The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-22 00:00:00

Mr. FITZGIBBON (turning to Mr, Brewster)—l beg of you
not to assume that I don't understand what I'm examining the
witness about, and it is not upon this occasion alone, but for the
future. lam pretty nearly a Clare man myself, and I can un-
derstand the Clare brogue well enough.
To the witness—Now, mind, I don't ask you about the sub-
stance of what is written in these scraps of paper, but I ask
you are those the identical scraps of paper you forwarded to the
Morning Herald?—The very identical papers.
Now show them to me. ( Witness handed them to the
Counsel ; the manuscript was written on both sides of the
sheet.) Did you send these identical papers for the pur-
pose of being set up in the office of the Morning Herald ?
I d4l.
I suppose you know enough of reporting to know that it is
necessary in sending manuscript to a printing-office that it
should be written only on one side ?—Yes.
That is a part of the instructions of every reporter ?
It is.

So that it may be setup at once, without being copied ?—Yes.
Was the paper you sent as it is now, in soaps of this kind ?
—No, they were in full length slips.
Atter having sent these slips to the Morning Herald, when
did you see them again 2—l received a letter from the proprie-
tor about two months ago.
Don't tell us about his letter now. I ask: you: only for a
date?-1 never saw them until about two months age.
In whose hands did you see them on that occasion I—The
Crown solicitor handed me a letter from the proprietor.

_
Now don't tell us about your letters.
Witness—My Lords, in justice to myself—
CHIEF JUSTloE—You're not asked about that now. How
did you come into communication with Mr. Kemmia ?—He
sent for me and I went to his office.
Was that the first time you were in his office?—lt was the
first time I ever saw him to my knowledge.
Whose initials are those on that paper?—Mine.
When and Where did you write them ?—ln Mr. Kemmis's
office, a few days alter 1 was called on by the proprietor to
do so.

But was you in communication with Mr. Kemmis before
?-INo.

Did you expect that communication from Mr. Kemmis to at.
tend at his office ?—Upon my oath I did not.
When did you begin to attend the Association meetinv ?
About eight or nine montl s ago.
For the first time?—l was off and on there before.

Were you a Repealer?—No.
Did you pay a shilling going in at the door ?—I did, the first
line I went in.

Afterwards you went in free—you went in as a reporter ?
I did.

Were the accounts of the proceedings you sent over from
your own notes?—Sometimes they were, and sometimes bor-
rowed from the notes of the man near me, perhaps.
Were they borrowed from the notes of the man near you ?
—Very frequently they were ; I copied them from the slips of
the man next me.

Was that a short-hand writer ?—Sometimes he was, and
sometimes nut; I gave the substance of what he had written
out, of course. I could not copy shorthand notes, not being a
shorthand writer myself.
Used you ever to ♦ary the language when you copied from
the manuscript of the man next you ?—I used.
In order that it should not have the appearance of being a
copy of what he transcribed ?—Precisely.
And am I to understand that that was done to prevent the
appearance, to your own proprietors, that you had merely
copied what another man had transcribed?—Exactly.
And those are the notes you have been reading here to-day?
—Yes.
Look to those notes you have read, and select out of them any
one piece of paper which you will swear, upon solemn oath,
contains what was taken down by you from the lips of the man
represented in it to have spoken I—Upon my solemn oath this
paper (holding up one of his sheets of manuscript) contains
the substance of what Mr. O'Connell said.
Will you swear those were his words?—To the best of my
belief it is the substance of what he said. 1 never attempted
t. give his exact words.
I\ ow, attend to me On Your oath, did you write what is
upon that slip of paper while Mr. O'Connell was speaking ?
Yes.
. . .

-
Upon your oath, was that written down upon that piece of
paper from the lips of Mr. O'Connell while he was speaking
it ?—Yes, occasionally taking a note, and catching the leading
topics in his di-scow se.

I ask you to fix upon any one of the pieces of paper you have
in your hand, that you will positively swear that you
believe was written while the speaker was speaking ?—To the
best of my recollection this (meaning one of his slips) was, but I
cannot be positive.
Then you are not positive ?—No.
What is the date of that slip ?_The 30th of May.
Then you are not positive as to that ?'—Not very.
Are you positive at all that that piece of paper was written
from his lips while he was speaking?—lt is in substance what
he said, to the best of my recollection.
Is that an answer ?—I think it is.
On your oath was it written while he was speaking, and not
from a paper ?—I cannot swear that, certainly.
Then you won't swear that itmay have been taken from a
paper ?—A certain portion of itmay or may not.
Alight not any person in the Court give me that answer—
that " portions of it may or may not?" Must it not be either
of the two things ?-1 do not recollect any particular case.
Could you fix upon any one of all the slips ?—I could not.
Take up your paper of the sth of July. Was that little
bundle made up in the same way as the others ?—Yes.
Was it written whilst you were in the Association?—lt was.
Was it written whilst the people were speaking ? Yee.

Do you swear that ?—I do.
The whole of it?—Yes.
While the meeting was going on, and in the Association-
room ?—Every one that refers to the meeting lof th• day was
written in the room.
And while each particular speaker was speaking ?—lt was.
Do you swear that positively—that every one of those slips
were written in the Association, and while each speaker, whose
language they purport to give, was speaking ?—Certainly not.
Did you tell me a moment ago they were ?—I did not.
Did you tell me in any sense they were ?—I said they
were. —(Sensation. )
And you say now they were not?—While the money was
'uniting in I wrote out what previously occurred.
N 1 ill you now turn to the speech put into the mouth of Mr.
O'Connell, on the 15th of July ?-11e said he wished to call
attention to tw o letters he had received that morning from
Sligo. One was written by a discharged soldier, stating "he
was employed by Mr. O'Connell."
Well nosy, have you the speech of Mr. O'Connell in moving
the insertion in the American book of a letter received from
merica?—l have. Mr. O'Connell moved that the letter be
insert, d in the American book, and not on the regular minutes,
and that thanks be conveyed to the two office-bearers named
in the letter, as subscribed to their fund.

Do you swear that sentence was written by yourself, when
the speaker was speaking ?—To the best of my opinion it was.
Was it not ?—I can't be certain.

NOW, listen to me while I read from this paper (Freeman's
Journal) a report of the same speech you have been reading to
us—" Mr. O'Connell said it was better to take up each of the
American letters by itself, and therefore moved that the letter
should be inserted in the American book, but not on the regu-
lar minutes of the association, and that the thanks of the associa-
tion be conveyed through the two office-bearers that were named
in the letter to the subscribers to that fund." Now, is not that
verbatim with what you have read from your slips.
Mr. 13REW:,TER—I beg your pardon, and 1 will take the
opinion of the Court whether I am right or not. I have no
objection if Mr. Fitzgibbon puts this newspaper in evidence, but
I object to his reading any quantity out of a newspaper he
pleases, and then asking the witness—Does that correspond
with something he has in his hands?
Mr. Fizzc niaox—l am not at present asking Mr. Brewster
to look at what I am doing at all.—(Laughter.) I am at pre-
sent testing the credit of this witness ; and I contend for my
right to show the jury that by any human means I cam.ot,
without having that paper before my eyes, repeat one word or
syllable that is in that paper.
Mr. BREWSTER.—It is not to the newspaper I object, but
to the mode of examination adopted by Mr. Fitzgibbon. I
object to the mode of his examination, because he reads from a
newspaper the exact words of the witness's notes which be
sent over in his correspondence.
Mr. FITZGIBBON—I don't read from the paper at all. I'll
read from my brief now, I tell you.—( Laughter.)
Mr. BREWSTER—If you offer the newspaper in evidence I
will not object to it, and then you may examine him as to it.
Mr. Ferzcreeox—Here is my brief ; will you have it in
evidence ?—( Great laughter.)
Mr. BREWSTER—It is not competent for you to read from
your brief or any other document, and then ask the witness if
what is read agrees with notes he has taken. I say it is not
competent to do so unless you put the document in evidence.
Mr. FITZGIBBON—I will take up this paper, and see if I
don't read a report of every word the witness says he sent to
the paper.
Mr. RitewsTEß—But that is what I object to.
Judge BuitzoN—Why go on to prove what you have such a
perfect transcript of ?
Mr. FITZGIBBON—The course I am taking is infinitely more
fair to the witness than the course alluded to on the other side;
it is the only fair and legal course which I am at present adopt-
ing; if 1 did not take this course, I would be stopped from
reading the document, if I did not examine the witness, as to
the fact, before he left the table. In the paper of the next
morning,l.find a verbatim report of what the witness says he sent
to London, and if I did not ask him about that I would have
been stopped from reading it, unless I asked the man about it when
I had him on the table. Here is a man who comes on the table
to tell the jury that he is a reporter for a newspaper, and as such
attended the meetings of the Association, where Alr. O'Connell
spoke. I will show he is not a reporter, and that he was incapable
of taking reports where he says he did, and that what he asserts is
false. 1 want to show what he says is absolutely, and morally
false, and a fabrication from beginning to end, and that he is
now speaking to the jury what is false, when he tells them that
the documents which he holds in his hand were written by him
at the meetings. He comes here falsely representing to the
jury that fact. He did not take a note at those meetings, nor
had he the ability of taking notes, and, therefore, I want to
show that what he did do was copied verbatim from the
morning papers of the next day, and sent off by him, al-
though he tells the jury he wrote the pieces of paper at the
meetings.
Judge Buarow—l see your object is very clear.
Judge Canatrzori—Mr. Fitzgibbon, am I to understand
that you intend to give the paper in evidence ?
Air. FITZGIBBON—No, I do not.
Judge CRAMPTON—Then I feel great difficulty in that ease
is allowing this sort of examination.
Mr. BREWSTER—If he puts in the newspaper as evidence I
will withdraw my objection, but unless he does so I must press
it. Mr. Fitzgibbon may tell me he will not read from the
paper but from his brief, and I object to that also, for how am
I to know but that brief might be a copy of what this gentle-
man sent to the Morning Herald.—(Laughter.) Lc t him put
in the newspaper as evidence, and I will withdraw the ob-
jection.
Mr. FITZGIBBON—I am here at present to —, but no, I
will get it in another form. Come, Sir, turn round and
answer me ?—Yes, I will, Mr. Fitzgibbon.
Will you now, Sir, take on yourself to swear, on your solemn
oath, that you did not copy these slips of paper from the
morning paper of the next day, and then send them off as
your own report ?—To the best of my recollection—l cannot
say. I might have copied them either from the paper, or a
notetaker's slips.
• Hah ! liah I Take that down. I will repeat the question,
Sir, (question repeated)?-1 might have copied them either
from the paper, or another notetaker's slips.
Well, did you do that while J. O'Connell was speaking ?
I can't say that.
One way or other ?—No one way or other.
Did you do that on the same day of the meetings or the
day after ?—I can't be positive as to that.
Not positive?—No, not positive.
Did you see the report in the morning papers of the next
day ?-1 might have seen it.
Then, you might have copied your report from the papers?
—Some of it I might have copied.
You might have copied it all ; eh ?—lt is possible.
Did you ever copy from the morning papers at all ?—Yes, 1
used to copy some, and cut out more from it. I sent the slips
which I cut from the papers over whenever I adapted them.
And you sent them to London?-1 did, possibly.
On your solemn oath will you venture to swear yon did not
take all these papers from the newspapers; or from another note-
taker's slips?
Judge PERRIN—Come, Sir, speak up, and let us hear you,
as it will save a great deal of time to do so.
Witness—For all I can tell, I might have copied them from
the newspaper or the nog-faker's slips. •