The Sun.
London, England, 1812-02-03 00:00:00

EVIDENCE FOR THE• FROSECUTiON.

Francis -Huddleston:examined by Mr. Solicitor•

General.

Did you attend at a pubic meeting on tlik Dtli of
July last, iu Fishamble-street ?-1 did.

Was it numerod,liettende4 ?—Very numerously.,
Who prtsided in the chair. ?—The Earl of Fins
• , • ,..-
gal ; I see him in Court.
Who ailed ea Secrelary there ?—Mr. Hay.
Did you see him in Court yesterday or this day .?.
I Or, him now in Court. .

'Were any resolutions .prepared, read by any per-
son .?..----There were. Mr. O'gonnellmoed tbur re-
solinionS; hot•before that, Mr. 1-1.4 y read to the
meeting a resolution which had taken place at a
p. for meeting._

What was the nature of that resolution ?

Mr.GooLD objected to the witness giving evidoucie
as to the import of these resolutioni.
:% Mr. PERE IN submitted to the Court, that such
statement of the witness, as to the general import of
the resolutions, was not legal evidence ; in support
of which he cited the case of Hussey against Coke,
in the Star Chamber, reported by Hobart. The
Court took the distinction between evidence go-
ing to support the material allegation of, and
gist of the indiament, and that which was only
stated by way of inducement, and over-tilled the
obje&ion.

M r
r. Huddlesten 'then explained. 'There were e.
solutions then proposed .by Mr. O'Gorman., and
.were carried unanimously. The words of the first
resolution, proposed; in an audible voice, for a re.
peal of the laws affecting Roman Catholics. He
then stated the third resolution, mentioning that 1;4
added an caztera, not having heard the words,
but which be Said he could supply from what he
saw in the Dublin Newspapers,
.namely, that the
Catholics would conform. theniselves, in txercisi.n.ik
their rights, and adhere to the--ancient forms of tt e
Constitution and to modern Statutes. He stated
that' John Burne proposed another resolution, viz.
that the Committee to be appointed to prepare Po7'
titions do consist of 'Catholic Peers, eickst sons of
Peer's, and Catholic Baronets;--idly, of ten: persona
chosen front each of the counties, and the SUryivill
delegates of 1793, to form an-integral part -of,thest
ten, and five persons from each parish in Dublin.
There were other resolutions—five hundred pektharri
to Todd Jones, and thanks to MeMbers of
went. ,

Air. Huddleston thought it necessary to expiala
some cir curustances that occurred herethe last day-
He felt most acutely th,',A any Iniscbneeption slrodld
go abroad. He adierted to the letter of Sir Charles
Saxton ; r there, were ; three: circumstances iviiirch
mode an indelible impression on his mind. He hill
often heard Mr. John Sirrnos-peak in private on
subjeet. The resoldricii6vas' in Me teeth of ,110
.a bustle_ in -ale mu as
at the time the resolution was proposed. He W 2
'expressly desired.not 'to insert- the wotil Delegate >
in repOrring. - .)„
BuartowEs,77lt proves how much, better a
suspeded. witness may acquit himself, a second
time.

Judge DOW NES.—I have not taken down pie
word
,of th evidence.

Cross•examineal by Mr. Goi:V.
How could such a letter, written in March, 01
fresh your memory on a subjedt in July ?
Mr. Huddleston.-71 did not stand in need of aof
thing •to refresh it ; an impression may be made bf
a chain of circumstances.

G—orZip.—So then you refresh your memorY
on a prior event by reference to a subsequent event;
that is the sublime and obscure.—The witness awl
proceeded-7-1)0es not hold an Otlice ; he has not*
since the late trial, had any communication on the
subjea of a place, or with any other person; 164
communication was in the Sheriff's prison; the
printed paper which he had in his possession, tie
that day, was read by him this day ; he looked 0
the resolution to refresh his memory as toMr. Hay's
conduct-; he rn ide a mistake—but if he looked gi
the printed paper, it was inadvertently; he swears
he did not :say 1803 instead of 1793 ; he gave the
same evidence on the last trial, not in words, but,
in substance; he was aware of the importance of
that admission ; he alluded to some variance in the
printed resolution from Ilk deposition; he was cool'
gelled to read his resolution in open Court; not
telapsed Papist, and swears he'never will, tpless
loses his senses; would not for a Catholic .I.3shor
rick. He was asked, would he for 30001.
Huddleston. Oh, no; nothing could change ltiy
private opinions; He might eo to mass 'front cove'
test'; he was accustomed to inisfortnne, and CoulJ
bear it ; he was not an unwilling witness; ilid not
swear, on a former trial, that he was an unwillini;
witness; if he swore at the.last trial that he was 30
.unwilling witness,lie would not have sworn alat34
he valued himself much on• his integrity. He wt"
asked, did he' ever give, a signature birder his haao
that he told an untruth > Witness does not under
stand the question; to the best of his recolletlion
never dtd; he recollects signing a paper,. but not
derogatory to the charaCter of a Gentleman ; it wag
a Piper in which Counsellor Bethel was concernea•
(Question over-ruled by the Court.) He did not
see Kirwan at the meeting. There were people 01
great charaaer and property ; believes Lord FiEVLII
to. be a loyal Man.—He was asked, he thing-

Lord Fingall Ouldi preside at any
had an illegal objet rt View ? Hie said he would
answer that question by a paralThrase; he was nut
accurate to the fourth resOlutiorr. Witness-was de-
sired by the Court to give direa answer;. Cannot
tell whether there was any variation- bet'\'veen the
evidence and the infOrmation.HeSwore before the
Chief Justice.
John Shepherd sworn.—ls a Peace Officer of the
Head Police Office : attended, by a direCtion, at
1-iffey-street Chapel, on the 31st of July last. Dr.
Sheridan presided. The chapel was very full. Mr.
the Traverser, addressed the Chairman:
The first thing done- was a Petition, proposed by'
Kirwan to the Prince Regent, about the laws
affealing the Catholics. The Motion to that effeCt
was carried unanimously. Mr% Kirwan made an-
other Motion, to dee five persons to represent the
Roman Catholic inhabitants of St. Mary's palish,
sto present the -Petitian and to transact` the -other
business, of .their parish, in the General Catholic
Committee,
Counsellor O'CONNELL Urged again the objec-
tion suggested by Mr. Pert in.
The objection was
aver-ruled. The examination was continued :
_ The Second Resolution, That seven persons, not
Candidates for the Committee, .slNld be chosen to
boathe five. This mode was put aside ; as some-
y asked, did not Mr. Kirwan know, that a pro-
clamation was issued.
'e-nPposition was withdrawn, and the original
Pr°P°silion was cart ied. Witness saw some of the
Seven persons nominated ; saw theM retire and re-
turn : before they, retired, they asked how they
shouldi know the candidates, and they were told
hley would get a list, which was accordingly given.
On the return of the seven persons, a queStion
was Put by Dr.-Burke, from the Chair, whether Dr.
"n
aerid
tobe an elhose name wag returned) was a fit per-
`ected to the Committee? The question
Was carried unanimously. Dr. Burke then quitted
lie chair, and Dr. Sheridan resumed the chair, and
e (Dr. Sheridan) then put the question on the other
suur, who were elected...
Cross-examined by Mr. BORNE.
se, Can
you take on.yourself- to say the word "repre-
was ill the Resolution ?—I have not a doubt,
put it was in the Resolution.
When did you last read your notes ?—Not since
the
22d of last NoVember, the day he found them:
theyh were in his desk in the Head Office of Police—
as not the notes.
What did you do with them ?—Gave therb to the
Crown Solicitor, Mr. Keinmis ; three days after he
"lore the informations, he got a copy, but could, not
(after a long pause) say who.gave him a copy of the
information.
Can VOU form a belief?—He was several times
asked this question, but he could not tell ; the ori-
ginal lay
.constantly in the office; the original infor-
mations kit the office. •
Where did you get the copy ?—On my oath I
can't tell. ,
How does it happen that a man whocan swear to
Particular words of a Resolution, cannot swear.un
what day or from what person he received the copy
of the information believe from Mr. M`Do-
n°gh, the person who attended as a witness.
T 1 'lid you lodge examinations against Dr. Breen
Breen was included, because, he heard his name
• Mentioned. 'Witness admitted that Dr. Breen was
.arresied, and in confinement abut half an hour in
.the Police Office. Here Mr. Borne called for the
informations sworn by Shepherd against Dr. Breen.
• Coon acceded.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL SOcrcreSteti-the propriety
esp
474. the Court inspeaing the informations, lest their
exPosure might be attended with public inconve-
nience. -
Mr. BORNE cited Lord Stafford's trial, where it
'Was admitted that the depositions before a Magistrate
were allowed to be read, in order to impeach the
credit of the witness.
Judge o,Bonaz wished the course observed on
trials should in this case be adhered to, namely, to
leave it to the Judge to insped the informations,
and that the Counsel should point out the tarts
Ithicli he suspeds would impeach the credit of the
witness. '
Judie DAY said, that his experience was to allow
the prisoner the information 1.(31- soch a purpose.
Mr. BORNE said, that the practice was so in Eng-
land.

t ATTORNEY GENERAL said, these informa-
lcms were the property of the Crown, and •in the
tostodv of the law, and therefore he would obje&
to the produaion of this document. • . -
The Court ruled, that that part of the informa-
tion relating to Dr. Breen should be read.
Witness said; that he did not swear positively
against Dr. Been, as one of the persons named : he
(lid not know any of the five personally, but he
:Wore merely because their names were Men-
"oned.

How did you know ?—Only by hearing their
"mes mentioned.
Since the last trial, did you converse with any
Verson ?—Certainly- not—not even with any person
in the Police Office.
Did any person speak to you about the trial
N(3..

No ?---Oh, yes—relative to the trial; but not for
bias.

Witness desired by the Court to answer.
"Witness said, that the only conversation he ever
Ilad (a long pause) was, on Sunday last, with young
'lad,K.emmis.
Where is the copy of the information you had on
last Saturday?--I cannot say.
Where did you leave it ?—I gave it to M‘Po-
noel', the second Clerk.
On what time on Saturday ?—About four o'clock.
lie thought that M'Donogh is the man who would,
be examined : he has another copy of 'his own—
,both have copies.
[Here Mr. Borne said, it was a well kept
Office] •
He believe M'Donogh destroyed his notes : can't
say the particular time.
Why do you believe he destroyed them ?—Be'.
cause I heard him say so.
The Court adjourned.