The Sun.
London, England, 1840-01-29 00:00:00

BIRCII-CORI ESPONDENTS

OF THE TIMES.
(From the Pilot of 'Tanury 27. )
TO THE EDITOR OF THE PILOT.

Sir—There appeared in the Dublin papers two reports
of t hat fell from me, respecting your friend, Mr. Birch.
ho was some time ago editor and conductor of the Monitor
newspaper. I was deceived into a belief that be was the
;muthor of a letter published by the ruffian gang of the
imncs. I certainly could not well have made a more
charge against any well-minded gentleman. With
the imilecWoll on my mind that Mr. Birch was the author,
I certainly assailed him in terms which I deeply regret,
and wish entirely to with(ltrrr. Ido this without any re-
set Yejon whatsoever; and, as a man and a Christian, my
desire is, tt3 repair the entire of the wrong I did him.
I have mentioned that there were two reports of what I
said respecting Mr. Birch. The first was more harsh
than I intended. The second Was not as apologetic as I
wished. I now desire to supply the latter deficiency, and
to restore Mr. Hirsh to any confidence 25 a public writer
and private gentleman of which I have deprived him.
I have the honour to bc, your faithful servant,
DANIEL O'CONNELL,

London, Jan. 24, IMO,
The above letter, we ate sure, will be fay satisfactory
to the respectable gentleman to whom it refer. But as
we are on the subject of the letters of B. to the 7rmes,
for which Mr. O'Connell so amply atones, for imputing
them to any man of character, we have to say sernethipg
of the lying author, whoever he may be. We can *how
him totally ignorant of the most minute Ni; well as the most
general matters which he asserts. In a late letter, treat.
ing of the attack by Mr. O'Connell on Mr. Birch—a let-
ter which is copied in the Standard from the Times, and
which alone gives it the honour of our notice, the writer,
addressing O'Connell, says
• One other word as to a late act of yours, of vindictive
treachery and atrocious falsehood. You are angry with a
man of the name of Birch, formerly the Editor of a News-
paper, and modestly called the Dublin Monitor. I have
neaid, as I never saw the paper, that he charged you with
pcculat on. You knew that Peter Purcell, the wealthy
coach driver, was the owner of this paper, and is, I be-
lieve, still the owner of it. No matter from what cause,
the coachman backed out of the charge, and you, O'Con-
nell, tell upon his hired scribe, and denounced hint as the
author of these letters, when you know in your soul poor
Birch had as much to say to them as yourself."
Now, see the ignorance of this writer of what is passing
under his view in Dublin ; and who can depend on a word
he says, relating to scenes in distant parts of Ireland?
" You know (says B.)that Peter Purcell was the owner of
the paper." False I Mr. Purcell, to whom he alludes,
had nothing to do with the Monitor when Mr. Birch was
editor. There is not a man who knows anything of such
subjects in this country who does not know that it was
since Mr. Birch ceased to be editor that Mr. Purcell be-
came the reputed purchaser of the Monitor. But the
falsehood answered the purpose of hanging another ca
lumny on O'Connell ; and, therefore, it was asserted.
We must now come to the point we chiefly commented
on the letter to come at. There is a general report that
the writer of these letters is a barrister—Mr. Ilolwell
Walsh—ond people are the more disposed to credit the
report, from the recollection of the castigation Mr. O'Con-
nell gave Mr. Walsh, when he was witness on an unfor-
tunate trial, combined with the spirit of rancorous personal
mali
,nity to Mr. O'Connell which these letters indicate.
We are sure Mr. Walsh is incapable of writing such let-
ters, and we notice it for the purpose of giving him an op-
portuity of contradicting the rumour.