The Sun.
London, England, 1848-10-03 00:00:00

gave in charge to two policemen, and they conveyed I
it to Mr. Gore Jones, in Thurles. He did not open
it at all. •
Michael Mulgrew, a police-constable, merely
proved the getting of the portmanteau from Mr. Cox,
which he delivered to Mr. Gore Jones, in Thurles.
During its transit from Cashel to Thurles it was not
opened or interfered with.
Charles Edward Bagnell, the engineer on the
Southern and Western Railway, proved his having
received a portmanteau in Thurles from Mr. Gore
Jones, with directions that he should deliver it to Mr.
Redington, the Under-Secretary, at Dublin Castle.
He delivered it to him at his lodge in the:park, in,the
same state as he received it from Mr. Jones.
Thomas Henry Burke examined—He knew Mr.
Redington, and held a situation in the chief Secre-
tary's office. He was at his house on Sunday, the
6th of August. While there a portmanteau came
about eight o'clock in the evening, which was deli-
vered by the engineer of the railway. It was left in
the hall, and was, he believed, locked. Shortly after
it came he (the witness) went to the Castle, where he
got a parcel rolled in a white handkerchief, which he
found in Mr. Redington's desk. As soon as he re-
tnrued with it the portmanteau was brought into the
dining-hall, and a bunch of keys being taken out of
the parcel, Mr. Redington gave them to him, with
one of which he opened it. On examining its con-
tents he found several papers, books, and clothes. He
put the clothes back and took out the papers, some of
which he marked, and then sealed them all up and
put them into a trunk. The witness then identified
the letter of Mr. Duffy to Mr. O'Brien, Mr. O'Brien's
letter to the owners of the colliery at Ballingarry,
and several other documents. When he put back the
clothes he brought it to the gaol of Kilmainham, when
he gave it to Mr. Allison, the Deputy-Governor.
Cross-examined by Mr. WHITESIDE.—Mr. Reding-
ton, the Under-Secretary of State, was in Dublin, and
would not, he believed, attend that trial. The witness
did not know whether a correspondence took place
between Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Redington on the sub-
ject of the trial. Mr. Redington did not take out the
papers, nor did he ever touch any one of them. He
thought there were some title deeds or marriage set-
tlements in the portmanteau, which he delivered to
Mr. O'Ferrall, the Commissioner of Police in Dublin.
They were not, he believed, given to Mr. O'Briee up
to the present moment.
Edward Allison,fthe Deputy-Governor of Kilmain-
ham Gaol, proved his having received the portmanteau
from the last witness, which he handed to Mr.
O'Brien. He told him he got instructions to deliver
it up, and he thanked him, but said no more.
Mr. Lowe examined—He knew Mr. Charles G.
'Duffy since 1843, and knew his handwriting ; the
name at the end of a letter handed him was written
by him, as he believed, but he would not swear dis-
tinctly it was. To the best of his judgment he be-
lieved it was in his handwriting.
Cross-examined—He saw the letter that morning
for the first time. He was found out by Mr. Ray, es
clerk in Mr. Kemmis's office.
Did you hold any employment under Mr. Duffy
—I was the manager of his printing-officethree years
ago, and was in communication with the Crown since
last August. I have no doubt that the letter is in
Mr. Duffy's handwriting.
Wm. O'Hara, Esq,, examined by the ATTORNEY-
GENERAL—He knew Mr. S. O'Brien. A letter
handed to him was in his handwriting. —(The witness
here read the letter carefully, and refused to give it
up until he had done so.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—That letter won't in-
dict you ? Indeed, it will not. Nor have I any fear
of you, Mr. Monahan. The letter was written on
the 4th of July, 1848. Ile knew Mr. John B. Dillon,
and believed that when he wrote that letter he was in
Meath. He knew young Mr. 0-Gorman, but never
saw him write, nor did he receive a letter from him.
The witness resided in Killiney, in the neighbourhood
of Kingstown, near Dublin, and recollected that on a
certain Saturday evening he left the witness's house,
Nvhert he lived with his wife. He came out from
Dublin in company with Mr. Meagher, and dined there.
The witness was ill in bed, and after dining, Mr.
Dillon and Mr. Meagher left about half-past seven
for a place called Laughlinston. The witness was
aware that they were going down to Mr. O'Brien, at
Enniscorthy, and before going they told him they had
just heard the Habeas Corpus Act was suspended.
He could not fix what day of the month that was, but
it was the Saturday previous to the outbreak at Bal-
lingarry. The witness was here about to enter into
ass explanation of the whole transaction, hut the Chief
Justice stopped him, and said he would not permit
him to make any statement which was not in evi-
dence.

Cross-examined—Mrs. Dillon was his niece, and
always lived with his family. Mr. Meagher was in
the habit of dining with him twice a week.
John Sharman deposed that he resided in Water-
ford, and knew Mr. Meagher's handwriting. A letter
found in the portmanteau was written by him. He
also identified ancther document, the contents of
which did not transpire.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then proposed to have
them read. They were found in Mr. O'Brien's pos-
session, and as to Mrs. Doheny, with whom the
portmanteau was found, it was impossible they could
produce her as a witness. The portmanteau was
given by a man named Norton to Mr. Cox, and was
subsequentiv forwarded to Dublin, where it was re-
ceived by Mr. O'Brien after the papers were taken
possession of. Under ail these circumstances, he
submitted it was evidence for the jury that the letters
were received by him.
Mr. WHITESIDE contended that no evidence was
produced to trace the portmanteau from Mrs. Do-
heny to Mr. O'Brien. That lady was not produced ;
and as any document could be introduced into it be-
tween his arrest and trial, neither the portmanteau nor
its contents could be, received as evidence against
him. He further contended that Mr. Redington,
who had the key of !the portmanteau, ought to have
been produced. . _ .

The CHIBY JUSTICE said the Court were of opinion
that there was evidence to show the portmanteau was
Mr. O'Brien's. Mr. O'Brien himself stated the port-
manteau was in Cashel ; it was found there; and all
the witnesses proved it was in the same state when
forwarded to Dublin. A parcel also was found on
Mr. O'Brien, in which a key was, belonging to the
portmanteau. It is opened at the Castle, and then
returned to Mr. O'Brien, who received and kept it in
his possession ever since. They would, however,
take a note of the objection made by Mr. Whiteside.
Wm. Franklin examined—He was the manager of
the Provincial Bank of Ireland in Limerick, where
Mr. O'Brien kept an account. He was acquainted
with Mr. O'Brien's handwriting, and identified se-
veral documents handed him, as being written by
that gentleman. One letter produced, the witness
could not swear was in his handwriting, except
the word " Cahirmoyle ;" and ;another, merely the
signature.

—Robert Walpole, an inspector of police in Dublin,
proved that he purchased at Mr. Grierson's, in
Dublin, the Queen's printer, a certain number of
Gazettes, dated the 21st, 25th, 26th, and 28th of
July. He remembered the 27th of July, having gone
to a person's house named Keeley, in Eustace-street,
Dublin. A sergeant named APCurdy, accompanied
him, from whom he got the papers he now produced,
and found by him in Keeley's house. When he was
making the search he saw two women, whom he be-
lieved to be the daughters of Keeley.
M'Curdy next deposed that he found the documents
handed in by the last witness in Keeley's house. He
found them in a cupboard or open press. There was
no person saw him actually taking them out, but after
he had done so, he went into a room where Keeley's
daughters were.

Cross-examined by Mr. WurrnsiDE—What autho-
rity had you for making the search ?—I had s war-
rant to search for arms.

And so in Ireland when you get a warrant to search
for arms, you search also for papers ?—I was desired
to do so.

Did you not get other letters, written by Catholic
clergymen, and the first dignitaries in the Roman
Catholic Church ?—I did not read them ; all I got in
the house I banded to Mr. Guy, the inspector.
Mary Ann Keeley, the daughter of Keeley, where
the papers were found, was next sworn. She was the
sister-in-law of Thomas Matthew Halpin, formerly
the secretary to the Irish Confederation. The papers
Rot by the policeman were brought by her from No. 9,
D'Olier-street, to Eustace-street. Mr. Halpin resided
in No. 9, D'Olier-street. He was not in the habit of
frequenting her father's house. The papers got in
the press in the shop were not brought by her ; but
those found in the open press were.
To the COURT—She brought the papers from 9,
D'Olier-street, because her sister was going to remove
to Dame-street.
Mr. FITZGERALD.—IS Mr. Halpin here ?—I don't
know, Sir. Nor do I know whether he is to be exa-
mined as a witness.
Jas. S. Dobbin examined.—He resides in Dublin,
and was a member of the " Red-hand Club," a branch
of the " Curran Club." It held its meetings on Con-
stitution-hill, The Curran Club met in Capel-street.
When he became a member of it he resided in Linen-
hall-street. He had been at one time an engineer,
but was now an attorney's clerk. There were about
thirty members connected with it, and about the 27th
of July the " Curran Club" had about 500 members.
rfe knew Mr. F. F. Meagher, whom he had often seen
at the Curran Club.

Mr. WHITESIDE objected to the evidence, for he
was instructed to state that Mr. S. o'l;rien was not
connected with any of these clubs.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL observed, in two or three
minutes they would prove him to be intimately con-
nected with them. _ _

Examination regumed.—On the evening of the 15th
July he attended a meeting of the Council of the
Confederation, according to summons, at 15, D'Olier-

street. He saw Mr. O'Brien there, and Mr. Halpin.
There were about 100 persons present.