The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-24 00:00:00

C ONC LIA TIO N lIA L L.—(From a Sketcli by A. 0 Muscom)

coloured by the partiality of friendship. The worst
fault in the work is its diffuseness—a fault of very
common occurrence with an unpractised writer.

EDUCATION and the DISSENTERS.
On Monday night the first public meeting of the
Dissenters of the metropolis was held at Craven Chapel,
Carnaby-market ; C. Hindley, Esq., M.P. in the
Chair; for the purpose of supporting the resolutions
of the Congregational Union of England- and Wales
for the promotion of general education. The chapel
was well filled, and the auditory evinced the greatest
interest in the proceedings.
The CHAIRMAN opened the proceedings by advert-
ing to the importance of general education in its
bearings upon the moral, social, and political condi-
tion of the country, and to the circumstances out of
which the relations of the Congregational Union had
arisen. Upon the defeat of the obnoxious measure in-
troduced by Sir J. Graham, it had been very strongly
felt by the Dissenting bodies that they should give some
decisive evidence to the world that it was pot to the
principle of general education that they objected, but to
the sectarian and obnoxious mode in which the Go
vernment had attempted to carry' it out. At the
autumnal meeting of the Congregational Churches
held at, Leeds in the month of October last, the im-
portant question was taken up, and the resolutions
' there adopted had led to the conference in London,
at-which it had been resolved to take up the motion
upon a scale commensurate with its importance, and

this was the first meeting held in the metropolis fur
the-purpose of carrying out the resolutions of that
body. . He concluded by imploring them to give
such an example of the seal and liberality of the
Dissenters of the metropolis as should operate upon
the country at large.
The Rev. J. JAMES stated the amount of the sub-
scriptions already received in support of the resolu-
tions. -The sum- according- to the last returns,rn
.
aOunted to. 221 . 7 760/ more than half of which had
bei'ln'
3,oo7notri.bbuy the ministerstedbyth of al
emetropvoli.s ; and, no less
than ious
congrega.
tional churches. Amongst the.subscriptions enume•
rated, were five of-1,00(31., and ten of 600/.
The itev. Dr. LEIFCHILD moved the first resolu-
tion, ,which was—" That this meeting heartily ap-
proves and will punctually second the project resolved
Wales, to
buypotnheact
othneirreegcaetnitoncaolaufenreionnceofonEendgulacnadtioannd, originated
raise at least 100,000/. by subscription, payable within
the In-
dependent
years,an dfrothmet.mheeectionn: is prompted to this approval
congregational churches of
ing
body towards the education of the
ci work
and determination not only by those general humane
and religious considerations that have induced Pro:
testant Dissenters pre-eminently at all times to'favour
education, but by considering further that, the pretext
for objectionable legislative measures will be the less
colourable in the degree in which the advocates 'of the
I'voluntary principle are true to themselves, and prole
its sufficiency by its acts." In moving this resolution

the Rev. Gentleman repudiated the idea of making the
projeet a sectarian ene. They would much have pre-
ferred a general system, to be carried out upon a prin-
ciple upon which all professing Christians could have
concurred, but that was now hopeless. The Government
measure having been defeated, the Established Church
had set the - example- of a denominational movement.
The Church would teach none but upon Church
principles ; then, the- Wesleyans had resolved
that they would- teach none but upon Wes-
leyan principles. What, then, remained, but
that the Congregationalists should teach upon
Congregational. principles ? Still, they abjured
every, thing of a sectarian character. Their object
was not to promote Dissent, but to remove ignorance..
In the schools they established they would teach the
Bible, and if the reading of the Bible made the chil-
dren of the` working-classes DisSenters, why, they
would neither be :surprised nor grieved.—(Laughter.)
The Rev. JonN BURNETT seconded the resolution
in an eloquent and impressive speech, and it was unit
nimmisly adopted.
-The meeting- was subsequently addressed by the
Rev. Dr. Read, the Rev. Mr. Jukes, and other gen-
tlemen ; and after a vote of thanks to the Chairman,
the meeting separated.

GOODWOOD PARK.—The Duke and Duchess of'
Richmond will have a succession of visitants until the meeting
of Parliament. His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge
is expected to arrive from Kew Palace, on Monday next, and
afterwards proceed on a visit to Col. Wyndham, at Petworth. •

~,.*

IRISH STATE TRIALS.
(From the Southern Reporter.)
We amospopr in possession of the entire case of the
Crown- against Mr: O'Connell and the other traver-
sers. Let us suppose the Attorney-General's state-
ment proved by unshaken evidence. With that very
considerable supposition let us examine the question
which a conscientious jury will have to try, and on
which they are to return a verdict. Let it be admitted
that the traversers had a common object—that object
being itself legal. It is laid down by the Attorney-
General, and before the grand jury, by Judge Burton,
that the moment persons combining for a legal object, or
any of them, adopt illegal means to accomplish it, then
it becomes an unlawful conspiracy, and, moreover,
that though charged with several illegal overt acts, if
one only be established, the -conspiracy is proved.
Supposing this to be the law, the case turns upon
this assertion—did the traversers, or any of them, in
endeavouring to obtain the repeal of the Act of Legis .
lative Union, which is admitted to be a legal object,
did they use illegal means ? This is what the jury
will have to consider; and, judging from the state-
ment of the Attorney-General, we strongly incline
to the belief that " not guilty" will be the verdict.
One opinion the jury will have to pronounce is
this—do they believe that Mr. O'Connell or the
other traversers contemplated a resort to physical
force at a future time ? Did they, when under the in-
fluence of the passing scene, using strong, fervid, im-
passioned language, did they for a moment mean to
convey to the multitudes they addressed, that at a
time yet to come and not distant, they would seek
the restitution of their Parliament by any other than
constitutional means ? Is there one who believes
thus of Mr. O'Connell—the preacher of peace and
order, as the only instruments for effecting great
measures of amelioration ? And if they do not be-
lieve this of the great leader of the Irish people, why
should legal casuistry make him accountable for
every illegal paragraph and idle song sung in
a newspaper, the proprietor of which happened
to be a member of the Association ? If the
jury are of opinion that Mr. O'Connell
in attending and addressing those large meet-
ings did not contemplate the attainment of the Re-
peal of an Act of Parliament at a future time by
illegal means, then, inasmuch as those meetings
were perfectly tranquil and no breach of the peace
committed—the language used at those meetings,
though strong, does not justify the charge of con-
spiracy to effect a legal object by illegal means.
Again, the traversers are charged with a conspiracy
to bring into hatred and contempt the Government
of the country as by law established. If a verdict of
guilty be established on this point, then will it be
illegal for her Majesty's subjects to meet for the
common object of petitioning Parliament for organic
changes in• the Constitution—such as the Vote by
Ballot—Household Suffrage, &c. &c. The Bill
of Rights protects the subject in the exercise of this
privilege, unless violent outrage or disturbance take
place ; this privilege cannot be interfered with. If the
charge be, that the traversers intended to bring into
contempt and hatred the Government of her Majesty in
Ireland, is there one who will credit it—seeing how
earnest and anxious they all were, and Mr. O'Connell
particularly, to infuse into the minds of the people a
respect and reverence for the Queen ? The third
charge is, that the traversers endeavoured by illegal
means to interfere with the established tribunals of
the cow itry by the appointment of Arbitration Courts.
Now the fact is, all that the traversers did was, on
application from the various districts, to testify their
opinion of the fitness of the persons named by the
districts, to arbitrate in any case they may be called
on by both parties—plaintiff and defendant—to ad-
judicate on the principle of the Ousel Galley in
Dublin. Whether this will be considered an illegal
act remains to be seen. In our opinion, when the
traversers' case comes to be proved, we are
_persuaded
the charge will fall to the ground. Where' then is
this mysterious conspiracy of which we have heard so
much ?—where are the disclosures the Attorney-Ge-
neral was pledged to make ? Of what value is the
Evening Mail's assurance that a most deep-laid and
mysterious conspiracy would be laid bare? Is‘there
a single fact brought forward that was not already as
well known to the whole world as to the Attorney-
General ? What additional information has the jury
received from a .nine-hour speech ?—None whatever.
They may have acquired some information on the in-
tricate law of conspiracy, but on that subject they will
get additional enlightenment. While the Attorney-
General was supported by the eloquent passages he
read from O'Connell's speeches, and the brilliant ex-
tracts from the Nation, his address was interesting
and considered well-arranged as to his material ; but
when he came to the prosecution, where he had to
depend upon his own resources, all accounts unite in
saying his was a complete and total failure. Of this
we do not complain, as we think it augurs well for
the traversers.