New-York daily tribune., 1844-02-21

Justice, and had made scaltlous and lnt!ammato-
ry speeches to the people.
The Attorney General then addressed the Jury
IN ong-winded speech which was nothing more
than history Of the Repeal movements, the e1-
tracing from O'Connell's speeches and writings
the more obnoxious portions and reading them to
| the Jury.
During the speech he alluded to the history of
the Union, and after concluding what he consld-
cred triumphant vlndicatlon of it, he exclaimed,
rs there any counsel on the other side who viii
declare this act Of Union void - OConnel in
terupted him with bold Yes This speech
occupied the second and third days.
The fourth day was occupied IN examining the
first Witness Mr.. Frederick B. Hughes. 1t
amounted TO nothing, except to Kill the count Of
the indictment against Mr.. Barrett. The fifth
day was occupied in the examination of Mr.
Hem, reporter for the Standard; the sixth in the
examination Of John jackson, correspondent Of
the Morning Herald, who, in his cross-examna-
ton, acknowledged that he was accustomed to
embellish little, and that he was bit of poet, },
which created laugh, as he stood six feet in
his boots
John Brown, a Printer proved that Mr.. Ray
was the Secretary of the Association; that he
had printed Reports" Of the Association, In
structons for the Repeal Wardcns, placards, &C..
some of which he produced, signed Daniel O'Con-
nell
Mr.. WHIrEs1DE objected to the reception Of
the documents, as evidence against the traversers
in the present case.
After discussion of an hour and half the
Court decided on admitting the document, /" In
structons to, Repeal Wardens," signed by Mr..
| O'Connell
The seventh day. between one and two O'clock
| O'ConneU and his son John rose and left the
Court to attend the regular Repeal Meeting at
Constitution Hall. This the Attorney General
declared he would not permit. The Sth, 9th,
| 10th and llth days were occupied in examination
of the crown witnesses, when the Attorney Gene
raj announced that the case for the crown had
closed. On the 18th the Court was crowded to
excess to hear the opening Of Mr.. Shell on the
part Of the defence 1t was Irish through
out impassoned, eloquent and thrilling. In one
of his bursts Of eloqucnce shout rang over the
Court which called down the Indignation of the
Chief Justice. 1t was noble defence of Ireland
and burning rebukc to the in Justice and tyranny
of England. Shell had become somewhat un-
/ popular with the Irish account of keeping
aloof from Repeal, but this speech has thrown
him back into the arms of the people. 1t is ele-
giant in diction-clear in argument, and contain
ing some Of the most mastery appeals to Jury
we have ever read. He kept even tho bar in
constant state of excitement, and like the lofty
speech of the martyr Emmett, 1t was the out
brcathings OF patriots soul aroused at It's coun
try's wrongs 1t drew tears from O'Conne
He removed the mantle from the history of Ire
land and showed her spoiled, robbed, butchercd
and trampled under foot by rapacious oppression
Yet there were no vindctive or harsh terms in his
address. The feeling that prompted 1t too
deep and holy to permit base emotions, and his
appeal was to the sense of right and that strong
sympathy in the human soul for the oppressed,
which nothing but a brutalizcd man Can resist.
The thirteenth day was occupied in speeches
from Messrs. Moore and Mitchell on behalf Of
Messrs Ticrney and Ray. On the l4th day Mr..
Ftzgbbon addressed the Court, making some Sc
we're remarks on the way the Attorney General
had conducted the case In the afternoon ses
sion note was handed to Mr.. Fitzgibbon from the
Attorney General amounting to challenge. Mr..
Fitzgibbon threw it back and demanded 1t should
be read to the Court. This the Attorney General
refused to do, and Mr. F. then stated its contents
to the Court, winch caused great excitement
(Mr. F.'s wife and child were present at the time
The Court expressed surprise and regret at the
contempt of Court by the Attorney General. The
thing was at length adjusted by the belligerent
Attorney withdrawing his note, and Mr.. +. con-
tinued his address. This was in keeping with
the laundering, childish course pursued by the
Attorney from beginning TO end in this case. Mr..
F. concluded his speech on the 18th day IN be-
half of Dr. Gray, one Of the propvietors of the
| Freeman'S Journal.
The 10th day was occupied by Mr.. Whiteside
in behalf of Mr.. Duffy Editor of The Nation
On the l7th, Mr.. McDonagh addressed the Court
on behalf of Mr.. Barrett. O'Connell comes next,
whose speech we must wait TO- till the next ar
rival. He was expected to address the Court on
Monday, the 9TH instant. He was waiting, 1t IS
thought, till Parliament should open and the
Queens Speech be received.
The Government rest their case chiefly on the
evidence of reporters and those connected with
the Press. The whole thing is evidently a sham,
and will probably explode in conditional Govern
mental pardon, should the packed Jury ever agree
in a verdict of guilty. The speech of o'Connell
will probably do as much for Repeal as mass
meeting.