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

in charge to two policemen, and they conveyed
Mr. Gore Jones, in Thurles. He did not open
all.

fichael Mulgrew, a police constable, merely
-hi the getting of the portmanteau from Mr. Cox,
h he delivered to Mr. Gore Jones, in Thurles.
,ng its transit from Cashel to Thurles it was not
Al or interfered with.

:arles Edward Bagnell, the engineer on the
kern and Western Railway, proved his having
.ved a portmanteau in Thurles from Mr. Gore
with directions that he should deliver it to Mr.
ngton, the Under• Secretary, at Dublin Castle.
-lelivered it to him at his lodge in the'park, in the
state as he received it from Mr. Jones.
homes Henry Burke examined—He knew Mr.
ington, and held a situation in the chief Secre-
f i's office. He was at his house on Sunday, the
[i of August. While there a portmanteau came
ut-, eight o'clock in the evening, which was deli-
red by the engineer of the railway. It was left in
a hall, and was, he believed, locked. Shortly after
came he (the witness) went to the Castle, where he
a parcel rolled in a white handkerchief, which he
ind in Mr. Redington's desk. As soon as he re-

tnrned 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. \YR ITESIDE.-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. Redingten 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'rerrall, the Commissioner of Police in Dublin.
They were not, he believed, given to Mr. O'Briem up
to the present moment.
Edward Allison, the Deputy-Governor of Kilmain-
ham Gaol, proved his :laving received the portmanteau
from the last witnes-, 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, a
clerk in Mr. Kemmis's office.

Did you hold any employment under Mr. Duffy ?
I was the manager of his printing-office:three years
), and was in communication with the Crown since
August. I have no doubt that the letter is in
r. Dutl'y's handwriting.
Wm. O'Hara, Esq., examined by the ATTORNEY..
;N ERAL—lle knew Mr. S. O'Brien. A letter
nded to hina was in his handwriting. —(The witness
.cc read the letter carefully, and refused to give it
until he had done so.)
!Me ATTORNEY-GENERAL—That letter won't in-
t you ? Indeed, it will not. Nor have I any fear
:\ Ir. Monahan. The letter was written on

iv 4th of July, 1848. He knew Mr. John B. Dillon,
n believed that when he wrote that letter he was in
Leath. lie knew young Mr. O'Gorman, but never
him write, nor did he receive a letter from him.
witness resided in Killiney, in the neighbourhood
cling town, near Dublin, and recollected that on a

tainSaturday evening he left the witness's house,

:ere he lived with hi;, wife. He came out from
ablin in company with Mr. Meagher, and dined there.

witness \vas ill in bed, and after dining, Mr.
Hon and Mr. Meagher left about half-past seven
a place called Laughlinston. The witness was

=o4.are that they were joing down to Mr. O'Brien, at
',nni3corthy, and before going they told him they had
ust heard the Habeas Corpus Act was suspended.
Ie could not fix what day of the month that was, but
RS the Saturday previous to the outbreak at Bal-
ing;irry. The witness was here about to enter into
n zplanation of the whole transaction, hut the Chief
: ce stopped him, and said he would not permit
-3 make any statement which was not in evi-

Cross-examined—Mrs. Dillon was his niece, and
always lived with hi,. 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 another 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
subsequently forwarded to Dublin, where it was re-
ceived by Mr. O'Brien after the papers were taken
possession of. Under all 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-
beny 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 CmEr JUSTICE said the Court were of opinion
t there was evidence to show the portmanteau was
e. O'Brien's. Mr. O'Brien himself stated the port-
Lateau was in Cashel ; it was found there; and all
witnesses proved it was in the same state when
-warded to Dublin. A parcel also was found on
r. O'Brien, in which a key was, belonging to the
!.•tnaanteau. It is opened at the Castle' and then
limed to Mr. O'Brien, who received and kept it in
; possession ever since. They would, however,
a note of the objection made by Mr. Whiteside.
`,:m. Franklin examined—lie was the manager of
Provincial Bank of Ireland in Limerick. where

'Mr. O'Brien kept an account. He was acquainted
with Mr. O'Brien's hand writing, and identified se-
ieral documents handed him, as being written by
,hat gentleman. One letter produced, the witness
!ould not swear was in his handwriting, except
Ail:, word " Cahirmoyle ;" and :another, merely the
;ignature.

obert Walpole, an inspector of police in Dublin,
;roved that lie purchased at Mr. Grierson's, in
Oublin, the Queen's printer, a certain number of
';azettes, dated the 21st, 25th, 26th, and 28th of
He remembered the 27th of July, having gone
o a person's house named Keeley, in Eustace-street,
)üblin. A sergeant named M'Curdy, accompanied
Can, from whom he got the papers he now produced,
ad found by him in Keeley's house. When he was
raking the search he saw two women, whom he be-
i,2veil to be the daughters of Keeley.
M'Curdy next deposed that he found the documents
an(k.d in by the last witness in Keeley's house. He
ou, them in a cupboard or open press. There was
o ,r,on saw him actually taking them out, but after
e ! done so, he went into a room where Keeley's
ters were.

~:-.)ss-examined by Mr. WHITESIDE—What autho-
rity had you for making the search ?—I had a 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 2—l did not read them ; all I got in
the house I handed 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
got 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 Courer--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.—lle resides in Dublin,
was a member of the " Red-hand Club," a branch
;;r the " Curran Club." It held its meetings on Con-
.tion-hill, The Curran Club met in Capel-street.
;11 he became a member of it he resided in Linen-
treet. Ile had been at one time an engineer,
as now an attorney's clerk. There were about
members connected with it, and about the "7th
'y the " Curran Club" had about 500 members.
;r:(3w Mr. F. F. Meagher, whom he had often seen
Curran Club.
WHITESIDE objected to the evidence, for he
Istructed to state that Mr. S. O'Brien was not
eted with any of these clubs.
;5 SOLICIIOR-GENERAL observed, in two or three
tes they 'weliald prove him to be intimately con-
'i with-them
:3mination resumed.—On the evening of the 15th
lie attendeciAt meeting of the Council of the
ederation, acc„oiding to summons, at 15, D'Olier-
t. fie saw Mi. O'Brien there, and Mr. Halpin.
were about:100 persons present.