The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-09 00:00:00

- •. . .
SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS
FROM THE EVZNINEI ?Ak'EOS OE YESTI.:ItDA
GLOBE.—The striking of the special jury for
fhe trial of O'Connell and his ere-lei-et:dents,
and the subsequent redmeeieti of ;:me n'ty-
names (drawn by ballot irons the list) to Lwciati-
f::ar, who will be summoned to try the issue
eetween the Crown and the travereere have
to lieu place. These preparations for the grand
notional drama have terminated the temporary
hail of public excitement which the suspension
of the proceedings, by the postponement
of the trial, had produced. Time course
to-tepted by the law•officers of the Crown in
tles striking of the jury—an account of which
THU be found in another column--is applauded
ee. condemned, in conformity with the relative
political position of the journals and the Govern-
2-13.ent. Their rejection, on the part of the Crown,
of every Roman Catholic, is Leiden as a !nester-
stroke of policy by the ultra- PrO LOA all t irt rty ;
while it is denounced by the Liberels es indica-
tive of' a determination, on the part of the Go-
vernment, to obtain a conviction by the alem-
d.eament of even the semblance of impartiality.
The striking off by the Crown oflieers of eleven
Roman Catholic jurors and one Protestant (an
Englishman) from the list, must be admitted to
be an extraordinary proceeding; tied calculated
to excite suspicion of a detertnination to pro-
cure a conviction by whatever means. We will
not, however, assume that even a jury thus sus-
piciously constructed, will necessarily return
a verdict hostile to evidence. But this we will
say—and we expect the concurrence of all who
are not precluded by.party prejudice from forming
an unbiassed opinion of • the case—that no
course could have been adopted so likely to em-
barrass the deliberations of twelve men desirous
of arriving at a just decision on the facts, as ad-
sleced in evidence for the prosecution and de-
fence. It will be impossible for the jury not to
feel that they are placed in an invidious posi-
tion by the conduct of the Crown officers. In
sensitive minds such a feeling will produce
timidity. This will be associated with regret
that they as a jury are wholly selected from one
of the two great parties into which their country is,
unhappily, divided. Resentment against the reck-
less officials, if not against their employers, whose
commands they executed, for having thus endea-
voured to convert the jury-box into the engine
of their purposes, and the jurors into their tools,
will be, more or less, the result, as mind inter-
elianges with mind its own views and kelings.
An indignant refusal to be thus degraded, in
-their persons as citizens, and in office as jurors,
will be produced. The Irish A ttorney-
-4G eneral's " devil," like the person from
whom he derives his appellation, will be
found to have over-helped those who called
him to their aid, and thus pitched them into
-the mud instead of placing them in the saddle.
But, take the other view. Suppose a conviction
—and for the purposes of our argument, it
is immaterial whether the finding he sup-
ported or not, by sufficient evidence—a ver-
dict against O'Connell and his co-defendants,
to be of any service to the Government, or of any
avail in putting down, the agitation for Repeal,
must be in accordance with public opinion.
By impugning the impartiality of time jury,
the Government has destroyed the moral ie-
fleence which a manifestly impartial verdict
--would have secured. By securing a jury of Pro-
testants, they have neutralised the ietluence
-which a conviction would have exercised on the
thinking part of the community; while they
have converted the prosecution into an addi-
tional provocation to excitement in the coun-
try which they would tranquillise by intimida-
tion. O'Connell convicted by a jury so eon-
stltuted, the Government—strong, as it deems
Yeelf in the possession of Ireland by military
occupation—would be embarrassed by success ;
and would be compelled, by fear of an insurrec-
tion, to make a virtue of necessity, and decline to
follow up the verdict by calling the defendants
forjudgment. The Irish Government is put
Qn the defensive. In justification of the question-
able policy pursued by the law officers of the
Crown on striking th e jury, the Dublin Packet puts
forth a laboured apology in its behalf. The specious
xeasoning of the advocate is frequently fatal to the
cause for which it is employed. The pains taken
by the Crown officers to obtain a jury of parti-
sans, not only shows something approaching, to
fear that a mixed jury could not be trusted with
the case they would be called upon to try, but
also that the bold step of striking off every
Catholic was one which it was necessary to gloss
over by sophistry, and to bolster up by an tip-
-peal to the theological prejudices of the domi-
nant Church. The following extract from the
(government organ, in the article we have al-
leded to, shows the extremity to which its
cepporters are driven to find plausibilities for
the sweeping rejection of Roman Catholics, as
unfit to serve, because of their creed, on " such a
fiery" :
"We contend that there existed good and incontrovertible
seasons for excluding the persons professing the Romaa Catholic
-religion from acting upon such a jury. We all know that the
xpeal agitation, which forms the essence and subject-matter of
:4:,J1-3 prosecution, is, with some very few exceptions, maintained
rxclusively by the Roman Catholic population of this country,
-fostered and encouraged by the Romish priesthood, two of
whom are numbered amongst the traversers; and we also know
That resort is had to every . species of oppression awl intimida-
tion to draw recruits to its ranks; and we verily believe
tech to be the general feeling amongst the lower orders of the
people upon this subject that were a Roman Catholic to agree
20 a finding of guilty' against O'Connell and the traverser?, he
would be subject to every species of persecution, and become an
object of execration to the vast majority of persons of his own
persuasion. This, we admit, is a hard saying, but such is our
solemn conviction; and admitting, as we unfeignedly do, that
any one of the individuals in question would be most desirous
act conscientiously, even under circumstances so trying and
kaaardous, yet it would be an act of the most positive cruelty to
-,,lace an individual in a position where the contest might be
between his conscience and his fears."
The trial of O'Connell and his co-defendants
then, to be a contest between Roman Catholics
-and Protestants! The distinctions which long
prevailed, and which, while they prevailed, were
a reproach to the Legislature and a source of dis
teaction and danger to the country, are revived.
The Government has practically re-enacted the
civildizabilities which excluded Catholics froin the
rights of citizenship. Its officers have dared public
opinion by expunging Papists from a jury pauel,
3n a country the inhabitants of which ere of the
-Roman Catholic religion in the proportion of even
to one ! The religious hostilities, which hid pre •
'sailed for three centuries, and were begi tieing. to
abai with the late concession of civil rink's to
the long-prescribed Many, are revived. The
Covernment declares that it dare not trust a
Roman Catholic in the jury-'sex Oil Ow
case to which it is a party. Yet, witl, wondemee
inconsistency, Sir Robert Peel pretest's to re
011.1 Ireland as an integral part of the enmpire
,ceeitled to equal privileges, and to les governed
-use equal laws, with the other part.i or her
lifejesty's domestic territoncs ! leeel Lyo l taut
right in his denunciation of
t, practically-, though w roeg epee
• s Irish are '' aliens" in the meoim mtien of con-
e- ent Tories. `as Alien me re:igioe "—they are
ivalified to act as juror.; between a Pretestaet
esevernment and Roman Catholic defeedatos !
is the substance of tht; Del din Pachet's
argument in defence of the cot--in
in perfect consistency with Lord
L endhurst's fulmination. Yet, were they
instead of being only nominally, " aliens," then
would Roman Catholics be its a better position
when prosecuted by the Goverimment for alleged
political offences. They would, us aliens: be en- •
titled to a mixed jury, to pass betwwom them awl
the Grown. The Government treats the Catholics
ita aliens, without allowing tlomn the privileges
of foreigners. Surely such a panel ;will he set
Aside by the Court.
STANDARD.—The proceedings at the strik-
tea of the special jury for the State trials, to
coinmence in Dublin this day week, is eetremely
amusing, more particularly on account or the
noif affectation of surprise and indignation of the
traversers' solicitor, as some Roman Catholics
mere excluded from the panel. The tone of the
attorney was, however, mild and sober, compared
-with the reclamation of time Fpeeman's JOupnal of
the day following the striking of the jury. Eight
personsare tobe tried as members °fa conthination
assumed by the prosecutor to be illegal. Of these
eight persons some are Roman Catholics, sonic
at least professing Protestants, and one is a
,Roman Catholic clergyman. Forty-eieht mines
„Zre taken by lot from a list of 717, prepared in
'strict Conformity with the terms of a statute, the
-provisions of which cannot be thought illiberal,
eeehen it is known that the statute was intraduced
ey /he late Sir Michael 0 Loghlin tied the pre-
., sit Nr. Justice Perrin, under the Irish adminis-
ieation of the Marquis of Normanby. The list
Far 48 being thus obtained by lot, the Crown
solicitor and the traversers' attorney proceed to
'reduce it, according to the peremptory direc-
sions of the law, by striking off twelve names
emelt ; how well soever satisfied with the
whole 48, still the solicitors must reduce time
"list. The Crown solicitor strikes off twelve
names, of which, says the Dublin Free .
ni man s
Journal, eleven (other accounts say ne)
are the names of Roman Catholics, and
the travellrser tt
hout a
s' aornyn exception, theey strikes offnames twelve
of
slarnea, a ,
wit
Protestants. If the striking; off names, there-
core, is to be taken as insult, the professors of the
-,2rotestant religion are prima facie snoreinsulted
1: eats-the professors of the Romanist faith.. But it
is said by the Freeman's Journal that.the Roman
inatholics objected to form the whole number
Roman Catholics in the list of 48. We
teleow not how 0;44 may be, but the Dublin Lvea•