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

Mr. FITZGIBUON—Can you tell from which you copied them?
—I cannot tell which.
A Juror—Mr. Jackson, did you not swear, a while ago, that
all you wrote was done during the time of the meetings in the
Exchange, and no place else ?—The majority of them were
written there.
Juror—Oh, but you certainly swore they were all written
there, and noishere else.
CHIEF JUSTICE—Let Mr. Fitzgibbon close his examina-
tion of the witness, and then, gentlemen, you can examine him.
Mr. FITZGIBBON—I will repeat the question of the juror,
and ask did you not swear awhile ago that you wrote all those
slips at the meeting, and in no other place?—'l'o the best of
my recollection the majority of them were written there.
Were all of them written there ?—Not all, perhaps ; some
of them were written after the meeting was wicr, some of them
were written next day.
Did you do any of them from the newspapers?—Some of
them.

I ask you again did you not swear that they were all written
at the meeting?—The majority of them were written there, or,
at least, generally speaking they were.
While the meetings were going on, were you always em-
ployed writing ?—Not always—only sometimes.
That is, you were sometimes only listening ?—Yes.
Do you recollect Mr. O'Connell having made a speech
upon aegro slavery ?—I do ; he spoke several times on that
subject.
Turn to your note of the speech he made on that subject
nu the sth of July. Were you present on that occasion?—
Yes.

Was not the speech a long one ?—Yes, to the best of my re-
collection.
I want a positive answer ; were you present the whole time
of the meeting ?—I rather think I was.
Is that a positive answer ? Were you present the whole time
of the meeting will not swear positively.
Will y.O swear you were there for an hour ?—Yes.
For two hours?—To the best of my recollection.
Is that the only answer you will give ? Will you swear po-
sitively to one hour ?—Yes.
That hour may have been made up of different periods ; were
you there more than once that day ?—I won't swear I was
there more than once.
Will you swear positively you were there more than an
hour ?—I think I was, but I did not time myself.
Will you swear p,,sitively to half an hour ?—N..
Will you be positive to one quarter of an hour ?—Yes, and
more.

What hour of the day did you go to the meeting ?—I don't
know exactly.
Who was on his legs when you entered the roam ?—I don't
know.
Did you not offer, a while ago, to tell me? Was any one in
the room when you went in?—Of course there was.
When you entered the room, was it empty or full ?—I never
went into the room but people were in it.
Can you tell whether it was morning, noon, or night when
you entered it ?—lt was about mid-day.
Did you hear the whole of Mr. O'Connell's speech ?—I did
not hear the whole of it.
You say you went there about twelve or one o'clock ?—Yes,
to the best of my recollection.
And you swear you heard Mr. O'Connell speak there?—
Yes.
Will you swear that Mr. O'Connell was at the meeting at
two o'clock?—He came in whilst I was there, according to my
note.
Will you swear, from your own living memory, that you saw
Mr. O'Connell coming into the Association on the sth of July?
—I either saw him coming into the room, or he was there be-
fore me when I went in'o it. And that is your answer from
the county of Clare ?—Yes ; and I am not ashamed of it.—
( Laughter. ) I believe that the Atlantic breeze hardens people's
faces very much ; does it ?—it may ; but it has not hardened
mine, at all events. Will you swear that the Atlantic breeze,
or anything else, has not hardened your face ?—I don't know
that it has hardened me in particular ; but I think I will prove
before 1 leave this table, if I am allowed to explain (as in jus-
tice I ought to be) that it has not. Now, turn to your note of
the 4th of September, and mind, don't lose sight of the ques-
tion between us—namely, that you are to prove to us, before
you leave the table, that you are not a hardened man. Will
you find for me the passage of Mr. O'Connell's speech which
you detailed to us to-day, and in which it is stated, in your
report, that he said, " No tumult should take place in his day ?"
Also read the passage in the report of his speech which has the
word " advisable" in it.
The witness then referred to his note of the speech, but it
appeared that it was spoken, not on the 4th of September, but
en the 29th of August.
After reading his report of the speech of Mr. O'Connell on
the occasion, the cross-examination was resumed.
Were you that day present when Mr. O'Connell was speak-
ing that speech, of which that purports to be a report ?—I
was. Ycu heard him begin it, and end it?—l did ; 1 was
writing at the time. Arid that is the report you were
writing ?—lt is. I wrote it out while I was there. Did you
write out the identical thing that you read here to- day, while
Mr. O'Connell was speaking ?—I did. On those very iden-
tical pieces of paper ?—Yes. As the words fell from Mr.
O'Connell's lips ?—I do not say I have the very words he
said, but 1 took the substance of the speech. Then you did
not take it from any other report or from any newspaper?—
Positively not. I wrote it while Mr. O'Connell was speaking.
On your oath, you swear that Mr. O'Connell that day used the
words " It would not be an unnatural or unadvisable result"
which you have just read ?—To the best of my recollection he
did. On your oath, will youlsvrear he used the word " unadvis-
a ble ?"—On my solemn oath I believe he did. Will you swear
it positively ?--I would not put it down if I did not think he
used it. I want you to state positively, did he use it ?—To
the best of my belief he did. You will not give any
answer except qualified in that way ? —On that occasion
I will not. Who was sitting next you on that day ?—I can-
not remember. Was any person sitting near you?—Some of
the reporters. Can you mention the name of any one re-
porter who was sitting near you ?—The reporters of the
Freeman's Journal and the Saunders's where there. Name
any particular reporter.—To the best of my belief that gentle-
man there, Mr. Edwards, was present. Are you certain?—
To the best of my belief he was. Can you far certain name any
gentleman ?—I think I could swear Mr. Edwards was there.
Oh, I think you could swear it too. Then you cannot name
a single reporter who was present !—I cannot; the usual corps
of teporters were there, but I cannot swear to any one reporter
in particular. Let me put a simpler question to you. Can
you name any single person who saw you in the Association
rooms on that day ?—Any one that was there might have seen
me. Mr. O'Connell or Mr. Ray might have seen me. I had
not the honour to speak to Mr. O'Connell that day, and I can-
not say that I expect to have that honour hereafter. 1 cannot
name any others who might have seen me. And you know
Mr. O'Connell and Mr. Ray are traversers and cannot give
evidence. Can you name any single man who opened his
lips there that day to you ?—At this distance of time I can-
not. It is only the 29th of August last. 1. id you speak to
any one ?-1 cannot say. Can you name any one man, woman,
or child who spoke to you that day ?—I cannot, ex-
cept those two gentlemen. \V hat two gentlemen?-51r O'Con-
nell and Mr. Ray. But you have not positively sworn that
even they spoke to you. Who was in the chair ?—I cannot re-
member. \% as Mr. John O'Connell there ?—I cannot say with-
out referring to my notes. The witness, after looking through
his notes, said that he perceived Mr. John O'Connell was
there. I took notes of those three gentlemen, because one
always mentions the leaders. One cannot play Hamlet, you
know, with the part of Hamlet left our. Did Mr. John O'Con-
nell say anything ?—He did. I have here, that " Mr. John
O'Connell thought it would be better if the matter was first
submitted to the committee." 1 certainly did not take this
from the newspapers. I cannot swear how long Mr. O'Con-
nell was speaking. He was probably speaking for nearly an
hour. Ido not think there was any other sneech except that
of Mr. O'Connell made on that day. There was no lung speech
made except Mr. O'Connell's, but there might be a few short
observations. And yet yen read your report of that long
speech, which was the speech of the day, in three or four
minutes ?—Do you swear those words were used,
"
he would
not say that such would bean unnatural or unadvisable result ?"
—I think those were his words precisely. Do you swear they
were his words?—On my oath, to the best of my belief, they
were. How near Mr. O'Connell were you at the time?—As
near as I am now to the corner where the Attorney-General is
sitting. I did not pay a shilling to get in, as the porter ad-
mitted me. Then the porter knew you to be the reporter : did
you look at any gentleman's slips there ?—I cannot say. There
were shorthand reporters there that day. The majority of the
reporters wrote shorthand notes. A shorthand reporter could
decidedly take a more faithful report of what Mr. O'Connell
said than I could.
Cross-examined by Mr. WHITESIDE, Queen's Counsel, on
the part of Mr. Duffy.—l think you mentioned the name of
Mr. Duffy?—You are quite right. Now draw on your me-
mory for facts, and not on your imagination. Did you see
Mr. Duffy at the meeting of the 6th of July
?--I cannot say
without referring to my notes. Or on the '2sth of July ?-1
must refer to my notes. And these notes you told Mr. Fitz-
gibbon you sometimes copied from another reporter, and
sometimes from the morning papers of the next day.
You have a taste for eloquence ? Not the slightest. Do you
not deal in " thunderbolts and tarnation fine things ? You
are, I see, a literary person, and contribute to the magazines.—
(Laughter.) I have a curiosity to see the paper in which—
those words appeared,?—l will make you a present of it.
Thank you. Does that kind of writing suit the London
market ?—lt goes down with them. They are very gullible,
I believe?-1 cannot get the extract for you without having
the slate. I cannot remember what Mr. Duffy said without
my notes. I did not take down everything he said. Don't
you know he spoke about Napoleon Bonaparte and your
friend the Duke of Wellington ? Did Mr. Kemmis ask you
the way in which you took down your report?—No ; I did
not think he would have called upon rise at all. Mr. Kemenis
wrote to me requesting me to come to his office. I did so,
and he handed me a letter from the proprietors of the
Morning Herald, stating they had kept my letters to them.
I did not ask you the contents of their letter. Have you
all those valuable efforts of yours that you sent to the Morning
Herald now in Court?—Oh, no, not all of them. Look to
your notes with reference to the songs in the Nation, and see,
in the meeting of the 4th of September, what allusion was
made by Mr. Ray to those songs ?—Mr. Ray said—Stop Sir.
Did you not say that he made some observations in the nature
of a speech ?—I did not ; I said it was a mere casual observa-
tion. To the best of my recollection he made those observa-
tions, and to the best of my recollection I was present, but I
can't say positively. I will not swear that it was not copied in
my report from another paper. Will you swear that he did not
say, that he had got a letter statir.g that some ballad-singers
had been taken up for tinging seditious songs, and that Mr.
O'Connell approved of the conduct of the persons who took them
up ?—My notes were but running commentaries on the pro-
ceedings taken quickly to be in time for the post, and I do not
undertake to swear to their verbal accuracy. I will not swear
'
that Mr. O'Connell did not stand up arid move a vote of
thanks to the person who arrested the ballad-singer. You
gave evidence of Mr. O'Connell s having read an address
en the 27th of August about the Irish representatives.
Now, did he not comment upon that address on that occasion?
—He did. Did he not fully comment on it, and was it not
a detail of grievances under which the Irish people suf-
fered ?—lc was such a detail, and he commented upon it.
Did it not set out all Irish grievances, whether civil or politi-
cal ?—Yea. Did you ever consider what would remedy them ?
—Never.—(Laughter.) Did not Mr. O'Connell say that the
people were not disaffected ?---He did. Did he not say that
the people were affectionate to the Queen and loyal to her per-
son ?-1 frequently heard him say so. Did you not hear him
speak of the French Constitution, and:allude to Louis Philippe ?
—I did, more than once. Did he not speak of it as not being
a fair and true Constitution, because the Haute of Lords was
what he called a " mockery ?"--Ile did. Don't you remember
Mr. O'Connell saying that he would correct an error, in repu-
diating all newspapers as being organs of the Association ?—I
think 1 heard him say so several times. Are yen not sure ?
lam sure, and I have beard him mention the Nation. Do
you recollect the day upon which the plait for the renewed ac-
tion of the Irish Parliament was read ?--I do. You wrote
about those matters according to the literary palate of your
readers ?—I did ; I made them up to make them spicy, by adding-
a little fun.—( Laughter.) Has the Morning Herald changed
hands of late?—lt has. Was it since that occurred that you
got directions to call on Mr. Kemmis, the Crown solicitor,
from your proprietors ?—No, but it was very shortly before.
were any paper said ?—I
quite surprised at
Did not Mr. O'Connell say that he would not, or the Associa-
otitotnenwhsiTaltdd nut, be
sa
yr responsible n ble
supposefor
you anything u
seeing thosemanuscript papers of yours handed to) ou ?—lndeed
I was.
Mr. WHITESIDE having told the witness that be might go
down from the table,
Mr. Jackson said he wished to Make one or two observations
in vindication of hi; character,

Mr. FITZGIBBON objected, because the witness, if he wished
to explain, should hove done so during his examination.
Mr. Jackson—l merely want to make one observation, my
Lords, to vindicate my character before the public.
Mr. FITZGIBBON—You shall nut, Sir.
The CHIEF JUSTICE—Let me hear what you have to say,
witness.

Mr. Jackson—Those manuscript documents, my Lords, were
given h 3 the proprietors of the Morning Herald to Mr. Kern-
mis, the Crown solicitor, and, so help me God, I never saw
them, or knew he had them, until he proc:uced me the letter of
those gentlemen, s'ating they had furnished him with them
and requiring me to initial them. I considered it was due to
my character before the world to make this plain explanation of
the truth.

Cross-examined by Mr. MoonE, upon behalf of the Rev.
Mr. Tierney—l have my notes of the Association meeting of
the 3d of October. I took those notes upon that day. I took
them at the meeting. I did not know the Rev. Mr. Tierney.
I did not even known his person. I mentioned his name as
being present on that day. I did so, not from my knowledge
of his person, because from some of the reporters' positions at
those meetings they could not see the speak-ms. I never saw
him before or since, to my knowledge. I thought on your
direct examination that you swore he was present at that meet-
ing ?—I heard a gentleman make a long speech whom I un-
derstood was Mr. Tierney. Did you not swear that the Rev.
Mr. Tierney made a speech ?—I can't say that I did. If you
swore it would it be true ? I believe so. Will you swear
that he was at that meeting ?—To the best of my belief he was.
At all events, you would not take upon yourself positively to
swear that he was there ?—I would not; but he made a long
speech, and that snakes me remember it.
Mr. MoostE—A Mr. Tierney made a speech?—Yes.
The witness was then allowed to retire.

Mr. MoonE (having communicated with the Crown coun-
sel) said, that as he had applied to them, and they refused his
application, he was obliged to make it to the Court, namely,
that his client and the other traversers should be furnished with
one copy of the notes of the witnesses examined upon the
previous day and Thunday, in order to conduct their defence.
'lose extracts were very long, and they (the traversers) would
not have copies of them but by their hieing furnished ; so he
hoped the Court would grant his application, which he consi-
dered very reasonable.
The CHIEF JUSTICE said that he did not know that the
Court had power to make such an order.
Mr. WHITESIDE—We will pay for them.
Mr. MooaE—l am sure even if the Court had not the power
of making the order, that if there was any difficulty felt by the
officers of the Crown, it would be removed if their Lordships
saw no objection to allow them to be furnished.
Judge CRAMPTON-If you had no means of having copies,
it would be very reasonable perhaps, but you have your short-
hand writers.

The CillEF JUSTICE—What documents do you ask for ?
Mr. Mootty—Copies of the documents read by the witnesses
yesterday and the day before. We will pay for copies, and we
could not have them transcribed from shorthand notes since the
previous day.
Mr. FITZGIBLON—They have read those documents in their
case. The witnesses read every single word of them. They
are here as documents. They are in the possession of the
Crown as documents.

The ATTORNEY-GENER•L-SUCh a course never has been
adopted until the present time, and I entirely object to it,
and I do so the more, because I cannot fail to recollect the
course that was adopted towards one of our witnesses. They
have every meeting as to which they require documents ro-•
ported by their O'All shorthand-writers for their newspapers.
They had the simplest and plainest course to adopt for ascer-
taining the documents which they now call for. Ido riot
wish to state here some matters, hut certainly under all the
circumstances which have taken place with respect to one of
our witnesses in some newspapers, it will prevent me from de-
parting from the usual course, and I shall not give copies of
the documents.

Mr. Moons, Queen's Counsel--I am bound to say that after
what has been just said by the Attorney-General I must not
call on the Court to make any order on the subject.
Mr. FITZGIBBON-I now submit to the Court that the whole
of the evidence given by Mr. Jackson ought to be struck out.
He was produced here as a witness to tell the jury what he had
heard and seen done at meetings, and read notes which he said
at first were taken in a particular way at particular meetings.
I submit that from his own showing it is as clear as possible
that the whole of his evidence ought to be struck out.
The CHIEF JUSTICK —Don't you think this is not the occa-
sion f..r making this application
Mr. FlTSalmnoti-1 rather think I am just in time. It is
when a witness goes off the table that such an application ought
to be made.

The CHIEF JusricE—He has been cross-examined by three
gentlemen. I don't think the Court can accede to the proposi-
tion that you make. It may be very well deserving of consi-
deration at another period, but not now.
John Browne examined by Mr. HOLM ES—I reside in Nassau-
street, and carry on the printing and stationery business. I
have been tong carrying on the business. It is at No. 36. 1
know Mr. Ray. I have known him for several years. I have
heard of an Association in the city of Dublin called the Loyal
National Repeal Association of Ireland. Mr. Ray holds the
situation of Secretary to that Society. I was employed to do
some printing work for that Society. The Association gene-
rally, through Mr. Ray, employed me. I have been four or
five years doing work for the Society. I have been paid for the
work I have done, except a running account now. I was paid
by Mr. Ray, and sometimes by a clerk in his office. Have you
received much money from time to time for the business you
did ?—I have. Could you mention how much ? Be under the sum.
Mr. WHITESIDE objected to the question. He did not see
how this could be evidence against the traversers.
Mr. HOLMES—I will ask my own questions.
Mr. WHITESIDE—Of course you will, and I will object
where I see fit.

Mr. HOLMES (to witness)—l now ask you to state, what
amount you received from time to time?—l could not say.
Oh, be under : have you kept any account-book ?—I have.
The account was sometimes about ‘201., and—

Mr. WIIITESIDK—I object to any evidence of the contents of
this gentleman's books, because they ought to have them here.
Mr. lloLmEs (to witness)—Havo you not been served with
a duces tecum?-1 leave.

Mr. flor.mEs—Well, now we will gratify Mr. Whiteside by
getting it read from your books. Do you knoo;what amount you
received from Mr. Ray from time to time for printing?
Mr. Justice PERRI Within what period?
Mr. HOL3lEb—Within the last two years.
Mr. WIIITESIDE.--I am obliged to your Lordship for putting
me in mind of that. 1 submit this is not evidence; tho first
thing in this indictment is stated to be on the Ist of March.
Mr. Justice CitAsirroli—l don't see, for my own part, the
relevancy of the inquiry.
Mr. lior.3rEs (handing a document to the witness)--Did
you print that document ? I did, and for the Repeal Associa-
tion. I printed it in the year 1843.
The Deputy Clerk of the Crown read the document, which
was the plan for the renewal •f the Irish Parliament. He also
read documents headed—" In.tructioris for the appointment of
Repeal-wardens and collectors," and " Form fur the appoint-
ment of Repeal- ardens," and others, which he admitted
having printed for the Association.
The witness was then examined as to the printing of " the
Address of the Repeal Association to the inhabitants of coun-
tries subject to the British Crown," " Rules to be observed by
arbitrators in districts," " Arbitration notices," and others, all
of which he admitted he printed. He said-1 printed 4,000 or
5,000 copies of the paper called 0' Calluyan's Letter ; 1,000
or 2,000 of the notices for the sitting of the Arbitration Courts;
200 of the rules to be observed by arbitrators ; 2,100 or
3,000 of the address of the Association to the British public;
and about 2,000 or 3,000 of the summonses for those Courts.
I printed all these for the Association, and I was paid for doingso.
I printed some of them from manuscript, and others from ex-
tracts from newspapers. I was served with a subpoena to
produce the manuscript. I searched for it, but I found very
little. I found the paper which I produce, headed " Lim-
iter for Repeal."
Mr. HOLMES.—Did you print any from that?—l think 1
did.

Mr. WHITESIDE—Thinking will not de; are you certain
that you did ?—I cannot swear positively.
Mr. WHITESIDE—That answer kill not do.
Mr. HOLMES.—Have you any doubt that you did ? Where
did you get the manuscript ?—I got it or the printer's office-
file. I think it probable that something was printed from tin
my office, but I urn not sure.
Mr. 1101.34E3—Y0u have your account-books here ; look
at them, and see if you have any entries of having printed
from it ?
Mr. WHITESIDE—The entries in his book:naay be very cor-
rect, but they cannot be evidence here.
The CHIEF JUSTICE—He can look at his book in order to
refresh his memory.
Mr. HoLst ES—Well, witness, have you any entry of that do-
cument ?
Mr. FITZGIBBON—I object to the question ; any entry he
may have cannot be evidence.
Mr. HOLMES—The fact is, these young men think 1 am
not able to stand out, but I am.—( Laughter.) Wilr.ess, I se•
peat ray question, have you any entry there relating to that
document T-1 have two entries relative to the Mullaghmast
meeting, but I cannot say whether they have reference to this
document or not.

Mr. WHITESIDE.—YOU must not read them.
Mr. HOLMES—WiII you swear you did not print that docu-
ment entitled " Leinster for Repeal?"-1 have a printed bill
here with the same heading, of which I printed about 2,000
for the Association, and I was paid for it. The newspapers, 1
believe, called the Mullaghmast meeting a " monster meeting."
I printed documents in reference to other monster meetings
which took place about Dublin. I have none of those docu-
ments here. I think I printed some in reference to the Donny-
brook meeting. The documents I have with me I brought in
consequence of a subpoena I received desiring me to do so.
And all the documents that are here did you print for the As-
sociation ?—I think I did. And you were paid for them?—
Yes. It was rather a good thing altogether, eh?
Mr. WHITEME—I object to that.
Mr. lioLltEs—Why, it was merely an observation.
Mr. WHITESIDE—Yes, it was an observation, with a great
deal of point in it.
Mr. lioLmEs—lf I attempted to stop you in half the obser-
vations you make which have nothing to say to the case, I
should have something to do.—(A laugh.)
Mr. WrirrEsinx— Ilat might be true, upon the cross-ex-
amination, but you forget your position ; you are examining
upon the direct.
Mr. lioLlsxs (to witness)—Look at that (revision of the
jury list), and say, did you print them or not, for the Associ-
ation ?—Yes. Were you paid for it or not ?-1 don't know
whether I was paid for it or not.
Cross-examined by Mr. WHITESIDE—Did you print these
eleven documents ?—Yes. Did you print these three documents
(headed " To the people of Ireland," &c.) P—Yes.
Mr. HOLMES here rose to ask the witness a question.
Mr. Wtilirstnu—l object to your asking the question unless
it arose from anything which fell from me on the direct.
Mr. Ilot.itEs-.--I.omitted to ask the witness aquetion.

Mr. Wityrastnr—i-flabject, then, to your asking it now.
11r. H is the only legal objection you have made.
'1 he Learned Counsel thin railed upon the Clerk of the
Crown to have the documents handed to the witness read
seriatim. . . • .

Mr. WHITESIDE submitted that none of the documents could
be made use of against the traverser!.
Mr. litmus-Ai said every one of the travorsers was a member
•f the Association. The documents were printed for the Asso-
ciation. The traverser! attended meetings of that Association,
some of whom made speeches there, and the documents were
clearly evidence against them all.
Mr. WHITESIDE—They are no evidence against Mr. Duffy.
Mr. llomstEs—The documents are printed by the desire of
the Secretary, one of the -,traversers being the Secretary, and
were paid fur by the Association.
Mr. WurrEsinz —As to Mr. Duffy, the only distinet evi-
dence against him is that given by the gentlemen who saw him
one day at Culvert's Theatre.
The. CHIEF JuSTICE-1 beg your pardon.
Justice CRAstrroN---This is not the time to make these
objections.
The CIIIEF JUSTICE—It was proved that Mr. Duffy
at-
tended meetings of the Association, and handed in subscrip-
tions.

Mr. WniTzsinE—The evidence given to-day is net worth a
rush.

The SOLICITOR-G ENERA 7—This is a question for the jury.
The ATTORNEY- GENERA L—This is not the time for a com-
mentary on the evidence. We will, when the time comes, show
the clearest evidence against Mr. Duffy.
The CHIEF JUSTICE—The Cuurt are of opinion that the
documet.ts are properly read against all.
WIIITESIDE said h• did not contend that it was not evi-
dence against a traverser for a witness to say that he got a cer-