The Sun.
London, England, 1836-02-17 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

We refer our readers to our report of the anxiously-
expected debate in the House of Commons last night.
The case brought against Mr. O'Connell by the Carlton
Club, got up with all the ingenuity of Mr. Holmes, Sir
James Graham, and Lord Stanley, turns out, even accor-
ding to their own statement, a most trumpery one. Mr.
O'Connell did not seek Mr. Raphael. Mr. Raphael had
been an anxious attendant on the Carlow Committee, in
daily communication during the period of its sittings with
Mr. Vigors, and the deputation from Carlow—offered him-
self to fight the battle of the county—was accepted by Mr.
Vigors, with whom the terms were settled—and Mr.
O'Connell was only called in afterwards as stakeholder for
the expenses by the worthy Sheriff himself. No Member
in the House, not even Mr. Hardy, with all his sancti-
monious and self-denying professions of disinterestedness,
accused Mr. O'Connell of any pecuniary corruption ; and
the accusation, with all the exaggerations with Which the
Tories Could burden it, amounts to this, that one thousand
pounds passed through Mr. O'Connell's hands to be ap-
plied in the payment of the legal expenses of the elec-
tion, and another thousand to pay the expenses before
the Committee. A further thousand, and about which the
whole noise has been made by Mr. Raphael, was thrown away
by the worthy Sheriff himself in carrying on proceedings
before the Committee, against the advice of Mr. O'Connell
and Mr. Vigors, and after they had abandoned the case as
hopeless. Nothing could he more amusing or instructive than
the countenance of Sir Robert Peel during Mr. O'Connell's
speech. It evidently displayed feelings of commisseration for
the scrape in which his eager allies had involved themselves, 1
and his anticipations of the signal failure of the hopes in which ,
they had been indulging from this their last resource, after their ,
defeat on the Address. He would not assist them in defeating ,
Mr. Warburton's amendment to the motion, notwithstand- ,
ing Lord Sandon's efforts to prove that it might admit
evidence before the Committee on some part of the
case contained in Mr. Vigors's petition. Lord Sandon
appears desirous of emulating the part Lord Stanley has
taken in this affair, if he is not jealous of the reputation
which the Noble Lord has acquired from it. So anxious
were the Tories to take any zdvantage that they persisted in
amending the list of the Committee which had been agreed
upon the day before, by all parties, with the consent of Mr.
O'Connell. On this point also their tactics appeared as un-
skilful as they were malevolent. To put two or three of their
more rabid supporters on the Committee, they threw an impu-
tation on such men amongst their supporters as Mr. Robert
Clive, Lord Eastnor, and Mr. Wilson Patton, and thus en-
deavoured to weaken the character of the tribunal selected
by themselves. No unprejudiced person, however, in the
House could think that any inquiry was necessary after Mr.
O'Connell's statement. Possibly the crowning indiscretion
of the whole attempt was the appointment of the Tory Attor-
ney-General as nominee that no part of the character
of a Tory prosecution should be wanting. We pray a good
deliverance to Sir F. Pollock, the Committee, and the Carlton
Club in this glorious effort to vindicate the purity of the House
of Commons and the independence of elections. The only
point in Mr. Hardy's speech which in the slightest degree
conveyed not a direct charge of personal corruption, but a
hypothetical charge of the possibility of corruption; not in the
actual circumstances of the case, but in certain other circum-
stances which might have taken place, was triumphantly dis-
posed of by Mr. O'Connell. Mr. Hardy, very conveniently
forgetting that immediately after the publication of the Ra-
phael correspondence, Mr. Vigors published a letter in the
Newspapers, stating that the money received by Mr.
O'Connell from Mr. Raphael was regularly transmitted to
him, and paid over to the Carlow Committee—chose to
assume that, at the time when Mr. Raphael and Mr.
O'Connell entered into the arrangement, it could not pos-
sibly be known whether there would be al contest or not ;
and if there had been no contest, the election expences
could not have amounted to any thing like 2,0001. ; and in that
case Mr. O'Connell would have pocketed the difference be-
t Ween the actual sum expended and the amount agreed to be
paid by Raphael. But even here he was successfully met ;
for Mr. C'Connell showed that there was no room at any time
for supposition, as the measures taken by Messrs. Bruen and
Kavanagh, before Raphael had agreed to pay the 21000/.,
clearly indicated not only that there would be a contest, but
that there would also be a petition. When the election was set
aside, '• what (said Mr. O'Connell) was the first step which
the ejected Members, Messrs. Bruen and Kavanagh, then
took ? Mr. Austin was Counsel for the petitioners—the suc-
cessful Oounsel ; and mark, the very moment the Committee
decided that they should be unseated, that very instant Mr. Austin
was retained by them for the petition that was to follow the
next election, thus marking their determination to bring the
case wain before another Committee." The House here
loudly Cheered Mr. O'Connell, and well they might ; for this
frail hypothesis is really the only tangible point discoverable in
the heap of solemn plausibilities delivered by the lion. Member
for Bradford. We rejoice that the charges have been brought
forward, and that a Committee has been appointed, not merely
to inquire into the agreement between Mr. Raphael and Mr.
O'Connell (which was all that Mr. Hardy wished), but also
into "the application of the moneys said to have been re-
ceived, and the circumstances under which they were received
and expended." As to Mr. O'Connell, the inquiry may be said
to be over. He was sought for by Raphael himself, who was
unwilling to pay money into the hands of persons of whom he
possessed no knowledge, and Mr. O'Connell could not possibly
profit by a transaction in which he was merely a channel of
transmission. For the money received from Mr. Raphael, he
has the acknowledgment of Mr. Vigors, and that respectable
gentleman will produce vouchers to the Committee, account-
ing for the legal expenditure of more than the sum received:
But there is a case against the Tories to be gone into. The
circumstances connected with the bringing forward the charges
against Mr. O'Connell will be part of that case ; and another
most important part of it will be the cruel persecution to
which the independent electors of Carlow have. been subjected
by cruel Orange landlords, for the votes conscientiously
given by them in several elections. These are the parties
who will now be on their trial, and not Mr. O'Con- 1
nell. The only interest which the inquiry will now
have in the eyes of the people of England, will be
the means it will afford of unmasking the cruel op-
pressors
of the Irish peasantry, of dragging them forth
to the light of day, and exhibiting them in all their re-
volting deformity. Mr. O'Connell has gained by the charges
against him. Well might he state, as he boldly did, that his
opponents took up the accusation, not from a love of justice,
hut because he was the advocate of the cause of the people.
I ant to be convicted," he exclaimed, " of corruption, be-
cause I have put down Toryism—that is my real crime." No
part of Mr. O'Connell's admirable speech was more forcible
than that in which he met the distinction which had been taken
Letween personal and pecuniary interest. He admitted that
he had an • interest, and a deep interest, in securing,
the return of Representatives who would contribute to the
exclusion o the Tories from office. He' had been re-
proached by the Tories . with wishing to return Mem-
bers for the sake of maintaining his influence in Ireland.
" I distinctly admit (he exclaimed) that. I have very considerable
influence in Ireland—l admit that I have a degree of influence
which ought not to be left with any one man in Ireland. I have
an influence which, in a sound state of society, no man possibly
could have in Ireland. Would you wish to make that influer.c'e
all-powerful ? If you do, take up the unjust, the partial, th.c (I
will not call it odious, but) criminal statement which ha,:, been
made by the lion. And Learned Gentleman. If you take IT his
view, and confirm the injustice of his statement, will you airrnaish
my power in Ireland? Will you diminish my influence with the
oppressed in that country? No ; you will ackl to it by another
injustice. The people of Ireland will say, 'lt is not the fact
' which has been condemned, but the advocate of our rights—the
defender of our privileges—the sustainer of our liberties, and thus
another gross and glaring injustice has been perpetrated against