The Sun.
London, England, 1823-06-13 00:00:00

TliE XING V. BARRY O'MEARA, ESQ.

Mr. PHILLIPS said, that leave had been given to him by
the Court, to mention this case to-day, but that unfortunately
he had not found an opportunity of so doing until the present
moment, when he feared it was too late to enter into it at
length. He therefore wished their Lordships to appoint some
day, when it would be most convenient for the Court to hear
the case. He had seen his client, and it was his desire that the
merits of the case should come before the Court.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—You know, Mr. Phillips, we
cannot dons you request. It is our duty so to arrange the busi-
ness of the Court, as may be most conducive to the interests of
the persons who come before us. The case must now come on
whenever it is convenient. It is impossible to depart from our
general rule, fir the sake of particular individuals, whose
Counsel, however, are very properly anxious for their interests.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DUBLIN, Juxz 10.
TIIE KING, AT TILE PROSECUTION OF THE RIGHT HON.

WILLIAM C. PLUNKETT, V. J. HAMILTON.

When this case was called on yesterday, Mr. NORTH rose
for the purpose of supporting the arguments advanced on a
former day by Mr. Bennett, to shew cause against the order
obtained in the case being made absolute. The Court inti-
mated it was unnecessary for this Gentleman to address them,
and the Chief Justice with accustomed dignity and precision,
proceeded to deliver the judgment of the Court.
He observed that this was an application for a criminal in-
formation, on behalf of the Right Hon. Wm. Conyngham
Plunkett, in his individual capacity. It was grounded upon
an affidavit from him, stating, he hail received through the
Pout-office a threatening letter, with the defendant's signature,
and another affidavit rom Alderman Darley, stating he be-
lieved the letter to be in the hand-writing of the defendant.—
The letter, as far as it, displayed the offence charged, furnished,
in the opinion of the Court, grounds for a proper application
for a criminal information; they were also. of opinion that the
offence was one calculated to obstruct the course of public
justice, and that there was no occasion to set out in the pro-
secutor's affidavit it was intended by the.'avriting, of the letter
distinguished,YCpinrsao,plo73pnlnaytnhaa
to provoke a breach of the public peace. There another
of
ground against the conditional order urged, because the d
4 Burrowes, • were cued in pro-
secutorcon-
could file an information es-officio, the Court ought
not to sanction the present application; in support of which
prosecutingtheor tKing
easvef.
assan iiii,tdiwviadsuaenl,ouangdh attoiplsayiyngthine
fimation ; but the Attorney-General here appears at the Bar
he
his own person ; and without discussing how far the principle*
present, was different from those cited, and any other high offi-.
cwe.
err!. the Crown
however,
twtehlel asm tuhgeepsnesehe
wenutohyr. ilTleheCourt
defend-
ant should be allowed, and in coming to this decision, they were
not governed so much by the denial of the defendant as by the
manner of that denial, and the circumstances connected with it.
It was not sufficient as a general rule in that Court, that a mere
denial to an imputed offence stopped the course of proceeding ;
but, on the contrary, it often furnished ground for sending the
case to another Tribunal ; for though the Court possessed ex-
traordinary powers analogous to those of a Grand Jury, yet were
the modes of investigation different. A Grand Jury cannot en-
quire into the defence, and have only to decide whether there
was sufficient ground to send the matter to be tried by another
Jury ; but this Court bad not only to decide whether the case
should be put in this particular way, but they had also to look
at it with reference to the expence, and in this respect, the
proceeding was most severe. The Court had always, there-
fore, to consider, whether from the defence this extraordinary
way of proceeding should be resorted to. Ilere the Chief-
Justice cited several cases relied on by the Counsel fur the
defendant, such as the King v. Dodd, the King v. Robertson,
in Blackstone'a Reports, and the King v. Daly ; and observed
on how far they differed from or agreed with the present. When
the defendant insisted upon his innocence, he must do so de-
cidedly and unequivocally, and such a denial the Court consi-
der not a proof of innocence or guilt, but on the probabity or
improbability of the matters alleged, deliver their Judgment.
In the present case the only proof of the guilt is the proof
of the hand-writing, and though the proof of the hand-writing
is good evidence on a trial, it is not sufficient when opposed to
the positive and direct swearing of the defendant, and in the
absence of all other. Both uffidavits may be morally true.—
Alderman Darley may conscientiously believe the latter to be
the hand-writing of the defendant, but the defendant cannot
be mistaken in knowing whether it be his writing or not.
His affidavit is full in this respect, and leaves no room for
evasion ; he swears not only that is not his hand-writing, but
that he was not privy to the writing of it, or knows who wrote
it; lie also disclaims the principles contained in the letter, and
swears he entertains no ill will to the prosecutor, but on the
contrary, considered him his father's friend, and that he was
anxious himself to know the writer. He also swore he knew
nothing of it until he saw it in the Newspaper sent to his father
in the country, the day after the motion in this Court, and
which paper he was not in the habit of rteeiving, and on the
following morning the defendant went before a Magistrate, and
voluntarily made an affidavit he was not the writer.
When these allegations were considered the Court were of
opinion that the probability of the charge should be left to the
ordinary tribunal. It' the defendant hail brought two or three
inure to confirm his affidavit, as to the hand-writing, his case
would be much stronger; and had such mode been resorted
to on the principle already declared, it is probable the prose.
cutor would not proceed. But the defendant also swears he
requested such an inspection of the letter by himself and his
friend, as would enable him to endeavour to trace the author,
though he subjected himself by such request to have evidence
furnished against him. This the prosecutor's Attorney refused.
It was not on the ground of any misconduct of this kind the
present decision was made, because such proceeding may have
been prudent on the part of this person ; but in the absence
of all other affidavits the Court could not see their way
in this case. From ull these reasons, and the poverty of the
party, the information must be disallowed without costs.
Mr. North after applied for the costs, but the Court refused,
the Chief-Justice observing there were grounds fully sufficient
to warrant the application.

Some quarries of white and green marble have
been lately discovered in the west of Ireland
which promise to be very valuable. The white
is said to be of a quality superior, for the
purposes of statuary and sculpture, to any
Italian marble, being of the same texture and
constitution with the best Grecian marble; and
the green marble is considered to be of the
family of the verde antique, and to rival the
finest specimens of that very rare and costly ar-
ticle in beauty.