of the realm, shall be given to
the promoters of a design intended to destroy the press of
this country. The document says that England is the
chief obstacle to the spread of Popery all over the world.
Now, why is England that obstacle ? Is there
anything in the character of Englishmen that prevents
them from being more likely to be made the dupes of this
church thaa any other men ? Are you alone the men who
possess true judgment and knowledge ? However flattering
it may be to your ideas to think so, yet that is not the cause
why the Papal system does not progress all over the world.
Why. is Italy in the hands of the Pope? She has no free
press. Spain is no better, for she has not even the image of
a free press. And Austria is bound to Rome by the con-
corder, by which the Emperor has deposed himself, and
placed the Pope on the throne; he has handed his own
crown to the Pope, and in that conntry also there is no free
press. I mtat take you to Fiance, governed as it is by our
ally the Emperor of the French. There also, where reigns
that child and representative of the Papal churl, which
makes him its tool at the present moment, and will cast him
off at its own time—there, also, there is no free press. All
these states and empires, gentl-men, are subservient to the
Papal church ; and why ? Do you believe that if
there was a free press existing in these countries, that
men of great intellect, of great research and know-
ledge who know well the history of that Church, would
not they spread abroad among their less intellectual
countrymen the truths that would destroy the Church.
If, then, you look at this as a proceeding intended to
destroy that free press—that freedom which we all pride
ourselves upon—you will see the serious, awful magnitude
of the present inq dry. When this paper was first
established the plaintiff brought four actions, and he was
not satisfied with having attempte I to crush the Herald,
but he instructed his solicitor to proceed against the news-
vendors, who could not have anything on earth to do with
the libel—he tried to prevent them from selling the paper.
Do you not see in this little fact a great, a clear, and con-
vincing proof that this is not an action between Mr.
Darby and Mr. Ouseley, but that it is one of series of
actions to crush the press of Liverpool, and to prevent the
harmless newavendors from selling that press ? Are you pre-
pared to abandon that press handed down to you by your fatbe-s,
which is associated with everything that is glorious and
great. It seems to me clearly thetthe object of thisac.ion is to
crush the Herald, and that it being crushed, a like desire for
the fall of all the newspapers in the country would be the
result. Don't you think it inconsistent that those gentle-
men who desire to possess an unlimited freedom in this
country, will not grant any freedom whatever to their own
country ? Nog, those gentlemen who won't allow liberty
to their own slaves when they come here, claim liberty from
us, and if we venture to express any of the doings of their
church, or any of the designs of their associations, they
make use of our rights for the purpose of destroying thoee
rights and our privileges.
Mr. Kenealy then proceeded to refer to several cis creel
cannons, Sec., of the Catholic Church, with a view to show
then t o, bat
read
that heretical princes might be excommunicated, and even
murdered ; but was stopped by his lordship, who took a
nmorte.Kofentheaely
cases referredwished to part ruled them
or t
hoeu
Bt order.clen
i
Domini—which was read every Maunday Thursday in Rome
by the Pope, and which ordered every bishop to persecute
heretics.
Court : You are going to read from the Canons and
Councils of the Church of Rome ?
Mr. Kenealy : I am, my for
Court : I must really decline to listen to them. Ido
not know anything about them, and I really do not want to
know. (Laughter.)
Mr. Kenealy : I have always been allowed. I remember
in the chartist trials;
Cold : I really cannot.
Mr. Kenealy : Probably your lordship will, at least, con-
descend to hear me ?
Court : Certainly. I have heard some of your observa-
tions with great pleasure, and all with great attention.
Mr. Keuealey : I remember during the chartist trials I
defenoed a man named Looney, who was tried for sedition.
His speech was given in evidence. I was allowed by the
four in lges in the Central Criminal Court to read extracts
from the writings of nearly all the great jurists and poli-
tical philosophers of England. The Attorney-General
prosecuted, but he did not venture to offer the least oppo-
sit on. I was allowed to do the same in the defence of
another man, named Dowling, at the following term.
The Court : The canons of the Church of Rome cannot
have the same reliance es the opinions of English jurists
and English lawyers. It would nut be oily irrelavent, but
quite na'schievous, to enter into such discussions. You
want to make such a speech as that—l suppose, for I never
read it—that made by Mr, Pope in the Pope and Maguire
controversy. (Laughter.) The result would be we should
have Mr. l'ope's statement without the opportunity of hear-
ing Mr. Maguire's reply. (Laughter.) You want to make
this court a place to deliver what is called a " great Protes-
tant speech," which I cannot at all allow.
Mr. Kenealy then proceeded to say that he did not know

Mr. Kenealy : But, my lord—

The Court : Mr. Kenealy, t.hiv article appears to me to be
irrelevant to the present matter.
Mr. Kenealy : Then your lordship excludes it ?
Toe Court : Do you press it ?
Mr. Kenealy : 1 do, my lord.
The Court : Then I shall exclude it in mercy to the
defends. t.

Mr. Serjeant Wilkins : My lord, I may venture to say
that I entirely concur with your lordship's view of the mat-
ter, but I would have it understood that we don't object to
its reception.

Thu C .urt I think it were better omitted

Mr. Serjeant Wilkins replied in a brief address, com-
menting %Lai great force and eloquence upon the whole
conduct of the defendant.

Mr. laeaealy then proceeded to address the jury on behalf
of the deft nee. After some prefatory observations, he said :
I shall lay before you the case of the defendant in all its
plainness and matter of fact simplicity, and that you, whea
you come by and by to consult together—laying aside, of
course, the effect which the powerful address of my learned
friend has had upon you, and looking to the case calmly and
dispassionately, shall be able to judge whetaer the defendant,
Mr. 0 aseley, has been a .tuated by any malicious motives ;
and whether the plaintiff has suffered any of the distressing
consequences imputed to him in the speech of my learned
friend. You will have to consieer whether any of
these things have occurred; and then, looking to the merits
of the case generally, whether the plaintiff is entitied to
the substantial damages for which Mr. Serjeant Wilkins so
powerfully contended. Now, gentlemen, it seemed to me,
although he is representing—not, I will say, the Church of
Rome, because, probably, that would be disputed—
but representing the representatives of the Church
of Rome—had acted in quite an opposite spirit to
the way in which the Church of Rome universally act. My
learned friend knew that if he put before you the arrogant
claims of the members of that church—if he were to pro-
claim the lofty pretensions of that church which claims uni-
versal dominion, and which anathematizes and excommuni-
cates all who will not bow to its teaching, or who does
not belong to the church, he would not be listened
to with patience by any society of Englishmen.
And therefore it was that he assumed the meekness
of the lamb—that he disclaimed the arrogant
pretensions of that [church—that he talked to
you of Christian chnrity,,and Christian love, and Christian
forbearance—qualities that never were exhibited by the
church—qualities that are inconsistent with all the history
of the church—qualities opposite to the buruings and prose-
cutions of the church he represents. There was consummate
skill, to be sure, In my learned friend adopting this meek
and Quaker-like tone—there was consummate art in the
appeal to these qualities ; but, gentlemen, if any of you
knov the past history of Papal persecutions, if any of yon
have read the acconn:s with which history teems of the
awful deeds perpetrated in the name of charity, in the name
of love, and in the name of mercy, to uphold the tenets
which he here represents, you will see at once that all the
meekness, and all the gentleness, have been assumed,
and that they are entirely inconsistent with everything
belonging to the persons he represents. Gentlemen, the
paper that contains this alleged libel has been charac-
terised as a firebrand. It has been predicted that it
would die a natural death. I have no doubt that a
great many people of Liverpool would be exceedingly glad
if it did die a natural death. I have no doubt that the
present proceeding is an attempt that that paper shall die a
natural death, because that paper advocates views repug-
nant to the interests of the Church cf Rome—because that
paper, speaking out in the spirit of Luther, does not hesi-
tate to proclaim its convictions—does not hesitate to expose
the various frauds every day perpetrated—the various
decrees every day formed—and the various links and
schemes every day endeavoured to be palmed off upon our
fellow subjects. No doubt it would be most agreeable to
the persons so exposed that the paper should be destroyed ;
and this action is an attempt to call in the aid of twelve
British jurymen to destroy that paper, net merely the
property of Mr. Ouseley, but the expression of free thought
in this great country. Gentlemen, in England
we have always prided ourselves on our freedom
of thought, and our freedom of expression. To
the press we owe all the liberty we have—to
the press we owe all the blessings we enjoy. Travel where
you may through every other part of Europe, and you will
not find free expressions of opinion in any state; no paper
is permitted to be printed and published that gives free
liberty to thought. You have a censorship all over Europe,
particularly in Catholic states ; are you prepared, gentlemen,
to allow a censorship in England ? Are you prepared to
stifle free thought in your country ?—are you prepared to
hand over a man who writes, probably, from the. burning
passion of his mind—passion created by his perusal
of history, —are you prepared to hand such a
man over to the tenuer mercy of a church whose
infamy he has exposed, and to crush every
newspaper in this country which does not suc-
cumb to the interests of the Church of Rome ?
Gentlemen, my learned friend said be was about to call the
plaintiff Darby into the box, and that I might ask him, it I
pleased, if he were a subject of the Court of Rome. I
knew very well the kind of answer that Mr. Darby had
been instructed to give if I bad asked him such a question.
I knew that he would be prepared with an answer to any
awkward interrogation of that kind. Mr. Darby, it
appears, has had spiritual communication with two gentle-
men since this action commenced--with Fathers Ilonorius
Marie, and Ignatius of St. Paul the Pdssionist, and no doubt
he was prepared by these with the answer he should give;
and, certainly, I am not inexperienced enough to have