The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-18 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
GLOBE.—If the Anti-Corn-law Leaguers are not
tilways tolerant of those who do not go all lengths with
them, the Corn-law Leaguers are lustily following their
example, at the expense of the Ministry. In fact the
Government will have two cereal combinations on its
back, instead of one. Out of the alligator jaws (de-
picted by IL B.) of the Anti-Corn-law League, the
Luckless Sir Robert sinks in the boa-constrictor gripe of
The landed protectionists. The chairman of the Suffolk
Leaguers thus denounces the policy of the present Go-
vernment, as having betrayed the constituency to whom
it owed its effective majority :
" They were well aware that at the last general election the
majority expected by the friends of the present Government
was 20, or thereabouts. By the exertions of the yeomanry and
of the agricultural interests generally, a majority of 100 was
secured.—( Hear.) Yet what was the result ? In the very
first session after the present Government were placed in
power Sir Robert Peel brought in his Corn Bill, which les-
sened the protection given to the agricultural interests.—
(Loud cries of Hear. )"
One of the spokesmen of the Surrey Leaguers cha-
racterises, as follows, the wisdom of the country gen-
tlemen, and charges the Minister of their choice with a
highly flattering aptness to being frightened :
" When they aaw an unconstitutional body coming
forward, and exercising such a powerful influence
against them, as was exercised by the Cotton Lords,'
as they were termed, it would hardly be supposed that
the lords of the soil, who, although they might be pos-
sessed of vast quantities of land, still had very little wisdom,
would have come forward to assist that body in their attacks
upon the agricultural interest. Such, however, was the case;
persons in high station, win ought to have supported them,
had, for political purposes, turned their backs upon them, and
gave their support to those who desired to destroy them.—
(Hear.) This being so, it was high time for them to come
Yorward themselves in support of that interest, which
was not only attacked by the Anti-Corn-law League,
but also by those who ought have been amongst its
chief supporters—(Cheers)—but who, on the contrary, had of
late thought fit to second the endeavours of its most determined
opponents.—(Hear, hear.) He did not wish to enter into a
political discussion, but he must say that the agriculturists, by
their apathy, had allowed the Government to make concessions,
which, if they had exerted themselves, he was quite sure would
never have been made ; and he called upon them now to resist
the endeavours of the Anti-Corn-law League to frighten their
friends into furthet' concessions."
But perhaps the most unkindest cut of all was that of
Lord Henniker at the Suffolk meeting:—
" The arguments used by the anti-corn-law advocates to
prove that the free importation of foreign corn would produce
no disarrangement in the agriculture of England, reminded
him of an anecdote. It was once asserted by some very grave
philosophers, that if an eel were put into a vessel filled with
water to the brim, the vessel would not overflow, as none of the
water would be displaced. Well, a tub was brought, and it was
filled in the presence of the philosophers. A country gentle-
man, one of the stupid country gentlemen, as they were called,
however, told them to take care lest the eel should splash them.
--(Laughter.) He was disbelieved ; the eel was put in, and
it was soon found that it splashed the water about in all direc-
tions. Now he warned the agriculturists that, if free trade were
adopted, they would get splashed in like manner."
This variation of the old story of Charles the Second
and the Royal Society is most maliciously calculated to
illustrate the result of putting in Peel. We beg, how-
ever, to make one slight variation more ; and the parallel
will be complete. In the modern Eel or Peel instance,
it was not the " grave philosophers " who asserted that,
if the Eel, or Peel, were put in, the vessel would not
overflow—" no disarrangement would be produced in the
agriculture of England." The grave philosophers
predicted precisely the contrary. We ourselves,
who have sometimes ironically been said to cul-
tivate the philosophical, emphatically warned " the
stupid country gentlemen," that the Eel, or Peel,
would " splash them." It wag those same " stupid
country gentlemen," whom Lord Henniker drags in,
head and shoulders, that were bent on trying the en-
philosophical experiment of a Peel Government.
Accordingly the Eel, or Peel, was put in, and " the
water was splashed about in all directions., It was
impossible to furnish a happier illustration of the
slippery champion chosen by the country gentlemen ;
or one which carne more infelicitously; or more in-
sidiously, from the lips of a senator, who took some
pains to declare that he wished to support Government
to the utmost of his power. The landed, as well as the
manufacturing League seem to repose their hopes in
Sir Robert Peel's squeezableness. Between them he
will most assuredly have the peine et forte duce to un-
dergo. " It was desirable," said a speaker at the Suffolk
meeting, " that Sir Robert Peel should know, and that
it should go forth through the land, that the yeomanry
were ready to support the laws and the institutions of
the State, and that they were not content to allow
themselves and their children to be injured to enrich
Mr. Cobden." We never heard that Mr. Cobden had
devised any artificial legislation to injure anybody ; or
any series of measures with regard to a great article of
commerce, each successive one of which has produced
disappointment to every interest consulted, or not con-
sulted. But what we are most edified by in these
Landed League proceedings is the sudden adoption
of the " unconstitutional" modes of action of the Anti-
Corn-law League. Lord Rendlesham said at the Suf.
folk meeting, " They were not to rest satisfied with
petitions only. They should come forward with sub-
scriptions, and if the League raised 100,000/. they ought
to raise 200,000/.—( Vehement cheers)—and thus con-
vince the world that though the League be a great
fact,' the agricultural interest was still a greater fact."
At the same meeting Mr. Gross said, that as tenant
farmers, they would tell their enemies that they were
ready for the fight. They would stand in the breach,
and nail their colours to the mast.--(Hear, hear.) How
was it possible for the farmers of Suffolk to compete with
the farmers of Poland ? There is a beautiful mixture of
metaphor and interrogation here. To " stand in the
breach," and " nail their colours to the mast," are each
gallant operations ; though they are not commonly con-
sidered capable of being performed at the same time and
place. However, as Sir R. Peel's Constrictionists mean to
raise 200,000/. for the League's 100,000/., it is possible that
they can do two things at once, in all manner of ways. It ap-
pears, however, that, though they can stand in a breach, and
nail colours to a mast, each of which are deeds of des-
perate daring—one of which seems enough at a time—
there is another thing which they can not do ; or, at
least, Mr. Gross pathetically asks, How can they ?
" How was it possible for the farmers of Suffolk to
compete with the farmers of Poland ?" Why per-
haps not, while they are standing in breaches, and
nailing their colours to the mast. Suppose they
tried a less showy process—viz., putting their shoulders
to the wheel ! A correspondent of last evening's
Standard actually founds a plea for protection on the
fact that the farmers won't put their shoulders to the
wheel, and adopt even tried improvements ! Others
might derive from his observations, which seem those of
a practical farmer, the strongest possible argument for
stimulating improvement by competition. But " how are
they to compete ?"—they can "stand in the breach," and
" nail colours to the mast"—but " compete" they cannot.
" She didn't mind death, but she couldn't bear pinching."
STANDARD.—One of the most common complaints
of the Anti-English party in Ireland is, that Parliament,
in legislating for the empire, does not study the
character nor endeavour to suit " the genius" of
the Irish people. What this much-talked-of genius
happens to be, it is very difficult to discover, as it
bas remained hitherto unsuited by every attempt of Par-
liaments, native or Saxon, but most of all by the com-
mon law of England, as far as respects trial by jury.
The proceedings which took place on Monday in Dub-
lin, at the commencement of the trial of Daniel
O'Connell and his fellow-agitators, present still
further proof of this fact, if after the previous trans-
actions in the case, such proof were at all required.
When every pretext for delay which the notorious in-
genuity of Mr. Pierce Mahony could devise, or the plen-
tiful affidavits of the traversers partisans support, had been
exhausted, Mr. O'Connell and his friends were at length
brought to bay by the Attorney-General upon Monday
morning. To imagine, however, that the calling over of
the jury would have gone off in decent gravity, and the
Attorney-General have been allowed to open the case
for the Crown, according to the practice of the matter-
of-fact and un-mercurial Saxons, had been to do the
agents for the traversers, the greatest injustice. On the
contrary, no sooner had the counsel taken their places
than Mr. Ford's grievance-discriminating eye marked a
piece of negligence on the part of the under sheriff's' lowest
official, and with becoming solemnity moved the
Court" to place the chair for the witnesses a little
to one side • a motion which, to do the audience justice,
they received with laughter, and which was granted by
the Court without the customary dissent of Mr. Justice
Perrin. This important matter being disposed of, Mr.
Ford proceeded to give an unmistakeable proof
of the sincerity of his desire, and that of the
party which ho represents, to have a jury without
any political bias whatever, and of the value
which they attach to the oath of jurors, that they
will be guided by evidence alone. A Mr. Benjamin
Eaton, ono of the special jury panel, sharing, it seems,
in the general and not unreasonable desire of avoiding
a service of many days upon the trials, claimed exemp-
tion upon the ground of ill-health, to which Mr. Ford,
with much candour, replied that it was quite impos-
sible for the traversers " to lose the chance " afforded
them by Mr. Eaton's being upon the jury. This plain
and candid reference to hopes grounded upon the
chance of the political feelings of a juror was made,
the reader will remark, by the representative of a
party which has been vapouring about the integrity
of trial by jury, as though the entire weight of
saving the Constitution had devolved upon them.
Amongst Irish patriots, however, there is always
to be found in acts a wholesome commentary upon
professions. The historical a ind"' C on of Mr. Wyse, the
well-worn rhetoric of Mr. Shell' the poetical
,fervour of
Mr. Thomas Steele, and even thefami familiar-faced jokes
and periods of Mr. O'Connell himse , are less va-
luable as a test of sincerity thanhi he lfh
of Mr. Ford to -'lose the chance" of
refusal
of retaining
Mr. Eaton. Such incidents these
seem
ex-
tremely odd to those who are accustomedwis teoibhelieve
that the spirit of the English la
supposing jurors to decide by the evidence that laidin
so
before them, and by that alone. We are net yet
enlightened as to use the popular language of our
Irish neighbours, who talk of " carrying agitation
into the Queen's Bench." And certainly, even
with their example before us, and with all the
knowledge of legal politics which they have been
of late imparting to us, carrying agitation into
the jury-room is still a novelty on this side the
Channel. The calling of the jury being got over, the
traversers made one further attempt to gain time by chal-
lenging the array on the ground of the omissions in the
list, the consideration of which had occupied the Court on
the previous Friday. By the application one further
day was gained, but no further advantage, as the Court
decided that the Attorney-General's demurrer to the
challenge should be allowed, Mr. Justice Perrin being
swain " under the disadvantage of not concurring with
his brethren." As to the ridiculous proceedings of the por-
tion of the corporation of Dublin, which masqueraded
through the streets on Monday morning, in attend-
ance upon Mr. O'Connell, they are only to be taken in

the same way as Mr. Ford's declaration—as so many
proofs of the truth of Roman Catholic pros ssions of
neutrality, and must have been, no doubt, gratifying to
those who saw so little harm in handing over to Mr.
O'Connell, and his followers, the Protestant co ora-
tions of Ireland.
FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.
TIMES.—The French Legitimatists betray considerable
signs of confusion under the attack which has been made
upon them by the sage Government of Louis Philippe,
as any party will do when skilfully pressed from with-
out, and unsupported by any definite object or clear and
understood principle of coherency within. The adhe-
rents of the Duke de Bordeaux have at present neither
the one nor the other. They have no definite object ;tfor
it is impossible that they can nourish any real expectation
of replacing " Henry V. on the throne of France.
They have no coherency of principle, else we should
hear of no coquetting with Republicanism. The more
able among them must repudiate the one—the more
honest must abhor the other. With the influence of the
nobility extinct, with the commercial and trading classes
wholly given to the dynasty of Louis Philippe, with the
students and artisans rank republicans, the army devoted
to the power which pays it, and even the clergy,
in whose cause the elder dynasty fell, and among
whom, therefore, the spark of old-fashioned loyalty
might be expected at least to linger—with even the
clergy in its younger and more vigorous part, too deeply
tinged with the wild doctrines ofLamennais to present
any firm basis for Royalist principles—with all these
things against them, it is, indeed, difficult to suppose that
any man of ordinary forethought, who mixes with the
world, or who even reads the daily papers, should cherish
the hope of a second restoration. There are no visible
materials for success—no locus standi—no point of con-
tact between Royalism and the French people—no body
of ancient and familiar prejudice—no national want to
which legitimacy is the necessary correlative—no still
existing remains of a feudal interest—there is nothing,
we will not say to encourage the expectation, but even to
keep alive the most distant hope of the most modified
triumph. The revolution of the last century, of which
the present state of France is a development, was not
the mere prostration of a party, it was the extermination
of a whole mass of principles with every thin.. that ad-
hered
to them. The entire soil which had been im-
pregnated with the traditionary feelings and ideas of
Royalism was swept away in a torrent of blood, and
the dry stone left bare below. We have now a
fresh formation to deal with—a new people, held
together (so long as it is held together), not by
habitual regard for any form of authority, but by a ra-
tional dislike of anarchy—owning no allegiance and
experiencing no reverence towards ancient associations
—and regarding those who still cling to such romantic
ideas as intrnders into a century which does not belong
to them—relics of a bygone age, whose uncongenial pre-
sence might perhaps be mischievous to modern institu-
tions, if it were not so palpably impotent. No mind has
sprung from the ruins of the 18th century—no able
enthusiast has survived the storm in which it passed
away, capable of transmitting its feelings or of infusing
its prejudices in the succeeding generation. The dynasty
of the Restoration—representative as it was of the line
of ancient monarchs—stood amidst young France, during
its short existence of fifteen years, like an alien con-
queror, maintaining itself by the mere advantage of pos-
session against an unfriendly and unapproachable popula-
tion. No impregnation of principles—no amalgamation of
interests, had taken place. The Bourbon race was torn up
and thrown aside after a short trial, and almost without
an effort, like a sapless slip which has not put out
a single fibre to grasp the chilly and barren soil which
surrounded it. Such as it was such it remained, ignorant
of and unintelligible to its generation. Is it conceivable
that it should regain the position of power which, when
in possession, it was wholly unable to preserve ? France,
it is true, contains elements of confusion in plenty.
Visionary aspirations—rude and dangerous theories—a
rankling jealousy of restraint, not confined in its expres-
sion to the closet or the parlour, but avowed and acted
on with a certain individual recklessness which marks a
wild reality—these are, indeed, omens of change—omens
which make us dread the moment when the vigilant eye
and firm hand by which they are at present kept in
check shall be removed. But amidst all these aspirations,
and theories, and jealousies, what spot of firm ground
can the Legitimatist place his foot upon ? There is none.
Even were the French Henriquiste, like the Spanish
Aloderado, to purchase a momentary triumph by a coali-
tion with his own bitterest enemies, nothing short of the
genius of Napoleon or the sagacity of Louis Philippe
could retain the dangerous supremacy. King Henry V.
would not hold his ground a week, and this his wiser
friends well know. It is this necessary hopelessness—
this absence of any real and practicable purpose—
which makes it, and must ever make it, impossible
that the French Legitimatists should form a compact
and united party ; and it is this necessary want of
unity which has been exposed by the Ministerial attack,
The Duke de Fitzjames declares, in the Quotidienne, his
readiness to repeat before a French jury the bold expres-
sions uttered in Belgrave-square. M. de Larey tells the
Chamber of Deputies that his oath of allegiance binds
him to "obey the laws of the country and no more."
Meanwhile the abler M. Berryer, representing, we
should suspect, a more considerable portion of those who
once composed the Royalist party, disclaims the notion
of a plot against the existing Government, appeals to
" the loyalty and sincerity which the Legitimatist party
had evinced during the last thirteen years," and assures
the Chamber that " the Legitimatist leaders who went
to London told the Duke de Bordeaux salutary truths on
the condition of the country, and the past faults of his
family," and now only desired " to serve France, to ex-
ercise their political rights, to avoid everything tending to
kindle civil war, and to unite with the rest of their fellow.

countrymen in repelling foreign invasion, even were
it undertaken in the interest of their own cause." Some
at least of these leaders would scarcely thank
M. Berryer for his disclaimer, Those who saluted the
Duke of Bordeaux as the " King of the future," can
scarcely be disposed to relish that able orator's protest
against civil war, and his unthankful rejection of the
Irish brigade, to whose possible services Mr. O'Con-
nell seems to ascribe so much present offers on
the young Prince's fortunes. But whether M. Berryer
refers to the liberal efforts of the Hibernian potentate
(who might be supposed to have enough on his hands at
home, without carrying his operations across the Chan-
gip, or to the less avowed, though perhaps more sub-
stantial friendship of the Courts of Eastern Europe, he

is certainly right in supposing that neither by internal
conflict nor external aid can " the heir of a long series
of Kings" hope to occupy to any purpose the throne of
his progenitors. If he will but thoroughly impress that
conclusion upon his party, he will do France a service,
save them from a most mischievous delusion, and earn
forgiveness for many such silly expeditions as that to
Belgrave-square.
ADVERTISER—The State trials did not after all

commence until Tuesday. Monday was spent in arguing
for and against a motion made by the traversers'
counsel, having for its object to set aside the jury, as
illegally constituted. The motion was refused by the
Court, Mr. Justice Perrin dissenting from his three
brother Judges. But though the decision of the Court
was adverse to the parties arraigned, the discussion
raised on the question has proved, in a moral sense, most
damaging to the prosecution. Mr. Fitzgibbon demon-
strated to the satisfaction of every one, except the
Court and the Attorney-General, that it was an act of
manifest unfairness, if not decidedly illegal, to try the
traversers with a jury constituted as is the jury impa-
nelled to try Mr. O'Connell and his alleged co-con-
spirators. This is the universal impression without the
walls of the Court, and the impression is shared by
one of the most enlightened Judges, either in the
Dublin Queen's Bench, or in any other Court in the
empire. Were there, therefore, no other damaging
circumstance connected with these ill-advised prosecu-
tions, this fact alone would be sufficient to divest a
conviction, supposing it to take place, of all moral in-
fluence. But when, in addition to the more than
suspicious circumstances under which the sixty-three
names were omitted from the list, we remember the
various previous mishaps and ugly occurrences connected
with these proceedings, we unhesitatingly say, that of
all the ill-judged measures of the present Government,
this will be found to be the most injudicious and most
injurious. Even, as just remarked, assuming a convic-
tion to take place, we cannot conceive the possibility of
Sir liobert Peel ever allowing the parties to be brought
up for judgment. The public mind already revolts
against these prosecutions ; should they be followed by
the infliction of punishment (always assuming a convic-
tion to ensue), a feeling of indignation will be created in
the public mind which will overwhelm and destroy the
Government of Sir Robert Peel. If there be one thing
more than another which the people of England hold to
be essential to the integrity of the national character, it is,
that no susTacions attach to the proceedings in our judicial
courts. Englishmen of all classes, and of all shades of
political feeling and opinion, abhor anything in our courts
of law which could be construed into an act of harshness
or unfairness. In the present case, should a conviction
take place and punishment follow, public sympathy
in favour of the traversers will become alarmingly strong'
and general—alarmingly so, we mean, for the Govern-
ment. Even those who are most opposed to Mr.
O'Connell, would, in the supposed case, consider him a
political martyr. Need we say what would be the pro-
bable effects in Ireland should O'Connell ever come to be
so considered ? We will not attempt to describe these
effects ; we leave our readers to exercise their own ima-
gination on the subject. Sir Robert Peel must by this
time be convinced that, even supposing a conviction were
ensured, no eclat whatever could accompany that result.
Whatever moral weight might have attached to these
trials, under other circumstances, none whatever can
attach to them after what has occurred,. Theirs has
been a strange eventful history indeed. It seems as if
Fate and the Irish Attorney-General were sworn
enemies, and that Fate had resolved to punish the
Learned Gentleman in every imaginable way. We do
not know if Mr. Smith bo given to cursing ; but if he be,
he must have given many a hearty curse to the mis-
haps and mortifications which he has had to encounter
in every successive stage of these proceedings. Next to
the learned official, Sir Robert Peel is to be pitied. ',Ye
are inclined to think that others, of whose names we
have heard but little in connection with these trials, have
had much more to do with them than the Premier. Be
this as it may, the odium rests exclusively on him. The
guilt and responsibility of the whole matter, so far as
public opinion and public feeling aro concerned, attach
to Sir Robert. No one knows this better than himself.
If there be one act of his ministerial life which ho
regrets more deeply than another, it is, we are sure, that
of ever having sanctioned these prosecutions.
His usual caution and worldly wisdom must have
forsaken him, when he gave his consent to the in-
stitution of proceedings against Mr. O'Connell and
the other parties associated with him in this in-
dictment. The difficulty with the Premier now is, how
to get out of the predicament into which he has brought
himself, without making his Government the laughing
stock of the civilised world, and drawing on himself the
contempt of friends as well as foes. He is indeed in a
pretty pickle, Lie is afraid to retrace his steps; he

wants the moral courage to undo what ho has done, by
putting an end to the proceedings. And yet he cannot
look forward to a conviction, even supposing he were
certain to obtain it, without fear and trembling. His
only hope, we take it, lies in the possible circumstance
of some legal defect being yet discovered in the proceed-
ings, which will have the effect of stopping them, and
consequently relieving him from the position of painful
perplexity in which he is placed. He will be a lucky
man if he be suffered to escape in that way. If he has
friends, this is the time for their prayers. Ile has
much need that one and all of them earnestly pray that
Heaven may send him a safe deliverance.

POST.—Whatever may be the ultimate result of the
State trials in Ireland (the result, for so far, has unques-
tionably been most salutary), the grand debateable point
will still remain—namely, the cause of Ireland's back-
wardness in all that should distinguish civilised life. 'We
shall still have to inquire how it happens that under the
" liberal and enlightened" Government of Great Britain
—with laws similar to those of England—with a soil
generally superior, and a climate certainly not inferior,
so large a portion of the population of Ireland continues,
from year to year, in a state of beggary and barbarism.
Our readers know that we have often glanced at this
question, and that our opinion is, that it is mere delusion
to suppose that the evils ot Ireland are to be cured by
such political changes as her agitators contend for. The
schemes of Whig economists and Reformers are not less
delusive. The very long article of the Edinburgh Review,
however ingenious in its speculations, and bold in its recom-
mendations of sweeping political and ecclesiastical
change, we regard as just so much trash, so far as re-
gards the practical amelioration of the state of the
people. 'What signifies it to the tillers of the ground—
the savage and half-destitute millions—whether the
establishment of the Anglo-Catholic Church be territo-
rial or congregational ? How would the condition of
the peasantry be affected, either for better or worse, by
the endowment of Maynooth, or the mortgaging of the
lands of the Established Church for behoof of the fund
of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners ? That which the
people want is a more comfortable way of living, and
that (except in the north) is at present forbidden
by the bad habits of the people—by the circum-
stances under which the land is overburdened by
a pauper tenantry—circumstances which exist in de-
fiance of the law, and which nothing' can cure but
some system of close superintendence to compel an
observance of the law. At present there is a close
and watchful superintendence, but it is that of the Ro-
man Catholic clergy, who do not respect the law, and
who very often have an interest in making arrange-
ments, or causing arrangements to be made,-„which are
at variance with the dispositions which the law, if exe-
cuted, would have made. In short, without denying
that, in many respects the Roman Catholic priest is
often found to be the friendly adviser, and the comfort
and stay of the poor people in their affliction, it must be
admitted (by those who know and respect the truth)
that as a superintendent and guide in civil and social
affairs, he often leads the people into courses unfavour-
able to social advancement. Our own belief is that poli-
tical reforms on a large scale will do nothing for the re-
moval of Ireland's social grievances, and that this
can only be brought about by the establishment of
a superintendence as close as that of the Romish
priest, but devoted to very different objects, and
carried on in strict conformity with the law. On a
former occasion, when speaking of the circumstances
under which land is held by the swarming population,
we cited the evidence of the late Judge Forster, whose
knowledge of the country, and whose integrity no one
could doubt, whatever might be thought of his some-
what heavy and pedantic manner. He said that the oc-
cupiers of the soil were barbarised by a habit of gavel
kind, and by tenancy in common and at will. This
is what every one who has practical acquaintance
with the subject must be convinced of. The con-
tinual subdisivion of the land is the monstrous oil.
Not that we are advocates for the huge holdings of
land which are common in England, We think
there are evils in farms of three thousand acres, as
well as in farms of ten, seven, and three acres, which
may often be found in Ireland. The possession of any
portion of land—a mere potato garden—seems to the
Irish peasant a justification for taking to himself a wife,
and producing a family. He knows there is a rent to be
paid, but he trusts something to his pig, and much to
Providence, for the means of paying the rent. In the
meantime, the potato garden (provided the crop do
not fail) will give him enough of the lowest kind of
food to sustain life ; but if the crop should fail, then
God help him and the children, for there is literally
nothing between them and downright starvation.
They know all this well enough, if they would
but exercise their reason, and be guided by what
they know. But they will not. It is not their habit.
They are ready to encounter any risk, however dreadful,
for the sake of setting up for themselves with a bit of
land. They ought not ,to be allowed to do this. If the
law were respected, they would find it impossible to ob-
tain the land ; but it is not respected. Men who have
not any legal right to divide and distribute their holdings,
nevertheless do divide and distribute them, and the hordes
of peasant paupers increase. Twenty years ago all this
was clearly explained to committees of both Houses of
Parliament, but the public have forgot all about these
Parliamentary inquiries, and now there are new inquiries
into the very same thing.

CHRONICLE.—Every stop in the progress of the
State trials in Ireland, serves more deeply to convince us
of the correctness of the opinion, which we have already
so frequently expressed concerning the impossibility of
those proceedings being followed by any advantage what-
ever to any party or any interest in the State. If a
verdict of guilty should be the result, it will be impos-
sible for any mortal out of the jury-box to form any
conjecture as to what portion it refers of that ocean of
circumstances and occurrences which are the foundation
of the charge. If the jury should acquit the prisoners,
it would be unwarrantable in reason to infer, from the.
verdict alone, that the twelve men in the box were of
opinion that all the public proceedings of the repealers
have been in conformity with the law of the land. With
regard to the only other possible contingency—namely,
that the jury should not agree in opinion about the case,
and be discharged without finding any verdict at all, it is,
of course, obvious that such a result would leave matters
no clearer than it found them. Such is, we think, the
conclusion at which every intelligent and impartial
person would arrive upon considering nothing more than
the nature of the charge, as well as that of the facts of
the proceedings, of the conduct and of the conversations
upon which it is founded ; together with the prodigious
length and illimitable multifariousness of the act of ac-
cusation. But this view of the case has been infinitely
strengthened by the occurrence of a fact, about the
existence and particular nature of which all doubt has
been removed by the discussion which took place in the
Irish Court of Queen's Bench, on Monday last. It is
now admitted by all parties, that of the whole number of
individuals from whom the jury for the trial of Mr.
O'Connell was to be selected, according to law, about
one-tenth have been excluded from the possibility of
being selected fur that purpose. The list of special
jurors delivered to the sheriflcontained about GO names
less than it ought, and accordingly, when the foreman
came to the book to be sworn, the defendants' counsel
presented a challenge to the array, upon the ground of
its having been fraudulently and illegally composed.
Lax logic, trivial topics, and a want of decorum
in demeanour appear to be so much the characteristics of
Irish tribunals, that we do not feel surprised at the ex-
hibition, upon the present occasion, of these usual attend-
ants upon the workings of Hibernian jurisprudence.
The law officers of the Crown objected that the chal-
lenge did not state the name of the individual by whom
the fraudulent and illegal omission of sixty names from
the panel had been actually perpetrated. As if it was to
be reasonably presumed that the defendants must be as
well acquainted with the person who performed a clan-
destine operation " in the innermost room of the clerk
of the peace's office," as they wero with that of the crier
of the Court. The Attorney-General refused to take
issue upon the averments of the challenge, and opposed
its reception upon the ground that it did not communi-
cate a fact which there was no other judicial way of as-
certaining than by allowing the challenge, which was
opposed on the part of the Crown. The Attorney-
General contended that the challenge did not allege that
Mr. Shaw himself was guilty of the fraud and illegality
complained of. But the only way in which this could
be ascertained, was by examining Mr. Shaw and the
other officials who were present; and this examination
was rendered impossible, by the course which was pur-
sued by the Attorney-General himself. But of what
earthly importance to the defendants or to the public
was it by whom the fraud was committed? The Solici-
tor-General said, that if it had been alleged that the
Sherijf had committed the fraud, that fact would con-
stitute a fair ground of challenge. This distinction,
which was adopted and sanctioned by the Court, gives
rise to the gravest considerations. We do not mean to
make any personal imputations upon the integrity of
any of the officials engaged in the conduct of the pro-
ceedings. But if—alio tenipore, alio consule—there should
exist, as there has existed, a party in power determined
upon ensuring, per fas et nefas, the conviction of a po-
litical or other antagonist, they have a reasonable as-
surance of being able, with perfect impunity, to prac-
tise the " art of packing," if they will only take care t o
act upon the intimation thrown out in the case of the
Queen v. O'Connell, and to perform the operation of
mutilating the jury list before that point of time at
which the Sheriff intervenes in the proceedings. It is a
very trite observation, but one which never can be too
often repeated, that every member of the community has
a deep interest in the purity of every proceeding con-
nected with the administration of justice, which, with
even a superabounding caution, ought to bo kept free
from any liability to the smallest degree of impropriety
or even of suspicion. We believe that we make no ha-
zardous assertion in stating that, independently of all the
other considerations to which we have already adverted,
the proceedings in the Court of Queen's Bench on Mon-
day last would be alone sufficient to prevent the candid and
impartial part of even the anti-repealing community from
being satisfied with a verdict of guilty, obtained from a jury
selected as they have been in the present case. The strik-
ing off, in Mr. Beurne's office, of all the Catholics upon
the reduced list of forty-eight, taken in conjunction with
the omission which has been the particular subject of
the present article, has had the effect of preventing a
single member of that persuasion from being empa-
nelled for the trial of the case which, partly in conse-
quence of the omissions which we have been discussing,
has now began to assume the appearance of a religious
prosecution. The feelings which are likely to be ex-
cited in such circumstances amongst the vast majority of
the Irish population, are of a very serious, or rather, of
a very dangerous character ; and as all the attempts
which have been made to induce the Attorney-General
to consent to the removal of such legitimate causes of
I Irritation have wholly and uniformly been rejected with
petulance as well as pertinacity, we can only again ex-
press our most earnest hope that some unexpected occur-
rence may bring to a premature conclusion a prosecution,
the effect of which must, as we believe, be in every sense
injurious to the public welfare.