The sun., 1870-05-27

rejected his courteous salutaton with an In
suit, and declared him in arrest, why did he
not heroically defend himself, as he had
threatened to do2 Why did he not call his
men, who must have been within reach of
his voice2 Why did he allow himself to be
tumbled into hack and driven off to st.
Albans Jail, without even giving yell, or
offering any other resistance whatever3
We must confess that the suspicion Of bad
faith on the part of Gen. O'NEILL, which
these events and actions have produced, is
not altogether unreasonable; and that unless
he can clearly dsprove and set aside tho i'm
putation which they seem to establish
against his courage and his good faith, he
will remain one Of the most unonviable
Fenians in the world.
1t is true that the facts which were yester.
day recountcd still constitute strong reason
for faith in this Fenian leader. Ills move
ment was admirably prepared and organized.
Its commencement was a surprise to both
the American and British Governments.
With their hordes of spies and Of officials
they had no premonition of this formidable
crusade for the fact still remains unques-
toned that the Fenian leaders had prepared
at least thirty thousand men to take part In
this invasion, and had collected arms and am
munition in ample quantities for the purpose.
All this we understand TO have been done
under the direction of Gen. 0'NEfLL; and we
say again that II demonstrates the existence
in him of extraordinary capacity for organiza.
ton and for silence. In view of these facts
the friends of Ireland will, we hope. be slow
to admit the accusation Of treachery now go
widely brought against this Fenian conf
mander. If he designed to deceive the Bro
therhood, and to sell himself and them out to
their British foes, what need was there for so
extensive an organization and is it likely
that with n dishonest purpose at the start he
could have accomplished all that he
had accomplished previous to "Wednesday ?
We must say that these considerations leave
the subject involved in uncertainty. While
there is very much in the conduct of o'NEuL
to excite and to justify doubt, there is also
much to lead to the belief that he was more
probably honest, and that his failure and ar
rest proceeded from that irrcsolution and
vac,llat ON which have often overcome men
engaged in great revolutionary movements.
1t is well known that during the coVp d'ttat
Of 1862, LOUIS NAPOLEON, terrified at the
uncertainty and bloodshed of the opera
ton, gave orders in the midst of The
danger to abandon the enterprise, and
he was only saved from that fatal
act by the greater resolution and
more unscrupulous character of his halt
rother DE- MoRSY, and his military assist.
ant ST. ARNAUD. 1t is not impossible that
similar misfortune of mind may have over
taken O'NElLL in the beginning Of an under
taking whose proportions must naturally
have become more gigantic as they loomcd
before him in the smoke of British powder
But the problem is one which we Will not
undertake to solve. We lay the facts before
our readers, and leave themto judge wheth-
er Gen. O'NEILL was a traitor who had
planned his own arrest beforehand, or n
brave soldier overtaken by fit of moral
cowardice which caused him to lose an op-
portunity that might have grown into some
thing great and memorable.