Daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1865, 1863-06-08
How tho EnRlisn Treat Reb.1,.

/ In the just published fourth volume Of
@assey's History Of England during the
Reign of George the Third, we find the fol-
lowing account Of the wa5sin which Irish
rebels were treated by the English govern.
ment ana its OH; ;ers s. 80
ga part of the Mount Kennedy corps of
yeomanry were, of an autumn night in the
year 1898, patroliug the village of Delbary.
in the county of Wicklow. Two or three Of
the party, led by WhollOgan, one of their
number entered the cottage of laboriue
man named Dogherty, and demanded if
there were any bloody rebels there? The
only inmates of The cabin we're Dogherty's
wife and sick lad, her son, who was eat
ing his supper. Whollaghan asked if the
boy was Dogherty's son; and being told
that he was, Then, you dog, said Wholla.
CHAN, you are to die here.' q hope not,'
answered the poor lad. And he prayed, If
there was any charge against him, to be
taken before Mr.. Latouche, a magistrate il
the neighborhood, of known humanity and
Justice. The fellow replied that he cared
nothing for Latouche, and raised his gun.
The mother entreated him for the love of
God, to take her life instead of her child's.
Whollaghan, with Eolley of abuse, pulled
the trigger twice, butthe piece missed fire.
~ comrade then handed him another gun,
and the woman rushed at the muxzle to
shield her son. In the struggle the piece
went off, and the ball broke young Dogh.
erty's arm.
"When the boy fell, the assassius left
the cabin; but WhoIlaghan returned, and
seing the lad supported by his mother,
cried out, rs not the dog dead yetP' 90
yes, sir, said tho poor woman, .he is dend
enough 'For fear he is not, said Wholla-
ghau, 'let him take this Aud with delib-
crate aim, he fred fourth time, and
Dougherty dropped dead out of his moth
er's arms.
''WhOllaghan was tried for murder, no.
by the civil tribunal, as he should have
been, but by court-martIal. The facts
were not disputed, but the defence was
that the poor boy had been rebel, and
that the prisoner was a humane and loyal
subject. That the Doghertys were rebels
is probable enough; as, indeed, it was
hardly possible that Catholic peasant
should have been anything else. But no
legal evidence of the fact was rendered, |
and the hearsay which was admitted was
about as credible as the oatHs.of the Or
angemen VINO came to give Wh0lIanghan a |
character for humanity. BdtIthe real de- |
fence was that the prisoner and his com.
panlons had been sent out with general |
orders from their officer to shoot anybody |
they pleased. The Court seemed to have
been of opinion that such orders were
neither unusual nor unreasonable, and it |
is difficult to collect from their finding that
they thought the prisoners had been guilty
even OF an error in judgment. They found
I'll That the prisoner did shoot and kill
Ihomas Dogherty, rebel; but do acquit |
him of any malicious or wilful intention
of murder"
Nothing like this has ever occurred in
our war. The rebels have committed afro
ctous outrages against loyal men; and in
some points their conduct put one in mind
OF the barbarous cruelties of the English
against the Sepoys; but on our side, not
even in the heat of battle have such mur-
ders been committed as the English en-
couraged in ireland.