The Sun.
London, England, 1848-05-29 00:00:00

S f ,
r.
MAY 29, 1848.
•

avowedmtehne, t ipme
re
baasp
5"
ciently plain, and accordingly he says, "I will speak
more plainly :"
wealth of grain, and roots, and cattle, far more than
enough to sustain in life and in comfort all the inhabi-
tants" There is now growing on the soil of Ireland a
of the island. That wealth must not leave us
the
that s pri
thoseng of
wordsthe e wae rr.e" not I
thsuintiA
another year, not until every grain of it is fought for
in every stage, from the tying Of the sheaf to the load-
ing of the ship. And the effort necessary for that
simple act of sel-preservation will at one and the same
blow prostrate British dominion, and landlordism toge-
ther. 'Tis but the one act of volition; if we resolve
but to live, we make our country a free and sovereign
state."
What, gentlemen, is a free and sovereign state, accord-
ing to Mr. Mitchel, but this ideal republic? Might I
ask you, in sober earnestness, as rational men, if Mr.
Holmes, who is to follow me, can put any meaning on
this language except that it was a piece of advice to the
farmers, who are to reap the forthcoming harvest, that
they should rise up in arms, possess themselves of the
property of the country, establish a republic, and make
Ireland a free and sovereign state? Tne letter is then
concluded as follows:--
" Will you not gird up your loins for this great na-
tional struggle, and stand with your countrymen for life
and land? Will you, the sons of a warlike race,•the.in-
heritors of conquering memories—with the arms of free-
men in all your homes, and 'relics of the gallant'Republi-
cans of '9B for ever before your eyes —will you.stand fold-
ing your hands in helpless 'loyalty,' and while every na-
tion in Christendom is seizing on its birthright with armed
hands, will you take patiently with your rations of
yellow meal, and your inevitable portion of eternal con-
tempt?
"If this be your determination, Protestants of
Ulster, then make haste, sign addresses of loyalty and
confidence in Lord Clarendon, and protest, with that
other Lordi your unalterable attachment to'' our ve•
nerabie institutions.'

" JOHN MITCHEL "
pArfocedteersebdmteosay—This, further
s hrisem,
gentlemen,ark i
s the
not a trial of
LearnedGeiitleirane
larceny, where the question is—did a particular person
steal this or that thing? It is a trial f)r a political of-
fence. The only instruction given by the Crown to
their officer, the Crown Solicitor, was upon no account,
and under no circumstances, to exclude a man for his
religion. No matter what religion he professed, it
was his duty to exclude from the jury-box men,
no matter what their religion may be, who co-
incided with the prisoner in his politieal opinions.
May I ask you; gentlemen, if men were biassed in their
judgments, would they be proper persons to be put upon
a jury? The only instruction that was given was this—
" Obtain an honest, fair, and impartial jury. Any man
who, from your information, you believe not to be a
man who will give an impartial verdict between the
Crown and the subject—that man, and that man alone,
without reference to his religion, you are to exclude
from the panel;" and that Mr. Kemmis has, according
to the best of his judgment, exercised that right, I en-
tertain no doubt; also you will recollect that efforts
have been made to intimidate jurors. You, I hope,
Gentlemen, are above all such feelings. I trust you are
men, and that is all that is required by the Crown, who
will discard from your minds anything that you may
have heard of Mr. Mitchel, or the publications in his
paper, before you entered the jury box. I trust you
are men who, having regard to the obligation of the
oath you have taken, will honestly and fairly give a
verdict which, laying your hand upon your heart, you
can say is consistent with the duty which you owe to
your country upon the one hand, and the prisoner upon
the other. trust that you are men who will honestly
and fairly discharge the very important duty which
you have been empanneled to discharge.
Mr. HoLDIES rose to address the jury for the defence
at a quarter past twelve o'clock. He said—May it
please your L irdships, and Gentlemen, I am counsel for
the prisoner, John Mitchel ; and I am well aware of the
important duty which devolves on me this day, as coun-
sel for that gentleman, and also of my inadequacy to dis-
charge that duty ; but I will avow that I ieel pride at
being selected on this occasion by Mr. Mitchel, because
I believe in my heart that he is an honest man, sincerely
attached to the principles he avows—and no doubt which
he avows boldly—and although the Government of this
country may fear him, or hate him, they cannot despise
him. Gentlemen, having thus said a word respecting
the prisoner as to character, I shall now proceed with
his case. The Attorney-General has fairly stated the
case on behalf of the Crown, and has read very fairly
all the publications respecting which Mr. Mitchel stands
indicted ; and there is only a part, and one part only of
the Attorney-General's statement to eomplaiu of, and
that is the conclusioti. *4; de. .n 4 ;think he was war-
ranted in stating in 'ails court whiat%, in;tructions he,
or those connected with him, received from the
Chief Governor of this courrtYy with respect
to the striking-a the Jury-; I thiuk- she -Crown aboul4
~ever know anything of striking juries—not a word
—ur give any instructions on the subject; for, if tho
Crown can do it, with respect to giving fair instruc-
tions, it—
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—What I said was, that
the instructions I gave to the Crown Solicitor were as I
stated.
Mr..IIoLSIES—I may be mistaken, and would be very
sorry to misinterpret anything said; but I wisunder•
stood that you intimated y our instructions from the Lord
Lieutenant.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—MOSt certainly not.
Mr. HoLSIES—Then I am mistaken. That is quite
sufficient.

Baron LEFROY-If the Attorney. General's statement
on this point had not been with a view to vindicate
himself personally from charges made against him, I
would have felt it my duty to have interrupted him.
It was with that view alone that we allowed him to
proceed.
Mr. Howies—Well, my Lords and Gentlemen, I may
be mistaken iu that, but there is yet something in the
Attorney-General's concluding statement I cannot be
mistaken in, and which I find fault with. There was,as
you are aware, a challenge to the array in this case on
the part of the accused, in consequence of information
he had received to the effect; that those whose duty
it was to empanel an impaitial jury, had not in all
instances done so, particularly with respect to Ro-
man Catholics. That issue was raised and queA-
tioned, and the triers found on their oaths that the
panel was a fair and impartial one; but what do
I find them? I find that, of this fair and impartial jury
—found to be so by two respectable citizens—the Crown
strikes off no less than thirty men, eighteen of them
Roman Catholics. There can be no doubt on that sub-
ject, therefore I will at once dismiss it. In this case,
gentlemen, the prisoner, John Mitchel, stands charged
with two dietinet offences—and it is somewhat remark-
able that, in support of those two distinct offences
—the same identical evidence is given to support
both. The Attorney-General will be very well
sati.fied, re) doubt, if you give your verdict on both or
either charges, or for anything, like the foreman of the
grand jury who found the bill=. The foreman of the
grand jury, gentlemen, having been asked if the jury had
found bills against the prisoner, replied, " Oh, yes ; we
find him guilty of sedition." "Gentlemen,"
said the
officer of the court, " he is not indicted for sedition."
" Well," said the foreman, " we find him guilty of trea-
son." But, gentlemen, again interrupted the officer, " the
charge against Mr. Mitchel is for felony." " Oh, no
matter to us," said the foreman, " sedition, treason, or
telony, it is all the same to us," and so with the Attorney-
General, if you convict the prisoner, that is all that
he wants. Gentlemen, as the Court will tell you,
the quesion in this case is not whether Mr. Mitchel
may have committed in these publications other offences;
if you think him guilty of high treason, you ought not to
find him so, for you must believe him guilty of one or
both of the charges made against him, or find a verdict
of acquittal. The first charge is, " that he compassed,
imagined, invented, devised, or intended to deprive, or
depose, our most gracious Sovereign the Q,ieen from the
style, honour, or Royal name of the Imperial Crown of the
United Kingdom," and that this was evidenced by overt
acts of his, namely, the publication of the different arti-
cles in the newspapers that were read for you. Now,
really, I may be very dull, but I do not rightly compre-
hend this part of the .Act of Parliament, or meaning of
the words, " to depose the Queen from the style. honour,
or royal name of the Imperial Crown of the United King-
dom." I can understand deposing the Queen from the
throne perfectly well. I can understand an attempt made
on thelife of the Queen perfectly well, or expelling her
from her dominions; but I do not, for the life of me,
know what it is to epose hi-r "from the style, honour, or
Royal name of the Imperial Crown of the United King-
dom." If Mr. Mitchell was indicted upon another section
of this statute, for "intimidating both or either Houses
of Parliament," I could understand the evidence here as
applicable perhaps, if it were alleged that by so doing
he got them to pass an Act to increase theirish repre-
sentatives from one to two hundred, but I cannot under-
stand this charge, for notwithstanding that he did so,
the Crown would not be affected in the least " in the
style, honour, or Royal name of the Imperial Crown of
the United Kingdom;" she would be still as she is, and
have the same title. lam not accusing the Attorney-
General of a blunder in drawing the indictment, for he
has followed the Act, but we must have Acts of Parlia-
ment, that we can understand, and I defy any man to
understand what it is to deprive her Majesty of the
style, honour, and Royal name of the Imperial Crown
of the United Kingdom. The importance of this con-
sideration would appear from the first section of the
article, which declares—" that from the Ist of January,
1801, the kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland shat;
be for ever united by the name of the United King-
dom of Great Britain and Ireland, and that the
Royal style and title appertaining to the Imperial
Crown of the United Kingdom, and all the
armorial bearings, &c., shall be such as his Majesty,
by his royal proclamation, under the great seal
shall appoint." Now, I can understand anything done
to deprive the Queen of her title of Sovereign of the
United Kingdom ; but, as I said before, I cannot under-
staud depriving her "of the style, honour. and royal
name," as laid in this indictment. NI, hat the depriva-
tion is I cannot comprehend, therefore I cannot under-
stand thischs
ese agaixt the prisoner. What is the
.
other charge ?. It. is "advising or. intending to levy
war against her "Majesty, her" heirs-otimecewsors; living
pirt of the United ,Kingdom, by force or o°4-
.

straint, to compel her to change her measures or coun-
cils." What measures ? What councils ? Is there
the slightest evidence here as to w hat measures or
councils these publications purported to change? Are
you, gentlemen, as a jury, to grope in the dark ?
Are these publications calculated to force the Queen to
alter her measures with France or America, or any
other country on the face of the earth ? What the
measures are the prisoner wants to change I cannot
understand ? What have been the measures of thi,
session of Parliament for the improvement of Ireland
The poor-law. That is the only measure I know
of, and has Mr. Mitchel endeavoured to change it ?
Not in the least; therefore I ask my Learned Friend.
the Attorney-General, or the gentlemen who will follow
me for the Crown, to tell you, on your oaths, what course
or measure it is my client has endeavoured, by advisinr
the levy of war," to force the Queen to change. I would
be glad to hear, even now, if the Attorney-General would
condescend to inform me. I have no objection to let him
mend his speech, if by doing so he can tell you any mea-
sure or council. Mr. Mitchel endeavoured to compel her
Majesty to change by trying to levy war. Gentlemen,
this is a criminal case, and it is incumbent on those who
make the charge to prove it as clear as light—to prove a
specific offence under the statute. The Crown, I admit,
have done all they could—they have followed the Act of
Parliament, but they have not proved that Mr. Mitchel
has tried to levy war against the .Queen—" to compel her
by constraint to change her measures or councils." I
put it to your Lordships that, under this Act, unless the
Crown prove a specific measure or council that the pri-
soner wanted to have changed by these publications,
is entitled to an acquittal; and, therefore, I apply myself
further to the case—i would wish to have your Lord-
ships'
the jury. If your L9rdships do not wish to interfere at
opinion on the subject as to what is to be left to
thisß stage of the trial, I wiil, of course, proceed—
. itrou LEFROY—Whatever the charge is, appears on

gst i
nouba
dremtwfe
uiisresnfle_ni
instance,
record,
he does
oi and
ecsh n
ot ht the Courti
yw ohuMii
life?II
gentlemen
Will
ref:
il:eLl.
Otmhes luaee Eri
lienseooednfivnvet i
hGcctthenn.htuiii
.I:nuneyurm _:.athila.nenndtt9wehpliailtritc the
ste eaetdjeeu drr tn°lipohb sea
t r v em. e—a. .
waein4rmicat 'el: nee
believe me—,..athtnhadattthlerreeljand.of uncertainty;
Mitchelnekjhas
otherwise, conspired
it will
mayn dutyd li upon
are those laid in this Act of Par-
It is not my duty here to tell
by
my
client
in
those publications- There are, and he
many of those expressions I also avow,
and I want to try this case of f
and the accused, which I cannot di between the Crown
attention to something of the history., without calling your
state of Ireland, and with that view and the present
avows
tell you, in the
great mistake is entertained by
effect that there cannot be slavery —that
persons to the
a slave unless he be in chains, or subj,etntoomban can be
the planter like the negroes; but the slavery tbfe lash of
speak is the slavery of the people, which consistsv!'hichl
that they do not make their own laws in
this,
themselves—that
they do not make the laws by which they are governed,
but that those laws are made by others, and I say it
boldly, that a people so circumstanced are in a state of
slavery.
Baron LEFROY said the Court were very reluctant to
interpose, but the course pursued by Mr. Holmes was
calculated to embarrass them in the situation they occu-
pied, by introducing objectionable matter, to which, if
they did not express their dissent, it might make them
liable to the imputation of having approved the line of
argument advanced by Mr. Holmes.
Mr. HOLMES—I am the last man to press upon the
Court that which I had not a right to do; and I think it
impossible to do justice to my client without doing ju::-
dee to Ireland also.—(Loud cheers.)
Baron LEFROY called upon the Sheriff to give orders
that persons who would again create disturbance in the
Court, should be taken into custody. The Learned
Baron commanded that the person who would commit.
such a breach of public decorum should be instantly
reported to the Court, and it would be his duty to com-
mit him. i s anemnasll badved enslaved expressions
uswi,l, ortntruse3l transported
u notst oeArd

Mr. HuLMES—The Act of Parliament under which
Mr. Mitchel stood at the bar does not prescribe one
punishment—it might be for two years' imprisonment,
or seven years' transportation, or transportation for Tile
—and if there should be a verdict of conviction, it is not
important to show all the circumstances of the case,arni
the provocations under which my client has acted in
those publications. I think it quite essential to his
case, and with that view the line I have prescribed rot
myself is quite necessary for his defence. My client
may be guilty of felony, but I say it broadly and boldi),
that England is the cause of the offence of which he is
accused, and I will demonstrate it. I care not by w hal
1 means you have been empanelled. I address you tit -
cause I bkeve you totre.-honest men and fatthful -isi.-
men. Tak7;kottiiiig from me; I will state upon la h au
thority:—" What does Met berty or a people consi in:
it consists—in the right and pawer-us-asske-laws-for-its
awn government. Were un individual to make law,-
tor another country, that person is a despot and the
people are slaves. When ono country Makes
laws fur another , country (and that 14:ngliin::
in making laws for Ireland, I will demon-
strate, by which - Ireland is enslaved), the country
which makes the laws is abiOlutely the sovereign coun-
try, and the country for which those laws are made, is
in a state of slavery." I give that upon the authority
of an Englishman—an honest man in his day—Black-
stone. And what does he say ? In constitutional
questions be will not be suspected or accused of being
ton much in favour of popular rights, he says :—" It
follows from the nature and constitution of a dependent
state, hat England should make laws fur Ireland"—
(treating Ireland as a conquered country)—" conquereci,
planted, and governed by England, it might be neces
nary that it should be subject to such laws as the su-
peri,r state thinks proper to prescribe." In speaking of
this country, Ireland, he (Blackstone) maintains that
because Ireland had been a conquered country in his
days, Ireland of the present time, and for posterity for
ever should be bound by such laws as the conquering
state thinks proper to make for her, He called upon
the jury, in conclusion, as they valued their oaths, and
as they valued justice and public good, manly bearing,
and personal honour, and as they loved the country of
their birth, to find a verdict of acquittal.
Mr. IIi.:NN replied on the part of the Crown.
_ _

Justice MoORE proceeded to charge the jury.
The jury than, at a quarter past four o'clock, retired
to their room, and their Lordships withdrew from the
bench. At ten minutes after six o'clock they returned,
:At.d inquired of the High SheritTif the jury hart agreed?
Ile replied in the negative, and by the direction of
Court proceeded to the jury-room and asked them if
they had found a verdict? In a few moments he
returned, and intimated to the Court that the jury had
not agreed, but there was a probability that they would
do so.

Their LORDSHIPS expressed an intention of adjourn-
mg the court for an hintr, and swore in special bailiff:,
to prevent any communication with the jury during the
interval.

Mr. FRENCH, the High Sheriff, intimated to their
Lordships, as they were about to retire, that it would
be necessary to swear im two more policemen and
another bailiff, in order to station one in a yard from
which the jury might be communicated with, and the:other
two were required the better to guard against the least
probability or tampering with the jury.
The additional s. ntinels were then sworn, and sta-
tioned by the Sheriff in the places in which their pre-
sence was necessary.
The word ran abroad like wildfire that the jury had
disagreed, and the excitement in Green-street and the
surrounding neighbourhood became intense, the populace
cheering and rushing through Capel-street, communicat-
ing to others the supposed fact.
Their Lordships remained upon the bench, and did
not adjourn the Court as they had intended, and the
seat immediately before the bar, upon which a umber
of Mr. Mitchel's friends were, was cleared by the
police, and two of the body was stationed at either
side of it.

Shortly afterwards (ten minutes to seven o'clock),
'.he jury re-entered their box. The silence at this mo-
ment was profound Every eye was turned towards the
box, and when the foreman handed the issue paper and
the indictment to the Clerk of the Crown the anxiety
was excessive.
Clerk of the Crown—How say you, gentlemen, guilty
or not guilty.
Foreman--Guilty.
Baron LEPROY (addressing the prisoner) said, " Stand
by till to-morrow."
Several of Mr. Mitchel's friends, some of whom are
barristers, pressed forward to shake hands with him,
and blocked up the bar, standing between the prisoner
dad the bench.
Baron LEFROY said he was surprised to see gentlemen
of the bar thus violating the order of the Court.
Mr. Mitchel was then reconducted by a private pas-
sage to Newgate, and the Court was adjourned to eleven
o'clock this mcruing, when it is supposed the sentence
will be pronounced.
A great concourse of persons assembled in Capel-
street, and it became necessary for the horse and foot
police to assemble and form into a solid line, to remove
them quietly and orderly, which was done without any
commotion save the shouts and yells of a few boys. The
police were on the alert during the evening to prevent
disturbance, and every necessary arrangement was made
to check and restrain any violation of the peace.
SENTENCE OF TRANSPORTATION ON
MITCHEL. _

SATURDAY, MAY 2i.—At five minutes after eleven,
the Judges, Baron Lefroy and Mr. Justice Moore, took
their seats on the bench.
Clerk of the Crown—Gaoler, put forward John Mit-
chel.

Mr. Mitchel was here placed at the bar, where he
stood in a cairn and firm attitude. He was warmly
shaken by the hand by his friends who were about the
bar.

While his friends were thus occupied,
„ Ltruoy called out in a peremptory tone,
Ivoep order in court."
Sir COLMAN O'LoGHLEN, then addressingl the Court,
your Lordships have no objection we wotkl
wish to have the verdict of the jury read by the Clerk
of the Crown.
Clerk Pt the-Crown—The verdict is gniAy'r..
Sir CoLnax O'LoottEN—What —woo paper ?
.144.4 the issue paper itself,