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

above named -Frederick Bond Hughes, Charles Ross, and
John Jackson, with respect to the duties to be per-
formed by them in Ireland. Also, a return of the
amount paid to the above-named for expenSes during
their attendance at the trial of the Queen against
O'Connell and others. Also, a return of all moneys paid
to the late or present proprietor or proprietors, mana-
gers, conductors, or persons in the emplr.y of the Morn-
ing Herald and Standard newspapers, or any of them, on
account of communications or information made or
given by the said parties, or any of them, to the Govern-
ment, in- reference- to- the -repeal agitation in Ireland;
distinguishing the times at which the said communica-
tions or informations were furnished, and the period at
which the several sums of money were paid. Also, the
name- or names of the shorthand writers appointed
to furnish the Government report of the proceedings
at the trial of the Queen-against O'Connell and others."
He said, in rising to call the attention of the House to the
motion of which he had given notice, he did not wish to
obstruct the motion of the Hon. Member for Rochdale,
nor to delay the House from going into the Committee of
Supply. He rose in the exercise of the undoubted right
every Member of that House possessed, of calling on the
GOvernmenti before voting any additional supplies, to
explain the manner in which it had already applied any of
those sums of money that had been placed at the disposal
of the Government, for the purposes of the public service.
More especially was it the duty of that House to look
into these matters when there was good reason to believe
that the sums already voted had been applied in a man-
ner not creditable or honourable. He believed that the
object of the recent State prosecutions was, in the first
place, to vindicate what was called the majesty of the
law, and, in the next place, to obtain an increased respect
for the institutions of the country by inspiring public
confidence in the wisdom and justice of the law.—( Hear,
hear.) He had carefully attended to the debate which
had taken place lately in that House, having reference to
the State trials, and he had thoughtfully weighed the
evidence given at them, and he must say he found it
totally impossible, in the whole transactions, to find
any portion of ,them creditable either to the judge who
presided, to the- jury who were impannelled, to the law
officers who instituted the proceedings—to any, indeed,
of, the parties concerned, but especially to some of those
persons who were witnesses on the part of Crown. The
branch of the subject to which,- on the present occasion,
_be. wished to call the attention of the House was, that
relative to the conduct pursued by the Government
towards the press, and those connected with or em-
ployed by it. An arbitrary Government had two ways
of destroying the liberty of the press—either by per-
secution, or by corruption by straining the law
against the press, or by corrupting the persons con-
nected with it. The present Government had pursued
both these courses. They were not satisfied with cor-
rupting the members of the press, but they attacked and
persecuted it,in such a way as he was perfectly satisfied
the law would not justify. That question, however,
would be distinctly brought forward by an Hon. Mem-
ber at a future time ; and he would not, therefore,
trouble the House with more than one observation in re-
ference to it upon the present occasion. He would just ob-
serve, that such a charge—the charge of conspiracy—so
framed and so supported, as ithad been recently in Ireland,
never had been, and never dared be, attempted in Eng-
land. It was contrary to the law, and that had been
distinctly ruled soon a trial in the year 1840 at Lan-
caster, not only by the Attorney-General, but by the
presiding judge on the occasion, Baron Rolfe. They
had seen-in Dublin the strange sight of Mr. O'Connell
being‘ made responsible for articles published in
Dublin newspapers which he never saw, and of making
the newspapers and the proprietors responsible for
speeches which others uttered and they never heard.
At that trial the Attorney-General . and Baron Rolfe
distinctly stated that the. only party responsible for
the articles in a newspaper was the proprietor, and that
even the editor was not to be held so, although he might
be one of the parties charged with the conspiracy. But
this was not the subject to which he wished to direct the
attention of the House. He wished to call their atten-
tion to that portion of the subject relating to the
reporters who had been employed by the Govern-
ment, and. those connected. with the public press,
.who had been corrupted by the Government, to aid their
purposes in these trials. He asserted that if the object
of those prosecutions had been to create a great moral
influence, all the transactions in connection with them
ought to bear the light of the day, and there could be
not the slightest objection to making' them public. He
thought the • conduct of the 'Attorney-General for
Ireland towards Mr. Bond Hughes was most extraordi-
nary, and he (Mr. Duncombe), in exercising his right as
a Member of that House, in moving for these re-
turns, did not in the slightest degree intend
to impugn that gentleman's conduct or character.
It was quite clear, from the speech of the counsel for the
traversers, that they acquitted him of any underhand.
proceeding. The party, therefore, who had most reason
to complain of the conduct of the Government was Mr.
Bond Hughes himself. With respect to the mistake
that had been made in the name of Mr. Barrett, it was
pqeuri
ft clear
ee
et
ya wtahrae t
oft hi
te
;Antnt
do r ey
it
was- G en
alsoer al
quite
I
that
the Crown solicitor and his clerk were also perfectly cog-
nisant of that mistake, and could have rectified it by the
dash of a pen; and- thus- put- an end .to the persecution
to which that gentleman was subjected. It was also
quite clear that Mr. Bond Hughes when he attended on
the Crown solicitor told him about the mistake with re-
spect to the name of Mr. Barrett. Mr. Kernmis, after
Mr. Hughes -had been indicted for swearing to the
fact, still. persisted in his endeavours to have it
proved. He (Mr. Duncombe) thought this most
discreditable to Mr. Ketnmis. In the Pilot news-
paper of the 26th of January it was remarked that
when Mr. Barrett went to lodge informations, he had no
means of knowing whether Mr. Bond Hughes was wil-
fully wrong, • because he could give no in-
formation or explanation on the subject.—(Hear.)
It was also remarked that Mr. Kernmis, the Crown so-
licitor, stated before the magistrate that Mr. Hughes was
not in the kingdom. He said he considered the present
proceeding a most extraordinary one, for Mr. Hughes
had-remained several-days in- Dublin after he swore his
information, and -yet no attempt had been made to
impeach his. veracity. The magistrate, it seemed,
refused the summons, because he thought, that the
granting 'of it would prejudice - the prosecution, as
Mr. Hughes was -out of the country. Why, would
the House,—would the country believe that Mr. Hughes
left Ireland by -the desire of the Solicitor of the Crown?
—(Hear, hear.) He was- told that unless he left Ire-
land his life would not be safe.'. Why should not his life
be safe? Could they not have made his life safe imme-
diately, and have quieted all the denunciations directed
against him by .stating publicly that he had not com-
mitted wilful perjury ?—(Hear, hear.) He understood
from the friends of Mr. Hughes that he was not at all
aware that he was to be a party to informations, and
that he would rather have tut off his right hand than
consent 'to be a party to any.—(Hear, hear.) Mr.
Hughes was not a person who would descend to become
a common informer. The fact was, he was deceived by
the Solicitor for .the Crown, having been told that he
was only swearing an affidavit, and verifying his notes,
whilst it turned out that he was laying an information.
—(Hear, hear.) Was such duplicity ever practised to-
wards any individual as was practised on this occasion

towards Alr. Bond Hughes? When Mr. Hughes was sent
over, he was desired on his arrival in Dublin to go to the
-Attorney-General. It appeared that the Attorney-General
being out' le went to Mr. -Brewster, and from Mr.
Brewster he received his instructions. It was for these
instructions that he now asked, together with the sums
of money that had been paid to Mr. Bond Hughes ; not
that he believed that any sum of money could compen-
sate that gentleman for the anxiety of mind which he
had suffered, and the injury which he had sustained
during the period that he remained under a cloud.—
(Hear, hear.) The Attorney and Solicitor-Generals, and
all the. parties connected with the Government, were
perfectly
_aware that Mr. Bond Hughes had rectified
_the mistake . which he had inadvertently. committed:.
He said, therefore, that Mr. Bond HugheS - had great
reason to complain. He (Mr. Duncombe) weal like to-
know what sum Mr. Hughes received as compensation ;
and whether.lie
.was ..as well paid as another individual,
he meant ,Mr. Charles Ross. He (Mr. Duncombe) had
now done with Mr. Bond; Hughes, and he hoped that he
had said nothing derogatory to that gentleman's
character, as it had not been his intention to do
so. He next came to the " Carlisle patriot."—
(Laughter.) Mr. Charles Ross, it appeared, was em-
ployed by the _Horning Chronicle newspaper as a repor-
ter,.and in his evidence, when examined by Mr. Ser-
geant Warren, he said that he arrived in Dublin on the
3d of July. He said he came to take the notes of Mr.
O'Connell's meeting at Donnybrook. He was asked,

"Did yon come of your., Own accord, or was it
Suggested to you ? Ido notnsk you who it was sug-
gested it to you.", Mr.. Ross---"It was suggested to.me."
He was. then asked,. for whom did- you' attend?" Mr.
Ross—"l attended On the part of the Government"
It therefore-appeared that he had been sent over by the'
GoVernment, they knowing that-he was in-the employ of
,the. Morning Chronicle, a paper opposed in politics to the
Government. In the course of cross-examination, this
question .was put; to him, ".Ibelieveyou said you were sent
over to Ireland by the. Government 1" Mr.-Ross—" Yes,
I Was."' "Now Government :is a comprehensive word,
have 'you any objection .to..tell what member of the Go-
Vernment - suggested this to you ?" - -Ifnmediately upon
this question being put, the , counsel for the CroWn
jumped-up,. and :said, "Don't answer .that question'!"
as much as •to say, ' "-Don't tell the Irish peo-
ple—don't tell the English people, . who it was
.that employed -you." . Mr. Charles Ross had
before stated that he had been sent • over and employed
by a person high in office.. Now -he (Mr. Duncombe)
wanted to know, and he thought-he had a right to .ask,
who that high person was ?—(Hear, • hear.) Could. not.
the Government • find other persons but those em-
ployed on newspapers—and employed by newspapers,
too, not in the interest of the Government ? Could they
not have- found other persons than those for such
a disreputable purpose as that for which Mr. Ross had
been engaged- Of course the Government knew per-
fectly ivell that a person going over-under false colours
—going as the reporter to the Morning Chronicle would
thereby be • enabled to obtain information with
facility. This they , considered was an advantage.
He Understood that at one meeting, that which took place
at -Mullaghmast, this 'individual, Mr. Ross, was. known
to be acquainted and connected with the liberal press,
and-was treated on that account with the greatest kind-.
ness,by the, traversers themselves.—(Hear, hear.) In-
.deed, so little:did they think that this gentleman was a
spy, that Mr. Steele, one of the traversers, took him
in his' own.carriage, 42 miles, to Dublin.—.(Hear, hear.)
By•this means he got an insight into all their secrets:—
(Hear, hear.) Now he (Mr. Duucombe) wanted to
know who wr 3 the honourable and upright individual who
,•emiojoyed that . individual. He stated that he had re-
ceived 350/. for this and 501. for, the,Donnybrook meet-
I-Wthett came back to England, and his connec-
,tigi iiwAh *ming Chronicle having ceased at the
termination of the session of Yarliame,nt,:he;went again
to Ireland for the Standard newspaper, and then it Was
that he did this dirty work for the Government. Those