The Sun.
London, England, 1848-11-21 00:00:00

:`'') flit

LONDON, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 1848.

One of our most eccentric essayists has written
what he called the autobiography of an old house
situated somewhere i❑ the Minories. As might be
imagined, the entertainment arising from the con-
ceit, consists in the extraordinary variety and incon-
gruity of the occurrences transpiring at different
periods in the same apartments. Ingenious, how-
ever, as may be the fictitious incidents depicted by
the romancist, they are as nothing when contrasted
with the realities of existence. The reflection occur-
ring to "Boa" in one of his most felicitous "Sketches,'
to the effect that tragedies and comedies might be
written from the mere enumeration of the successive
occupants of a hackney coach, is realised a thousand
times by every thoughtful man who crosses the lintel
of a public edifice. And never, perhaps, was
the singularity of the contrasts afforded by these
shifting scenes and fluctuating emotions more con-
spicuously observable than it has recently been in
the Round-room of the Dublin Rotunda. Orange
meetings have been there followed by assemblies of the
most democratic character; harangues, fraught with
the principles of Conservatism, have hardly ceased
resounding between the walls of the building at the ex-
tremity'of Sackville-street, before the same walls have
reverberated with the voice of demagogues who have
striven to ring the tocsin of Revolution. Only as re-
cently as 1847, the Irish Confederation collected toge-
ther in the Rotunda ; and now, in 1848, the Rotunda
has witnessed a very different spectacle—a banquet
given in honour of the Hero and Conqueror of Sinde.
On the former occasion the auditors were addressed
by THOMAS MEAGHER, by WILLIAM SMITH
O'BRIEN, by Joux MITCHEL, and by their colleagues.
On the latter the speakers were Prince GEORGE of
CAMBRIDGE, the Duke of LEINSTER, and Sir CHARLES
NAPIER, while, as if to render the confusion of events,
names, and principles still more striking, the gallant
and illustrious company, assembled to express their
admiration for the military and administrative suc-
cesses of a Great Captain, were addressed by the emi-
nent Irishman whose genius and eloquence have been
recently employed in the defence of the rebel confede-
rates.

It is a circumstance not unworthy of consideration
that England is by no means stinting in the honours
and felicitations showered on her most distinguished
citizens. Whatever may be said of public ingrati-
tude as regards the treatment of any great public
servant, or of parsimony in the distribution of re-
wards to those who have deserved well of the nation,
it is beyond denial that that ingratitude is only inci-
dental, and that parsimony only exceptional. The splen-
grace population
have
n o f
respondedPte
srt 'did munificence of a man like Mr. VERNON, a man who
has exercised his purse and his intellect, alike, in behalf
of the
might b
vh
the
gfto
f undoubtedly
with a
baronetcy. The gallantry and promptitude of such a
man as LieutenantEnwaanEs, might, unquestionably,
and without the squandering of the guerdons of war,
have been promoted to the rank of full Colonel, and
posterity,
t
invested with the higher insignia of the Order of the
Bath. But, viewing matters in the generality, and
not in regard to a few isolated particulars, England is
not chargeable with blindness to the services performed
by her more meritorious citizens. In addition to the
stars and ribbands of knighthood, to munificent dis-

tributions of prize money, to monuments erected by
way of memorial in the public streets o!' the capital,
and in the other great cities of the empire, our mili-
tary and naval heroes receive in a hundred different
nays expressions of the homage anti admiratijil of their
compatriots. In these respects the gloriou,, Captain who
gave his name to immortality on the fields of Meanee
and Hyderabad has, since the date of his return
homewards, been particularly fortunate. Banquets
of congratulation have been given to him with a cor-
dial air of enthusiasm in the metropolis of England,
in a fashionable watering-place like Cheltenham, and
ultimately in the beautiful capital of Ireland. For
several reasons the last-mentioned entertainment
must have possessed a peculiar and paramount
interest for the distinguished guest, seeing that, in
addition to the circumstance of his being welcomed
by so many of his most eminent brother officers, he
was greeted with their congratulations in the land of
his nativity. Besides the express:ye eulogiums pro-
nounced upon Sir CHARLES NAPIER by Prince
GEORGE of CAMBRIDGE, by his Grace the Duke of
LEINSTER, and by the forensic eloquence of Mr.
WHITESIDE, there were several details in the demon-
stration which must have affected the heart of the
Conqueror very gratefully. The mere decora-
tions of the Rotunda, the marble bust,
with its crown of laurel leaves, the mar-
tial strains of the band of the Inniskillen
Dragoons, the banners with :heir inscriptions, the
magic names of Corunna, of Busaco, of Fuentes
d'Onor, of Badajoz, of Meanee, of Hyderabad, of all
those foughten fields in whose dangers and in whose
glories he had alike participate], conveyed a language
nobler than that of compliment, and more truthful
than that of flattery; it expressed the national appre-
ciation of the bravery, the genius, the patriotism, the
self-sacrifice, the consistency, the perseverance, the
devotion, and the glory of a life, the whole energies
of which had been lavished in the furtherance of the
national interests, and in the enhancement of the
national reputation.

The judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench in
Ireland was pronounced on Saturday upon the writ
of error brought by Mr. JOHN MARTIN against his
recent conviction under the "Treason Felony" Act,
when the Judges unanimously decided against the
prisoner upon all the questions submitted for their
consideration. The verdict of the jury and the sen-
tence thereon is, therefore, confirmed in every respect,
and the prisoner will, therefore, suffer the punishment
awarded for the very serious offence of which a jury
of his countrymen found him to be guilty, unless the
matter should be brought before a higher tribunal,
and a different decision should then be arrived at.
We shall not now enter into a consideration of the
technical points urged on behalf of the unfortunate
gentleman with so much ability and zeal by his ta-
lented counsel. In every question of mere form,
not going to the substantial merits of the case, the
decision is of little public importance. If the objec-
tions to the form of the caption of the indictment—
of the indictment itself—or of the sentence, had been
substantial, the only feeling that could arise would be
one of regret that justice had been defeated, and that
a criminal had escaped the penal consequences to
which he had deliberately subjected himself, through
any blunders on the part of those to whom the con-
duct of his prosecution had been entrusted. The
precedent could not be a very dangerous one, what-
ever way the case Might have been decided. If it
had been in favour of the prisoner, new forms would
be prepared, which could not be objected to in any
of the particulars specified, so that no future
ill consequences would have resulted, and similar
questions would not'again arise in any other case. The
unhappy man himself, warned by the perils from
which he had so fortunately been rescued, would
most probably have retired into private life, and ab-
stained from again venturing among the shoals and
quicksands of political adventure. On the other hand,
the judgment being in favour of the Crown cannot
in any degree prejudice the liberty or the safety of
any other citizen of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland, for, as we hare already stated,
the objections were purely formal, and did not in any
degree affect the justice of the case, or the fairness
and impartiality of the tribunal by which he was
convicted.

I One point was, however, raised of a more serious
character, and which we trust will receive that
attentive consideration it so eminently deserves. The
prisoner, on his trial, had challenged one of the
jurors for cause. He alleged that the gentleman
about to be sworn, and thus to become one of the
arbiters of his future fate, ',Ras directly interested in
obtaining a conviction ; that, by the old charter of
Hamar the FIYTII, the Corporation of Dublin became
entitled to the goods and chattels of all persons con
victed of felony in that city ; that the party ob-
jected to was a burgess and rate-payer of Dublin,
and as such liable to contribute to the borough fund,
established by the Municipal Corporation Act, and
that the borough fund was insufficient for the purposes
of the Act. It, therefore, followed as a matter of
course from these premises, that the gentlemen alluded
to would have to pay certain sums, which must be
diminished by the forfeiture of the prisoner's property.
There is nothing of more vital importance to the
well-being of a nation than that the administration
of justice should be beyond the breath of calumny or
suspicion—that its purity should not be merely unim-
peached but unimpeachable, and placed far beyond
the possibility of doubt or question. It is the con•
stitutional privilege of every British' subject that he
cannot be convicted or,Tht —punished for, any serious
offence unless upon the oath of twelve of his peers
wholly indifferent between him and the Crown. If
any parties interested in obtaining a conviction can
be impannelled to try his case, this privilege
is invaded—the great palladium of the na-
tional liberties is set aside, so far as he is
concerned. The question is the same whether
the amount of interest be great or small, whether
it be of the utmost magnitude or of the most trivial
character. The law wisely makes no distinction in
such a case, because it would be impossible to draw
the line of demarcation, or to state with sufficient
certainty what degree of interest should be taken into
account. If a person could be benefited to the
extent of the smallest coin of the realm by the ver-
dict he might return, he would clearly be incom-
petent to decide, for a future, case might occur where
the amount at stake might 'be a matter of real im-
portance and calculated to influence the mind of the
juror, who should be wholly unprejudiced
and impartial. Could it be said that a
member of a small corporation, where a few
persons ' would have the entire control and

management of • the corporate funds, would not
have an interest in convicting a prisoner possessed of
very large personal 'property, if the same thereby
became forfeited to the corporation, to the amount of
many thousands of pounds ? Certainly not ; and yet
the precedent that has been established would make
such a person a proper arbiter on the life, liberty
and fortune, of the man, in whose goods when for-,
feited his judge would participate. No question of
inconvenience, however embarrassing the result
might prove, should be allowed to have any weight
in deciding the point. The Legislature should be
appealed to. Parliament is alone competent to pro-
vide a fitting remedy. The legislative and judicial
functions are wholly separate and distinct. The
judges of the Supreme Courts are to interpret,
not to make the law. They have only
to decide on it as it exists, and if injurious conse-
quences should follow from that decision, another and
a very differently constituted body should deliberate
upon the measures thereby rendered necessary.
The entire system of forfeitures is of the most
odious description. Although the ancient law is still
maintained, depriving a party convicted of felony of
all his goods and chattels, it is seldom, if ever, prac-
tically enforced. The property is invariably restored,
when the person has expieted his offence, by suffering
allotted punishments, or it is distributed equitably
among the family and dependents of the convict.
Even in'the most aggravated cases of murder this rule
is generally acted upon. It would, indeed,
be most unjust to visit the sins of a father
upon his innocent wife and children. They
must suffer deeply under even the most favour-
able circumstances. Why should these sufferings be
unduly aggravated by their being plunged without any
fault of their own into poverty and destitution, and,
perhaps, thus driven to crime, by the operation of
the law itself ? The practice that has been adopted
clearly establishes the impropriety of the system ;

4-Z4
• •••