The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-08 00:00:00

~ • •+~ ~

IRISH STATE TRIALS

TWENTIETH DAY.

QUEEN'S BENCJL-DUBLIN, TUESDAY

THE QUEEN V. DANIEL O'CONNELL AND OTHERS
CLOSE OF THE TRAVERSERS' CASE.

The Court sat at the usual hour.
Mr. Moone, Q.C., rose and said—My Lords, the coun
sel for the traversers, availing themselves of the indul•
Fence granted by your Lordships yesterday evening,
ave endeavoured, to the utmost of their power, to go
over the evidence in this case ; and they have come to
the conclusion that, with few exceptions, the evidence
Upon which they mean to rest the defence has already
Appeared before the Court. They felt themselves under
'4lO necessity to bring a very considerable number of
witnesses to town. Those witnesses are still in town,
and, would prove several material' facts : but, as the
mading facts upon which they rely have already ap-
peared, they do not think that they would be justified in
'n,isecuPYing the time of the Court with the examination of
''"°se witnesses ; and in all human probability the time
Which will be taken up with the witnesses they intend
to Produce will be very trifling.
Frederick Wm. Conway was then sworn end. ex-
nn hied by Mr. HATCUELL, Q.C.—I reside tin 'faith-
-I;4les-road, and lived in the, city of Dublin in the year
'BlO. At that time I was editor of the Freeman's
i°4rsoi, and attended sole( pUblic meetings. I recol-
lect having attended in that year a meeting for the dis-
cussion of the repeal of the union at the Royal Ex
d Change. I knew. Mr. O'Connell personally at that time.
ti " him at the meeting. Sir James Riddell, at that
me High Sheriff, was in the chair. The object of the
~P,,,1e
ni"ting was to etitin Parliament for reeal.—[A Freeman's p Jouro
nal, with the paper ccontaining th file
*Port of the meeting, was produced and identified by
jitness.3-1 was Secretary to the meeting. Among the
betiding persons at the meeting were Mr. Shaw, since Sir
betiding
Shaw, the second chairman, end Colonel Talbot,
n°"' Lord Talbot de Malahide. I forget the others. The
creport of Mr. O'Connell's- speech at the meeting appeared
oice in the Freeman's Journal. The first report was
correct as to the topics, but the second was better writ-
At this time there was not so good a corps of re-
porters in Dublin as dere is now.—(The witness here
espeechlready.)
`l4 the report of Mr. O'Connell's speech, which has
been published in our report of Mr. Sheil's
....lreeze you connected with the Dublin Evening Pest?
Will you take the file of the Dublin Freeman's Journal
of the year 1800 ?—I have it,.
„,1,1, ask at the Report of the Union Catholic meeting
"",„.ich was held in Dublin on the 14th of January, 1800.
I see it here.
i. Sir COLMAN O'LOUGHLIN then read a report of a meet-
a„.l h.P.h.l on that day, at which Mr. O'Connell made the
47deciesli.titgoatihnest
juthrje..union referred to by Mr. Sheil in his
ILsTenELL—l'll only trouble you, Mr. Conway,
j look at one paper more. Look at the Freeman's
tu"al 01 the sth of October, 1810—do you find your
Ateattached to a petition inserted in it ?—I find my
sy,rae to an address.
11„."0_ you find the answers to that address given by Sir
-Ru", rt Shaw and Mr. Henry Grattan ?—I do.
e:reOLMAN O'LouGnust then read the address against
St; 11„.nien presented in that year to Sir Robert Shaw and
r•t- iienry Grattan, the then representatives for the
41,11°f uith the answers of those gentlemen, also
-rred to by Mr. Sheil in his address to the jury. The
rs--red Counsel also read the requisition calling the
11g, dated the 17th of September, 1810.
xannnation resumed—Do you remember the exist-
le e the Catholic Association previmis to the year
Were
do.
• • ?
didke re You a member of that association
ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected to. this question.
tt is1::lot see what reference it had to the question then
tr
1.
lA•TCHELL said, that what he proposed to show
ioti"e evidence was simply this—the Dublin Evening
ea.% al!ld other newspapers were circulated by the
113g,°!le Association in the same manner as the Repeal
lellttion acted in the present instance, and he wished
lje evidence of that fact.
Att,He CHIEF JUSTICE—You cannot object to that, Mr.
rtieu ,
The 3.
those
,iATTOHNET-GENERAL said, that the reading of
tciok,relunents already submitted to the Court and jury
Ittly -13 great deal of time, but he did not wish to offer
!That ea objection. He could not, however, see
do ;`he acts of the Roman Catholic Association had to
Zion Pu the case, and he therefore objected to the ques-
by I&byMr. Hatchell.
first •"lisiricE---If the objection were made upon the
htweietroduction of the evidence already given, it
.might
he %been held good ; but having passed it
_by in silence,
%Lk °tight the question then asked by Dfr. Hatchell
not be objected to, as it was of a piece with the rest.
I,.%IITTORNEINGENERAL replied that the Crown had
(Ye lan to exclude the repeal speeches made by Mr.
dihett?liell in the years 1800 and 1810, because they had
tliterltlet reference to the repeal question ; but it was
.a
Assoc! thing when a meeting of the Roman-Catholic
4134:1140n was referred to. They did not, he would
4tur ' Wish to make any objections of a captious
teqt e Pineikt if an inquiry were gone into as to what
4,4rtai„l at the Roman Catholic Association, they
't'etly-a'Yn,Would do so, because it was following a per-
Peara'aerent course from any yet adopted. It ap-
kost4 to the mathst it was occupying the public time
krteces
ParNitaLATcnEia, said he would not press it. He merely
aald in lihat Course, because his Learned Friend Mr. Shell
effect-4 his statement to the jury that evidence to that
would be given.
014 he 'SOLICITOR-GENERAL observed that they never
r any objection to what Mr. O'Connell or any in-
' divided
1 • -
It said with reference to the repeal question, but
JudesB quite different when other topics were introduced..
to Iluarow—ls it alleged that what is propoied
17,10 e given iii evidence now bears on the question of the
ul n ?
aud ATcHELL---No, my Lord.
istr H
Age CLtsirrost—lt is quite outside the issues.
te
TCHELL—Mr. •Sheil, in his statement, my
said that Mr. Conway and Mr. Staunton would
t )(ttrnin
yth ed to show that newspapers were circulated
itredev_eatholic Association, and that is the reason I of-
,ae evidence which was objected to.
4qa, at!. Sergeant WA.anex—Was editor of the Free-
141,te4canal in 1810. Ceased to be connected with
kseiltSPer in 1812. Is now the proprietor of the Dublin
air rig Post.
4O....,ijamea Perry, examined by Mr. vifarrEstm,
1,,11,;)nly aim
a member of the Society of Friends, com-
ba_ ailed Quakers. I have the rules of that body
()/1“:.
tere_vvitness being desired to read that part of the
4e rmg to arbitration,
lysd 1.7.°4/4Elr-GENERAL objected to their being re-
Ntursevidenee.
• Whiteside and MdDonough replied to the ob-
tlth. and were followed by Mr. Sergeant Warren on
Theof tk
013*" Crown.
ju3ilieee,.tic2 Was overruled, the Lord Chief Justice,
taintit it zurton, and Mr. Justice Perrin being
f ; Air
riot • Justice Crampton
Th r,
x.satio . giving his opinion in
•
, ation of Mr. Perry was then proceeded.
teiero stated that he was -a
member of the Society
ttretke "ts, Proserouced the rules of that body in re-
fro'ni°
sed. roes by arbitration. He read ex-
th4t! 1696 minutes of meetings held at London in the
beta ett,e 107, wherein it was recommended,
Nr they s,!_ of differences between any of the mem-
kft,sttetee 4,":)141d .be settled between themselves, or by
s„,:rs,ll,l;° arbitrators, and not by law. In case they
14'rti, the refused to comply with the terms of the
R.,.tttetirogP
taorty, Fee
usant should be admonished. by
`urther winch he might belong ; and if there
hi„, refusal, then the meeting would testify
tt!.):l'isotr.itteiceisto-ziannehlaendshould be expelled the Society.
tkh"rethreo-1 had read were subsequently adopted by
and all members were strictly
woodss idhere to the principles of truth in all their
t' 43 . A
of ere 3 far as the witness knew the regula-
ko 411 -•'lnly acted on ; but he had no recollec-
tl4ll Y lestane •
fitei roetti, e which it was necessary to ad-
t qalle",er• He was not himself one of the
tr,4,11% for \-411h, but was aware of its existence.
tale toereim '"o Purpose of havine• differences among
trktl:eeasiotill'en adjusted by arbitnition. He recollected
kers in a 'natter
Mr. Brewster appeared before arbi-
).?l,4
,:eotro.atter submitted to their award.
slr'seXte,tith,sve Secretary to the Ouzel Galley Society,
11.4 fLewere,.tCaltned• He stated that the rules of the
errsettle at the members should sit as arbitrators
1 el Prov'd nt °f any matter in dispute to them re-
40h:itgarielye. d alp
rthe arbitrators chosen were members
,si. _ ten to _ •sina ties are not-to make any personal
il:iplit:Ppointrouleentners of the Galley, either respecting
edteade After the orb arbitrators, or of the subject in
actmaint e arbitrators are chosen, the registrar
th tho ed with their names, and he communi-
tsm_ deed of
Persons• It •
i+ 'eit eed of • is necessary for the parties
°llcl rbuvle.okf.
coonnrett.russion which could afterwards be
'l` e, 4 -4, panic A sum: of four guineas each was
41e end 'toy Bto py the expenses of the refer-
tt IN% ety Fills Was. paid to a charitable society.
I%h eat the rally consisted of about forty members ;
;11,144 alf4ereaatiluttemniber may
be, a little less. Disputes
Vippaitir Heir
aw dare of the kind generally sub-
t. uh, nr.. -The -arbitrators have power
st,e xiait, Guinness re, if. necessary. At present Messrs.
'o.xw , Chambers, Wilson, Colville,
eedanbcl,,,seru....ver. al others, memers.
adi„ °r the -e-sr• BENNETT, Q.C.—The Society
t• 'ell' user • luirpose of having differences ami-
ktN; go ;1;1:117 who wish to have their disputes
iet dgr,ot_ members and ask for an arbitra-
eroaset!lal rite% 1 so. settled are principally those of
tNri:4B. go throaut it is open to any stranger ; the
.tieit esion through a regular form'; part of the deed
.?4,t. 'lll7,r:sea mat the award shall be made a
tvputhey rian:
ana
eaun vite Int
ieern
ti
draeyferrfoerdbtooththpearatribesi:
ipts• I,lrbitratars
gc:j4tioli e.Y do not re selected from the forty mem-
Ibrytict
1) lett t° hold „atilakearticular
particularannouncementdays ; t of
ya theirrtonlyi
es.
an
~‘v4,ll4lllllzr
vorerkben,
t;s3:scir.atpedroV
Ittkl!1,1%"--,,ei:tttlyir upon rttaa d°011:0111)
; but, so far as the witness
t‘ti as noZ
any Act of Parliament.
Al.r„ tue 14th B', ticect the Morning Register
'ikt•py
gqt -lofty-GER -PeeMber, 1841.
111,(111,
and
or
the n Eititi. said the Morning Register
tlrtiveski its eonteenwt papers circulated by the Asso-
,,r sers s couldnot be made evidence for
4t•<rrzottoto
(e.- el! wer- said the published speeches of Mr.
It} he objee, ." clearly
issue, and had not been
put In* 4.11, Lect to,
am
it
do sv‘ere teaherthat
113' th °ltt'ltY -G
sal sAs eAS • ENERA.I., said that the papers circu-
Pers slpelation
weekly a
nayn tahi
lrye ej -oduary.
eer `ward;4 b u not asp
4,sin kefryeentto y
Coaunnyseol! itthsempeampberersm.,a s
. Y the Do .