The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-14 00:00:00

THE STATE TRIALS.

DUBLIN COMMISSION CO URT. -FRIDAY, A uG. 11.
THE QUEEN V. &DOHERTY.

The Court sat at ten o'clock. The names of the
jurors were called over. The prisoner, Kevin Izod
O'Doherty was placed at the bar, and his trial was
resumed.
Mr. BUTT, on the part of the prisoner, called the
attention of the:Court to the fact that two distinct offences
were charged in the indictment, expressed in separate
sets of counts, and submitted that the Crown should
make its election as to which of the charges they should
proceed upon.
The ATTORNEY •GENERAL—The application is One
that was discussed on a former occasion, and the answer
then given was, that although it was perfectly plain that
two different intents were charged, yet the act growing
out of the intents is the same.
The Court ruled in favour of the Crown.
Mr. Burr then proceeded to address the jury on the
part of the prisoner. Having reminded them of the
momentous duty they had to perform, he begged to call
their attention to the precise offence they had to try.
Unless they could, upon their oaths, beyond a reason-
able doubt, say that the prisoner at the bar was guilty
of the precise offence in the indictment, they could not
find a verdict to that effect. He could not say those
writings were not seditious, and if the Attorney-General
had instituted a prosecution against the prisoner at the
bar for sedition, and if the jury believed him to be the
writer or publisher of the articles read to them, he
admitted they ought to find him guilty. But this was
not a prosecution for sedition, this was a prosecution
under a penal Act of Parliament. It was not, however,
an Act for making sedition felony, though it was
an Act which, in the hands of a weak jury,
might be made the instrument of grievous op-
pression ; but with fair and intelligent jurors to
administer it, there was nothing in the Act to
which the most ardent lover of liberty could object.
He called attention to the charges in the indict-
ment, and the evidence offered in support of them, which
was to be drawn from the publications themselves. But
even if the jury believed he wrote all those articles
without having in his mind' the settled treasonable mo-
tives imputed to him, they could not find him guilty. Let
them look to the evidence adduced to sustain the charge
against the prisoner, and what did it chow? It merely
appeared that those writings were published in a news
paper of which the prisoner was proprietor, but did it
appear that they were written by him,. or that he ex-
pressed his own intentions, or uttered them in that pub-
lication ? It was true the publication of the writings of
another, if those writings were seditious, would be also
sedition, but could they draw from the fact that he pub-
lished the writings of another the inference beyond rea-
sonable doubt that he expressed, uttered, and declared
an intention existing in his own mind. Was there, he
asked, a particle of evidence offered to the jury to show
them that this gentleman ever took part in the publica-
tion of the Tribune, except the part he was bound to
take as its proprietor. In fact, ho was surprised that the
Crown had closed their evidence without going further.
On a former trial they had produced the manuscripts.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL--NO, that is not the case.
_ _

Mr. BUTT—In the former case to which he referred, the
prisoner (Mr. Mitchel) was prosecuted for a letter signed
John Mitchel," and a speech made by him, and they
produced a witness to prove he made the speech. And
what was peculiar in this case was, that all the manu-
scripts in the Tribune office were seized by the Crown;
they had given notice to the Crown Solicitor to produce
those manuscripts on the trial, and if they were produced
the jury would find them varying in handwriting, and
differing in style; and he defied the Attorney-General
to prove that they were in the handwriting of his client.
Let the Solicitor-General in reply deal with the case as
he would, no argument or assertion could change this
broad and staring fact, that they were called upon to find
his client guilty on this indictment merely because he
was the proprietor of a newspaper. He admitted that
the object of the articles was to familiarize the Irish
people with the use of arms, but it went no further, and
when, by a former Administration an attempt was made
to prevent the Irish people from having the indiscrimi-
nate use of arms, did they recollect the indignant elo-
quence that rolled from the Whig benches against the
proposition, and did they remember that it was said by a
member of the party at present in power, that it was
their right to possess arms; but now, an attempt was
made to brand his client with the name of felon, because
he expressed a similar opinion.
No evidence was given for the prisoner.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL replied on the part of the
Crown. With respect to the able address of the counsel
for the prisoner, he would say that, with very few ex-
ceptions, there was very little difference between them
respecting the construction of the Act of Parliament and
the application of the evidence to sustain the charge con-
tained in the indictment. It was charged in the indict-
ment that it was the intent of the prisoner to depose the
Queen from the style, title, and royal name of the Impe-
-1 rial Crown ; but it does not necessarily follow that his
' intention was to depose the Queen from her throne. The
intent was to separate one part_of the empire from the
rest, and detach it from the Crown; and if it appeared to
the jury that it was the intention of the prisoner to alter
the government of this portion of the empire, or to sever
it from the rest of the empire, they should find him
guilty of the offence charged by the indictment. Then
what was the second charge which his Learned Friend,
in defence of his client, had to a certain degree attempted
to mystify ? The second charge was that he compassed,
intended, imagined, and contemplated the levying of war
within this portion of the realm, with a view to compel
the Sovereign to change her measures and councils.
The intention of levying war could not be denied; and
he asked the jury for what purpose war was to be levied?
Was it to compel the Queen to persevere in her mea-
sures and councils? Was it to co-operate with the Queen
and the Government of Ireland to carry out the mea-
sures of the Queen, or of her Viceroy in this portion of
the realm? Be called attention to the articles published
by the prisoner, and particularly to a passage to the
effect that the leaders of the Confederation were standing
by with folded arms, in deference to the imbecile cowards
on Burgh-quay. These persons in their closets, where
those articles were written, and by the writing of which
they earned a livelihood, were safe from the perils they
provoked others to encounter, and would escape the
consequences, if they were not liable to punishment for
writing or publishing those articles. Of the two, he
considered the man who, from his place of safety, incited
and encouraged others to engage in perilous and criminal
enterprises, encountering all the dangers of civil war,
was more culpable and deserving of punishment than the
unfortunate man who, yielding to exciting stimulants to
take the field, exposed his life either in battle or on the
scaffold. But this was all an affair of the pocket. The
object was to procure an extended circulation for his
paper, and no matter how brutalising those articles
might be, they were issued from the press, and it was
left to the good taste or good feeling of the law to sup•
press such publications.
Baron PENNEFITIIER charged the jury. He called
attention to a statement made by prisoner's Counsel—
that they had served notice on the Crown to produce
the manuscripts found in the Tiibune-office, and re-
marked that no evidence was given of the service of that
notice, nor had any call been made in Court to produce
the manuscript, for the purpose of showing that the
gle
pri-
soner was not the author of those publications. Be did
not understand the Counsel of the prisoner to argue that
the prisoner had not a criminal intent, but lrie' under-
stood him to say that he had not the intentcharged in
the indictment; he agreed with the Learned Counsel for
the prisoner that the jury could not convict the prisoner
unless it appeared to them that he had that intent, and
d It appeared to him
expressed it by this publication.
that the publications in some degree at least went to
the maintenance of both intentions, therefore,
and, it
WAS fit for him to mention the intentions charged to

f the jury, :And then refer to the pub!ications to enalle
I them to, 6'orra an opinion as to what intention this
person iitd. If they considered the prisoner's object
was to eveite rebellion and v at., they would see if
they could draw from those publications what the object
or objects of that war must have been. Was it in-
tended by that war to disc.olve the union with Great
Britain 7! to take from the Queen her royal style and
name of Queen of the United Kingdom of Greet Britain
and 'refund I' Was it to erect Ireland into a separate
and ind, ne.,lndent state, unconnected with any other in
the world ? If such were the intention he was bound to
tell the n it was an intention within the purvieu of the
Act of j'arliament. With respect to the intention of
levying war, if that war were levied to prevent the ex-
port of provisions from this country, could that object
be attained without an alteration of the measures of the
Sovereiv,ert ? If that alteration was to be obtained by '
force or war, it would fall within the charge in the in-
dictment With respect to levying war against the
Queen fot the purpose of forcing her to change het
measures, it was totally immaterial in the consideration
of the question whether war ensued or not, or even
that the, attempt was made and proved abortive,
if the intention was conceived by the prisoner, and
if he menFested that intention by the publications given
in evidence. They had heard of the insurrection
that had taken place, and of the manner in which it
terminated. They heard of the misery that would en-
sue if it proceeded further, and of the certain portion of
misery that did ensue in consequence of its being car-
ried to tar ; but all these were matters entirely beside
the question they had to try. They had merely to con-
sider whether the prisoner had the intentions alleged,
and whether he had declared and published them in the
paper in question. The jury would read those papers
dispassionately, and form their opinion upon them
calmly, justly, and deliberately—Fiat jto titia ruatecclum.
Mr. BUTT—I understood you to say, my Lord, that
I admitted the prisoner had the intent imputed ; but I
merely meant the articles.
Baron ,:PENNEFATLIER—You are quite right, and 1
never in',-ended to convey anything else.
FOREMAN—Can we get the Act of Parliament.
Baron - PENNEFATHER—No, in a case before Lord
Tenterd m it was ruled, that it was not proper to send
up an A-at of Parliament to a jury, but the court would
state the substance of it to them.

Mr. LONGLEY (Crown Council)—They have the in-
dictment- my Lord, and the very words are in it.
The jury retired at a quarter-past three o'clock, and
at four o'clock they again appeared in the jury-box.
FOREM:AN --The jury are anxious to inquire if the
publishing of the articles in the paper would render
the prisoner guilty under the Felony Act, just as much
as if he had written the articles himself ?

Baron TENNEFATHER—The fact of his being regis-
tered proprietor is prima facie evidence against him;
it may be rebutted, but in this case it has not been re-
butted.

The jury again retired.
At half-past five o'clock, the jury again came into
Court.

Clerk of the CROWN—Have you agreed to your ver-
dict? Foreman—No. I don't think there is the slightest
chance of our agreeing% Some of the gentlemen seem
to have a difficulty abut prima facie evidence. They
don't seem to understand what your Lordship said
about it.
Baron PENNEFATIIER.—If the indictment was for
publishing this newspaper I would be bound to tell you
that the declaration made by the prisoner in the Stamp-
office on the 15th of June was conclusive evidence of
his being the proprietor and publisher of that paper.
But the indictment is not per se for publishing this
newspaper. It charges him with making the publication
with the intention of deposing the Queen from her royal
style of Queen of the United Kingdom. So to find out
his intention you must be of opinion that he knew the
contents of the papers published, and he had an oppor-
tunity of showing his innocence. He is conclusively
shown to be proprietor and publisher, but the ques-
tion is whether he knew the contents of what was
published. That is necessary to fasten upon him an
intention to depose the Queen and deprive her of her
royal name.
A juror—Some of the jurors not knowing the mean-
ing of prima facie, wish to know whether your Lordship
meant to convey that prima facie evidence was suffi-
cient to convict the party under the Felony Act. There
is a difference of opinion amongst us on that point.
Some of the j.trors hold that your Lordship stated that
if there was prima facie evidence of the prisoner's
guilt, we should at once find him guilty; others attach a
different meaning to the phrase, and we wish to have
your Lordship's opinion.
Baron PENNEFATBER—I did not mean, gentlemen, to
direct you, or to tell you, that in point of law, because
lie was proprietor and publisher of the paper, he neces-
sarily knew its contents. But I told you it was evidence
that he did know the contents, and thatyou were to terra
your judgment on the whole of the case, reading the
documents and the other evidence, namely, his signing
this document in the stamp-office; and you are to see
whether you are satisfied that he was not only the pro
prietor and publisher, but that he know the contents.
The knowledge of the contents is necessary, as appears
to me, to enable you to form an opinion as to whether
he did intend to deprive the Sovereign of her style and
dignity.
A consultation took place between the jury in their
jury-box, and it was again announced by a juror that
they could not agree.
Baron PENNEYATHER—YOU must retire, gentleman.
I cannot discharge you at present.
A juror—There is no chance of agreeing.
The jury retired, and bailiffs were placed over them.

At ten o'clock the jury were again called in.
Clerk of the Court—Gentlemen, have you agreed ?

Foreman—No, and there is not the slightest Chance of
our agreeing.
The jury were then locked up for the night.
Dennis floban, printer of the Tribune, was arraigned
for printing certain seditious articles in that paper.
The prisoner submitted and handed in an affidavit in
mitigation. Testimony was produced as to his character,
and it was stated that his politics differed from the views
advocated in the Tribune, and that he merely undertook
to print the paper as a matter of business.
The ATTORMBY-GENERAL left the matter to the Court.
lie would not say a word which could lead to the sup-
position that any excuse would tend to mitigate the
charge made against the prisoner.
Baron PENNEFATHER—Our feeling is, that we cannot
hold that a person who, even incautiously, allows his
11&1130 to bo made use of for such a purpose, is entirely
frc e from blame.
The COURT promised to consider the matter.
MORE BILLS.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I have to apply to your lord-
ships not to dischare the city grand jury to-day. I have
a few other bills to send up.

SATURDAY.

The Court sat at half-past ten o'clock.
At a quarter to eleven o'clock the jury appeared in
.hcir box.

Clerk of the Crown—Have you agreed to your
verdict?

Foreman—No; nor is there the least chance of it.
Baron PENNEFATHER—Under the circumstances, Mr.
Attorney, it does not appear to the Court that we
should endanger the lives or health of the jurors by
keeping tt cm any longer.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I haven° possible desire that
they should be kept any longer than is necessary.
Baron PENNEFATHER—The jury cannot endure this
kind of ordeal beyond a certain time, and we cannot
subject gentlemen who have come here to discharge an
onerous duty to dangers affecting their lives or health.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL—One of the gentlemen does
really appear ill.
Juror—l am about sixty years of age, and I might ex-
pect to be allowed to retire.
The jury was then discharged, on the grounds as set
forth on the record, "That further confinement would
be dangerous to their health and lives."
The prisoner was conveyed back to Newgate.l
THE QUEEN V. THOMAS DE REILLY.

Clerk of the Crown—Crier, call Thomas Davin
Tho Crier called Mr. O'Reilly, and repeated the call
outside the court; but there was no answer.
Charles Henry West and Michael O'Reilly (Thomas
D. Reilly's bail) were called upon to produce his body,
or forfeit their recognisances.
Sir CuLMAN OIOGIILEN-It was impossible for Mr.
West to take any steps to bring in the body of Thomas
Davin Reilly, because he is in custody himself under the
Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, and cannot take him
into custody.
Baron PENNEFATIIER-But the party has been dis-
abled by his own act.
THE QUEEN V. J. F. FITZPITRICX..
The defendant was charged with carrying a pike be-
twee❑ two and three o'clock in the morning, and after-
wards denying he had it. The party did not attend; his
recogninnces were estreated, and a Bench warrant
issued for his apprehension.
Some persons charged with having arms in their pos-
session, submitted, and were sentenced to a day's impri-
sonment.
TRUE BILLS AGAINST THE PRINTER OF TUE " FELON"

NEWSPAPER.
True bills were found against Mr. Shaw, the printer of
the Felon newspaper.
Foreman of the Grand Jury—We have disposed
of all the bills before us, and perhaps you will dis-
charge us?
CIIIEF BARON—For this day, gentlemen, you may
retire, but we require your attendance on Monday.
Baron PENNEFATIIER—WO hope to discharge you on
Monday.

ge-------_
The mercantile letters from liamburgh received
this morning express a strong conviction that the
blockade of the Elbe, although announced for the 15th,
will not take place. A report was current that on the
sth inst. two couriers from _Frankfort had passed through
the city, one to General Wrangel with orders to sign the
armistice, and one to Copenhagen to inform the Ministry
with the fact of such instructions having been given ; and
this baying met with credence, the funds have been
steadily improving for two or three days. The quantity
of bills upon London received from Vienna, and the in-
crease of those drawn against corn in consequence of the
rainy weather, had driven tho rate of exchange down to
13.64 for three months' paper. This fall, however, had
brought in purchasers, and there was a consequent ten-
dency to reaction.
SMUGGLING GUNPOWDER FOR THE TRI'II REBELS,
it is for the
—The Smack Montague, of Port St. Mary, laugh Cone,
master, is detained in the above port, or;
her way to
Dublin, having on board three tons of gunpowder,
suspicious circumstances. The master under
says
doubt, the a
dupeflag on entering
Du
Pigeon-house, and as a signal for boats to come to dis-
chargeblin
Bay.thepowildeer,is, he
nwoasdotuo 6 .
signing rebel. Government is 'not likely to send gun-
powderboiavto. r p
ol
ot
It. is
The
vesselunderstood
dleoar. igon
wanasutnapkroonteocntedbolan
aridixo
L
was wind bound when the discovery Was made.—hie of
Man Times.

MAGAZINES,—(CONTINUED.)
BENTLEYS.
This is perhaps the most interesting number of
Bentley that has yet appeared. It contains the com-
mencement of "El Buscapie," a long lost work of
Cervantes, the manuscript of which has been recently
discovered in Cadiz, under circumstances which leave
no doubt as to its genuineness. Indeed, it is impos-
sihle to read half a page of the admirable translation
by Miss Thomasina Ross without at once recognising
the style, and manner,and satire of Cervantes. There is
another paper also of melancholy interest, viz., a post-
humous unfinished wog: by poor T. H. Sealy, the
most pleasant of magazine writers, on whom the
mantle of Charles Lamb seemed to have fallen. 'We
regret to hear that he died in a state bordering on
destitution, and that he has left three young children
doubly orphaned (their mother died some short time
before their father) to struggle as they may with the;
world ; the eldest is only nine years of age. Surely
this is a case calling for a public subscription, if eTtr
there was such a case in the world. Among the new
contributions to Bentley we notice what we imagine
to be the commencement of a series, entitled " Way-
! side Pictures through France, Belgium, and Ger-
many." The sketcher is a master of his craft, and
dashes off his sketches with infinite spirit. Take, as
an example, the following sketch of Havre :
" Havre has a terrible air of business. You feel this
at once. The moment you land you are coiled up in
ropes and casks and trucks end porters and cranes
and the bustle of the Custom-house. The life of Warro
is on its quays and its docks. There is no relief or es-
cape from the din and clatter. If you attempt to get
into the streets, it is still the same thing. The Custom-
house and the port pursue you wherever you move. The
docks stretch up into the centre of the whole, to the re-
sidences, and even to the country-houses of the mer-
chants, whose affsifs are thus brought literally to their
very doors. This eternal presence of the machinery of
business thrust into the windows of domestic life cannot
make a trade, but what wonderful facilities it offers to a
trade in progress, or already made.
" There never was anything so preposterous as to
build fortified walls round such a town, which is not only
a sea-pert of groat traffic, but the greatest sea tort—the
Liverpool—of France. The error has been gradually
rectifying itself, as might have been expected, practical
necessity rebuking the short-sightedness of old theories.
As the population increased, and encamped in the open
country, carrying out the town beyond its prescribed
limits, the walls have been taken down, and the enclo-
sure enlarged. But the new walls are as great an impe-
diment as the old, and have been again in the same
manner out-grown by the population. Here, then, is a
great commercial city, with its heart shut in by a waste
circumjacent ring, whilst its members are cast sprawling
outside. To build a wall round a place of business,
whose gates are jealously closed and sentinelled at a
certain hour every night, and to say to commerce,
Thus far shalt thou come, and no farther,' might have
answered the purpose in an age when storehouses were
little better than depots for stolen goods ; but in this
age, when we age loosening the fetters of industry, and
cultivating freedom of intercourse over the cisilized
world, such a restriction is not only absuril but must ul-
timately prove to be impracticable. These fortifications
and the mercantile spirit they enclose are antagonist
principles, and cannot eubtist together. The Govern-
ment of France might as well issue an edict to stop all
the clocks and watches in the kingdom at a particular
moment every day for the purpose Of regulating the sun
as build fortifications to restrain the free action of indus-
try. All such hindrances must vanish as knowledge
makes head against ignorance, and discovers to us surer
safeguards than bastions or dykes. The passport sys-
tem is a similar contradiction to the spirit of the age,
and cannot, even as a source of revenue, continue to co-
exist with railroads and steam- packets."
The other articles are admirable, and as illustrations
we have portraits of Sir E. Bulwer Lytton and of
Chateaubriand, and a quaint sketch of Leech, illus-
trating a quaint story by Horace Mayhew concerning
" a most unfeeling and cowardly assault."