The Sun.
London, England, 1867-11-06 00:00:00

The Fenian Trials at Manchester.

MANCHESTER, Tuesday.—Mr. Digby Seymour
concluded his address to the jury for the defence of
Martin, Nugent, and Coffey on Monday. Dealing
with the case of Martin, the learned counsel ani-
madverted in strong terms upon the evidence of
deutity adduced on the part of the prosecution, re-
f erring more particularly to that of John Beek, the
railway clerk, who, after swearing to Martin, on
cross-examination hesitated ; and at last, when the
brother of Martin was produced, made the miser-
able confession, "I was wrong ; that is the man I
swore to." There is no resemblance between the
two men, and he asked the jury if upon such evi-
dence they would condemn a man. The witness
Jane Riley had given them the dagger scene. It
was clear that if she wai to be believed, all the
other witnesses who had spoken to Martin had not
stated that which was true. It was not out of the
class to which Martin belonged that Fenians were
collected. They were collected from amongst the
young and frivolous, but not from amongst those
who had wives and families. Martin was a married
man with a large family. He was a respectable
man, and had an engagement which would put £2
or £3 into his pocket per week. He would prove
that by his employers, who were in court, and they
would tell them that he had given two sureties to
them for his good behaviour, respectability, and
honesty. The taint of Fenianism had never poisoned
his loyalty ; he had never attended their select meet-
ings or joined in their gatherings. Ile regretted that
the whole of the men were not put into the dock to-
gether, and then the jury would fully realise the
position of the prisoners. If both Coffey and Lar-
kin had been put together in the same charge, the
jury would have seen how much alike they were, and
he was almost sure it would have made them
very particular as to which of them they con-
victed. The learned counsel then referred to the
discrepancies in the evidence of Munn and others as
to the hat Nugent wore, and the conflicting
statements as to what Nugent did at the time of
the attack on the van. He believed he would suc-
ceed in establishing as strong an alibi for Nugent as
for Martin. Then as to Coffey, there was one
irresistible point : several of the witnesses had told
them that he was very like Larkin, and one wit-
ness, Mr. Knowles, who went to swear to Larkin,
swore to Coffey in mistake. With respect to the
meeting between Coffey and Pickup in the public-
house in Hyde-road the night after the attack, could
the jury suppose that a man would go to the scene
of the tragedy in which he had been engaged, like a
moth playing round a candle, and leading to his
own destruction. They could not suppose that a man
would be so absurd. It was not until the quarrel
with Coffey that Pickup pretended to identify him
and sent for a policeman, who laughed the idea to
scorn. For Coffey witnesses would be called who
would prove that he could not have been at the
arch ; that ho was a provident man, and that he
paid his contributions into a co-operative society on
the very night when it was stated that he was near
the scene of the outrage. The learned counsel, in
conclusion, said he thought enough justice had been
done. The moral effect of the trial of last week
must be great ; it must carry terror where it ought
to, and it must go to the world that if an outrage
is committed in England, English justice will follow,
and judgment follow the detection of the crime. He
had never shrunk from the bold avowal of his
opinion of the proceedings taken by her Majesty's
advisers ; but five men now awaited their doom, and
great as the moral force of their conviction was,
infinitely more moral force would be in the acquittal
of the prisoners then charged ; for just as in pro-
portion charity was more lovely than power, and
mercy was more beautiful than justice, just in that
proportion would b 3 the verdict that established the
present prisoners' innocence over the verdict that
produced the other men's dooms. It would be said
that they had not been urged by pfejudices without
or passion within, and that they had vindicated
justice by inquiring into the case of the prosecution,
always remembering that it is the sublime, duty of a
British jury in the midst of judgment to remember
mercy.

The following witnesses were then called on be-
half of Martin :

Susannah Kirkby, residing in Barley-street, Old-
ham-road, deposed that the prisoner, William Mar-
tin, came to lodge with her about the end of last
July. She had two daughters, one of whom, Eliza,
was married to John Martin, brother to William
Martin. On the 18th September a Mrs. Brecknell
came into her house, about 10 o'clock in the morn-
ing, with a ticket of admission to the theatre for
two. William Martin was in the house at the time.
Ile left the house between 10 and o'clooli to go