The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-05 00:00:00

.rgii_Ny,:i.JDrSifil6W, MONT) IN G. PE WRU A R

It now remains for me to say but a few words in re-
ference to the particular acts charged against my client,
Mr. Duffy. Gentlemen, I at' once admit that he is a
Repealer—that he is of opinion that the union
ought to be repealed but he never attended any one
of those meetings. His state of health did not per-
mit him ; his inclination did not permit him ; his
business did not permit Mtn ; and the only occasion on
which he attended a meeting of the Repeal Association
he handed in some subscriptions, and did nothing
more.' You are yet called upon to hold him re-
sponsible for everything that was said and done at those
meetings—for the speech made at Clifden, as well as
that at Mullaghmast, Mr. Duffy is to be held accountable.
What, then, is the separate evidence against him ? I
shall apply myself very briefly to it. Ihe publication
of a song has been charged against him, and anything
more monstrous than the manner in which
that part of the charge is introduced into
the indictment it is scarcely possible to con-
ceive. The charge against Mr. Duffy, I should
observe, is- under two distinct heads—the publica-
tion of reports of speeches' and the original articles and
observations upon them. With respect to the reports I
apprehend that you cannot find him guilty of any charge
of conspiracy. He reprinted in his weekly paper, though
not at such a length, the reports of proceedings for the
previous week, compiled from perhaps ten or a dozen
other journals in which they originally appeared. The
remaining question, then, is as to the original publica-
tions,nwhich I • sTI
in
el
Attorneytak e the lGi trot
which, I admit, suggest other considerations,
yralopfrobringingproposes
o establishunde ourthe
crime of conspiracy, by picking out three or four articles,
published at different periods, and suggested by passing
events, culled from the publications in a weekly newspa-
per, extending over a period of nine months, and read to
the Court as being calculated to prejudice the minds of the
people against the Government of England; and, observe,
that all the intervening quotations, which might qualify,
or explain them, are passed over, although the Learned
Gentleman ferretted out everything else that could serve
his purposes, whether in large type or in small. The
song on which they rely is entitled " The Memory of
the Dead," and was published in the Nation or. the Ist
of April, 1843—a very proper day for the publication
of that which is now selected by the Crown as evidence
of a conspiracy. Are you to visit this act of Mr.
Duff's on Mr. O'Connell or to presume that it was
published in pursuance of a common plan between the
traversers? That song was written by some clever
young man. and I took the liberty of reading to you
another song published in the same paper on the same
day, and which it was certainly as agreeable to
hear as many of Mr. Attorney-General's state-
ments. These very sweet, agreeable verses were read
from the very same paper. Are you to be
asked to believe that Mr. O'Connell and Mr. Steele
knew beforehand that some young man, perhaps within
the' walls of Trinity College, animated with that poetic
fire which illumined his imaginative soul, would write
that song and send it to the proprietor of the Nation
to fill up a corner in his paper ? Are you to believe
that all this was done in pursuance of a common object,
and in furtherance of a Conspiracy ? Is it come to this,
that the Government of England is not safe—that the
constitution of England is in danger, because some
young men, gifted as the writer of that song un-
questionably was, adverted, in poetic language,
to the mistaken views of men who lived in former
days ?—or will any twelve honest, or intelligent,
or experienced men, he asked to found a. verdict
on such grounds ? Gentlemen, it is not fair—it is
not chivali ous—it is not generous thus to take a young
man to ask for the ardent and warm-hearted effu-
sions of his early youth. The writer whom, of 'all
others, I most admire—the writer who, in my opinion,
has, by his writings, done more than any other author
to uphold our social system—to mend the morals and
improve the mind—Robert Southey himself, commenced
his career by writing that memorable work, " Wat
Tyler," but the tone and temper of his mind were
changed when a sounder judgment and more' extensive
knowledge of the world taught him to view men and
manners by the calm light of cool, dispassionate reason.
Alas ! Mr. Solicitor, am Ito be told that it is worthy of
a wise and enlightened Government to bear down
with the . full current of a. State prosecution upon
the writer of that enthusiastic little song, writ-
ten with the ardour of thoughtless youth, and
that, too, after the lapse of nine months from
the time of its composition ? Gentlemen, in the
disastrous and criminal movement of '9l, amongst the
most prominent of the leaders were two ill-fated mem-
bers of my own profession—Henry and John Shears.
In a review which recently appeared in a re-
spectable literary publication, the Athenceum, of
the " Life and Writings of the late William
Taylor, of Norwich," I find this remarkable fact noticed,
that the first letter of a long correspondence between
Taylor and Southey transmits an elegy on the fate of
those unhappy young men. I will read for you an ex-
tract from the review in the .Athenaum:—" In 1798
William Taylor became acquainted with Robert Southey,
then rising into fame, and a correspondence ensued be-
tween them which extended for many years. It is sin-
gular that Taylor's first letter should transmit an elegy
on the fate of Henry and John Shears, who had just
been executed for high treason in Dublin ; Taylor cele-
brates them as martyred patriots. The passage in which
their mother is introduced, bidding them farewell in the
dungeon, will give a general notion of the spirit which
pervades the whole :
Sons, 'twas for this I bore you—die as men,
To whom your father's country and your offspring
Deserved to owe the good
Ye struggled to obtain.
Thy wife, son, cannot speak— she loves thy children ;
And in her poverty shall thank her God
That thou hast boldly dared
Devote them for thy country.
Thou needest, John, thy mother's counsel not.
If the few weeks that ere we meet, roll by,
Worthy of thee I spend,
Well pleased mine eyes shall close.
And, Gentlemen, am to be told that the man who
penned that touching verse is to be brandedfor ever more
as a conspirator, because he commisserated the unhappy
end of any ardent and misguided men who loved their
country, " not too wisely, but too well ?" No, Gen-
tlemen, such a proceeding would be scandalous and
disgraceful ; and equally unworthy is it of the great
and distinguished Government which prosecutes in the
present instance, to direct the thunders of their indig-
nation against the enthusiastic young author of the
" Memory of the Dead." Let the Solicitor-General tell
how the Government of England punished Mr. Moore
for poems not a whit more indicative of conspiracy (if
conspiracy indeed there be) than the stanzas which have
been read to you. Let him tell you how Moore was
punished for writing -such lines as these in the " La-
mentation of Aughrim" :
Could the chain for an instant be riven
Which tyranny flung round us then,
Oh! 'tis not in man nor in heaven
To let Tyranny bind it again.
But 'tis past ; and though blazoned in story
The name of our victor may be,
Accursed is the march of the glory
Which treads o'er the hearts of the free.
He will tell you how the bard was punished for penning
the song of " Rourke, Prince of Breffny," and of in-
serting in it such lines as these --
Already the curse is upon her,
And strangers her valleys profane ;
They come to divide—to dishonour ;
And tyrants they long will remain.
But onward !—the green banner rearing,
Go flesh every sword to the hilt :
On our side is Virtue and Erinj
On theirs is the Saxon and Guilt.
Yes, gentlemen, the author of the "Adventures of an
Irish Gentleman in Search of a Religion," and of the
" Memoirs of Lord Edward Fitzgerald," was punished.
But how was he punished ? He was punished by a
pension from the English Government--yes, Moore
was punished with a pension for his sedition; and you,
Gentlemen of the jury, are now solicited to bring a
verdict of " guilty' against the writer of this song, and
to declare your conviction that the emanation of a mind,
young, ardent, poetical, and imaginative, though mis-
taken, was written in furtherance of a common plan and
design of the most infamous nature! However ardent
the youth of Ireland may be, it should never be forgotten
of therm that they never forgot their loyalty to their
Sovereign—even when in 1715 and 1745 the best blood
of England-and of Scotland bedewed the scaffold, in con-
sequence of the mad,. and well-nigh successful attempt
to dislodge the present Royal family from the throne
of these countries, the Irish were faithful even to the
death.. Are not the free subjects of a free state to be
permitted to raise their voices in constitutional protes-
tation and remonstrance, when they think that their
interests are endangered or injured ? Scott, the most
cautious of writers, was once called upon to decide
between his attachment to his party and his love of
Scotland. The British Ministry declared their inten-
tion to introduce—regardless of the feelings of the
Scottish people, who considered that their interests
wire vitally concerned—a Bill in reference to the joint-
'stock banks of Scotland. The Scotch thought that
they would be injured by the contemplated Bill ;
and Sir Walter Scott, fired with indignation at the idea
that the Act should be introduced without con-
sulting the wishes and feelings of his countrymen,
wrote under the signature of " Malachi Malagrouther"
a series of letters which excited such a flame of indig-
nation in the country, from north to south, from east to
west, that the Minister of the Crown was obliged to fly
away with his obnoxious Bill under his arm, just as,
the Attorney-General would be forced to fly off with his
monster indictment on hid shoulder, for it would not fit
under any man's arni.—(Laughter.) The British Mi-,
nister failed, for the Scotch said, "we must get our
joint-stock banks"—aye, and they did succeed in getting
them; and are we not a country as good as Scotland,
that succeeded in wringing from the British Minister
their rights in what they considered a mercantile point
of view? Was that to be done in-a cold and servile war-
ner? Do you think Scott did it in that cold and mawkish
manner, and said, as we lawyers say, " Oh! I respect-
' fully submit?" Not he; he too well knew that he might
as well be whistling jigs to a milestone--(Laughter)—
and, therefore, he went boldly about the task, and Sir
Walter Scott succeeded in making his country—which
contained about one quarter of the number of inhabitants
that Ireland did—he succeeded, I say,
in making her
happy, respectable, and great, while we remain a poor,
pitiful, pelting province. lam not ashamed to say. this.
I' hope that the people of Ireland will combine in the
one cause, and that is the cause of their common coun-
try--for the common good of that country—for the good
of this ancient kingdom, that she may once again
flourish in the world's history. There is one
article more I shall trouble you with; but I
must remark that I cannot approve of the unjust and
intemperate observations which were sometimes made
upon the English nation—for they are a great, free and
magnanimous people. I object to reviving the recollec-
tions of past struggles and Contentions. They can only
be usefully recalled for one purpose, and-I hope and-be-
lieve it was for that purpose—to show the people the

Gentlemen, the Attorney-General has called the tra-
versers severely to task for having adopted the resolu-
tion of the old volunteers, and for having quoted in
their speeches the words of some illustrious men, now
no more, who expressed it as their opinion that in point
of constitmtional principle and upon constitutional
reasoning, the Union was null and void. He told you that
what is stated by Members of Parliament against an
Act before it becomes law cannot justify a man in op-
posing that Act of Parliament after it shall have be-
come the law of the land. That is certainly true to a
certain extent ; but I cannot help thinking that the
Attorney-General is endeavouring to push the principle
somewhat too fur. lie finds fault= with us fur having
quoted the words of that distinguished man, Mr. Saurin,
but I do not think that he had any right to call us to
task for having done so. Why should not Mr. O'Con-
nell refer to Mr. Saurin's words ? They are public
property—they are the property of the Irish people.
Gentlemen, I will trouble you with one word more—it is
the declaration of the Lord Fitzgerald and Vesci, who at
the time was prime Sergeant of lreland—a very lucrati% e
office. He sat in the House ..f Commons at the time, and
hear what he says—" Posterity w ill inquire into the means
by which this Union was carried. If the question had never
been made, I should have declined the discussion of it; but
as it has I must declare that it is not, in my opinion, within
the moral competence of Parliament to destroy and ex-
tinguish itself, and with it the rights and liberties of
those who created it. I acknowledge the competency of
the English Parliament to adopt the union with Scot-
land, because the number of the representatives and the
Peerage only was increased, which, as the Crown, by its
prerogative may do, so may the act of the Legislature.
But after the Union the constitution of England conti-
nued, but -the constitution of Scotland was dispersed. And
of this opinion must the great advocate of constitutional
establishment have been. The House of Lords was
not competent to dissolve the House .of Commons, I
nor even to dissolve itself, nor to abdicate if it would
its proportion in the legislation of the king-
dom ; that though a king may abdicate in his
own person he cannot abdicate for the monarchy.
The constituent parts of a state are obliged to hold
their public faith with each other. Such a com •
pact may, with respect to Great Britain, be a union,
but with respect to Ireland, it will be a revolution.
The Scotch Parliament was elected with a notice to the
people that such a measure would be submitted to their
discussion. How different the present case. Will the
measure proposed benefit the country. and remove the
causes of the discontent ? In my opinion not. It will,
on the contrary, increase the agitation of the one, and
aggravate the other ? Will it tranquillise this great
metropolis, which, so lately as the last summer,
by its valour and spirit, preserved this country
to ourselves and to Great Britain, while the
Government of the country lay shuddering in the
Castle ? Whom, then, will it gratify ? Not the loyal-
ist'-, but the United Irishmen. Nine out often of the
men execrate the measure—the, women are unanimous
against it, Would to God that they would emulate the
Athenian ladies, and subject the man who would vote for
it to the ban of their displeasure. Will it give you any
stronger claim on Great Britain ? No ; and lam satis-
fied that the honour of the British nation would reject
such an insinuation. Would Great Britain, that arms
for the deliverance of Europe, that seized Prussia, Sar-
dinia, the Emperor, and guarantees his loans, that
makes Egypt an object of his care—Will she refuse her
protection to Ireland ?" He concludes—" Posterity
inquire into the means by which this Union is car-
ried." Gentlemen, yon see what that man clearly foresaw.
After numerous references to authorities the Learned
Gentlemen continued:—lt is Curious, too,:that the Act
of Union contains noprovision that its finality should not
be discussed; and, therefore, the Attorney-General's ar-
gument against the right of the traversers to do so fails.
He then read an extract from Molyneux's book on the
state of Ireland, quoted the passage in which the writer
questioned the right of the English Government to de-
prive the Irish people of their ancient privileges, which
they had possessed fur 500 years, and proceeded to say:
—The English were so unable to get over the arguments
contained in that book, that they ordered it to be burned
by the common hangman—a circumstance which in-
creases very much my estimation of the work.—(A
laugh.) I will next call your attention to the considera-
tion of what Mr. O'Connell has asserted about the
revival of the Irish Parliament, and I will first, how-
ever, dispose of his proposition for the "Renewed
action of the Irish Parliament." Mr. O'Connell in that
extraordinary document sets forth the whole of the
Irish population, and states his opinion, that household
suffrage is the best. Why, Gentlemen, that is the
suffrage we have at present in Dublin. Every man who
has a house worth ten pounds possesses a vote, and there
are very few houses in Dublin that are not worth tot
The Duke of Richmond, who was examined by Mr.
Erskine on the trial of Hardy, was of opinion that the
whole system of the franchise was corrupt, and that
every man who had not 'committed a crime ought to
have a vote ; and that there ought to be Annual Parlia-
ments, Vote by Ballot, &c., all which was very well for
a duke. And in his letter to Colonel Sharman he (the
Duke of Richmond) states that he is of opinion that the
two nations should have but one Parliament, provided
the Sovereign of England should reside a reasonable
times in this country, and hold her Imperial Parliament
in it,
,which he said her Majesty could do with a scratch
of her pen—and, Gentlemen, I hope she may. It is a
positive insult to the understanding of any man to say
that such a state of things would not be a positive
-benefit to the country, improve her trade, her manufac-
tures, and her resources. Even our own profession
would be benefited by it; for the residence of her most
Gracious Majesty in this country would be no bar to her
loyal subjects to go to law.—(Laughter.) The
Attorney-General adopted the Socratic doctrine
in his argument with us : he put questions to
us. Now, I am not to be held accountable for the
doctrines propounded by others who have spoken
before me. But it can be said, as was alleged, that
it is revolutionary to state that every town possessing
10,000 inhabitants should have a representative? Why,
that is but the principle of the 'Reform Bill. Mr.
O'Connell also says that every man who marries shall
have a vote. I think there can be no objection on that
score—and that the conspiracy on that ground may be
abandoned ; and certainly such a question could not be
submitted to a more favourable jury, for you are all
married.—(Laughter.) Has Mr. O'Connell said that her
Majesty was to be pulled from her throne—the House of
Peers to be abolished—and the House of Commons ex-
tingushed? No. What then has he done? He has
been guilty of the monstrous proceeding of extending
the Royal prerogative? The Attorney-General—the
legal champion of the Crown—charges it as a crime
against Mr. O'Connell that he said the Queen has a
larger, wider, and more extended prerogative than her
Majesty possesses. Where is the authority in which it
is laid down that the man who propounded such a propo-
sition is to be charged as a conspirator? What authority
is there for saying that Mr. Duffy, Mr. Steele, or any
one else, is to be charged with conspiracy, because when
they heard such a proposition they did not say to the per-
son propounding it cite us some authority—cite us your
case? Suppose Mr. O'Connell, instead of saying that
Parliament should be reformed—that a Parliament
should be given to Ireland—said, Sir, I am of opinion
that Parliament is a humbug—a nuisance ; that her
Majesty has a perfect right to rule, independent of
either House of Parliament. Why, what would be the
consequence ? I cite a case in point. A celebrated writer
in England wrote a book, in which he said that the
House of Commons might be dispensed with. That was
voted to be a scandalous and seditious libel by the House,
and the Attorney-General of the day was directed to
prosecute the writer. He was accordingly prosecuted,
and the case is to be found in Peake's cases in the King's
Bench. It is called the King v. Reeves. Lord Kenyon
there laid it dOwn that the power of free discussion was
the right of every subject of this country—a right to the
free exercise of which we were indebted, more than to
any other claimed by Englishmen, for the enjoyment of
all the blessings we possess—for the Reformation—
the Revolution—and our emancipation from the ty-
ranny of the Stuarts, &c. &c.—and that in a free coun-
try like this the productions of a political writer should
not be hardly dealt with. He directed the jury to read
through the whole book, and then form their judgment
on the entire work. That was his charge, and do you
wonder that the people of England should be so much
attached to the judicial system under which they live,
when you hear laid down by the Lord Chief Justice of
England a doctrine so constitutional—so favourable to
freedom and the 'right of the subject as that doctrine?
The jury in that case retired; they had the book
before them; and though they decided that the book
was improper, yet, nevertheless, they thought
that he wits not actuated by any bad inten-
tion; and Lord Kenyon said he approved of
their verdict. That was the doctrine pro-
pounded from the Bench, and the jury having looked
with the eye of men of sense, qualified their verdict by
saying they deprecated what was said by the defendant,
the mode in which be conducted his argumeat, but they
found their verdict of not guilty, and the Lord CH'
Justice said he approved of their decision. Therefore, if Mr.
O'Connell said her Majesty may dispense with the Ilouse
of Lords he would be safe according to the authority of
that case. Gentlemen, the power and prerogative of
the Crown to issue writs seems to have been a very ex-
tensive power—at least, as it was formerly exercised.
In the reign of Elizabeth, she, wishing to have a majo-
rity, sent the writs to only fifty boroughs and left out
ten. There are very remarkable instances where the
Crown have withheld writs from places entitled to send
representatives to Parliainent, as to numbers. Looking
to the Parliamentary history, we find 'the most
elaborate discourse ever spoken. It was by Sir
John Davies, .the Attorney-General to King James the
First, and was to be found in Leland's " History of Ire-
land." In that discourse you will see the right King
James the First had for what he did--to create forty
boroughs in the north of Ireland in one day. It was
questioned in that Parliament whether he had a right to
do so—the question was discussed--carried over to Eng-
land, and it was decided in favour of his right, and those
persons so elected under his writs sat in Parliament to
the period of the union. The last instance of the kind
was the issuing of a writ for theborough of Newark, and
it was decidsd in the House of Commons, by a very
large majority, that the Sovereign had a right to create
the borough. Mr. O'Connell's argument was this, that
the Sovereign has still the power to create boroughs in
England. Chitty, in his work on the prerogatives of the
Crown, enters into that question, and says there was
nothing to take away the prerogatives of the. Crown in
that respect. Then, if it does exist, the union is in the
power of the Sovereign, and that learned writer says it
is in the power of the Crown to create boroughs as they
did before.
Mr. Justice PEnem—What is the date of that work ?
Mr. WUITESIDE—It was published in the year 1820—
since the union. Whether the argument be right or wrong,
which is not the question before you, is a man to be
branded as a conspirator because, without knowing
whether Mr. O'Connell was right or wrong—and Mr.
.Putfy wilt pardon me, for I'don't think he has read
sufficiently on the subject—he adopted his opinions ?

EENTH DAY

, - DUBLIN, SATURDAY, FED. 3,
,The Court sat at the usual hour.

.111 r. O'ConsaLL—My Lord, I respectfully submit to the
Court, as the line of .observation which it will be my duty to
take will not be precisely that taken by any other Counsel, and
as I knovr:the materials Mr. M.Donongh has will take a con-
siderable, part of this day, if it were not interfering too much
with the course of the trial, I should be glad it your Lordships
would hear me on Monday, and not call on me, this day. I
can promise the Court that in what I have to say—and it is
not much--I shall condense it still more, by, knowing I shall be
called upon on Monday. ,
CitiEr JukricE—Certainly, Mr, O'Connell, we shall com-
ply wlih your application. I wish
,t 9 know whether Mr.
Steele intends to address the Court ?
Air. O'ColtszLL....No, my Lord.

errors of their forefathers—and by the warning teach f Mr. M‘Dosoudsr* resumed his address—My Lords, the in.
how to shun them. Let silence for ever cover—let dark- dulgence you are kind enough tolgrant.will not be abused by
ness hide them—let no hand withdraw the veil that con- j me, and I shall not prolong my at dress in censequenee. I beg
leave,*Gentlemen of the Jury, to direct your attention to the
teals them—or, if it touch them, let it be for a holy and
imbibe
useful purpose—to morality and pea,..e from the evidence. The next meeting to which I shall call your atten-
lessons of the past. Gentlemen of the jury, I have no tion is the, meeting of the 6th of August, 1843 -the Ihltinglass
' meeting—and the witnesses named Godfrey, Twigs, Lenahan,
more to say upon that part of the case. I admit that Hughes, and Taylor, all constables of police. There inomee
strong language has been used, and I regret it. The term thing in the evidence of Godfrey exceedingly suspicious. This
" Saxon" has been applied to Englishmen. Mr. O'Con- man was not ordered to take notes at all ; and when he was
nell has entirely renounced it at the request of an questioned on that point, he hesitated for a long time before he
English gentleman—l believe he borrowed it from gave an answer in the negative,' because he knew that
Moore. Moore was wrong to have used it. Yet pro- the fact of , a policeman doing a, duty that he was not
bably when the trials are over, if I elided upon the ordered to do was calculates] to excite surprise. In the
Learned Gentleman (pointing to the Solicitor-General) I opening speech of the Attortei-Generel, he stated that one
should find " MoOre's Melodies," and "The Irish Gentle_ person at the meeting .at BaltingliA I, was
~ heard to
_say that
Father Lalor told them in the chapel, It was too far gone
man in Seaich of a Religion" upon his table—yet,perha ,
if he knew who knocked at the door he would, like the now; but they would get it, but not without bloodshed."
That statement was made, of course, from the instructions re-
lady in the play, thrast one into a drawer, and put the calved by the Attorney-General; yet that statement has not
other under the table.—(Loud laughter.) The last.clocu- been sustained by evidence. The next witness was Henry
ment to which I shall refer is, " The Morality of War," Twin. who took no notes at all, and he gave you some
which the Attorney-General has dwelt upon so eloquently, expressions that fell from the crowd. * They said, - wait
and translated with not a little freedom into "The: Mora- patiently fur two months. That this expression did not mean that
lity of Rebellion." [After referring to that document-the the people should be quiet for two months before breaking out
Learned Gentleman thus concluded his long speech] ::-- in disturbance, time has proved. He saw no inclination, on
I will say that the true object of this unprecedented the part of the people, to riot or disturbence. The next wit-
nos -
prosecution is to stifle the discussion of a great public...?, 14 Lenohan. This witness reported one sentence of Mr.
O s-onnell's speeeh. He said he heard Mr. O'Connell tell 'the
question. Reviewed in this light, all other considera- people that he was glad to see them there, and he hoped to see
tions sink into insignificance ; its importance becomes
them
when he next came there. That produced great
vast indeed. A nation's rights are involved in the issue, laughter, and yet that hutnourous ex; re-sion is changed into
a nation's liberties are at stake—that won—what pre- a sort of assignation to meet again for an outbreak and
serves the precious privileges you possess? The ex- massacre. John Taylor. also a constable, and of the lowest
ercise of the right of political discussion—free, uritratn. grade, is the next witness. He, not having taken any notes,•
melled, bold. The laws which wisdom framed—the in.. affects to give one or two • short sentences of Mr. &core.
stitutions struck out by patriotism, learning, Or*genhis— nell'slespesetch ; 'stone
hLaes la: hseem:roeuild
tget
lraenpdelaelrdisf the
'can they preserve the springs of freedom fresh and pure? r
teem" meted to prevent the people from coming to the meet-
.No ; destroy the right of free discussion, and you dry up
ing p;
but still they did come, and if he wanted them
the sources of freedom. By the same means by which your again they would come to him.' The object of Mr. O'Connell WAS
liberties were won can they be increased or defended. to impress on the people union 'and perseverance. It was rne-
Do not quarrel with the partial evils free discussion lancholy to reflect how Mr. O'Connell's meaning had been per-
creates, nor seek to contract the enjoyment of the verted. He would next refer to the testimony of Johnson,
greatest privilege 'within the narrow limits timid men from Longford. The testimony of such men is naturally subject
prescribe. With the passing mischiefs of its extrava- to.great suspicion; it was their trade—their duty—to seek out
ganee, contrast the prodigious blessings it has heaped for anything that would criminate a Repealer. Notwithstand-
on man. Free discussion aroused the human mind ing all their diligence, they could find nothing criminal—they
from the torpor of ages—taught it to think, and c?euld discover
M _n_o plot.• The Learned Counsel then read from
n
shook the thrones of ignorance and darkness. Free
Eveningail of January 19, that which had been given in
evidence.t The Learned Counsel, in support of his position,
discussion gave to Europe the Reformation, which then quoted several passagei from the speech of Mr. O'Coo-
I have been taught to believe the mightiest nell at the Tara meeting, to the effect that, althmigh the Act
event in the' history of the human race—illuminated the of Union was really a nullity, yet, so long as it was'the law,
world with the radient light of spiritual truth. May it it should be obeyed, and that its repeal should be sought by
shine with steady and increasing splendour'. Free dis- peaceable.and constitutional means. He also read the speeches
cussion gave to England the revolution, abolished tyran- of Mr. Boylan. Mr. Grattan, Mr. Smith O'Brien, and others,
ny, swept away the montrous abuses it rears, and esta- to show that the same peaceable doctrines were held forth by
blished the liberties under which we live. Free discus- them also. The next meeting Was held in Loughrea on
sion, since that glorious epoch, has not only preserved the 10th of September, 1843. It was riot convened by the
but purified our Constitution, reformed our laws, reduced Association, but was one of those springing out of
our punishments, and extended its wholesome influence iliirrtsistsioantiendedenatinrtellyitintdseophesnedrveloef !tat
whenever
tomr
heeeting
to every portion of our political system. The spirit of ara no second witness is produced, not even a newspaper.
inquiry it . creates has revealed the secrets of nature-- crhere is but one exception, that of the Mullaghmast meeting,
explained the wonders of creation, teaching the know- where Mr. Hughes attended, and he, allow me to observe, is a
ledge of the stupendous works of God. Arts, science, fair specimen of a manly and an honest witness. But I will
civilization, freedom, pure religion, are its noble show you that Mr. Ross's notes, by their own intrinsic evi-
realities. Would you undo the labours of science, ex- dente, are not to be relied on. 'Mr. Ross, with his topical
tinguish.literature, stop the efforts of genius, restore notes—(Laughter)—he himself told you that Mr.- O'Connell
ignorance, bigotry, barbarism—then put down free dis-
did not mean to say what he read, fr:, his notes. Suppose
cussion,. and you have accomplished all. Savage con- that man Rosa had died—supposein
that his notes could have
querors, in the blindness of their ignorance, have scat- been made evidence, by their having been translated, be would
have made Mr. O'Connell say what be himself swears Mr.
tered and destroyed the intellectual treasures of a great O'Connell did not say—that is. did not mean. He would have
antiquity. Those who make war on the sacred put treason into Mr. O'Connell's mouth. Mr. Barrett slid net
rights of free discussion, without their igno- attend that meeting ;in fact, be did not attend any meeting.
ranee, imitate their fury. They may check the CHIEF JUSTICE—I think you are mis-stating, Mr.
expression of some thought, which might, if uttered, I.l*Donough.
redeem the liberties or increase the happiness of man. Mr. M‘Donoticin—No, my Lord, lam not; it is a fact
The -insidious assailants of . this great prerogative of on which I intend to rely. 'Mr. Barrett did not attendd.aly
intellectual beings, by the cover under which they ad- meeting in the open air; and his sole crime is for having dined
vance, conceal the character of their assault upon the two or tohreemes teith the Repeaters.ppotofhe roseexcPuetilosen. Mr.
liberties of the human race. They seem to admit the .sgsrstet
gott obtainL
evidencelnquiries wereln su
instituted in') all parts of the
liberty to discuss—blame only its extravagance, pro- country, and the police were on the alert; they are seat-
-bounce hollow praises' on the value of freedom of speech, tered over the face of the land; they are to be found in
and straightway begin a prosecution to cripple or destroy every l hamlet in the country, watching the develope•
it.' The open despot avows his object is to oppress or to anent of some treasonable act, but which they Signally failed
enslave—resistance is certain to encounter his tyranny, to discover—for this plain reason, that it did not exist.
and perhaps subvert it. Not so the artful assailant of a The next meeting was that at Mullaghmast, and the witnesses
nation's rights—he declares friendship while he wages to that meeting are Mr. B. Hughes, his assistant Mr. Latham,
war, and professes affection for the thing he hates.— Mr. Charles Ross, and Healy, the pol;ceman. They were not
State prosecutions, if you believe them, are ever the examined at the same time. Hughes was called first, and
fastest friends of freedom. They tell you peace is dis • Mealy in some days after. Mr. Hughes went openly ; he ap-
turbed,,order broken, by the excesses of turbulent and prised the parties that he came there to watch their proceed-
seditious demagogues. No doubt there might be a Ini
fts ; given was received with cordiality;heanotheevrelnad,
ei y him o . e his no es.
seeming peace—a deathlike stillness—by repressing the Mr. Ross was recognised ;as a person connected with and
feelings and passions of men. So in the fairest portions representing a Liberal paper. who had been previously in-
of Europe this day, there is peace, and order, and troduced to the Association by a gentleman belonging to the
'submission, under paternal despotism, ecclesiastical Evening Post. He should, therefore, be regarded as a per-
su'td civil. That peace springs from terror, that son who was treated familiarly by those on the platform
sebmission from ignorance, that silence from de- and in the pavilion, and ho had an opportunity of judging of
'spair. Who dares discuss, when with discus- their conduct and intentions, which Mr. Hughes might not
siOn and by discussion tyranny must perish ? Corn-
be supposed to have, who bad openly proclaimed himself as a
•
G
p4re the stillness of despotism with the healthful ani- olveeranmenetnreporter. AgaiezheHealy weas sent from thte south,
ofnlation, the natural warmth, the bold language, the He riel i
xn:ld
with td he was sele tse he was a s ranger.
e people, and d
heard their expressions, and
pikiud bearing, which spring from freedom and the what does he prove he heard them say, but to shout for
consciousness of its possession. Which will you pre- the Queen and repeal of the Union? Every one of
for ? Insult not the dignity of manhood by suppos- those witnesses concurred in characterising that meet-
ing that contentment of the heart can exist under ing as one of the most peaceable'-description and tendency.
despotism. There may be degrees in its severity, and The witness Healy said that he saw temperance bands
so degrees in the sufferings of its victims. Terrible the there, but not at all so numerous as at some of Father
dangers which lurk beneath the calm surface of despotic Mathew's processions in the south of Ireland, where, on one
power. The movements of the oppressed will at times
occasion, he saw forty-five bands dressed, as Mr. Roes pro-
,
disturb their tyrant's tranquillity, and warn him their day, terly called them, in fancy, dresses. Such was e meeting at
' lattendedthereinh. '
aghmast. Mr. 0 Centre I
of vengeance or triumph may be nigh. But in these rh-olbuells, with several otherl aldermen and town-councillors Of
happy countries, the very safety of the State consists in Dublin, and the first resolution proposed was a declaration of
freedom of discussion. Partial evils in all systems of loyalty and attachment to the Queen. The Learned amuse]
political government 'there must be ; but their worst then proceeded to read a variety of extracts from Mr. O'Con-
effects are obviated when their cause is sought for, • nell's speech on occasion of the Mullaghmast. Repeal demon-
discovered, considered, discussed. Milton has taught stration, and alluded especially to the ' circumstance of the
a: great political truth, in language as instructive speaker having repudiated, in language Most distinct
as his sublimest verse:—" For this is not the liberty and emphatic, the idea of the 'repeal movement
which we can le pe, that no grievances ever should arise . being susceptible of any sectarian complexion.
intended
Wil-sfoar
national movement, which. was designated, .and
in the commonwealth—that let -no man in this world the express benefit of all Irishmen, irrespective of political or
expect ; but when complaints are freely heard, deeply religious
considered, and speedily reformed—then is the utmost differences. The Learned Counsel read from the
Freeman's Journal the report of Mr. Barrett's speech on thei
bound of civil liberty.
.obtained that wise men look for." occasion of the Mullaghmast demonstration. He would now
Suffer the complaints of the Irish people to be freely come to the next meeting, which was intended to have taken
heard. You want the power to have them speedily re- place—he alluded to the intended meeting at Clontarf, and he
formed. Their case to-day may be yours to-morrow. would more particularly refer to the substituted meeting, which,
Preserve the right of free discussion as you would cling was held at Calvert's Theatre, on the 9th of October. It vas
to life. Combat error with argument, misrepresentation proved by Mr.
relßoonnd Hughestthat a meeting
was
toan announced
on
by fact, falsehood with truth. " For who knows not," take
_place at Clontarf, but the evening previous .
saith the same great writer, "
Lord-Lieutenant, by the advice, of course, of his law ad-
to the Almighty. One needs no policies nor strata- visers, prohibiting that meeting. That was the first
gems to make her victorious—these are the shifts interposition of the Government, and it was obeyed with a
error uses against her power." •If this demand for a promptitude worthy of commendation. Well, the Clontarf
native Parliament rest on a delusion, dispel that de- meeting did not take place, but the resolutions prepared for Clon-
lusion by the omnipotence of truth. Why do you love turf were approved of at the meeting on the following day in
-+-why do other netions honour England? Are you— Abbey-street, It was well that meeting was held, because it
are they—dazzled by her naval or military glories, the evinced what the peaceable: objects of the intended Clontarf
splendour of her literature, her sublime discoveries in meeting was. The first two resolutions adopted at the
smence, her boundless wealth, her almost incredible Abbey-street meeting asserted the right of petitioning for
No the repeal, and perfect allegiance to the Queen • the third was
labours in every work of art and skill ? Isio ;
a vote of -con-fidence in Mr. O'Connell, ' d the fourth
You love her—you cling to England because she was to the effect that a petition be forwarded -tr the Houses of
has been for ages past the seat of free discussion, and, Lords and Commons for a Repeal of the Legislative Union.
therefore, the home of rational freedom, and the hope Mr. O'Connell made a speech upon that occasion, in which he
of oppressed men throughout the world. Under' the said he had two objects ; one of which was to proclaim to Ire-
laws of England it is our happiness to live. They laud that there was but one way of obtaining the repeal, and
breathe the spirit of liberty and reason. Emulate this that was by obedience to everything bearing the form of legal
day the great virtues of Englishmen—their love of authority ; resistance was not right until legal 'authority was
fairness—their immoveable independence, and the sense done away with, and the iron and dread hand of power was
of justice rooted in their nature—these are the virtues raised against them. There were certain other charges sought
which qualify jurors to decide the right of their to be made, and one of these was a short article, introducing a
fellow-men. Deserted b these of what avail is report of a meeting which was held in America, and at which
y ,
Mr. Tyler, the son of the President of America, attended. and
the tribunal of a jury ? It is worthless as the made a speech. The sentiments made use of by Mr. Tyler
human body when the living soul has fled. Prove to were absolutely attributed to Mr. Barrett. He proceeded to
the accused, from whom, perchance, you widely differ read certain passages frets the speeches made at the meeting
in opinion—whose liberties and fortunes are in your in America :—I shall now call your attention to the sth and
hands—that you are there not to persecute, but to save. 6th Vic., entitled an Act to amend the law relating to defame.
Believe me you will not secure the true interests of Eng- tor, libels.
land by leaning too severely on your countrynien. They The SOLICITOR-GENZRAL—Iint not seditious libels.
say to their English brethren, and with truth—We have Mr. M•Dorroueu—l sun speaking generally on the subjett,.
been at your side whenever danger was to be faced The Learned Gentleman then read an extract front the Aet of
or honour won—the scorching sun of the East and Parliament.
the
pestilence of the West we have endured to CHIEF .IUSTICE—Is that in Imperial Act?
Mr. M‘Dorrouon—Yes, my Lord.
spread your commerce—to - extend your empire—to Judge err—Extending to Ireland ?.
uphold your glory. The bones of our countrymen Mr..M‘Dosouren—Yes, my Lord. The Solicitor-General
whitened the fields of Portugal, of Spain, of suggests that a seditious libel is not referred to in that
France. Fighting your battles they fell—in a nobler statute. This Act only just now occurred to me, and lam
cause they could not. We have helped to gather your not prepared to say that be is not right, and from his greater
imperishable laurels. We have helped to win you im- familiarity with the Act of Parliament, he may be so. But
mortal triumphs. Now, in time of peace, we ask you to suppose the word " seditious" libel is not there, parties
be
restore that Parliament you planted here with your may indicted for conspiring to defame another just as
laws and language, uprooted in a dismal period of our
certain
as if a conspiracy, by seditious papers, to effect a
history, in the moment of our terror, our divisions, our heerteasitnahpliusrhpeose ; and
insteadany precedentoi‘fatheriprosecontora,oitfitohoisofd
fa ii
weakness, it may be, our crime. Re-establish the Com- tins, indict ad,
parartaPfor a conspiiacnygt7daefame him.. It was
mons on the broad foundation of the people's choice— the settled law of the land that when a man was accused of any
replace the peerage, the Corinthian pillars of the offence, whether conspiracy, or anything else, it was absolutely
capitol, secured and adorned with the strength necessary that the jury, before they returned a verdict of guilty,
and splendour of the Crown—and let the Monarch should be satisfied that the evidence adduced, on the part of
of England, as in ages. past, rule a brilliant and united the prosecution was such as to bring guilt home to him be-
empire• in solidity, magnificence, and power.- When goad the 'possibility of • doubt. Something.: had been said at
the privilege of the English Parliament were invaded the commencement of the . present trial in allusion to the
construction of the jury; but this was a topic upon which
that people took the field, struck down the Ministry, be would not touch ; for he. would never utter a word that 1
and dragged their Sovereign to, the block. This could be by poisibility construed into an expression of doubt
Prosecution is not essential for - ihe maintenance of on his part that the respectable and enlightened gentlemen
.the authority and prerogaiyes of the Crown. Our who: he had the honour: to address, would discharge their duty
gracious . Sovereign needs not State . prosecutions with fineness, propriety, and diScretion. If. they, had upon
to secure her prerogatives or preserve her power. their minds any rational doubt of the alleged conspiracy
She has the unbought loyalty of a chivalrous and having been substantially proved by the evidence that had
gallant people. The• arm of authority she been adduced on behalf of the Crown, they should not—they
requires not to raise. The glory of her gentle reign will could*not—find the traversers guilty. If the jury could, con.
be—she will have ruled, not by the sword, but by the sistently with the . maxims of law, and the dictates of their
affections ; that the true source of her power has been,
own consciences, find a verdict of acquittal, he bad no doubt
that that verdict would do more to attach the people of this
not in terrors of the law, but in the hearts of her country td the administration of justice, and to convince them
people. Your patience is exhausted. If I have spoken of the purity of the legal tribunals, than anything that had
suitably to the subject, I have spoken as I could have occurred 'for centuries past. Those who advocate the repeal
wished ; but if, as you may think, deficiently, I have are no despicable faction—they are the majority of the Irish
spoken as, I could. .Do you, from what has been said, people. Whatever may be our speculations as to the result of
and from the better arguments omitted, which may be your verdict, I cannot better conclude the observations I have
well suggested by your manly understandings and your had occasion to make to you, than by-humbly imploring Pro-
honest hearts, give a verdict consistent with justice, vidence to lead your minds to a just conclusion.
yet leaning to liberty—dictated by truth, yet inclining Mr. HENN, Q. C., then rose to address the Court for Mr.'
Thomas Steele—lt was with unfeigned regret he felt himself
to the side of accused men, struggling against the
. . compelled to obtrude himself upon their notice at that stage of
weight, and power, and influence of the Crown, and pre- the proceedings. He was not himself aware, until a xerrshort
Judice, more overwhelming still—a verdict undesired bY time previously, that the duty would devolve on him. He felt
a' party, but to be applauded by the impartial monitor that everything that eloquence, wit, and sound reasoning could
within your breasts, becoming the high spirit of' Irish do had been already done, and in the observations he should
gentlemen, and the intrepid guardians of the rights and have to make, he would endeavour to abstain as much as pos.
liberties of a free people. ‘Vhn Mr. Whiteside:con- sible from going over the same topics that had been dis-
eluded his address, which was listened to with intense cussed with so much more ability than he could approach
attention,,he sat doWn amidst a burst of applause, which them with, and he should, if possible, introduce new
the presence ofthe Court could not suppress. matter. He implored the jury to recollect that they
Mr. MtllostouGH, Q.C., next addressed the jury, as were not now empanelled to try whether repeal was politic,
counsel for Mr. Barrett, the proprietor-of the Pilot, but owrhwethheetrhetrheitd7s•o(uuald be beneficial to this country or not, or
sion of it be beneficial to this country or
had not finished his speech when the Court rose. h re- not. He begged' to impress that upon their minds, because).
lated to reports of speeches and comments on the diffe- he knew that at this moment there were hundreds out
rent meetings which appeared in that paper; but, as far of that. Court who believed that that was the question they
as we can judge from the introductory part, contained no were trying. He knew before they were empanelled that
new arguments. , there were hundreds, aye, thousands of their fellow-citisens
who were convinced that was the question to be tried. He
knew that the case was prejudged by-thousands of honest
and conscientious men; and he felt convinced that, before the
facts of that case were opened, and before the law applicable
to it was stated, that there were not to be found in the
city of Dublin ten men who bad not firmed their opinions
on this case—no, not two—he doubted if there was one. He
was convinced that there was not a single-Repealer who did
not pronounce the traversers " not guilty ;" and that there
was not a man opposed to repeal that did. not pronounce. &yer-
diet of " guilty." He had heard it over and over aga.ainey, stated
and
that was perfectly true. But he did not think that this indictment charged nothing but
.ankcotii::
as yet had been
had heard it said that a conspiracy to
point in question. They
itself . . rat attention
effect a criminal object. was a crime ,
called with sufficient accuracy to the
il.a.d actual
it also laid down that a conspiracy to effect a lawful object
by criminal means was itself a crime. Now, be thought