Star.
London, England, 1811-11-26 00:00:00

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 22,

. It was understood on Thursday, that the evidence
had cloned on the part of the Crown, but on the Sit-
ting of the Court this day at ten o'clock, the Ones
ksrice called on MlcDonough, a Clerk in Major
Sirr's Office, to explain certain parts of his evidence,
which in his Lordship's mind were contradictory and
inconclusive. He was asked, whether among these
persons sworn to in the information he Lad mention.
ed 1)r. Breen as present ?
He could not actually say that Dr. Breen was in
the Chapel at Liffey-street—heard his name, to the
best of his recollection, mentioned—did not see him
in the Chapel—knew his person, and heard that he
was one of those concerned in the delegation.
Mr. Justice OSBOiNE —But in the information be-
fxe us, you do not speak as to your belief—you swear
positively that Dr. Breen was one of the persons
chosen.

CHIEF JUSTICE—Then you swore positively to a
man whom yhu.did not see.

, •
Witness ordered to retire.

Mr. Bunitowra then-rose. He began by arraigning
the conduct of the Crown in the formation of the Jury
—he lamented to have witnessed that there was not
more decency, or the appearance at least, if it was no
more, of justice on the part of the Crown. He did
not lay blame to his Majesty's Attorney-General,
whose virtues and talents he took occasi na repeatedly
to panegyrize. He was convinced that honourable
and upright man would not be privy to any act of
meanness, of unconstitutional and illegal interference
on the part of the known agents, instruments, nay the
very creatures of Administration. It was notorious
that on the Jury, there was not a single Catholic, in
a cause, in which the Catholic interest was so deeply
concerned. He reflected upon the circumstance
with pain, not unmixed with a considerable portion
of dismay, that in a City, nine tenths of whose inha-
bitants consisted of Catholics, not one was to be found
on a Jury in which the Catholics were Iv be tried.—
Nay, the only Catholic on the Pannel was instantly
objected to—but that was not enough for the Crown
! —it was not content with, objecting to the S‘Jlitiry
Catholic—but it objected against twenty-two Protcs-
tants upon no grounds whatever. These Protestants,
it should seem, were under the suspicion of being sus-
pected as friends to the great Catholic Cause. But
the very circumstances of these challenges put the
present Jury in a most delicate and awful situation.
The eyes of the country were on them. From the
partiality evinced by the Crown to their selection
hoax among so many other of their excellent and li-
beral fellow-citizens, it would naturally be concluded,
that they were prejudiced, and illiberal. He did not
insinuate that they were, he believed in his heart that
they were not—but see the situation in which they
were placed by the Crown—a- situation, be would
contend, not only indelicate, but almost unconttitu-
tional. They would, however, he felt convinced,
rescue themselves from the peculiarity in which they
were so unhandsomely placed, as contradistinguished
from the remainder of their fellow-citizens.

Mr. BURROWES then went into the subject matter
of the trial before the Court. He first addressed him-
self to the Facts, then to the Law—next to the His-
tory orthe Catholics of Ireland, and finally to the
Policy of the Irish Administration. In the course of
his speech, Mr. Burrowes pronounced a panegyric on
the Facts PRESS OF IRELAND, and stigmatised in his
powerful and impassioned language the incendiaries
and slaves, hired by the Castle to influence the popu-
lar mind, and to inflame the people to madness.—He
then sat down, amidst a murmur of applause.
When Mr. Burrowes had concluded, the Counsel
fur the Traverser, relying upon the evidence of the
Crown and the Law and Justice of their case, declin-
ed calling witnesses or occupying the attention of the
Court and Jury on a case which they considered al-
ready proved• for their Client.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL rose to reply.
Mr. GOOLD objected on the ground of usage, that
the Crown Lawyers, except in cases where evidence
was tendered on the part of the Traversers, had no
right to reply.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL insisted on the right.
Justice OSBORNE wished for precedents to establish
the right.
Mr. O'Comm said, that Mr. Justice Day ruled in
the case of Williams, on the last Munster Circuit,
against the right claimed by the Crown in those cases.
iI Mr. Justice DAY assented.
Mr. %many said, that Mr. Justice Osborne ruled
, a similar case at the Assizes of Waterford.
Mr. Justice OSBORNE assented.

Mr. J3yabiz cited a case from Reports made in the
time of Lord Kenyon, in which that axle Judge had
strongly reprobated the practice which Crown Law-
yers assumed of speaking when no evidence had been
produced by the Traverser.
Mr. O'CoNNEL immediately read the passage, and
in corroboration cited the case of 'Walter Cor, in
which Lord Norbury and Baron George decided
against Serjeant Moore, who essayed a reply.
Mr. PERRIN stated the particulars of the case, in
which, the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas said,
that the right of the Attorney General was a personal
right, and could not be transferred to his brother.
Mr. Justice OSBORNE was rather againstthe practice.
Mr. Justice DALY thought that it was established
by analogy. •
Mr. Justice DAY was rather inclined with Ms
brothers.
Mr. BELLEW argued acutely against the right
claimed.
The Cum JUSTICE did not think the case in Lord
Kenyon went to the present instance.

*Mr. BURTONsaid, that perhaps the Crown would
wave the right, and allow the case to go to tke intry.
Mr. BALL insisted'on the tight of the Crowe.
The SOLICITO/t-GENZRAL world not, c-iye up thati
right.
The A'rroewn'.GzxsttAL coincided witf the Soli:
citQr, and insisted on the right.

.

v..V`-'';l!,'V -""

.

of the Crown. • •
Mr. BURTON thenaske&-a whether since twaCrows
Lawyers were allowed to :peak, where no evidence
was adduced on the, pet of the Tem rser, a'zpther
Counsel would not be allowed to his aims?'
To this el:: enUrt, after sonle hesitation, assented.

Mr. GooLn then, in a straia of elrquence in p-cu-
liar to and which fascinated the Court for
more than two hours, touched upon all the leading
topics of this great c.tu,e,
The SOLICITOU-G ENERAI, replied with great anima-
tion and force, and concludmi by obbetv,ng, that a
new b-)dy, the Catholic Conyeatirn, had arisen in our
political horizon, obedient to no flees, governed by
no attraction, a stranger to our system, and which
menaced its ruin.

The Cum, JUSTICE, after recapitulating the evi-
dence, ploceedcd to define th? Law. We could not
discover in his Lordsh p's speech auy shade of dis-
tinction 'from that delivered on Thursday by his Ma-
jesty's Attorney.GcneraL—Atier about an hour and
an half's' charge, the Jury retired.
Mr. BONE rose, and intittired whether the Indict-4r
ment cm which the Traverser was tried, was httaded •
up to the Jury ?
The CHIEF Jusricg said that it was not usual nor

necessary.
Mr. JUSTICE OSIORNE thought that the Indictment
might have been read to them, if they wished it.
Mr. o,Coweeu. contended that the Jury should
havea copy of the Indictment on which they were
to decide.

While the point was pending, Mr. Geale, the rore.
man, and Mr. Pepper returned into the Box, and re-
quested a Cf,py of the Indictment. They took ocea-
si. n at the same time to inqu're whether the Jury
c-uld bring in separate verdicts far the two counts
Litl in the Indiciment?
It was answered in the affirmative, and the Clerk
of the Crown having enlarged the issue, the Jury
again retired. It is impossible (indeed language
sinks under the effort) to describe the state end
anxiety manifested while the J.,ry were in their room.
Although it was nine o'clock at night, yet the hall of
the Four Courts, the Court of King's Bench, all the
avenues leading, to theCourti,“the very attic windows
at the top of the Courts were crowded with people.—
When it was announced that the Jury had agreed to
their verdict, after an hour and a half's deliberatidn,
there was a deep silence for a minute.
Mr. Byfne, the Clerk of the Crown, then called
over the names of the Jury t having answersd, Mfr.
Geale, the Foreman, handed down the issue—" %Nor
tLrr."—The word was scarcely pronounced when
a peal of huzzsing and shouts rung through the
Court and galleries :. it was caught by the anxious
auditors in the Hall. The Judges attempted se spettlr,
the Officers attempted to act ; the enthusiasm deafen.
ed and destroyed every attempt'. The Judges•waited
for some minutes, and the Chief Justice attempted to
address the Court, but he could not be beast • As
the Jurors passed through the Hall they were greeted
with waving of hats and clapping of hands. Nerve**
this exhibition confined to the populace—.fill patent
:joined in it. The verdict, in the course of ten
minutes, was known in every part of the town': the
tide ran instantly in every direction. The Adepts
reached the most remote streets with the rapidity Of
an electric stroke.
FROM THE DUBLIN EVENING POST OF SATUIWAt,
" Trial by Jury ! Triumph of the l'orck ! Triumph it the,
Constitution !
" The verdict of the Jory last night will do more
for the peace, The happiaess, the liberties of Irishmen,
than the combined 'talents of all the Administrations
this country ever saw could possibly achieve—the
union of Protestant, Catholic, and Presbyterian. which
the Circular and the Proclamation so rapidly pro.
moted, this Verdict—this immortal Verdict, has ce-
mented, we trust, for ever. A Jitry, composed .of
Protestants and Presbyterians, has found a verdict in
favour of the agg!eved Catholic—in favour of public
right—in favour of Ireland —in favour of the Empire.
It has thuwn a , shield around the Constitution-ek
will give stability to the State—it will diffuse char.
mony aroughout the Country—the Triumph is great
—the Consequences will be gloriout—the Benefits
thus conferred upou the Throne and the People, are
incalculable. The enthusiastic joy that last night,
wi..11 the quickness of lightning, spread from the Court
to every corner of this City, is not to be described.—
The plaudits in the Court, when the verdict of 'Not
Guilty was returned, announced the glad tidings to
the multitude in the Hall and adjoining avenum, and
in a few minutes the acclamations rent the air for
miles around.—ln the Theatre the intelligence was
communicated from the gallery on the close of the
last act of the Play; the shout of applause that fol.
lowed was long and general.
" Notwithstanding this great and universal sensa-
tion in the public mind, the most perfect order and
decorum prevailed throughout the city—this lively
feeling was only manifested by buzzes, waving of
hats and clapping oftands. The display of the Po.
lice, and of :r military Patrole in the streets, was tan.
necessary. 'The Garrison had orders to be in readj.
ness, and a second order commanded the artillery to
limber their guns. Here the people bad another ca.
1 umph, for never did a multitude, having such cause
of exultation, conduct themselves with more 'fledge*.
tion ; the expression of their honest feelings did apt
exceed the bounds of prs.priety —but we havenot room.
at present to continue the subject.
" A number of Gentlemen of high•and patriot le
character attended the trial, among,t whom we oh.
, served George Lidwill, Esq.—We mention him With
honour."

MMIE

LAW INTF,LLIOEI4CB.

-
COURT OR iriNcrp RENefl, NOV.
• Ting 11.ING V. SEDLIY.
Davenport Sedley, the defendant in this case, was
brought up to receive the judgment of the Court,
having been convicted of a conspiracy, along with
Henry Meyer and John Sedley, the defendant,' D.
Sedley's son, to defraud, and having, in consequence,
actually defrauded the Marquis of Headfort of ae-'
ceptances, to the amount of upwards of resooo, by
representing the persons to whom the acceptances
were given, as being in a great mercantile business,
and capable of making loans or advances of money to
a large amount, whereas, in fact, they were low and
despicable characters, in no mercantile employmentf
and incapable of making pecuniary advances to any
antount, being themselves needy and insolvent per-
sons. A petition was read from the defendant, hum
bly praying that the several letters, under 'diffe-
rent signatures, which were sworn on the trial to
have been written by his son, Jean Sedley, might be
compared together, and /with originals writings of
Jolla Sidley's; that the defendant having already
been imprisoned in Newgate for nine months, should
have that taken, into consideration in awarding the
punishment now to be inflicted on him ; and that, in-
stead of Newc.otte, he might be imprisoned in the pri-
rim of the King's Bench.
. The Court, however, did not think themselves
called on to notice the petition.
'tor. Justice Gaose, in pronouncing the judgment
cc.be Court, desci ibed the present as being a foul
fraud and a conspiracy—one of the worst ntisdemea-
nours known in the law of this country. The present
offence, too, was calculated to injure the person
against whom it was practised in his reputation as
well as in his fortune. Injurious and artful as such
attempts frequently were, he bad never met with one
snore injurious or more artful than that for which the
defendant was now called on to receive judgment.—
The unlawfully and fraudulently procuring accep-
tinces to bids which were to be put into circulation,.
was in itself a clinic of an alarming nature, as it went
to usher into the apparent securities, void of
any consideration, and which, therefore, as they were
not to be paid, must for a time draw down disgrace
on him by whom they were accepted, and be attended
with great inconvenience to any hoinsst and 6cnafuk
holder, into whose hands they might chance to come.
These calamities.had, in the present instance, been
brought about by'',an artful conspiracy, and by means
which the law deemed tantamount to a complete
cheat. One et* the attempts to enf Ice payment of
the acceptances so fraudulently obtained, even was
to impute to the person by whom the bills were ac-
cepted, the commission of an unnatural crime. The
whole parole testimony, when joined to the written
evidence adduced, left it impossible for any man to
doubt of the defendant's guilt. The judgMent which
the Court had to pronounce ought to have three
things in view : the defendant's correction ; an ex-
ample to others • and to make the defendant's name
and person so-well known, that no one, who chose to
exercise common discretion, might run any danger of
being imposed on by his arts in time coming. The
sentence of the Court, in the whole circumstances of
the case, was, that the dtifendant be imprisoned in his
Isfajesty's jail of Newgate for two years, and that he
do once, during that period, stand in and upon the
pillory for one hour, between the hours of twelve and
one le the day, itt the Old Bailey, opposite to the door

of Newgate.
THE KING V. DAVISON.
This defendant was also brought up for judgment.
Mr. Justice Gitosc, in pAssing the sentence' of the
Court, said, that his affidavits in mitigation Were
rather maims of aggravation ; but still this was a
Much less aggrAv.ited case than the list. The Cain
sentenced him to 13 calendar months imprisonment
in IN esvgate.