On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    The jary in that case acquitted Hardy . The next stage in the proceedings related to Mullinahone , and the evidence in reference to the transaction connected with this part of the case merely touched upon the attempt made by the pr « ° jf escape arrest . They had the witnesses , William "Wisgans and O'SuUivan , swearing in reference to tlreTtransaction connected with this part of the ease , audit was some what singular that not a single witness from Mullinahone was produced to prove any part of the case . Notan inhabitant , not a shopkeeper , was produced—and the evidence given related merely to the marching of the people , and the visit to the police barrack . It was verv remarkable that the priest ^^ M - — rttt _ —

    of the parish was not produced ; a priest or two appeared upon the scene now and again and then disappeared . The chane | bell rung , and one would Suppose that his reverence would have been attracted by its tones , and could have given evidence of the transaction ; but not 6 ne of them was btought forward . The evidence of police constables was very unsatisfactory . When the revolution began , there were twenty persons present . The police constable next reported Mr William S . O'Brien as saying ? that all vacancies would be filled up by Irishmen , ' and he did not think the jary would be of opinion that that sentence amounted to high treason ; for what did it mean more than ibis—that when there was au Irish administration in this country , all

    situations and vacancies should be filled up by Irishmen ? A very bad and criminal saying , no doubt . Take the entire speech , and what was there in it from beginning to end to indicate a treasonable intent in the mind of the speaker ? What , let him ask , was there in it , in fact , about any particular form of povernmenr , or about the Queen , or the House of Peers , or whether there should be a monarchy or republic in Ireland , or its connexion with England in the sense in which he had always contended for it ? Nothing ! It was perfectly plain that it was a mere personal object which he " ^ r O'B . ) soueht to attain froiu first to last . The

    gle topic which pressed upon his mind was this—* I am apprehensive of arrest , and will you ( to the people ) suffer me to be arrested ? ' to which they replied that they would not . He ( Air W , ) never , in all his experience , knew of an instance where a speech of this kind was held to be proof of a treasonable intent in the mind of Mr O'Brien ; and further , in connexion wi th * this speech , it was important to remark that it was followed by no act of violence , outbreak , instigation to outbreak , or interference with property whatever . Then came the evidence of the policeman Sullivan , who deposed to the number of people who had assembled at Mullinahone . Now . it was remarkable that the

    statement of this witness , that there were 5 , 000 persons in the town on that occasion , was not confirmed by any of the other witnesses . He ( Mr W . ) did not , however , seek to impute to this witness a wilful disregard of bis oath , but he was entitled to conclude from his evidence that when a man was found to exaggerate the truth in any one particular , it was scarcely possible that he wonld not have done so in other respects also . He next came to deal with the affair at the police barracks at Mullinahone in connexion with which the Attorney General had observed that Mr O'Brien was bent upon a bloody revolution . Now , a man who was bent on the accomp lishment of a bloody revolution , must be bold and

    daring , and prepared to attempt mighty enterprises ; and it was not to be supposed that he could attain his ends by soft and civil speeches—the evidence showed that Mr O'Brien had a large number of men with him at Mullinahone , forming a force amply sufficient to effect the purpose he was accused by the Attorney General of having contemplated iu Mullinahone . In fact , the Attorney General alleged that because he ( Mr O'Brien ) had had a sufficient force to effect a treasonable purpose at Mullinahone , the jury must believe that the treasonable intent to effect it existed in his mind , even though he made no attempt whatever to accomplish his purpise . But he ( Mr Wbiteside ) was convinced that the jury ,

    viewisg the whole of his client ' s conduct throughout the transaction , would arrive at the opinion that there was no ground whatever for the allegation of the Attorney General—for the fact that Mr O'Brien having had sufficient force to employ successfully against the police , yet did not make use of it for that purpose , ought to convince them of his innocence , or at least induce them to place but little reliance npon the misreported speeches which had been forced into the case , for the manifest purpose of strengthening a case which without them was felt by the crown itself not to be altogether complete . It was then sworn that when Mr O'Brien came to the police barrack he bad a military-looking cap

    apon his head . But what was the fact of the matter ? It was this , that he wore upon his head one of the caps worn by the members of the ' 82 Club , similar to that worn by the late Daniel O'Connell , who had en one occasion remarked that he intended to have himself crowned at Tira , and yet sras not prosecuted by the Attorney General of that day . It was deposed that ia the course of the conversation which took place between Mr O'Brien and the police in the barrack-room at Mullinahone , the former observed to the latter , ' . Follow me to Callan , and I will place you under pay , ' adding , ' I am about to attack a barrack where there are 500 police . ' Now he ( Mr Whiteside ) did not place the

    slightest credit upon the last of these expressions , and he would give evidence of the most complete character to contradict it . What police barrack in the whole country contained so many as 500 men ? Not a single one ; asd this expression the policeman who gave the evidence must have known perfectly well to have been a pure fiction . In fact , the largest number of constables in any police barrack in Ireland did not exceed forty or fifty men ; and it was rational to suppose tha ' t this bravado conld never have taken place , inasmuch as it was not in the sli ghtest degree calculated to create a successful impression upon the persons to whom it was supposed to have been addressed in

    consequence of its intrinsic absurdity . Mr O'Brien then said he should give them an hour to consider —and if within that hour they did not agree to give their arms up , he would be back and take them . The first inquiry , then , for the jury was—did the police remain there , or did they go away ? But as thfrjurywould . no doubt , recollect , they remained four hours packing np their furniture , and the conquering revolutionist—the man who was to seize the kingdom—forgot to come back and seize the rauskets . Brit the police did more—they marched fifteen miles to Cashel , but were not molested in the slightest degree—and that was the levying war against her . Majesty ! It was a clear convincing

    proof , said the Attorney General , of his being guilty of high treasom , because he levied war against the sovereign of these realms . "When Mr O'Brien went to the police barrack the men were unarmed , and the witnesses examined described the two persons who accompanied him as being armed—one bearing a double-barrelled gun , and the other a fowlingpiece , while the prisoner himself had three pistolsone in his hand , and the other two in his breast . But they did not molest the police ; they remained just two minutes , and lo !—that was levying war against her Majest y ' .-that was a proceeding which put Queen ' victoria ' s crown in imminent jeopardy ! ( A augh . ) He ( Mr Whiteslde ) would askthe iurv "

    could they generall y bdieve that that circumstance was a proof of the commission of an overt act of high treason ? It was , they should bear in mind , one of the most important features in the case up to that point ; there was nothing done before it but mere talk ; and would they believe that that most extraordinary and unaccountable visit of two minutes to a police office at Mullinahone was a clear overt act of levying war against the Soverei gn of the realm ? They must recollect that marching in arms was nothing , except it was meant to commit an act of treason , for if it were so all the Orangemen of the north would be brought up for trial at the next assizes . One of the jurors asked the witness who

    deposed to this visit a question about the pike one of them earned , when he trailed it , and placed the sharp point of it on the ground , and that was one of the progfs given of an intention to levy war . That was not the way they levied war in France , to which h « learned fnend alluded with so much horror-that was not the way they acted when they wanted to Kvolnhomse and overturn a throne-they did not SsfcSPattS

    ¥ PS . Ssmrs 5 = wa 8 thatit provedalevying ofwar . hg ™ sssassi 1 *;? SSK pWKSSSSWI

    Untitled Article

    Attorney General . —I did not say there was a flag . I said there was a sash . Mr Whiteside . —Yes , it was such a sash as Commodore or Commander M'Cormack , of Ballingarry , might wear . ( A laugh . ) But what was that sash or flag , or whatever the Attorney General might wish to call it ? Wh y that , said to be hostile to the Queen , was a Scotch shawl , such as that which gentlemen oftea wear —( a laugh)—that innocent fact or circumstance was tortured and perverted , to give what would otherwise be an inoocent blameless act a guilty meaning and complexion , which , of itself , it could not bear . A juror then asked another question , as to how Mr O'Brien procured the arms . But m a f ^ « * . . *

    the fact was , that Mr O'Brien left town without dagger , powder , or ball in his portmanteau ; for were they in it , no doubt they would have been discovered in the lime-kiln . Mr O'Brien wished to have a guard to protect him from arrest , and that he contended did not constitute the crime of high treason . It was asked for what purpose did Mr O'Brien carry arms ? But it was the business of the Attorney General , to prove that the arms were procured for treasonable purposes . Did they say or prove for what purpose the arms ' were procured ? Did they at the ] police office say why they wanted the arms of the police ? No ; for the evidence of the witness was , that they did not ; and that

    after tbey went away he saw them no more . That was the nature and substance of the Mullinahone transaction . There was no interruption of the police , or attempt to take their arms by force , or marching to attack the police barrack , as occurred in John Frost ' s case , when he boldly marched into the town of Newport . The Attorney General relied on the equivocal evidence of the two policemen ; but no act was done which constituted the crime of high treason , and he ( Mr Whiteside ) therefore submitted that the jury would not , and could not , adopt a strained and forced construction of the evidence , and come to the conclusion that it was an actual

    levying of war . In the cross-examination of the witness Wiggins , he said Mr O'Brien wore a cap like that worn by the late Mr O'Connell , with a peak and a gold band ; and as to what was said by Mr O'Brien , as witness took no notes of the conversation , the jury ceuld give his statement no credit whatever , He asked them would they , or could they , recollect , at the distance of two months , a casual conversation of about two minutes ? He said , no ; it was impossible they could do so , and they should , therefore , attach no credit to it whatsoever . As to the circumstance deposed to by TobiB , the car-boy , he attached no importance to it whatsoever . He drove him from Mullinahone

    towards Carrick , wheie he met a crowd of persons armed with-pikes , but they were not under his control or authority . Would they meet him without any previous concert ? The people often went out before to meet the late Mr O'Connell and other popular favourites , and it was never said they were at any time guilty of hig h treason for such conduct . If they were armed with pikes how could he help it . or how could he prevent it , when he had nothing whatever to do in the transaction ? Then came the first affair at Ballingarry , deposed by to Egan and a man named Bourke . The first man was an inhabitant of the town ; he was not in the police , and all he proved was , that he saw Mr O'Brien coming

    from Mullinahone . He had arms then , and so had some of the crowd ; but for what purpose ? Why , to protect Mr O'Brien . The witness then deposed to a speech he made , which was similar to that delivered at Enniscorthy ; and indeed that speech might have been stereotyped , for all he said subsequently was only a repetition of his first address . He was , he said , afraid of being arrested ; but what proof was that of a general object to create a revolution ? A man did not embark in projects of treason without knowing what he had to do ; and again , he ( Mr Whiteside ) avowed that Mr O'Brien ' s purpose was to avoid and resist

    what he conceived to be his unconstitutional arrest by Lord Clarendon , who meant to put him into gaol , not to try him , but to imprison him for an indefinite period . If he ( Mr Whiteside ) wanted evidence to establish what he had said that morning , the speech of Mr Dillon would be perfectly conclusive on the subject . Egan , the witness , said that Mr O'Brien wanted a guard for the ni ght of twenty . What did that prove ? That he wanted a body guard , but not a guard for any other purpose . Egan said he did not see Mr O'Brien again that evening . Having got the body guard , he dismissed the army , and went to bed and slept , Heroes of revolutions did not act after that fashion .

    They dii not sleep ; they rather continued awaketo plot , to contrive , to see what post they should attack ; but Mr O'Brien having got his guard around him , he went to bed and slept ( laughter ) . That witness called the people a mob—he said he saw some guns and pikes as they were leaving Ballingarry , and going to Killenaule ; the men walked by his ( tvitness ' s ) door ; they met at a certain distance to guard Mr O'Brien , and then they left him—Mr O'Brien dismissed the army . That indeed , was the act of a revolutionist . The learned gentleman then referred to 'the drilling witness , ' Sparrow , and commented upon the evidence of this person at very great length .

    Sparrow said that he saw thir . y armed men about Mr O'Brien—that the others had scythes and pitchforks , and such weapons as the peasantry on a sudden and for a sudden object might supply themselves with . He dwelt on the utter improbability of this witness ' s evidence . The' army' went to O'Brien ' s Cross , where they dispersed , and Mr O'Brien went on his way . The armed party continued with him , but the mob went away . Did they ever see or know of such a thing as ' house drilling , ' which had been sworn to on this occasion ? Egan did not prove it , although , he was a house-builder in the village of Ballingarry—Bourke did not prove it—Sparrow gave evidence of it ; bntwho could believe him ? Where was the

    postmaster or postmistress who lived under the pay of the state , and was he dismissed in an hour ? Where was any respectable inhabitant of the place ? Where was any man unconnected with the police force ? and where was this Sparrow living ? and what did he say he would not do ? He ( Sparrow ) was living with the police , and he said he never would take money from any person whatever , after this trial was over , or even while it was pending . They admit the entire case up to the present momentwas the desire to escape arresJ , and this was shown from Enniscorthy up to the present moment . It was alleged by the Attorney General that the prisoner behaved like a marauder ; and had availed

    himself of the ri ght of a revolutionist to take possession of houses and food , and had not paid for anything . What was the evidence with regard to that ? It was that four or five persons entered a house , took a temperate meal , and drank nothing but water . Did they remark how auxious the Attorney General was to find out the facts connected with the hotel bill ? For half an honr he was torturing the witness to prove that this innocent act was one indicative of an intent to set out upon a marauding expedition . What passed ? The prisoner , supposing him to be one of the party , went to bed very quietly , and slept , upon the eve of a revolution ; and the sum of 13 s 6 d was paid in the morning a

    fact which he was sure the shorthand writer for the Crown would preserve as one of the most appalling in that most awful part of the case ; He would next proceed to Killenaule . It was impassible for any twelve men to say up to this period that the prisoner contemplated the desi gn of high treason . The twenty armed men , about whom evidence had been given , went a certain distance with the prisoner ; he was on an outside car with two men , and they drove to the hotel ; Could there be a more ridiculous abortion of proof than was furnished by this part of the case ? They marched to Mullinahone , and then—oh ! dreadful revolution—some bread was purchased . When revolutions were undertaken

    pnvate property was but little respected ; but nothing of the kind occurred in the present case . No property was injured—no rights invaded ; and could they hold that such a transaction iras high treason , when it was not held in a case where the people > urnt houses , and police and soldiers confederated together ? Bread was obtained and eaten—this was not high treason . But ( said the Attorney General ) put the hotel bill inthe round tower andthe socks or Btockings together , and a case of high treason is made out such as should convince the most sceptical jury in the world ' . ' Had the people fired upon the police or the troops , that would have been a different

    thing . But the fact was , that , having preserved the prisoner from arrest , they ate their bread and peacefully dispersed . He appealed to the jury to consider the statement of the Attorney General , and compare it vritht he facts . Where was the army ? Gone . Where was their leader ? He was off on an outside car . Where was his carbine or blunderbuss ? Under the cushion- and thus the leader of a revolution was driven into Killenaule . The learned counsel then referred to the evidence of the innkeeper ( Walsh ) , and that of a police constable ( Mathew ) . The evidence of the latter person had reference to a matter which made it impossible t

    Untitled Article

    impute the guilt of treason to Mr O'Brien . Did the prisoner tell the people to make a barricade , or resist the trrops ? He did hot speak a word , or direct the people to make a barricade ; and when it was made , it was merely for the purpose of preserving Mr O'Brien from arrest . The Attorney General said that was hig h , treason . He ( Mr Whiteside ) contended that a sudden act done by a man in a moment of impulse could not be held to be hig h treason . When the Earl of Northumberland marched with some thousands of men , the judges held that his acts did not amount to high treason , because the guilty intent was not shown . This was the best evidence the law officers could obtain after rummaging the coun-— » V ^ ^^ fl W * * W ^ A m

    try with the whole of the constabulary at their back . The learned counsel then referred to the evidence of Captain Longmore , in reference to the erection of the barricades at Killenaule , in order to show that the object of the people was solely that of preserving Mr O'Brien from arrest . Here was the evidence of a man who , being a British officer , would not vary one word from the truth . The allegation was , that the prisoner made war against the Queen . To do that , there should be a determination , as in the case of John Frost , to kill the troops of the Queen . There were men inside the barricades —men who had rifles—the troops halted , and they were addressed thus— ' If you are people upon ordinary business , and are not come to arrest Mr

    O'Brien , we have no quarrel with you . ; we are not making war against the Queen , nor are we desirous to subvert her authority ; our sole desire is to prevent Mr O'Brien from being arrested . ' ' No , ' said the officer , 'I have no intention to arrest Mr O'Brien . ' The barricade was removed—not a trigger was pulled—not a stone thrown—not a pike or bayonet raised ; and , in an indictment which did not charge that the military were marching upon the service of the Queen , Mr O'Brien was charged with high treason . This occurred upon the 28 th of July . The jury would decide that case as twelve Englishmen would decide it ; and there was not one of that magnanimous nation that would hesitate one moment in acquitting the prisoner . If the prisoner

    had been guilty of illegal acts in the Association , why had not the Attorney General caused his arrest ? He should then have asserted the dignity of the law ; and there were many law officers , not out of that court , who had enforced the law in the ordinary manner , and quieted the country . Did they believe that when behind a barricade a whole population was assembled , and not a man was injured ; and when the man . who had the rifle , and did not shoot the officer , though he could have done so , any desire was entertained to kill one of her Majesty ' s troops ? It was proved to demonstration that the troops were received with courtesy , and greeted with cheers on their way . The criminal law presented no such case of hi gh treason ; The prisoner

    might have been indicted for a rank misdemeanor , and the dignity of the law would have been vindicated ; but his argument was , that the acts done did not amount to high treason . Nobody was hurt—and that waa what the Attorney General upon a solemn trial for life or death , said was a proof of a revolutionary intention ! Defend m from conatructive treason ! One thought never crossed the breast of Mr O'Brien against the dignity of the Queen . In what speech did he refer to her name ? Where had he spoken with disrespect of a lady and a Queen , wh ^ m it wa 3 the object of every chivalrous nature to respect , admire , venerate , honour , and love ? Mr Whiteeide having commented upon some evidence of a less material character , proceeded to refer to the

    transactions which took place at Ballingarry . Mr O'Brien having arrived at Boulagh , some w tnesses were produced to depose to his earliest proceedings in that locality . Of these witnesses he would take that of Lamphier , who appeared to be the most respectable of the cumber , and whose evidence embraced all that was material in this portion of the case . Trm Lamphier , who was an agent in the employment of the Mining Company , stated that upon the 28 ; h of July last he heard a speaoh made , by Mr O'Brien to the people on the Common of Baulagh ; and what did he make his client eay , ' that there was a proclamation issued for his arrest , and that he wished the people to protect him from that arrest . ' Now , was it not remarkable that this man , who was

    ohargedwith having headed a formidable rebsllion , did not say to bis army , ' Let us capture Clontnel , seize upon her Majesty ' s troops , and blow up the barracks in which they are stationed ? ' No , he says Bimply this , ' If you protect me Ireland will be free in % fortnight , ' clearly showing that what he aimed at waB tho personal protection of himself . And wai it not ako remarkable that Mr O'Brien and his friends—those men who contemplated an immediate insurrection , according to the attorney Generalshould tell their hearera , not to be prepared to break into armed insurrection on the instant , but , as one of them said , ' in a week , ' another ' in a fortnight , ' and a third , who was fixed upon as the most violent of the party , S 3 distant a period as six months . Here

    it was sworn by the same witness that some of the people told Mr O'Brien that they had nothing but Btoses to use in the fight , and that ho replied that atonea were very useful where better arms could not be had . Now , in the came of common sense , did any me ever hear of a number of men going to wage war against one of ths most powerful monarchs in the world armed with stones ? No doubt his client told them it would be better for them to have other arms ; but even if he did say so , that was not high treason—but for what purpose did-he use that language ? To oreate rebellion ? No , but 'toprotect ; him , ' to use his own oft-repeated words . He ( Mr Whiteside ) thought it was utterly impossible for human reason to reconcile the conduot of the people

    and that of his client in this part of the transaction , with any other hypothesis than that he had just laid down . Then oame the evidence of the witness Cullen , concerning which he observed , that if he wanted evidence for the purpose of clearing Mr O'Brien ' s case from every unfavourable feature it presented , he could not have desired stronger testimony in support of the ' argument he heard all along advanced than what had been supplied by this witness . This witness stated that Mr O'Brien having mounted an old ditch , addressed the people , and said— Can von supply ma with a sufficient force to keep ma from 200 men ? ' Waa that , he would ask the jury , tho force that would be employed by the government of the Queen of England if they wished to quell an

    insurrection ? No , but it was exactly such a force as would ba sent for the arrest of a single man . This was the common sense view which any rational man would take of the language used by Mr O'Brien , and t applied to the case he had endeavoured to establish all through his speaoh . Mr O'Brien did not say ' Come out with me into the field , and let us assail the Queen and destroy theempire . ' No , but thia only , ' Have you a force sufficient to protect me from any attempt that may be made to arrest me by 200 men ?' Mr Whiteside . then contended that the barricade erected on the Ballingarry road waa like that erected at Killenaule for the purpose of obstructing any attempt cf the officers of justice to arrest Mr O'Brien . To establish the case for tho Crown , the Atternnv

    General had given evidence that Mr O'Brien had gone into tbe yard attached to the mining concern , for the purpose of obtaining carts , & ? ., to raiss a barricade . . Now , to thia evidence ho would reply by pointing to another part of the evidence given by the same witness , which was to the effect that no attempt whatever waa made by Mr O'Brien or his followers to make use of the gunpowder Which they ( the colliers ) knew was kept in the concerns of the company . Now , it was perfectly dear that if Mr O'Brien had intended to make war upon tho Queen , this barrel of gunpowder would have been the very thing for his purpose , and would , have been taken by . him to asBist in the accomplishment of his purpose . But if , on the other band , tbe object of Mr O'Brien was , as

    he alleged it to be , to escape arrest , was it not more natural for him to ask for : the carts in order to erect a barricade , and to leave the gunpowder , whioh he did not require , untouohed ! lie would confidently leave it to the jury to decide whether the hypothesis he had just advanoed . or that of the Attorney General , wastke moBt consistent with the faots proved in evidence . What would be the ordinary conduct of a man resolved per fas ant nefas to do . it ? Let tke jury imagine the case of a man who intended to commit a robbery at a railway office—who went np to the olerk , and said , 'I want the money of the railway company , ' and when the other said , 'it belonged to that company , ' the person went away . Was that robbery ? Mr O'Brien asked for a pony which would

    ride down the cavalry of Great Britain—( laughter ) —a pony just then , it appeared , going to waterdaughter )—and then the witness said , No , I cannot give you either the pony or let you have the key of the barrack , because I should get into trouble with my employer , ' and than , Mr O'Brien walked away . Was that a proof of a treasonable purpose , or of levying war againat her . Majesty ? Oh ! but , ' said the Attorney General , he wanted the barrack for military purpoBOB . ' But if he did , why did he not take it ? He could do so if he wished j for the witness deposed he had a crowd with him , and that no one was in the concerns but himself and a few men . P M « S " tat ? ltoa Jl S «* lettM S"en * by Mr O'Brien from Dublin , in order that he ( mould

    mark it ; and he added that on the very evenine when this transaction occurred he forwarded to Dublin £ 100 in money , and had fifty pounds of nowder in the place . They wereall within Mr O'Brien ' s reach . He might have seized them if he liked , but he deolined doing so , in consequence of the reasons Riven . bythij witness . Then came the evidence of Mr Purdy , which waa not of mnoh consequence in the case . And how he would call the attention ot thejury to the evidenoe of Mr Trant and the five policemen , who deposed to the transaction at the Widow Cormiok ' a house . He should not detain them at any length on that of Mr Cox , for it was immaterial to the case . Mr Trant stated he got orders to proceed to Ballingarry on the owning of

    Untitled Article

    that day , ' to act in concert with Mr Cox , ' coming in anothePdirection ; who wasdMirousof-receiving the reward of £ 500 ; for he said to Mr Trant , ' Oh ! you let £ 500 slip out of your hands ; ' ( A' laugh . ) The jury must remember that the only - body of men under tho control of Mr O'Brien were the colliers who ran after him ; he had nothing whatever to say to the people , who lived at a distant part of 6 he country he did not send for them—he had no authority over them—there was no proof of a combination or conspiracy in . the entire transaction . The whole ) and the" powerful part of the present case entirely depended almost on the evidenoe of Mr Trant . That inspector , he was told , wrote a dispatoh , detailing the transaction , whioh would out-do 'Gufwood ' s Dispatches oi the Duke ef Wellington , ' commencing with the poetio words , — . Whoever takes the foremost foeman ' s life , H imself shall eonquer in the Strife . * 1-3 — ^> F'Aa' AAll £ »* * Ai | AAM& ^ M « fc > l « lffi * ¦ f % ^^ mi . t A ^»»«?^ . —* ?~~

    ( areat laug hter . ) That showed the mood he was in ( alaugh ); but he ( Mr Whiteside ) "firmly believed that if he had not gone into the stone house of the Widow M'Oormiok , —if he did not run up the hill for proteotion , there would have been no collision on that occasion . ¦ This was the first time when treason burst out in all its fury and malignity . He referred his evidence to the jury . He deposed that one shot was fired by the people , and then they found him in the stone house . This Budden quarrel , this painful and melancholy transaction , would not , he ( Mr Whiteside ) was firmly convinced , ba high treason had ho not retired to that house . It was only that morning Ut O'Brien and the people who were with him heard of the proclamation for his arrest , and

    his protection from the , seizure of the police was their powerful objeot . He had great doubts who fired tbe first shot ; for they must remember that an unarmed man oame forward before firing took place , and exclaimed , ' For God ' s sake let there be peacelet there be no firing " . ' Did that look like ' a determined , murdering purposai of attacking the police ? They would recollect that in the attack which took place 300 rounds of ball cartridges were fired by the police . The evidence of Mr Trant was , that he or * dered the police not to fire unless fired on by the people . He ( Mr W . ) regretted sincerely that he did not go down stairs instead of looking out from above , Ifor had he done so the coafliot would not have taken place . Mr O'Brien went round to the front of the ' house SB he was deaired , but Trant

    remained above stairs , Mr Trant , be it remembered ,, did not swear as to the words Slash away , and * slaughterthem .. 'all , ' being used , but he said there was a oraW , and then'the' firing commenced . He could speak of nothing else but the orash , and whenever he ( Mr Whiteside ) asked him anything his reply was ' orash , oraah , crash . ' ( A laugh . ) . The firing continued for one hour . 230 rounds of ball cartridge were fired by the polios ; and yet , after all that , there were no mavka of the bulleta fifed by the people , and it required , as he was informed , a microscopic view of the house to discover the injury done to it , for be it remembered the panes of glass ware broken by the police in tho aat of firing . Mr Trant said he was wounded , bat he did not know it

    or feel the pain , nor could he say he was wounded at all until some of the policemen told him . ( A lauzh . ) He said also he did not go to bed during the cjnfliot —a circumstance of which he was not quite sura . ( A laugh . ) The policemen did not see him during the fight , but after it was over he was found gathering up the trophies of his most brilliant campaign . The learned counsel then reforred to the evidence of Robinson and the other two policemen . One of them swore thai Mr O'Brien was near the window , with one foot upon the sill , when it was stated he made use of the words , ' Slash away , boys , slaughter them all . ' The other witness said that Me O'Brien had gone away , and the third said that when he made use of the words , his ( witness ' s ) bayonet was within six

    inches of hU breast . Not one man was wounded , though this order was stated to have been given—not a ballet was found—not a remnant of the battle appeared but the description that was given by the police , and he called upon the jury to give the benefit of the doubt ; arising from the deposition of Mahoney , who did Hot hear Mr O'Brien use the words , and also from the absence of Rafferly , who also was at the window , and though as a matter of course examined by the Crown , had not been produoed by the law officers ; , None had suffered except the unfortunate men who were within range of the police guns . He called upon the jury to diabalieve the testimony of Moran , whb was naturally a coward and assassin , for he swore that he would have shot the defenoeless women who

    were there probably for the purpose of resouing and lea diag away from the place of confliot , their husbands ,, sons , or brothers . He implored of them to reflect on the testimony of a man who said he would have imbrued his hands in the blood , not of a man , but a poor defenceless woman , rushing forward to reaoue her relative . The learned oounsel then referred to the evidence of Mr Cox ; He lauded the manner in which he gave his evidence , but dwelt upon the ciroumstance that he had . not mentioned to the inspector-general anything- " about the use of the wards ' slash away . ' He next referred to the evidence of other witnesses , for the purpose of showing thai the objeot , from first to-last ; was to preserve Mr O'Brien from arrest . Could they believe that the man

    who said' slash away , ' would hsvetold the policeman whom he met on the road that it would be an ururianly thing to attack an unarmed man ? The revolution terminated by the ringleader descending from hia horse , surrendering it to the man from whom he took it , and suffering him to go about his business . The last words of Mr O'Brien were that he wanted no bloodshed . Were these the acts and words of a man who desired a revolution ? It was impossible to oonceive that he contemplated anything of the kind . Where was the mark of the bullet ? There was not ane Bcrape on any one of the entire body of the police . How unlike the case of John Frost ! Here the officer only imagines , dreams , and thinks he was hurt or wounded ; but neither hurt nor wound has been found

    on his person . They did not examine the Widow M'Cormick . Why not ? They did not examine any of the women who were there . Why not ? There wore women and children there . It was not amid women and children those individuals would levy war against the Queen . It was well the children were not there ; for if they were , it wa 3 evident from the testimony of one of these policemen that he would have shot them all . He had the word , however , of his client to say that he never used any of the expressions sworn against him on that occasions ABto ' slash away , slaughter them all , ' he referred to Ihe testimony of Mahony , the policeman , the first of the constabu . lary called , who wa 3 touched by Mr O'Brien ' s band , : Mahony did not swear one word as to the expres .

    &ion stated to have been used by Mr O'Brien . Mahoney said that a stone oame into tke window . Did this consist with the enormous orash oi the inspector ? No doubt that was the stone that struok Mr Trant . ( Laughter . ) Mahony heard no crash ; he saw no ball come in ; all he ( Mahony ) saw was the one stone ; he saidhe saw a small number of fire arms . It wsa impossible that Trant swore what was correot , when he said he saw a great number of fire arms ; It was impossible ! Mahony , in point of faot , contradicted all the witnessess . A juror asked , were there any marks of balls ? The reply of Mahuney was , ihat there were no marks of balls or bullets whatever . He then went to tke evidence of Moran , on which he commented in the most severe terms , Bhowing the

    impossibility of his statement , and demonstrating the disposition by which ho was aotuatad by tho entire tenor of his testimony , which was of the most sanguinary character . . Mauoney swore that the firing was one quarter ot an hour ; Moran swore that It was three quarters of an hour ; and when asked what sort waa tho firing and what he saw , the reply was that he saw one man attempt to fire , Then Moran Bwore that he saw women in the crowd , and that if he saw womon in the crowd picking up stone 3 he would have shot them all . He really regretted to hear such testimony given by one of the police foroe . But Moran swore

    that Mr O'Brien , while making use ef these expression ? , was in a position in which he must have been shot dead immediately , and deservedly , if he had used the language that was attributed to him : Moran said , too , there were armed men inside the wall , protecting Mr O'Brien . Let them mark that . Moran said if he could have shot , Mr O'Brien he would ; but when asked haw near he was to him , he replied that his bayonet was within six inches of Mr O'Brien ; and when pressed as to why he did not fire , he said ' I did ust hear him ' and there he ( Moran ) stopped short . Thai was the evidence of that young vjan Moran .

    Their lordships then retired , and when the Court resumed its sitting , Mr Whiteside proceeded with his address . He commenced by taking a review of the various documents given in evidence on the part of the crown . Tbe first of these papers consisted of a penoil tracing of a map found upon Mr O'Brien ' s person at the time of his arrest , and whioh he ( Mr Whiteside ) was called upon by the crown to explain . That , how . e \ er , he positively declined to do , and would leave it to the Solicitor General to fix any guilt he ooulddiacover in connexion with it upon his client , if he was able to do so . There was , however , a dooument of somewhat greater importance , whioh he did not deny —viz ,, the letter written by Mr O'Brien to the di . rectors of the Mining Company , dated the 29 th of July , 1818 , and which the Attorney General asserted to have been written previous to an intended battle .

    Mr Whiteaide then read the letter he referred to , Bection by seotion , commenting npon each comecutive passage , in order to prove that Mr O'Brien ' s sole objeot in writing it was to prevent the colliers , who had protected him from arrest , from being thrown out of employmont on his aocount . He ( Mr O'B . ) did not talk in it of attacking the troops of the Queen , but clearly shows that he had in view only a personal object—the evasion of any attempt made to arrest him . Then he recommended that the whole of the proceeds of the colliery should ba employed in the payment of the men' for the present . ' And his client then complained of the manner in which the colliery had been worked , and suggested ' that the men Bhould be paid by wages , and not by oontraot . ' Now , there was nothing criminal in that suggestion , and it was somewhat remarkable that it had , been since adopted by the same mining company . Mr Whiteside then referred to the passage iu the letter

    Untitled Article

    which threatened that if the company did not comply witU the writer ' s suggestions , their property would be forfeited in the event of the Irish revolution aaceeStdft ' J ?™ he ( Mr Whiteside ) submitted that it was a highly improper proceeding to make a threat of tnis nature ; nothing could , in fact , exousesuohlanguage , but still it amounteiTTo no more than a threat ; and it wasplain ; from a review of the entire document , thathieolUnfcmereljfsonghtto . doaBervice to the men who had protect ^ Kira for it must be clear to every one that if he ~ had then contemplated an insurrection , he would not have ' sat down toi write a letter to a mining company for the pur . poge of suggesting that the price of their coals should be lowered . The learned gentleman then drew the 1 . * V i | fflH *«_ . __ m _ b « .

    attention of the jury to the haste in whioh Mr Meagher ' s letter was written . He said that it was not high treason to go to New York , and that the words et cetera , et cetera , ' did not involve any intention to commit an aot of high treason . Then as to the letter of Mr Duffy , he said that , in the first place , the person who wrote that was in the custody of the crown ; he had a newspaper , which was seized , and the papers found there taken away , but they did not find a single line from Mr O'Brien ; It was all-important to know the date of that dooument—it was no doubt , dated Saturday , but that might have been a Saturday two or three years ago . How did the jury know the year in whioh it was . written ? He had just been informed that through the kindness of the Attorney General an account of the papers ft '< m w ¦ " ^» fWUWkU

    tound in the portmanteau , was to ba given , among which were papera dated in 1843 , Tbere waa to much of duplioity—jo maon of treaqhery abroad- * though he did not accuse any one—that if the docu meal ; were received in evidenoe , it should be shown it existed before his arrest . The learned gentleman next proceeded to oemmenton the sddreaB presented to Mr O'Brien at Enniaoorthy , and the letter of Mr Meigher , found in the portmanteau , and proceeded to observe on the evidence of Dobbin . He appeared ( he said ) in the oharioter of a spy—he was an informer , but there was a rule of law that a witness who oame forward in that way should ba confirmed by 8 ther witne 3 ses . No jury could believe the statement of a spy unless he ym so corroborated . He deposed firat to the meeting on the 15 ; h of Jalyand

    , where waa the confirmation of that ? Next followed thoso of the 19 -h and 2 Ut , and yet his statements were not corroborated in any one particular . Then came his testimony regarding the Red Hand Club but although , the government had detectives and policemen watching the door where its meetings were ^ held , not a word of corroboration was given The Solicitor General would toll thera that the great corroboration of Dobbin consisted in the balloting papers—the handwriting of these documents was not proved . Dobbin , swore that no olergym . au was to ba balloted for . If there wece a meeting , it waa an innocent one-no guilt was upon the faca . of . any oae of the balloting papers ; but suppose there were , did the government expBot the jury whom he saw bafore him to oonviot the Protsstant agitator in ths dock ,

    while the Roman Catholic priest walked abroad in allthefreBhness of health and freedom , administeringgho'tly consolation to his flock ? , Was the prisoner to be visited with the terrible responsibility of the offence with whioh he was charged , while the priest for whomeight voted to plaoe him on the war oounoil walked free ? Anl if he ( Mr W . ) vindicated the Attorney General , he also vindicated Lord Clarendon ' s government and the British ministry when he said that thia could not be so Father Ksnyon was an innocent maa ; but if he were guilty , the crown was prosecuting a man who was hot so , and were not prosecuting another who was elected , or nearly elected , a memberof the war council . If they were to expect impartial justice in that country they should take thai ?

    stand upon the entire people of the realm . Let them ' have no partial one-sided administration . Let the i Protestant be convicted if he were guilty , but unless ! they were prepared for the basest despotism thafc i ever disgraced freedom , let them reaolve upon an ! inflexible and impartial law for air men alike .- He ( Father Kenypn ) was balloted for as a member of the war counoil , and he was innooent . He would appeal to the jury , and the free and . magaanimou 3 nation under whom they lived to sea that justice be done—he a 9 ked for nothing more . He appealed to their honest natures , was one man to bo struck down and anothetspared—was his oliont to ba strioken down and sacrificed , and the other spared ? He acquitted the law officers of the orown—he acquitted the government and the prosecutors of his client , for

    they did not know or believe that Father Kenyon was the member of an illegal , guilty , and treasonable conspiracy against the Qaeen , and therefore he was not prosecuted , being an innocent man ; and was the man for whom even the informer said ao one had voted to be made responsible ? It was for the jury to say whether the charge against the prisoner had been established . The charge was high treason , and he had shown thorn that an endeavour to escape arrest did not amount to high treassn . The learned counsel then proceeded thus : — ' Gentlemen , I have spoken to this case . I have gone over the entire evidence given by the cro ^ n to sustain the charge against the prisoner , and it is for you to say whether that charge is established . The aocusation against him in for high treason , compassing the death of the

    Queen by levying war against the Q , ueen in her realm . I have explained to you the principles upon which this crime is to be ascertained ; I have shown you that appearing in arms is not enough , that an endeavour tpesoape from arrest ia not enough . It must be plain to you that the prisoner is guilty of the obar ^ e contained in this indictment before you can convict him . Gentlemen , I have observed upon the evidence , and I simply submit to you in conclusion , that however you may condemn certain acts of Mr O'Brien , however equivocal you may think some observations made by him in one letter are , yet , if you believe that his offence falls short of the tremendous orime of treason , you are bound by the solemn duty you have undertaken , irrespective of every cossequence , to acquit the prisoner . Well I know the

    weighty difficulties I have to encounter , and how inoompetent my feeble powers have been to grapple with and overoome them . Well do I know how prejudioe has blocked up the avenues to the understanding ef some—how oalumnyhas done its work with others—and hew it has been said that the impracticable politician must perish at last . If he had been a hypocrite , and had covered his selfishness with the maBkof patriotism—if he had said what ho did not believe—if he had unsaid to-morrow what he had 8 aid to-day , he might have been a p- ' triotio placeman , and enjoyed individual prosperity , having traded with taot for a time upon the miseries of his country . Wrong he may have been in the opinions he has imbibed , yet he has adhered to them steadily and consistently throughout his life , and he suffers

    now for having honestly maintained them , believing them to be true . He has been reviled , caricatured , and slandered in his native country from one extremity to the other , he haa . been hunted m a traitor and covered with abuse , and where is ho to look for justioe ? Where can be his hope for a temperate consideration of his whole political life but where the law has plaoed his safety—in the honour , discernment , and humanity of a jury of his countrymen—a rampart or defence to stand between the crown and prisoner . If the crime consisting in the intention of the soul is not sufficiently established , judges must be unhanding , but jurors may yield to the frailties of human nature . Jurors may throw the broad shield of their protection around the accused , whose intention they can believe to have been innocent

    censurable though hiB conduot may have beon . Suoh is the high office assigned to jou by the constitution , whose foundations were laid in the deepest wisdom , which through a succession of ages has been cemented by tho patriot ' s blood and consecrated in the martyr ' s fire . It is for you to say whether his guilt is established conclusively or not . The law of your country , wise , just , and morciful , has deolared that if there be a doubt that doubt must be given in favour of him whose life is sought to be affected ; and , therefore , yielding to those benign principles and those generous impulse ^ of your heart ? , it is for you to stand between the prisoner and his grave . Review his life . A love of hia country he imbibed from hia mother's breast . It was strengthened b y his father ' s example , perhaps , to a dangerous exoeas . Hia father

    recounted to pirn how on the last memorable night of our national independence he had heard the burning words of Grattan , of Plunket , and of Buahe—how . he had been persuaded by the gravity of- their arguments , transported by their eloquence , and inflamed by their patriotic ardour . Those lessons taught to bia parent he has never forgotten , and believing that the Union was carried by corruption , he struggled for its repeal , and to restore to Ireland its Parliimentary existence . In that has been the labour of his life—a delusion I admit ; but is not death upon the scaffold a terrible punishment for believing that Irishmen have the capacity and intellect to rule the affairs of their native country ? Would to God that Mr Smith O'Brien were my only olient ! The happiness of an honourable . anniflnf

    and royal family is at stake thw day . The churoh the bar , the senate , furnish member * nearly and dearly related to the prisoner . They may differ from him in politics , but they are here to give him conselation in this melancholy day . Should you send him to . the soaffold they must struggle on hereafter wit ] broken hearts through a cheerless existence , labouring in sorrow for him the ; loved . A venerable lady whose life has been spent amidst an affeotionate tei nantry , who has lavished her fortnne and dispensed blessings and charities around her , awaits wit trembling heart your verdiot . If your verdict consigns her beloved son to the grave , that heart wi

    quickly beat no more . Six innocent ohildren await to be informed whether they are to be stripped o the inheritance whioh has deioended in their family for agea , and driven beggars and fttherless upon the world through the rigorouB enactmen ts of a crue law-whether they are to be restored to peace am joy , or plunged into the uttermost depths of blacl despair . There is another who still clings to hope —that hope may it be blessed in you ! Her heart ' s blood she would gladly ? ive to save the objoot of her youthful affeotions . You will not send her , unless at the command of conscience , to ' an untimely jrave [ During the deliyeryof this passage the entire audiente

    Untitled Article

    beoarie rfoibly mdvad / Mfof' ^ the . firstiiine ainba ' .. ; the trialSmhfrQ'Brien ' 8 lip ojiiver ^ aiidl iiseye >/ nlJedj as the idea of u- mother ;? brotheryi « bildreni' ™> and wife mourning over their possible loss was \ U ' " fibly presented to his mind . For a moment he bant '' his head ' 04 his hand ';¦ he ^ firmly ' prfei ^ jh is"br ^ WftV : a fewj seopndi and again resumed , hia Abated , calm * ' - '' ¦> new ; . Notn theaudienoe , tlwtwrVntbe jury , toe , ¦'¦»¦ occupants of the benohej , all continued deeply ; moved ,. ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ % and from many a manly eye , to which * tears'had'long ' been strangers , the' big drops rolled in-rapid succea . ' " ' sim . We i ^ w ^ b « : to . ^ Tja [ ; BeeS . ftT » iiMiiim -4 7 whose action and tone , far more eloouentW than « m ? r

    . w& word » ' expreased tte deep emotions with . ' ^ ffiSS * ° TOhe f . 4 Wwedatthecontemplat oi : ' ? ? tt » J . ^ verdict ] let even in this case of blood I do not auk for pity la a wa ing spirit- Iaskit ^ n She / - **¦ , " ""^ wNK&hi e wiS the rooted pnnoiples of our common law . Tho * e prinoiplesought to Bhine out in glorious p rfeoS rw greal oauso i ) etffeen the P « soner and the £ n ! f \ a d Terdlct in ^ ordance with them Sw ? f S * ° ' £ " , r > but a trium Ph ^ the her wfll ? nT " - ' . ^ 811811 °° ™^ y client , nei . tXi . T -. ? Or ff t ll i . r cens re that conviction . I £ TL ethl 9 fi » te with the faith of a Christian and the firmness of a man . The last accenta - of his lips will breathe a prayer for ItehnAh ^ . ¦

    nes ana gland ' s conatitutip Hal freedom ; and Ya ft 5 . Th * ° * * - J « W he will be consoled Jam I » 38 ufctm , . and his » a ° rifices somesystem ofgovernment shall arise 8 noh aa I aVer ha 9 ne . ver yet exiated-wiae . impartial , comprehensive " anfl above all which may c 9 nduct to iSSS ^ SvS , and greatness the country he has loved , not wiaelv perhaps , but too well . Our Sovereign kahaUath whemith she seals her compaot with a free peoole That

    mercy . justioe you administer To remorse lea * , cruel , sanguinary code , but justice in mercyTa nothing can frail msrtals approaoh so nearly to tha attnbutesoftho Almighty a ? in ihe adnS rat £ n office here below . Divine justice will ba tern , pered with mercy , or dismal will ba our fate . Tha awful iBsues of life and death are now in your hands Do justice in meroy The last faint murmurs oa your quivering hps will ba for mercy ere the immortal spirit shall take its flight to , Itruat , a better and a brighter world . Witneases were then called for the defence . William

    Mr Hamill-Was the origidal senrata , * tfthe ™^ mtaMi a document , which he examined , and aSd contained the onginal rules of the Confederation ) The ' rules were firat submitted at aprelirainarv mefiV . ngatRadlej ' s Hotel . Mr Smith oSeTatteTded the meeting . The rules were in proof , She ? were m manuscript also . Those role , were aited at a ' general meeting ** the Rotunda . A lecS 1 the uae and capacity of Confederate ClubYdXred at the Docter Doyh Club , by Charles GVvta SS ? was circulated among the members . -A reportTo * w ^ ffcK ^ Kffi » & iMssastss John Martin , MrVanan , and others were members . Mr Brennan was not a member , nor nas Mr

    By Mr Fitzgerald-There were clergymen oa the council ; among others the Rev . Mr Meehan and the Rev . Mr Keayon were members ef it ; Dr Gray , one of the proprietors of the Frsejun ' s Journal and a member of the Irish League and of the RepealAssooiation . verified the doouments produced as the rules of those societies . A pamphlet % Sl * - ? k R POrt ° J « A Speeoh delivered b ? Me-O Bnen in the House of Commons , in 1843 , on thfr CtUMi of Du « mt « at ia Ireland ; and a letter produced was one written by Mr O'Brien on ihinint , th »

    Kspeal Association . Both the speech and letter were cumulated among the membets of the Raneal Association . Had known Mr O'Brien intimalely since 1844 . Ha < i conversed vary frequently with him on political subjeots . Had never heard him ex . press himself disrespectfully towards the qZ £ Had often heard him aay ha would retire from ' ¦ Bffiii ! u ^^ *^ ^ - ^ ffl I Cross-examined to tbe Solicitor Geaeral-The | early meeting * , hod for the purpose of forming the ! League , wen held in the room of the FreEM ° n ofhoe ; the terms were agreed upon before July 10 th ¦ witness wu aware of the coalition batween the two ; parties . The meeting was not one of mnral nr nh * .

    steal torce advocates ; it was a meeting of moral force advocates . ; They thought there was a difference in their opinions with regard to the mode of conducting the repeal agitation , but they found out when they met and consulted together that there was no real difference of opinion as ta the manner in which the agitation ought to be carried on . It was understood the clubs ware to be separate from the League . Members of clubs were not neoessarily cxoluded ; the only persons who were excluded were the place huntera . None of the membgrsofthe League were to be responsible for the acts or opinions of any other body or individual . Members of the Association nd of the Confederation were admissible to the League ; the only exclusion was the plaoe-hunters John Maher , Esq ., deputy lieutenant of the oouniv

    ot Wextord , and formerly member for the county was a friend of Smith O'Brien ' s and had been for many years . He came to witness ' s house on Situray , the 22 nd of last July , at half-past seven o ' clock .-ie oame from Enniacorth y in witness ' s carriagehe oame inconsequence . of an invitation which wit . ness wroto to him on the 21 it of April last . The etter produced was tha letter of invitation . ( Thisletter was one of thoie found by the crown in the portmanteau of Mr O'Brien , seized at Caahel . ) Mr O'Brien remained at the house that night . A servant came to witness ' s dressing room at . half-past eight o ' olock , to say that Mr O'Brien wished to speak to him , and he immediately went to him . The Attorney Grheral objected to thii evidence . He thought a private transaction of thid sort ought not to be put in evidence .

    Mr Fitzgerald said the charge against Mr O'Brien waB founded upon certain acts . The crown had traced him to Enniscorthy ^ and he ( Mr Fitzgerald ) wished to ' show what he did when he went there . Oae of the declarations relied upon by the Attorney General waa the evidenoa of a policeman ,- proving what Mr O'Brien did between the time of bia arrival at Ennifloorthy and the house-of Mr Meagber . Chief Justioa Blackburna said it did not ; appear to the court that evidence ought to be adduced upon any matter in which the crown had not made a declaration . The examination was then resuraed-. On going to the room where Mr O'Brien was , Mr O'Brien said to me—r—The Attorney General again objeoted to evidence wing given aB to private matters of conversation between Mr O Bnen and the witness . .

    Mr 0 ! Bnen ( who appeared much agitated at the opinion of the court ) here said—I am sorry to inter , rupt you , my lord , but 1 must ask , in common fair , ness , whether evarj speech made by me subsequently to leaving Dublin , and reported in sudi a taahion aa I believe no speeches were over reported before ,, by common policemen , are to ba taken aB evidence of ray intention , and my dsolarations made to my private Meeds to be excluded . It appeaw to me the meat monstrous decision ever heard in a court o £ justice . Sir Colman O'Lo ^ hlen was about to ask the witness to state what Mr O'Brien said to himwhen

    , Mr O'Brien said—I think you had batter save yourself tho trouble of going further . It is quite a faroe , and I call upon you to give up the case , as the Court is evidently againBu me . I say thia ii a substantial violation of all the principles of justice , and I call upon my counsel to give up the case . Mr Fitzgerald—My . lords , I .. have sent for Mr Whiteaide , who is not in court , and in the meantime perhaps yon will allow rue to examine Mr Maher with respect to other matters . The Coutt—Oh , certainly , Mr Fitzierald .

    Mr Maher ' a examination was then oontinued—Mr Mcagher and Mr Dillon , who arrived at my houeeat an early hour by the mail , left it after breakfast ia oompany with Mr O'Brien ; I know Mr O'Brien since 1835 , and I think I am acquainted with his political [ sentiments ; I can distinctly Bay that he is ? m $ ? V& , - $ ueen and t 0 the coaatitution ; I : oid Mr O Bnan thi morniBg after he arrived at my bouse that I had nsked DrSynnotfc , my own parish priest , and one or two other clergymen , to meet him at dinner . Mr O'Brien-My lords , I must appeal to you to know whether the conversation I held with Mr Meagher , on the morning of my departure , is or is not to be received by the court ?

    . The Solicitor General-As the rejection of the evidence with respeot to the conversation appears to prey upon Mr O'Brien ' s mind , I an willing , on , the Sptfon Cr ° > t 0 Wlthdraw my objeotion toita Lp f ^ orne ^ , eral ~ Bufc ' my lords , I hope it will not be considered as a precedent . , Chief Justice BlackburneimOur . opinion is that counsel for Mr O'B . ien have a . right to adduce ev " denoe with respect to any traiiBldriS tadSted i the declarations made by the crown , but this being a matter di 8 t . no fromi the allegations of the Sn he is not so entitled . The Solicitor General , however ! has no objection . You may proceed , Mr F tzgerald ; ! Examination of Mr Maher oontinued-On the 52 / . *» «™ d-a servant came to nay Mt w ™ m Tk nted t 0 8 peak t 0 me - On Roing to him , Sn , if T ther ° WOr 0 tW ° Othe * « IW » U for whom la thought I waB not prepared . H « n ^«^ « vZh *

    and IJUlou came from town , and bring the news of the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act , and that a warrant is issued for my arrest , which they Sk ZL hav £ c ° me down > the wne . ooaoh as them , selves . Get us some breakfast , and let us go on our Z 1 \ a . ? t areB 0 T friend 8 in Kilkenny whom I would wish to consult . ' I told him I would send my carnage with them , They breakfasted , and K

    Untitled Article

    6 .. TH&-NQR ^ Eml- ^ fe- - - —¦ .-. ¦ ,- . ¦ - — ^ -.-. ^ ,,. ^ ^ ^^ , ^ . OcTom ^ Ut-lB ^ h ^ : f ¦ 1 V ¦ ' . ..

• Citation
  • Northern Star (1837-1852), Oct. 14, 1848, page 6, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1492/page/6/