The Sun.
London, England, 1825-08-26 00:00:00

MR. O'CONNELL AND COBBETT.

TO TIIE PROPRIETOR OF THE MORNING REGISTER'
Conk, AUG. 2J, l8?5•
My dear Sir,—You have made the public a kind of half pro-
mise that I would publish a reply to Cobbett's foolish but viru-
lent attacks upon me; and I am more than half determined tO
keep your promise. I will do it so soon as his last Register 01211
have gone the rounds of all the Orange newspapers. They
readily publish his attacks upon me. They will not publish one
word of my reply ; they hate me so, because I have injured the
Catholic cause ! Well, I consent.

Before I have time to give a detailed reply to his ludicrous
assaults, I wish to carry the war into his quarters, and to in-
form him thus, that I distinctly charge him with three put t
fief h?ns. _ _

First—lt is a pure fiction of his invention, that any person
of character told him that my speech at the Bridge-street
,
meeting was accurately reported. Set that down fur falsehoot,
the first.

Second—lt is equally untrue, that any such person told bin'
that Mr. Brie was the reporter of that speech.
Third—lt is equally untrue, that any such person told hirer
that the report of that speech was shown to me by anyperson,
before its publication.
I distinctly accuse Cobbett of these three fictions. There is
but one way of convincing me that he has not wilfully in
vented them : it is, by giving the name of the alleged 3111;
former. Let him not shuffle upon this point. Ile has Vib
licly relied on this pretended person's information, and his
cannot shelter himself, under ' any pretence, from giving -
name. But no, be truly :till not give it—simply, because he
cannot.
It would be quite idle for him to allege that he is restrainearl
by delicacy.—Delicacy, forsooth ! ! Why, the charge
corruption which lie brought against me in his first attscl,„
ate
and retracted in his second, was grounded upon the Privbie
(if any thing be private) conversation of a gentleman at
table after dinner. It is quite manifest that he has misrepre
sented, in his first attack, that conversation. But he 11 ss
,-
pretty fellow to complain, as he has often done, of the public
tion of private letters, and yet publish the after-dinner conyer,
.s'ation of a guest at his own table. We manage these Our
d'fferently in Ireland. But I will return to this subject agalvt,
,
with more of contemptuous ridicule than of that sober cones
ness which it would, upon a more important occasion, deserf.,
and obtain.
I have thrown these things out in this way just to „,tise
•
8.-ve
myself a little on matters rather collateral to the princiPal tI
s
ject between us—by thus distinctly impeaching his veracitY an
denying his delicacy.
letter
I will give him at leisure a full reply. His second he
has indeed furnished part of that reply. In the first eof
charged me with corruption ; in the second he Acquits
that charge, but still accuses we of " inconsistency" and r
ordinate vanity."
He is, to be sure, a comical miscreant, to accuse any net. ehy,
son of " inconsistency" and " vanity" as of crimes. "
eke
suppose I were guilty of both these crimes, I should the
no other apology to him than the school-boy phrase--
bed is large enough for both of us—share the blanket, fr'
Cobbett.'
M next letter will be longer, but some days must e
lapse
beforey I can write it.—l am always your's very faithfullY; •
DANIEL O'CONN%'-'