The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1844-06-21
NEW YORK. FRIDAY MORNING. JUNE 81 1914

~ ~ w 4 NElSEAs Il Asl cLA u
though considerable opposition made to them
in this country. No State has comparatively derl-
we'd so much profit from these changes as North
Germany. Some weeks after these changes, the
Union increased the tariff upon mixed cottons and
woolien stuffs, in degree amounting almost TO u
prohibtive duty. Representations were made on
this measure were adopted, reprisas might perhaps
be made use Of; nevertheless the measure was put
into execution.
Immediately after Prussia made two proposals,
viz that the duties on cotton velvet might be dit
minshed, and that he Prussian shipping might be
placed on the same footing as the Epgllfh tor the
expectation to third country, and In what 1t is
generally called indirect commerce. The first Of
these demands WIS refused, but the second was
granted; but the first was not refused because in
Germany an example OF restrictive measures was
shown. The second measure was granted in spite
Of these dents; ard this occasion the Br-
tish government gave to The treaty of 1872 inter-
pretaton in favor of Prussia an Interpretation
| which it would have been easy for the English 60
vernment 10 rerulse, had II not desired the COM
mercial relations between England and Germany
should increase in facility and extent. This was
the point at which affairs stood In 1872, on the
part OF England, measures were passed To facilitate
commerce; on Ire part OF Germany, measures to
restrict commerce in considerable degree. In
1913, there were no reprisals on the part OF Great
Britain, but, on the contrary, new concession !;
on the part of Germany, measures still more dec
called just, that whilst England does not grant every
demand made to it, because among number Of
conce ssions II refuses one, the Union should exc
cute measures OF all kinds which restrict commerce
between the two nations, and that underline ausp-
ces nj State whose government, at least Oh this
subject, holds course Numerically opposed 10 the
language it speaks. Thus after having shown the
disadvantages. Of the changes now IN view, and
having proved that the commercial measures 81
Great Britain had right to different return on
the part of Germany, 1t only, remains TO me to
charge your lordshlp to make known to the Prus-
sian government, that recently the English govern
ment regarded as certain the change in the tariff
iron, but that, whether that change takes place
not, it will present Prussia with no proposal eatve
this prop0siton either at present or tor the future
Convinced that is not compatible with the dlgni-
ty Of England to make proposals which are CONT
| nualy repulsed, the English government has &C.
CURED the conviction that, al regards csmmerclai
facilities, It can count on no support from Prussia
and the other States of the German Union and II
considers II It's duty to take its measures, tor the
| future, without taking into consideration things
which, in other circumstances, it would most Ger.
tainly have considered.
| Your lordship will have the kindness to commu-
nicate copy Of this despatch to the Prussian Mi
mister of Foreign Affairs | am, &c.
(Signed) ABERDEEN.
STATE PRosEourIovs-CouRro OF QUEENS BENCH
Trinity Term opened on Wednesday, 22d ult. and
there was, of course, full attendance Of the Bar
in the expectation that Judgment would be pro
nounced upon the motion for new trial in the case
ct the Queen rs. Daniel O'Connell and others
Towards the close of the day the Court intlmatec
that they would give Judgment on Friday. This
announcement caused full attendance in tn,
Court on the day fixed. On the sitting of the iul
Court, shortly after eleven O'clock, the case o
"The Queen against Daniel O'Connell and others
having been called,
Mr. Justice PERRIN proceeded to deliver his judg
ment. Having stated the nature of the charges az
set forth in the Indictment, he proceeded to con
kGIH fhn RE ytunh thn IN L
new trial had been rested by the counsel for The
traversers The objections as to mere form, suci
rs the misnomer Of Mr.. Rigby, the juryman. the
objection to the panel arising out of the omission
OF the names Of the Catholic jurors, as being pro-
perly matter Of challenge, not { a new trial, he
indicated the Court from the objection that j, hac
been deficient in exp!lcitness to the law Of con
lspiracy. He expressed his concurrence in the
greater part Of the charge, with the law land down
and the facts submitted to the jury, but though
that. there had been substantial error in ad
hitting certain newspapers, the property of Messs
Barrett or Duffy, as being per Sc evidence of fact.
done OF speeches made by Mr. O'Connell, which
were not otherwise In evidence. Reports II
newspapers were proof of facts, nor coulC
narrative statements, made on the. authority o
their proprletors, who were responsible for them
be brought in evidence as to the acts or speeche
Of another. The publication in the Pilot or Free
Gray, but not against Mr. O'Connell, except in st
far the acts OF the former could affect the latter
and, therefore, the Court had been substantial,
wrong in stating that Mr. O'Connell had been q
there which were Justly and strongly commented
upon, when there nothing in evidence Il
prove the assertion but those newspaper reports
In the course of his defence Mr.. OConnell re
| marked, with justice, that the Crown argued IL
circle with regard to those journals, for first thel
| used them to prove that conspiracy existed, ant
having so deduced that fact, they used the nara
tives OF these papers to prove acts OF conspiracy
sItvysdn nIs IJa otn
newspapers should not have been used until TIT
| conspiracy had been proved; indeed, there wa
abundance OF proof to impiicate Mr.. O'Connell II
the conspiracy without their aid; yet, with the Tor
mer impression on his mind, and mindful OF The
| principle Of civil law, which holds that one impro
per issue vitaes verdict, matter how well sup
ported by other evidence, he thought MIR. OCOnne,
entitled TO new trial. more especially as he coul'
| not say how far the jury had been influenced II
| their verdict by this newspaper evidence, whicl
was, in his mind, so improper Tor their coDsldera
ion. With respect to the Rev. Mr.. Tlerney, i
had been urged that there were some peculiar cir
cumstances, and his counsel had relied upon tn,
tact that no previous knowledge OF the acts OF tn
other traversers had been attributed to, proved
against him by the Crown, although he certan
Joined the association, and made very repr..len
sble speech there on the third of October but q
membership of that body was not legal, and n
previous knowledge or concert with others ha
been proved, he thought these facts should hav
been more plainly laid before the jury, and woul
direct new trial tor the reverend gentleman, 81
the ground OF vagueness and ooseness in tn
charge.
Mr.. Justice CHAMPION next delivered his judgmen
which was very long and careful Heeagreed will
his brother Perrin Ia every point, save The admlssl
bility of the newspapers against Mr.. O'CoGnell
| which he thought were clearly matter TO 60 befor
the jury, even il the statements therein were false
| for he held that Mr. O'Conne was responsible TO
them, ss they were published in pursuance OF thu
| common object, and that the publication was ips
facto part OF the conspiracy. lie thought that BIZ
brother Perrns remarks with regard to the Rev
Mr.. Tierney were very just, and concurrng in then
| as he did, they would dIrect a new TRIAL for tina
gentleman, even nj n rick OF including all the trav
ersers in it, Tor he could not, ut such hazard per
nit him to suffer wrong. That course, however
would be obviated, il the Crown could enter ,
Mole yroseq,si against him, which would satisfy hin
| (Sir ]. Crampon)
Mr.. Justice BuKroN followed, and in a Judgment,
ot his usuoi ability, stated the reasons which ht
L Ihnuahf the shnnld he refused