The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-03 00:00:00

t address of the Hon. Mem".:er for Dungarven, (Mr. Sheil), to
the Court, which could tend to have roused the feelings of
the Attorney-General for Ireland. Iron. Gentlemen in this
House were all willing to make ample allowances .for such
ebullitions of feelings, but this House was not like 3 Court
of Justice. If ever there was a time when everything like
personal feeling should be avoided it was in this case. He
agreed with the Hon. Member for Cork that from the very
beginning of those trials there was a moat unfortunate irrita-
bility shown by the Attorney-General, which he was sure
the Government would be the first to admit. If he ex-
pressed his regret, no gentleman would wish to carry the
matter further ; still t hat would prove that a high legal func.
tionary was deficient in that temper which was necessary to the
dignified discharge of his duties. The only vindication which had
been offered on his behalf was that many expressions had been
used which were likely to excite a man of an irritable temper,
but he denied that there was anything in the speeches of the
Right Hon. Member for Dungarvon, or Mr. Fitzgibbon, be-
yond what the interests of their clients called for.
Mr. IVYSE explained.
Mr. SHAW, as an old and intimate friend of the Attorney- I
General for Ireland, wished to bear testimony to his high
standing in his profession, and his many estimable private qua-
lities. At ale same time, he did not at, all mean to vindicate
the conduct of the Attorney-General. Still he would say
that he thought it an unjust, ungenerous, and unjustifiable
attack which had been made by the Hon. Member for Bath
upon a man of his own profession. He (Mr. Shaw) thought
Mr. Roebuck was not exactly the man best suited for bring-
ing such an accusation as this—(Hear, hear)—for lie thought
him one of the most unfit persons to stand up and deliver a
lecture upon this subject. But what he complained of most
was, that this attack had been made on account of the parti-
cular act of having sent a challenge, but that the Hon. 'Mem-
ber had made a general and indiscriminate attack upon the
Attorney-General. He (Mr. Shaw) knew the Attorney-
General well, and he could fearlessly appeal to every Member in
the profession as to whether the insinuation of the Hon. Mem-
ber tor Bath, that he was unfit for the place he holds, was worth
anything. He asked the Hon. and Learned Member for
Cashel whether all pat ties did not agree that the Attorney-
General was an honour to 4i *profession, and that he had al-
ways conducted himself in 'way most creditable to himself?
He was placed in peculia t icumstances. He (Mr. Shaw) was
sorry to refer to the trial new pending in Ireland, but allusion
had been made to th e Attorney-General's requiring Mr. J.
O'Connell's attendance . n Court when he only went into the
library. Now, what wa *tee fact ? Why, that Mr. O'Connell
gad gone to that very association which the indictment, under
which he was being tried, had declared to be illegal, and h:s in.
tention to do so had been publicly advertised in the newspapers.
(Cheers from the Tor) benches.) His attendance was not
required as a criminal, but ho was allowed to wear his ow n dress,
and sit amongst tie Counsel. Therefore this was a gross mis-
representation. He (Mr. Shaw) heard men ef all political
parties in Ireland agree that under the circumstances of this
trial, the Attorney-General's conduct had reflected the greatest
credit on him.—( Loud laughter and ironical cheers.) He
believed that it was the object of many newspapers, and of al-
most all his opponents, to make a set against the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman, in order that he might be unfitted for the
performance of his duties. He expressed those opinions not as
a partisan ; he had never spoken to the Attorney-General on
the subject, nor had he ever expressed an opinion on the mat-
ter until the present ; but now he felt bound to bear testi-
mony to the general endeavour of the Attorney-General to
discharge his arduous duties not only with propriety but in
good temper.—(Loud laughter.) The matter alluded to by
the Hon. Member for Bath, occurred during a temporary ab-
sence of the Judges, and the moment the Court was informed
of the matter, it pronounced the strongest condemnation. The
matter there terminated, and ought not to have been revived.
Dr. STOCK said, as his Right Honourable and Learned
Friend had put a question to him in such a direct manner, he
should say that he thought the Attorney-General had displayed
more temper than either his friends or enemies expected. No
public officer was ever called on to discharge duties of such
importance, and which required the most decided exercise of
judgment and temper—( Hear, hear)—and he stated his per-
fect belief that there were not wanting inducements on the
other side to bring to a teat the infirmity of his temper.—
(Ministerial cheers.) He repeated that the Attorney-General,
taking all the circumstances of his position into consideration,
had acted with touch more temper than could he expected from
him.--( Laughter. ) He was in habits of personal intimacy
with the Attorney-General for Ireland ; he knew him well,
and a better or more honourable man, or one who better dis-
charged all the relations of private life, never lived.—( Hear. )
He was an honour to his profession—he possessed great legal
acuteness—and he was entitled to and enjoyed the deference
and respect of his pro.ession and of the country.—(Cheers. )
He knew him to be of the must unexceptionable character ;
but his appointment to the situation he held was most unfortu-
nate, because there were persons at the bar who were more fit
to carry out the objects of the present Government than Mr.
Smith. He had, as all men had, his deftets, but a more
excellent lawyer did not exist.—(Cheers. )
Lord INGESTRIE said it would be most ungenerous in
hint if he did nut get up and state that, during the time he
was present in the Court of Queen's Bench, in Ireland, no
person could have conducted himself with greater propriety
than the Attorney-General did there. He would, further, call
the attention of the Howe to the fact that attacks were made
upon him. Even Mr. O'Connell himself, in the Association,
attributed personal motives to him, for he said—" No verdict,
no Chief Justiceship." As far as he sae., the Attorney-
General conducted himself with great mildness, and a quiet
demeanour, and no person in a similar situation could behave
wth greater moderation than the Attorney-General did for
the few days be (Lord Ingestrie) had been in Dublin.
Mr. WALLACE said that the Attorney-General for Ireland
bad great cause to say " save me from my friends." Front
the Right Hoe. Baronet downwards, one and all concurred
in giving him the character of one most unfit to fill his, present
situation. The House recollected the mode in which he con-
ducted himself with regard to the Arms Bill. The Attorney-
General for England had to do the work of the Attorney-Ge-
neral for Ireland. The expressions used by his Hon. and
Learned Friend below him were but the truth, and he de-
served great praise for dealing with the Attorney-General for
Ireland as he did, especially as be knew that the members of
the profession were not fond of attacking each other.—
( Laughter.) The Attorney-General was guilty of an open
breach ef the law, and when the Government said they
ought not to interfere and dismiss him, ho begged
to remind them of the conduct pursued towards the
Liberal magistrates of Ireland who attended repeal meetings,
and they dismissed those magistrates without any sort of
ceremony; but they had nothing to do with three-cornered
notes. It was undeniable that the Attorney-General pos-
bested an irritability of temper which unfitted him for his
situation. His character as a lawyer, or as a gentleman, was
equally indifferent to him, but he maintained that a worse
selection could not be made than that of the Attorney-General
fur Ireland to fill h.s situation. With regard to what aas said
on the impropriety of alluding to what was going on in Ire-
land, he could not understand why those three paragraphs re-
lating to that country were inserted, if it was not intended to
muzzle them.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) It muzzled the
Noble Lord, but it would net muzzle others, and he was glad
they had an opportunity of discussing the subject. He would
support the motion of the Hon. Member for Rochdale.
Mr. BROTHERTON had listened with attention to the
present discussion, and he regretted that no person denounced
the practice of duelling generally. He was not disposed to
reflect on the conduct of the Attorney-General, and perhaps
it were better to wait till he was present himself.—(Hear. )
He thought the practice of duelling ought to be denounced by
that House. How could they expect the people could be reli-
gious when a practice so repugnant to the ordix.ances of religion,
and so opposed to the law, was countenanced by some of the
highest in the land? It was nothing but murder.—(Hear,
hear.) The conduct of the Attorney-General was denounced;
but let those who were without stain themselves cast the first
stone. --( Hear, hear.) lie hoped the present debate would
nut he without its use in putting an end to this practice.
Mr. CURTEIS said he did not think the Govt timent had
any right to complain of the subject of Ireland being introduced
into debate pending the present trials. He had heard it stated
by two Hon. Members for Ireland (one of whom was remark-
able for his moderation), that it was their firm conviction the
address, as it now stood, would influence the verdict of the jury.
He wished to see a fair and impartial verdict, and he would.
therefore wish to see all that related to Ireland expunged
from it. This was the ground on which he would give his
vote in favour of the amendment. He regretted that the leader
of the Opposition had not moved an amendment to the address
which would unite their strength, instead of having it frit-
tered away in two divisions last night, in which he was obliged
to vote against these with whom he usually acted. The At-
torney-General for Ireland had received a severe castigation
from the House, but he did riot think he ought to be dismissed
from his office.

Sir W. BARRON said he could not avoid alluding to an
expression which had fallen from the Noble Lord the Secretary
for Ireland. He said that the Attorney-General for Ireland
had condected himself with temper and moderation during this
unfortunate prosecution, for such it was. He knew the Noble
Lord would not state anything which he slid not believe to be
the fact, but he had been grossly misinformed on the subject.
Having attentively observed the progress of the trial, he must
say he never in the course of his experience read or heard of
such a gross instance of want of temper, such insulting lan-
guage, and such uncalled-for observations, as were made by the
Attorney-General during the trials, from their commencement
to their present stage, and he wished a Committee of the
House were appointed to inquire into the fact. He
was certain there never was such a gross want of
temper, discretion, and judgment displayed as during the
whole of these transactions. Let him call to mind what
occurred at an early stage of the prosecutions. Three of the
solicitors employed by the traversers made a solemn affidavit
that it was necesiary for the defence to have certain papers,
and to collect certain evidence, without which the defence
could not be conducted with fairness or justice to their clients.
The Attorney-General, on his own mere ipse dixit, comes
down, and tells the Court that tke affidavits of these three re-
spectable gentlemen were made solely for the purposes of delay.
Such a course of conduct as this, so unjust, so unbecoming, and
so insulting, was never before known in that or in any other
Court ; and he was at last obliged, :n the presence of the
Court, to retract this language, and make an apology for it.
Mr. SHAW—Are you not speaking of some other person ?
Sir W. BARRON—Mr. Brewster.—( Cheers and laughter.)
They might have their cheer. He *as talking of the entire
conduct of this case—( Oh, oh. )—this was a part of the whole.
And in opening the case to the Court the Learned Gentleman
used language which had never before been heard in a
court of justice, witi regard to the traversers. He asserted
to the Court that, ofihis own knowledge, he could prove a for-
midable conspiracy, thus aggravating the case in every position
that he took, and that, too, in language which would not be
tolerated in the Courts of this country, and which would never
be used by the Learned Attorney-General opposite, as well
from a sense of propriety and decorum, as from the knowledge
that, by such conduct, he was only injuring his own case. But
not only in this had the Attorney-General for Ireland greatly
committed himself, but he had removed every Roman Catholic
who was left on the jury list.—(Cries of " Oh, oh.") That
Learned Gentleman conduct was before the House, and
he had a right to remark upon every part of it. He insulted
every Roman Catholic in that country, by removing eleven
Roman Catholics as unfit to be on the jury, the only eleven
Roman Catholics that were upon the panel, and he left no one
upon it but gentlemen notoriously opposed to the traversers in
politics. Was that justice? was that fairness? They tried
men upon a charge, a political charge, and they took care to
have upon the jury only those whip were known to be adverse
to them on the very identical
_point upon which they
were charged. Why, if a Frenchman or a Bel-
gian, a Spaniard, a German, or a Tark, were put
upon their trial in this country they were allowed
to have six of their own countrymen upon the jury. He be-
lieved that was the number—he was no lawyer—but he knew
every foreigner was entitled, at least, to have a portioa of
foreigners on the jury, But here were their own countryneea-,
to be tried, and none were to be on the jury save those known
to be opposed to them—men filled with prejudices %ping them,
and eM,
and whose opinions and sentiments were 7inawn and recorded.
Vas this fair play? He appealed to the English people if
it
was right or fair to try a man by his enemies, and this
did
in
country where polities ran so high as unhappily they
what might,
Bat would the verdict have any effect—r.oSsid
any weight ? He said that let the verdict be
• ht thank
moral effect of it would be destroyed, aqd. theyha
might
more
their Attorney-General for it, Ilks cysts hire t c
trlrt ye
alienation between the
that had occurred
gendered more anOoeity, t ananything had en-
his mass of evil they had
within
'l4
la 4 fifty year
Fq...La" They might continue him
to thatdc their Att.:lOlPS
Pe2llt of the two countries,
they perpetuated an insult to that
owl, Roman
in his office, list he torPtehaeeruhirecornumnetrnytmatisna,t
f9iny
ud,ointitkage
from knowledge of hie own; whsO g 4