The Sun.
London, England, 1848-05-17 00:00:00

IRIS

STATE PROSECUTIONS.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
TRIAL OF MR. SMITH O'BRIEN.

DUBLIN, MONDAY NlGHT.—After the post left this
evening,
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE charged the jury. He
said—ln thin case her Majesty's Attorney-General had
filed an information against the traverser, W.S.O'Brisn.
the subject of which information are certain passages of
, a speech delivered by him on the 15th of March, in the
present year. I say certain passage s, because you zre
now all aware there was a large portion of that speech
which is not transcribed into this information, and
which, so, far, is nut for you in any way to consider
than this: that having heard that part which is steted
, in the indictment, as well as that part which is omitted,
it is now fir you to consider whether the portions that
are omitted either qualify, retract, or explain that which
is the subject-matter of the information. The first con-
whether this be a seditious
General ? So far as regards the speaking of this
speech, there exists no difficulty. ss reaht iionnt
hf (,),rp)a•
It there did, it would be
';tuicwulialirs
be,
carged by her Majesty's Attor-
ney
a matter for your consideration ; but it is conceded
that the report of Mr. Hodges is a correct and accurate
report of the speech delivered by Mr. Smith O'Brien;
so on that subject you have no difficulty. The diffi-
culty in the case, whatever be its amount in value con-
sists in this—whether you on your oaths shall be able
to find that those portions of the speech, or any of them,
were delivered with all or any of the intentions charged
sa.ywatshhaitgihk
in the information? That is a subject exclusively for
duty to render you, I shall first call your attention to
you to consider. In the assistance which it will be my
the designs with which this speech is charged to have
been uttered on the information. I need not define to
13t,hseeldaintigouuasg;eanudsetdhebryefollrlert.hSe.
you what sedition is, because I am quite prepared to
it
tith any one of the intents charged by this information,
before said, is, was
it uttered with all or any of those
intents, for I tell
lan-
guage. I have now to
if it were, it was seditious lan-
: made against 2.1 O'Brien,3 call your attention to the charge
Mr- you
before, that if any of those
your satisfaction, the question, e' Briensti on, wasas 1
designs are made out to
to him is crime- of sedition imputed
established. N
next observation I have to —w, gentlemen the
the language which is the s makes s this. In considering
your duty is to understand subject-matter of this charge,
sons to whom it was addressed should language—as the per-
is no matter what may pass in should understand it. It
judge of his intention by his a man's mind, we must
must be taken to be uttered with the and those words
veying that meaning which the we intention of eon-
their plain natural signification, itopeorrtd.s themselves, in
the power of any man having uttered ,e and it is not in
' put upon them a construction different fromemain words, to
nary meaning. He must stand or fall byththeir ordi-
which those who hear them attribute to thee meaning
And
you must see at once that if that were not the ml;
responsibility for spoken or written language would be
at an end; and again I say, you will be bound to take up
the report of this speech, and read it as those to whom
it was addressed understood it. By that understanding
you are to bind the defendant to that from which the
law does not allow him to escape—for otherwise the
evasion of the law must be universal. You will
observe that all these are preliminary remarks which I
wish to impress on your mind as the key or index by
which you are to be controlled and regulated when you
come to consider the language of this speech. The next
observations I will make to you are on the subject of
the repeal of the union. Now, gentlemen, the repeal
of the union means this and nothing else—the union
consists in the Acts of the Irish and British Parliament.
Those are the Acts of the two Legislatures, the result
of which was the legislative union of the two countries.
And those Acts of Parliament, I have to tell you, can
only be repealed by law, and are only capable of being
repealed by an Act of the Imperial Legislature. There
is no other power Icy which that repeal can be legiti-
mately effected, but that repeal, so to be effeeted, is an
object which it is perfectly lawful for any man to
contemplate, and by legal means to bring to pass. As it
can only be legally effected by the act of the Legislature,
the means by which that act is to be brought about.
are those which must be ordinarily familiar to you a,
the means by which the Legislature may be moved
to exercise its functions. It is the right of ever)
subject to petition the Legislature for the repeal of the
union. It is the right of every man, by hi representa-
tive in Parliament, to endeavour tO'procurA lie repeal of
that Act. It is the right of every man fully, fairly, and
freely, liberally and without control,. to discuss the
merits, and expose the demerits of any act of the Go-
vernmen,, or of any act of the Legislature, and there art
no means which reason, persuasion, or personal influence
can supply, or any other mode affecting individual will
and action, which can be imagined, that are not lawfully

...
open to every man who wishes to effect changes in thd,
law of the land; but these are all preliminary, in their
nature to the act of the Legislature, by which alone they
can be accomplished. And it you shuuld be of opinion,
viii the consiaeration or this :lie( eh, that it is coistin..l '-
means of the kind I have meinioncd—that is to say, by
means of argument, reason, and persuasion—effects ar.
produced which are calculated in their nature to work
uP) i the minds of those who are to makes the laws ?ft.country, it is exempt from the charge of being seditious
it is an act which every subject of the resin has an
right to perform, in order legally to accomplish that
legal purpose. But while I have on the one hand told
you how it is lawful to act, I must come to another
consideration, and a material one in the considera-
tion of this subject. However lawful or legitimate the
repeal of the Acts of Union may be in themselves, they
are not to be accomplished by the use of illegal means;
they are not to be accomplished by actual force; they
are not to be accomplished by the threat of force; they
are not to be accomplished by the threat of foreign
invasion, or by foreign recruits, or money, or assistance.
The use of these means, and the advice to have recourse
to them are utterly illegal. I may say of them, that the
acts are treasonable and the advice is seditious. You
will have to bear in mind this important question as
to the construction of these words, and the natural,
plain, and obvious meaning of them. Is it such as to
fall within the class of means which I have mentioned
as being perfectly legitimate, or does it fall within that
class which includes exhortations to violence—threats
of force, and threats of foreign invasion? That will
be for your consideration, because if that be your de-
liberate judgment on considering this speech, you will
have no alternative but to pronounce it seditious, and
seditious in a high degree. But there is a third
view of this subject which must not be omitted,
because there are passages in this publication,
which, if they do not fall within the second
class of illegal means which have been dis
closed, seem to deserve to fall within another class
requiring consideration, and that is, whether the repeal
of the union be not a mere pretext; and whether, run-
ning through this speech, there be not a third view, and
whether it does nut mean the dismemberment, by force
and foreign aid and assistance, of Ireland from the
British empire. I am pointing out this to you, not as
the actual construction of this speech, for it will be for
you to decide what that is, but I am pointing to it as
possible that, in certain passages of this speech, that
may have been, if not the intention of the traverser, at
least the meaning which his words are calculated to
create; and having done so much by way of preliminary
observation, I will call your attention a little in detail
to the speech which is the subject-matter of this pro-
secution;
the purpose of bringing them before you distinctly, to
the topics of defence which the traverser's counsel has
relied upon, and see whether they are calculated to re-
move the impression which the evidence of the.
Crown is considered entitled to make. The meeting
at which the speech was made was held on the 15th
of March, I,to adopt an address of congratulation to
the citizens of the French Republic. It was, I will
not say more of it, a very precipitate move—an
early manifestation to conciliate parties in France, who
had just overthrown the established institutions of the
country. The address to the French people is drawn
up by Mr. O'Brien himself. I will not go over any por-
ot this address which does not directly bear on the sub
.jest before me; but, fur the purpose of seeing whether
Mr. O'Brien be guilty or innocent, you must look to
every part of it connected with the charge against him.
He is entitled to have every part of it read, to show if
he can, the absence of sedition, and he is bound by every
paOt of it that shows the presence of sedition. His
Lordship,
French having read passages from the address to the
ti
people, and from the Youghall address, con-
nned—Gentlemen, it is needless to say that the Par-
liament of England. which is called a usurpation in that
address, is the Imperial Parliament, and that address
Pr4Pounds the overthrow of that Parliament. Now,
unquestionably, the word "overthrow" does in itself
import something, I would say, different from ordinary
and legitimate means. The very term imports same
re=action and some irregular or unconstitutional course;
but I should be sorry indeed to fix upon that phrase, or
to Say that was necessarily its meaning. It is fore you
to say whether it meant the overthrow of
.hs.3_,__
Im-
perial Parliament by the repeal of the_elegii "",
known and
union—that repeal to be effected by h
b the seduction
constitutional means of' repealing an Act_t of Parliament,
or: to overthrow it by the use of forced—b y
the solicitation
al the soldiery and constabulary,
of: foreign aid and assistance. I
.h
Mr. O'Brien's speech
atten-
tion to the suggestion contained in
and
toy call your
and there a state of
with respect to the landlord class
shin'ted at, for it was said
ti4tigs different from repeal
that the property of the atnwdalords would be confiscated
as the penalty of their supporting the connexion be.
tween the two countries. Ise
n extaddresses his hearers
thus :—" I would advise you to fraternise with every
class you have been ivhisthee habit of considering as hostile,
and I think it is your duty to fraternize with the
soldiers." I don't pretend to give an accurate descrip-
tion of the word " fraternize," but I am able to suggest
' tO you what it means here. as used by Una' speakerr, and
Ido suggest to you that he exhorting them to confede-
rate with the soldiers to secure their sympathy_to
make them partners in his designs, and to make them
' t4a instruments of carrying his designs into execution.
The next passage was addressed to ancther body of the
1 4ueen's forces (the constabulary), whose support or neu-
trality it was plainly the object of the speaker to secure'.
i
re
i A vino ob 70'u
42,0Theu7N,;i,shaienh innoueognduto
moon wrlsa;cwas
wrll,4ness
=wads
wervamined,
I -.4.4.1. -;•rift.4/11. .41 f/I cntr:'t 1,,..i. • r • -