The Sun.
London, England, 1835-11-16 00:00:00

he was to be the person.' Vigors conceded, this, as he ac-'
ceded to everything else I agreed to.
Vigors also confessed that, no matter what the expenses
Of the election might be, the second 1,0001. was to be alto-
gether applied to the. expenses of a petition, in case the
return should be petitioned against.
I settled the matter with Raphael in less time than it lias
taken me to describe the facts. He called on me for an en-
gagement that Mr. Vigors would perform his part Of the
agreement. I complied 4 once, and wrote him, without a
moment's delay, and hastily, the letter of the Ist of June,
which he has published in violation Of all the observances
of private communication.
This was his bargain. He was to pay 2,000/. One-half
at once, to defray so much of the legal expenses of the-con-
test ; the other half when returned. These sums I stipu-
lated that Vigors should receive—sums incomparably short
of half the expenses. See what an excellent bargain this
most discourteous Gentile made. The election for the
county, it was known, would last six days, as in fact it did
last ; one day for nomination, and five days polling—and
his moiety of the expenses was to be paid for 1,0001.
I beg of any person who was ever engaged in a contested
election for a county, to estimate what the one-half of the
expense of five days' polling really amounts to, including
expenses of every description. Why, no usurer ever made
so good a bargain as this man did. No man ever was, sub-
jected to a worse bargain than that which, in his absence, I
made for Mr. Vigors, but which he at once adopted and
ratified. _ _ _

To show how far we wero from desiring that this man
should pay more than he ought to do, let me just refer-to
one expense only, that of printing his address. The Dub-
lin Evening Post—an excellent authority on this point—
states that the payment made to that print alone for the
publication of Raphael's address, and mine on his behalf, to
the electors, was more than 301., and that the expenditure
for -such publication in the other newspapers must have
amounted to from three to 4001.

Now I hate these details. Surely it is only necessary to
say that no man ever yet had a five days' poll for a county
who would not rejoice at having but 1,0001. to pay as his
moiety on -all, all expenses—Sheriff, Sub-Sheriff, booths,
poll-clerks, deputies, agents, inspectors, books, paper, print-
ing, advertising, carriage of voters to the assize towr, with
a tremendous train of et ceteras.

I dwell too much on these subjects. If there should be
no petition I agreed on the part of Mr. Vio.ors that the
greater part of the second I,oool.—more than one-half of
it—whatever might be the amount of the election expenses,
should be applied to commence the formation of a..fund to
indemnify the voters, and their friends and relations, from
that persecution which the Carlow landlords then threatened
and have since exercised. This plan Raphael not only ap-
proved of, but declared he would augment that fund, and
purchase an estate in Carlow, to enable him to give pro-
tection to that class of persons.

Strange to say, that, favourable as the arrangement was
to him, it was scarcely concluded when he shuffled and
equivocated, and sought to have the benefit of all that was
useful to him, without performing his part. I concluded
the arrangement with him on the 31st of May ; yet, until
the 10th of June, Le did rot lodge the first 1,000/. I
had more trouble with him, than I' ever had with any man:
Again, so soon as he was returned, he shuffled and equivo-
cated again, and I was compelled again to be very peremp-
tory with him, to make him fulfil the second stipulation.
The Committee was struck—unfortunately it was a Tory
Committee. Since I have been in Parliament, I have
never known a Tory Committee decline to find reasons for
giving the victory to 'the Tory party. My opinion, from
the moment the Committee was struck, and especially after
!heir first decision, was, that it was hopeless to contest the
the matter further. But Mr. Vigors performed his part of
the compact to the letter. Every shilling of the second
1,0001. was expended in the defence of the petition. This,
indeed, is, in substance, adMitted by Raphael himself. He
attributes to me the employment of Mr. Baker.
,He
knows that I did not employ him, and that he was the
agent of Mr. Vigors. He attributes to me the payment of
the second 1,0001. to Mr. Baker. This is pure invention.
He knows that I paid. the money to Mr. Vigors, and that
he expended the money to the. last farthing in defending
the petition.

The meeting of the 4th of August was held at the instance
of Mr. Vigors. It was held that Mr. Vigors might, in my
presence, announce to Raphael that, so soon as the last of
the 1,0001. was expended, he would abandon the contest.'
We discussed thd matter fully. It was finally arranged by
Raphael that Vigors, adopting, as he always fully did, my
contract as binding on' bim, was bound not to relinquish the
seats as long as they could possibly be contested ; but he
soon admitted 'that although Vigors was bound to pay all
the expenses as long as he saw any prospect of a successful
issue, he was not bound to continue the contest after ex-
pending the 1,0001., and that when he had no adequate
motive to expend more money he was under no obligation
to go further. If Raphael afterwards employed an agent
and counsel of his own, he did so upon the most explicit
understanding that he had no claim upon any person for
his voluntarily choosing to do so. Such were the facts of
the case.

If I were disposed to act as harshly towards this man as
he deserves, I could point out in his publication twenty in-
stances of utter falsehoods or gross perversions of fact ; but

I may content myself with recalling to your recollection the
paragraph I quoted in my first letter—a paragraph of six _
lines, containing 'one dozen of what I call falsehoods. A
word of one syllable would be more appropriate.
But I cannot conclude without protesting against the
treacherous practice of publishing letters written in that
careless and confidential way which results from the belief
that what one writes can never meet the public eye. It is
only in cases of crime that it is permitted to use such let-
ters, 'and then only by third persons.
,But where can this man find an excuse for his depravity
of publishing my note of the 21st of June, telling him of
his return, and adding " my communication is from a Ca-
binet Minister—but this is private."
That note—making no part of any charge, accusation,
or even insinuation against me—he publishes, although it is
expressly said in it " this is private." Is he ever again to
be admitted into civilised society ?

But he has no feeling of a gentleman to restrain him,
and I notice the publication of that letter, not to bring a
blush of shame into, his cheek, which would be impossible,
but to account for the accident by which I was informed of
the return by a Cabinet Minister.
The 21st of June was Sunday. Of course no private
letters were delivered that day ; but I was aware that the
returns of the officers of police from all the counties in Ire-
land, in which any disturbance or excitement existed, were
received at the Irish Office on Sunday. I happened to meet
one of the Ministry, with whom I was acquainted long be-
fore he was in the Cabinet, and continued to have that ho-
nour while I was in violent opposition. I asked him if there
was a police report that day from Carlow, and whether it
mentioned the state of the election? He said there was, and
that it stated that, Raphael and Vigors were returned.
then wrote the private note to Raphael, which he has
published, and thereby, as he intended, excited the calumz
nious comments of the Tory press.

Men of Carlow—honest and patriotic men of Carlow—l
again implore your pardon for having recommended such a
man to your favour. He has exhibited a malignant meanness
which makes me deeply deplore everhaving entertained even
a neutral opinion of him. We will forget him for ever.
Need I say that his object in calumniating me is obvious,
but he will be disappointed ? He has exhausted his prospects
on the side of liberal opinions, and he wants to qualify himself
for the Tory ranks, but he is mistaken. They have faithless
and false beings enough-of their own ;he is not wanted.
I conclude, having demonstrated that this man has no
cause* to complain ; that the money he paid was much less
than his moiety of the legal and ordinary expenses ; and that
if he had not been the very basest of human beings he never
would have published his letter—a letter intended merely
to pander to the bad passions of the Tory party—who, how-
ever, find it impossible to render it available. • His stupid
malignity suggested to him that he had an important Ms-
covery to make. His story, after all, is but the idiot's tale,
and really signifies nothing.—l have the honour to be,
fellow-countrymen, your faithful servant,
DANIEL O'CONNELL.•

TO THE ELECTORS of the COUNTY of CARLOW.

Gentlemen,—l have read, without surprise, Mr. O'Con-
nell's very elegant and gentlemanly address to you, pur-
porting to be a reply to mine of the 20th ult. As there
seems to be no doubt that the transactions between that
individual and myself will become the subject of Parlia-
mentary inquiry, I shall not enter into any further contro-
versy on the subject, particularly as. I profess myself
utterly incompetent to compete with him in language which
I have ever been, and I trust ever shall be, incapable of
using.
I shrink not from investigation before a tribunal where
.facts, not assertions, however audacious, will prove to whom
the epithets " vagabond," " faithless creature," and ",a mighty
great liar," arc most applicable.
I will only add, that notwiLlistandino• Mr. O'Connell's
" guarantee, in the fullest sense of the honourable engage-
Ment, that I should not possibly be required to pay one
shilling more in any event, or upon any.contingeney what-
soever," I have been called upon to pay, and have paid,
upwards of 1,1001. in addition to the 2,000/. towards the
expenses of opposing the " petition against the return," and
there are other claims still unsettled.
I deny that I have been guilty of any breach of confi-
dence in publishing the correspondence ;'no secrecy was
imposed, nor was any necessary, that I am aware of ; and
had Mr. O'Connell performed his engagement, or expressed
any regret at not being able to do so, I of course should
not have published that which would have been matter of
na importance to any but ourselves. As it is, he has himself