Star.
London, England, 1830-05-13 00:00:00

;h.- eeound Whiteboyisni decline.. I was counsel for those men,
nd lam nut ashamed to say that my heart's best feelings were
wer'...ly enlisted in their cause. I wish to say that Ido not mean
to east the slightest imputation upon the' juries which tried those
pen o:s. The first was exclusively protestant, and returned a
beititet rapidly, perhaps too rapidly, of guilty against Leary.
In the second jury were five or six cathohes. The major
part of these were for conviction, some for more and some for
lees; one mita, a catholic, was for total acquittal—he was
!tepee 4by his brother catholics. but he held out for two days,
when tree of the jurors became ill, and they were all dismissed.—
The third tete: came on, end the Catholics were entirely ex-
cluded from that Jury. (hear, hear, hear.) It was exclusively
Protestant, and almost instantaneously acquitted the prisoners.
ettrettquence of this verdict, the other men, who had been
cone:ma, were respited ; although the judge 'had inthnatcd to
them the. their case was hopeless, none were executed—all were
trantqs tied : and it will be a subject worthy of future considers.
tien whether that punishment might not be considered incam-
seensurate with their ambiguous guilt. On the third trial I
come to Patrick Daly, the principal witness for the crown. He
swore that Leary, Connors, Murphy, and the other conspirators,
had determined to murder Hood Low, on his return from the fair
f Kiltiorrery ; that a death warrant for his murder was written
cur, and signed by the chief conspi or sommittee-men. Mr.
Baron Penefatlier handed me the Woes of this same mats,
taken before the magistrates on the 29t of ibp, 1829. That was
the interval between the conspiracy and hillectition. I now put
it to the consideration of every member of this house, could that in.
diyidual have sworn the truth when giving his depositions, and not
have mentioned this fact of the death-warrant, and of the fair of Rile
dorrery ? If the evidence on this point was true, the depositions must
have been false. But these depositions and informations are
part of the secrets of the Crown in Ireland. In England, it is
true, an accused individual is informed a the details of the
Cearge against ism; but, in Ireland, he seldom knows ally
thing of the matter, unless by surmise, or except he be guilty.
But, Sir, in this case, such was the result of the production of these
depositions, the accused man was at once acquitted. And here I
complain that the leading Counsel for the Crown had held in his
brief that very document, and at the moment when he was seeking
the capital conviction of the men who were at once exculpated by
its production.—( Hear. hear.)—This is a question of propriety, hut
I cannot acquiesce in the justice or humanity of withholding a fair
chance of exculpation from an unfortunate wretch when trembling
on the very brink of eternity. On this principle I have acted in
ir.y own eases I am not often the prosecutor, but, where I am,
I repudiate such evidence as I have just noticed. I could not
think myself justified in seeking a conviction where I did not feel
perfectly satisfied as to the guilt of the accused.—(Hear.)—lf this
be the duty of a private professional individual, how much
more Imperatively does it not become that of the Crown ? (Hear.)
Its object should not be the infliction of punishment, but a fair ad.
ministration of justice. Again, then, I complain of the suppression
on the part of the crown counsel, of that which the judge thought it
his duty to produce.—(Hrar.) I will do him the justice, however,
to admit that he had on that occasion the assistance of three learned
gentlemen of the Irish bar, whom I take it for granted were aware of
the contents of these depositions. To the characters of Mr. Bennet and
Mr. Green I willingly bear my testimony; mere humane gentlemen
cannot exist. But if gentlemen will maintain the validity, as a practice,
of this custom of regarding evidence and depositions, surely they
will concur with me in introducing a bill into this house, the object
of which shall be to correct so objectionable a mode of proceeding—
(hear, hear). In the conduct of this trial, the learned counsel had
said that he could corroborate the testimony of Daly by the production
of a boy of the most unbiassed feeling and unimpeachable veracity.
What was the fact ? This boy, it had been said, had been actually
introduced by Daly into the tent on the occasion of the alleged con.
spiracy at the fair, and had been directed by him to observe the
writing and signing of the murder-warrant. Yet I ask, did Daly
state this fact in his deposition ? He alluded neither to the person
nor the set_ -(hear). I call, then, for the papers containing the de-
positions of this Daly—(hear). I call on the house to support me
in my demands by the claims of humanity—by the anxiety—the
suffering—the agony that unfortunate accused but acquitted indivi.
dual endured in the dock, where lie so long stood on trial for the life
which a perjured miscreant was swearing away. I never quarrelled
with Government for these prosecutions. If the Commission was
expensive, it had the effect of restorting to liberty, much sooner than
they otherwise would have been, many innocent men ; I only blame
the conduct of the leading iunsel respecting the depositions I
have alluded to. (Hear, hear.) Such is my case—all I ask for is
these depositions, and the notes of the Learned Judge who con-
ducted this trial. Is it intended to produce tnese documents ? 1
have been taunted on this subject (Hear, hear.) I now ask those
who have taunted me,Leand those who have applauded them, whether
they will now meet the question fairly, and accede to my demand ?
I have asked for the notes of Baron Pennefather and here I cannot
avoid bearing testimony to the admirable demeanour of that ex.
cellent judge. I feel happy in paying a just tribute to the coin.
panion of my youth, but who has been raised by his merits to a
station far above my humble walk ; but never in any country or time
has the bench been ¢raced with a more admirable union of erudition
and humanity. ith his notes I should feel satisfied, but to avoid
any invidious feeling, L extend my application to those of both
judges who presided at the commission of Doneraile. Why
do I ask for these documents ? Because I wish to have the
best evidence to produce to the house in support of my state-
meat. I wish to 'produce testimony " omni exceptione majus" I
am to be told that an application for a judge's notes is novel. I
know that I have high legal authority opposed to me on this point
—the authority of a man whose independence and extensive acquire-
ments in his profession 1 sincerely admire, though I differ from
him in political feelings. But 1 beg the house to consider that in
every case which occurs at the Old Bailey, or at sessions
throughout the country which is laid before the Privy Council,
the Judge's notes are called for and submitted without the
slightest exception. If, then, these documents are at the com-
mand of the executive, I ask shall there be any difficulty in sub.
witting them to this house? (Hear, hear.) The Judges themselves
are constantly in the habit of calling for each other's notes.—
When the Lord Chancellor, or the Master of the Rolls, direct an
issue, they familiarly call for the Judge's notes. Why, then,
should there be such difficulty when this house requires them ?
And am I not justified in calling for the highest evidence in this
case ? Is it fair to meet this cue by a mere canvassing of Daly's
evidence, without the documents ? I submit not. I say that army
member of this house should have the details of that evidence is
his hands. I have been reproached with not having introduced the
subject sooner. I confess I feel regret that it should be now neces-
sary for me to do so. I did wish that the subject might have bass
burled in oblivion, with all the angry feelings to which it has gives
occasion : but, as far as regards delay on my part, I have only
to say, that I could not bring the subject forward with pro.
piety until after the late Cork Assizes. One of the men involved
in the Doneraile conspiracy was then tried, and it was not prudent
to enter on this case until his fats shoald have been decided.—
(hear, hear.) If I felt impelled to aerate this matter at all, it
was because I had occasion to observe and to regret that certain
invidious distinctions had not as yet been suppused—because I
was compelled to witness political and religious differences, in some
degree, papetuated. Thank GoD, however, those distinctions sin
now gradtially and inevitably, and in spite of the exertions of the
evil-minded, subsiding ! Thank Goo those differences which have
separated man from man are fading sway before the operations of
that .glorious measure to which I hope I may be considered to
havecontributed in some humble degree, even though it were through
thaw/ons of excitement and agitation. (Hear, hear.) Mr. O'Con.
net then thanked the House for its great indulgence—for the silent
attention and exceeding courtesy with which it had heard his ob-
. Oreations. The honourable and learned gentleman concluded by
„moving for copies of the several depositions or informations sworn
~ by Patrick Daly, one of the witnesses examined at the Special
• Commission held in Cork upon the trial of the Doneraile con.
spirators, and also for the notes of the learned judge who presided
at the said triaL

The question having been put from the Chair,
Mr DOHERTY said, that if the hon. and learned gentleman
bad occasion to apologise to the house, and to thank them for their
patient attention,
he (Mr. D.) sincerely felt that he himself had
sr:occasion fee their indulgence. It was with sincerity be said
regretted to be obliged to go into a statement of the einem.
stances of this case. If the question involved only his personal &mac.
ter—though never was a made more serious or mote nffeefing
the character of a professional max that that of knowing a wit-
ness for the aown to have sworn falsely and to be perjured; and
yet with all that knowledge permitting him to go on giving tea.
timony that affected the lives of men on their trial. If this were a
question altering his personal character only, he might be less
anxious about it, although well justified in taking all means to repel
the charge ; but here be had to defend the administration of justice
in Ireland from the charges which were made against it by the hon.
aid leaned gentleman. In doing that he had to go through a wide
range of facts and circumstances; but he would certainly do his
best to condense the case as much as possible ; and he assured the
house he would keep within the limits of moderation. ( Hear
hear, heat.) He would ha' !nameable if he did not, for there
was nothing in this case to alter Me conduct. He was there with a
just and an indignant sense of alt attempt made, for the first time,
to establish an appeal from the juries of Ireland to that house,
mid that without the benefit of witnesses to be called before the
home, before they would printrance their vadia upon men who
were already acquitted:l, . hear.) He thought the charge
was against himself directly bier conduct in the case, in having
gone on with the exam of a whales, whom he knew
to be perjured, in order sti set, at Ja,simatse & verdict against
:r tire planes. With the Commhim he bad nothing to
do—erbetha that can was wise and expedient, or not, be was
not called upon to say 4 tlt was Abe to the justice of the country
JI
and to the respectable denten against whose lives the conspiracy