Newspaper of The New York Herald, March 10, 1844, Page 1

Newspaper of The New York Herald dated March 10, 1844 Page 1
Text content (automatically generated)

r l? i ii T U 1 . * * i ' = Vol. X., Ho* 70-Whole No. 3040O'CONNELL'S SPEECH AT THE IRISH STATE TRIALS. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 5. Long before ihe doors of the Queen's Bench were opened this morning they were surrounded by crowds of persons anxious to obtain admission. W( never saw curiosity excited to such a pitch, anJ wc do not exaggerate when we state that severa! thousands went away who were disappointed in obtaining places in the galleries and body of the Court. The arrangements made by the Sheriff wore well calculated to maintain order and regularity. At ten o'clock precisely their Lordships took their seats on the bench, and as soon as the names of the traversers and jury were called over, Mr. 0'Coxnki.l rose, and, having bowed to the bench, pioceeded to speak as follows:?Gentlemen, I beg your patient attention whilst I endeavor to show you in as few sentences as possible, and in my own plain and prosaic style, my right to dc mand a favorable verdict at your nands. I shall ask that verdict without disrespect on the one hand, or flattery on the other. 1 shall not appeal either to your passions or your feelings, but I trust that I shall be able respectfully to show that I have a right to ask it in the name of common sense and common justice, and those being the basin upon which I snail rest, I have too high an opinion of your understandings to doubt for a moment I shall ask it in vain. Being thus convinced in my own mind that I am entitled^to your verdict of acquittal, and after the bnlliant display of eloquence you have heard, I do not think that I would be warranted in trespassing on your attention at any great length. Gentlemen have addressed you, with whose eloquence you must have been delighted as well as instructed. I will not. because 1 cannot, attempt to follow them, but I shall, I trust, submit to 2ou plain unanswerable facts that will come ome to your understanding and good sense, and convince you that in anything I have done I have transgressed no law, and was actuated solely by a desire to serve my country. Gentlemen of the Jury, I am here not as my own client alone? my clients are the people of Ireland?I am here as ' counsel for the Irish nation?I stand here as the advocate of the righ's, liberties, and privileges of that people ; and, my only anxiety is, that they, or their rights, should be impeded by any tlni^I have done, or by my want of power to sustain trfwr cause here this day. I trust, however, that I shall be able to convince you, that they ought not to suf. fer by any proceeding of which 1 have been instrumental I am the advocate of Ireland, and the Irish people?I am a Repealer?I avow it. Iain conscious of tny integrity of purpose, and, 1 tell you, that when I commenced that line of conduct which has brought me before you this day, the object I had in view was the Repeal of that Union. 1 tell you that I cannot bear it?it was forced upon the Irish people by the most foul and unjustifiable means that ever a government had recourse to, and I have the highest authority for saving so. I have the authority of one who had a seat on that bench, and who in n <w in his honored grave I promise you, gentlemen, that 1 will be as brief as I possibly can?and I may repeat again, that it would be unfair towards you, after all you have already heard, to attempt to travel over the same ground as those who went before me. I shall deal in facts, and those facts I will condense as much as possible. 1 am not here to deny anything that I have done, or deny anything 1 have said ; on the contrary 1 am here to assert what I have often before stated in other places, at the same time claiming the right of not being made accountable for the clumsy mistakes of newspaper reporters, and newspaper speeches squeezed into such a compass as might nave suited the convenience af those who published them. No doubt I may in the excitement ol a moment have said harsh things of individuals that, upon reflection, 1 would ratner I had not said ; but the substance of all I have ever said I am now not onlyready to vindicate,but to reiterate again. Theiu us to all my actions, I am ready not only to uvowF them, hat to justify tliein. All that I nave done was in the performance of what T believed to be * a sacred duty, having no other object in view but the restoration of the Irish Parliament, and the good of the Irish People. 1 was looking for an Irish Parliament, because 1 found that the Irish people had been cheated of this sacred right. I found that the Union was accomplished at a revolutionary period?the nation of Europe was disturbed by the infidel philosophy of France, and overrun by het great militaiy force?the dynastv of nations was changed?princes were banished and monarchies overthrown?it was at that period that Ireland was robbed of her legislative independence. I saw that the day of restoration and regeneration had come for every country but my own, and I summoned all my energies to arouse the people to obtain what they lost, by moral, peaceable, and constitutional means, which, I believe, were pleasing in the sight of Heaven, ana ought to he approved of by man.? That was the course that I pursued, and ought I, gentlemen of the jury, to be ashamed to come in ere this day to justify it1 I know that 1 labor under great disadvantages; let me not for a moment be understood as saying that they are not such as the law and the court have sanctioned,and 1 ought not on that account to complain of them. This is not the time to discuss how you have been brought into thai box, or if the Attorney General has done anything that the law did not sanction; but I am h^re to address plain facts to your sense and understanding?I am here to speak to you with courtesy, but without flattery; andl deceive myself much if that love of honesty and fair play, which constitute the noblest and best part of our common nature, shall not be triumphant over all preconceived prejudices, and that I shall have a favorable verdict at your hands. There is a great discrepancy of opinion between you and me. You differ with me on the question of Repeal; and if you did not you would not be here to day to try a case like this ? You differ from me in point of religion; if you did not, not one of you would be in that box lo-dny; if you professed the same faith that I do you would , not be allowed to sit in judgmeni upon me I may say that all the differences winch exist between us are aggravated by my being a Catholic, and that 1 have Uinia mum iu?u ?i?y umvi IIIKII IU |?ui uuwii Jt IUlCIV tant ascendancy, of which some of you were, perhaps, the champions, and, if not the champions, you were not the antagonists. This is one great disadvantage, but it does not terrify me from the announcement of those general principles of universal liberty to all in which I glory -, nor doas it make me feel for a moment that my cause shull not be safe in your hands. I glory in what 1 have done; nnd, being now in the power of your honesty and integrity, I appeal to you 011 these grounds albne. 1 ieel perfectly sure that you will be guided only by common sense and justice in your verdict; and it is not in any way despairing of your justice t hat 1 have made these observations; but I must aay that I would prefer that it had heen otherwise for your own sakes and tor mine; I would prefer that your verdict, whatever it may be, should not be liable to misrepresentation, and that no infirmity of human nature could be supposed to have any influence in the case. I have now done with the subject, and I come to the case itself. I must say that I never knew of it more curious case. It certainly is the strangest ense of which T have had any experience ; it is not a case consisting of one fact, or of two facts, or of ten farts, but of the history of nine months. Yon ore called on to go through nil the details of the events which have taken place in this country during the last nine months. An enormous mass of matter is placed before you?n mass of matter which I defy the most brilliant understanding so to investigate and scan as to take in all its important points; those points which are necessary for forming a ground and just judgment upon the whole ut u..e view. Where such a quantity of materials are placed be lore it, the human nwinoty fails, or, what is much worse than a failure, it is apt to forget those facts which are of a rebutting and nuligatory character, and to bear away only those ones which form the prominent parts of the charge. Therefore, do 1 arraign this prosecution, not from any hostility to the frsniers of it, but for the utter lmpoHsibility in which it places the jury, to disengage from that mass ot materials, the real facts of tne case, on one aide ; and, on the other, to find out, in a word, the real question to be tried. Let us see what help I will be able to afford you 111 the matter, and in the first p'ace, let us see what are the affirmative, anil what are the negative qualities of this prosecution?in other words, what tins prosecution is, nnd what it in not. < lentlemen, this prosecution hinges on the cabalistic word " conspiracy I" and what is a conspiracy ? III look into the dictionary for the mean ingot it, I find that a conspiiacy is "a private agreement between several persons to commit a crime." Now, that isthe common sense definition ot the word ; hut if has been taken under the special protection of the gentlemen of the bar, and they, not content with tne common sense meaning, take the word in n two-fold sense, in a way of their owe; tliey have two hooks to their line?and tell you that you most spell out a conspiracy by impli E NE NI cation, where yon have no evidence of any agree- tl ment existing. Well, let us take the conspiracy d which is alleged in the present case, and see what tl are its negative and affirmative qualities; let ua see o what u the evidence brought by the crown to es- ii tablish iv In the first place, it is admitted by the c Crown itsell that there is no secrecy iu the matter n ?that the conspiracy does not consist of any pri- f vale agreement?any secret society?they do not e allege any private information?no, not even a sin- i gle private conversation. Every thing was open, u unconcealed, public, as clear to the eyes of the t whole worla its the noon-duy sun. Its evidence c w is to be found in the columns of the Evening i Mail quite as much as in the Evening Post. It was t raked up out of that secret abyss of most secret in- 1 formation?the newspaper. The conspiracy was a concocted in the face of the world, and the bellman s sent about to invite all who wished to come in and be I witnesses?so it is not easy for one to defend oneself i from the charge of conspiracy under suchcircum- t stances. I submit there should be an agreement r to constitute a conspiracy, and not such an agree- t ment as is made in that way before the world?not t an agreement which is made lor instance in the j presence of the law officers of the Crown, of the t learned Attorney-General, or Solicitor-Ug*<ral, or i i nr.. ... i??, v.... ? . >... .. i. Ml liri iUUjrgij oocift^aurai'ian . J?u nr utc ausurdity, gentlemen, of calling such an agreement a conspiracy. Is it, indeed, common sense??is it to be endured by rational men thut we should be told (hat such an agreement is a conspiracy? But when waa the agreement made, or how, or where was it inadel Was it in the winter season, or in summer, in soring, or in autumn? Was it on a holiday, or a week-day? What was the hour, or day. or week, or year, on which it was entered into? Who was it that proposed it,or who seconded it? Gentlemen, I appeal to your common sense and reason?1 ask you to place yourselves in my position, and to suppose that you address a Catholic Jury, as I address you, and would you not feel?I will not call it indignation?but would you not laugh to scorn the idea, that such a Jury should hud you guilty of a conspiracy under such circumstances? There is not the slightest evidence before you of any concoction which would be required in the crime of conspiracy. I don't know whether even I am accused of having been present at the formation of the conspiracy; but surely if so, some time ought to have been pointed out that 1 might have the benefit of an ulibi, if I could make it out (laughter.) But here the charge is spread over so much time, and in so indefinite a way, that I should only take it as a toss-up whether or not I was present on the occasion. Was the agreement in writing or was it a parole one ? Really, gentlemen, if an action at Nisi Prtus were, to be supported by such evidence, and that you were in the dox to try the case if there were even no more than a ?10 contract at stake, I ask you could you find a verdict that the contract existed? It might be said, us it was (o a certain Judge, whose time has long since passed away?"My lord, it might not be evidence in the transaction of a ?10 promissory note, but it would be evidence to sup ort a prosecution on a criminal charge in your lordship's court." Gentlemen, it is nut here a ?10 contract which is at stake; but, as in the case of a contract, your honest view of the case will be, that if a conspiracy exists it mu9t be proved; and, if not proved?that it does not exist. The Attorney General, in good sooth, leaves it to our imagiuation to discover where the conspiracy exists. A conspiracy ought to be a reality; but he leaves it altogether to you to imagine it. I don't speak in any disparagement of his talents. I admit that he hassnown much talent,and mucii ingenuity, auu inuusiry, 111 laying una cusr before yon. lie occupied eleven hours?eleven mortal hours?in his statement, yet in what part of , it did he tell you w here the conspiracy existed!? "Wait (said ne) till I come to the close;" and when he got to the close, "Go back (said he) to the beginning??o through the whole of it, and find out , the conspiracy the best way you can." It is not with any nflectation that 1 say it, but if any could i have found out the proofs of a conspiracy existing | it would be the Attorney General. Yes, lie took 11 , hours to throw those extracts into your box for you to find out that there was a conspiracy.fThere are the Pilot, Nation, and Freemen, read them?it is good enough for you, make out the conspiracy if you can out of the evidence they give. I remember once, on theMunster C.rcuit,the celebrated. Egan was defending a case, which was staled by a Mr. llnnre, a gentleman of a dark appearance, who made a very strong speech. Egan, in reply to this?and, by the way, he was sure of his jury, which is an excuse 1 want?said, "1 nrn sure you will not be led away by 'he daik oblivion ot a brow." (A laugh )? "Why, Egan." said some one to him. "that is nonsense?why aid you say so!" "To be sure it is," was his reply, "but isn't it good enough for a jury!" (Laughter.) Mo eleven hours is good enough lor you. Gentlemen, it is monstrous?it is criininullv monstrous?to say that that is a conspiracy which takes eleven hours to develope it. llardy was tried for constructive treason, and, to celebrate his acquittal, uii anniversaiy was held. When the health of one of the Jurors was drunk, one of the Jurors, not much acquainted with public speaking, made a speech. He said, ".Mr. Chairman, I tell you I acquitted Hardy, because Lord Eldon?then Sergeant Scott?took eleven hours to state the case, eight or nine days giving evidence, and I know that no man could be really guilty of treason when so many words were used to tell it and such a long time to prove it (laugh.) 1 ha\e made up my mind to convict a man of high treason when the case is proved, but I won't be tor letting an Attorney General ransack newspapers in order to make out a case." (A laugh ) The case was one exactly in point. If a conspiracy existed the Attorney General would not have taken an hour or half an hour to do so?he would have strict it of itsverbage?he would, as a Barrister?for, inough I am not in my wig and gown, I'll stand up for tlie Bar still?have stated a plain case to the Jury?lie would have laid his hpoid on it?he would have shown you when, where, how, who were the men, what was the time?the dale?the circumstances? but lie leaves it all to yourselves to solve?it is good enough for you! (Loud laughter ) But no conspiracy or secrecy was even imputed, and you have, therefore, nothing left but conjecture?nothing to ui'tnsrc iinj'i'cutu in 1'iivaic?me cuiuc 10 uciurr: you, and,therefore, I stand on this?if you know it all?there never was a case in which tne Attorney General was so little entitled to call a Jury to spell out something beyond the case-?something which you are left to guess ut. Gentlemen, you tnay remember about the time the trials were about to commence the hall of these Courts and the country were full of rumors. It was said that something dark and atrocious would conte out?that they had a clue to everything. I do solemnly assure you that no less than seven gentlemen were pointed out as betraying me. Such n man, it is said, was seen going into Mr. Kemmis** office?another was at the Castle?n third was seen going into the house of a certain barrister, near your residence in Merrion.square. "Do not associate friends," said be to me, "with Mr. so-and-so. he is a traitor?he will betray you;" and thus no legs 'han seven suffered in their character exceedingly. My answer was?they have nothing to betray?much good may do them if they go to these places. If they invent tkevfwill be pain well for it. I ask you, gentlemen, did you not expect, when empannelled in that box, to heur something which you did not know before?some plot discovered?soine secret machination?some private conversation of some of these Traversers which would astonish you ? If you were so fortunate as not to expect all these things, yon have not been disappointed; hut it you entertained the expectation, was ever disappointment so complete ! Go where you please; search, search, consider, scan over the evidence, and a conspiracy is no where to be found. All say of the Att. General?is thut all, has he nothing more to tell ! We knew all that before, and yet this is the conspiracy. Yes, gentlemen, what became of the dark designs, the stratagems, the conspiracy which existed in the imagination of so many?vanished, nothing to disclose, nothing discovered T It would have been the duty of the government, nnd they have plenty of resources to purchase true testimony?to prove a conspiracy, if it existed. We cannot conceal from ourselvas that this is a kind of ministerial crime?that the question is, whether we shall have a conciliatory ministry in office, who will enlarge the elective franchise, or the whigs again promoted, who promised to do a good deal, and did little. That is the question. You |s?rceive then, what interest in forwarding every part of the case?thefstrong stake?the interest they have to discover the real lacts existing?the anxietyto discover and point out a conspiracy; tofollowthe conspirators into theircaves and recesses, and bring their diabolical acts to the light of day. Nn man could have a sironger motive in conducting the prosecution than the Attorney General. No man has so totally tailed. And why 1 Because he had nothing to discover. It is impossible to answer it otherwise. Kvery motive which can influence itower was brought to plRy?all the influence and anthortiy of wealth?situations in the excise and custom* ? in the police office?the constabulary, above all things the revenue police?every temptation, in fine, and yet all in vain?for one reason, because there was nothing to disclose?nothing to betray. Well, then, what is the evidence! If we hnve nothing n w, let ua see what the old is. The life, they s?y, of an old coat is a nsw button (n laugh) ?let us see if they stitched sny old almanack on W YC :w YORK, SUNDAY MC tie old story read. There is nothing hut repeal emonstrations. They rely on two things?first, he meetings, and next the newapaiicrs?to xjiell nit the indetinable conspiracy which existed in the niagination. They give you neither date, or tune, >r place, or position, hut lirst, the accounts of nettings held, and next, the evidence of that fact roin volumes of newspapers. We ahull consider ach of these by itself, nut would you allow ine to nake this observation 1 As there is nothing secret, Liid us you know all, 1 ask you to consider what vouid tempt me, an old lawyer, to make n public ouspiracv, and induce the Irish people to enter nto til I boasted that 1 kept the people from the ueshes ol the law?that was oue of my boasts, fou heard it rend twenty times from inv speeches; nid does one of you believe, under these circumtunces, that 1 entered into a public conspiracy 1 f there was anything secret you must say the >ld lawyer saw it, and is there one of you can lelieve that 1 You may not have as favorable in opinion of me as those who know tne beter. You only know me and my principles through he medium of calumny?hut there is not one ot /ou who can think me such an idiot us to ruin the jause nearest my heart?the darling object of inv imbition?the cause for which I refused to go oil he bench?the cause for which 1 refused to go on lie bench?the cause for which I refused the office if Master ot the Rolls. There is, 1 know, a uucsiou whether or not I refused the office of Chief 13a oil, but there is none of my refusal to be Master ?f the Rolls. 1 refused the dignity and leisure of he bench?with un accumulation of years upon my lead?1 know the short time 1 have to labor in my location. That eternity, and the approach ol that udgnieut which will consign me to an eternity ot veal or woe, cannot be long postponed ; mid do rou, can you, imagine i would fie so cruel us to ener into such a conspiracy?into such a gross abmrdity ! Irish gentlemen, put your hands to your tearta una say?does one ot you believe that 1 I'ariou me if I will make too ftee with you ; but spell >ut the eleven hours, using your charges as you nav, and suy, can you find me guilty of u foul conipiracy1! Your verdict may strike me?it may shoren the few days I have yet before me?but it eanlot destroy the consciousness which I feel that I im entitled to your verdict. But, perhaps, grntlenen, the Attorney General wantH you to believe hat I am a conspirator, without knowing it, like i man that has stumbled into a pit in the dark. But it all occurred in the open day, and I could not "all without knowing it. If you believe anything you must belirve that I am a conspirator, without my own knowledge, and there can be no guilt without a guilty intention. But 1 acorn to rest my defence upon a paltry point of law ! The thing is too >lain, too simple, to require it. It is a new invention on this side of the water ; some person here lias been dreuming of it; this imaginary conspiracy is now resting on your minds without the slightest particle of reality. Would slavery have been abolished at the present moment if its advocates had entered into a conspiracy ? and yet they held their public meetings, and by those meetings made for themselves bitter and unrelenting enemies. There never was a more formidable party than the West Indian party in England, and they might have taken ihe newspaitcrs, and.from the reports given of their proceedings have, with equal propriety, have prose cuted them for a conspiracy?they should have indicted Wilberforce, who has written his name upon the most prominent pages of history, as the strenuous advocate of freedom ?and who will utver be fotgotien, whilst a feeling in favor of humanity exists?he should have been indicted for a conspiracy. The venerableClarksun, too, is yet alive, and upon the same principle should stilt be prosecuted us#i conspirat ar. Convict us, and lie is not free ta his old age. Don't take away, gend'tnen, the only hope we have of giving expression to our wishes, our wants, or our grievances, and drive from us the right of Iree discussion. By the names of Wilbt rforce, and ClarkMin, I corjure you to dismiss from your box every attempt tn shut ou' Iree discussion. In reference to the abolttiou ot slave rv, 1 r? juice to say thatl was a sharer in that Movement: undthough humble and uugittrd us I a tit, I had the honor to belong to that conspiracy bv which slavery was nbi l>sh< d. I certainly did |?oiir nut lite lava of my indignation upon the supporterof that vile e>stern If this docitirie ot coiiapiiacy had sooner been found ou', f suppose we would ai the pre real dsysre the same cruelty and ferocity curri* d ou towards the negro population ; hut it ww the Heav? n-descendtd im-pirati'm of bold humanity that has established thelreedom ot man. What wnuld become of the reform tu parliament t Would it been given us as far as we have got it, or would we now be promised another reform by the Quteu's speech, had it not been lor these large public meetings? For Catholic emancipation, before it was granted, we held equally lttrge meetings, and there was an eminent lawyer at that day?and I hope the /utorney-Genrrul will not imagine that I mean hint any disrespect when 1 say that he whs his superior?who had as strong an antipathy to that measure?1 mean Willium tfanrin. He watched lis, and he was defeated on one trial that he prosecuted: but he never thought of turning it into a nriwrillinn for n rnnwnirufu 1 wots trxuA ?# *U?? time lor words I had spoken; lint I wan never tried lor a conspiracy; we had our parish meetings, and our county meetings; on the 17th of January, lH2!t, there was what I may termaMtnultnnenUH meeting held in every parish in llfkadIttbsMMM inonieni; ami would not that have been evidence of a conspiracy, il what you are now called upon to believe is suthcient evidence? Upon that day every parish resolved that they would never give up the agitation of the question until their object was accomplished. It was reserved, however, tor ihe present Attorney-General to discover that those meetings were evidence of a conspiracy. There is a very serious question lor discussion at present in England ; that question is for the purpose ol obtaining chcaj) bread for the poor."'I am not going to enter into that subject now, gentlemen, although I am fully prepared to do so. Wc have been charged with having collected money; the Anti Corn Law League and the Anti-Slavery Society have both collected money also; and the AntiCorn Law League have been charged with iocendiaiisin, and other illegal acts, which I am lar from charging them with; but similar charges have never been attributed to us. Is this precedent to be sent over to England, and tip- agitation to obtain cheap bread lor the poor to he turned into a vile conspiracy? No, gentlemen, the Englishmen are sale. Theic will not be a juror sworn in England to try the case. I was mocking and jesting with you when I said Englishmen were in danger. They will he protected by their own Jury and all that we ask or require is, that our Jury will protect us. In this inode will redress for the English people be worked out, despite of those who are now uneasy in the enioyment of their monopolies under the accumulated weight ol public opinion. A celebrated French author says?and I do not quote him in approval of the conduct of the French, lor no man abhors more sincerely and more intensely than I do their infidel republicanism?one of their great men has said that ''youcannot rnnke a revolution with rose water." He would effect it by blood. I, on the contrary, by the peaceful influence of public opinion, employing not rose water, hut genuine Irish spirit as one of my ingredients? (Laughter ) I come now to consider the machinery of the evidence brought forward to sustain this indictment. There have been two classes of evidence?if J am not wrong in using the expression? submitted to you by the Attorney General? monster meetings and newspaper publications. 1 will take up the consideration of each separately. I sin not hen; to deny that those meetings took nlnrr T nrlmif that th#?v mnltifuHir?/?n? v ? ryiru in their number* from ten* of thousands to hundreds of thousands. It lias been said somewhere that the magnitude nlnne of a meeting makes it illegnl. I will not discuss that uuestion ; I do not attach so much weight to the opinion as to consider it worthy of discussion I admit thRt (host; meetings took place?that they were most numerously attended, and i boast of it 1 nsk was there any life of man, woman or child, or even of any animal, lost at uny of those meet ings ? You will unanimously answer, no, not one. I ask, was any inun. woman or child struck, detained or as-iaullud ? ami you will again answer, no. not one. Any person injured 1 not one. Was tnere any female, young or old, treated with indelicacy of vceeh or conduct? not one. Was there a single shilling's worth of property destryyed or injured in anyway? Not one. (>h, yes, there whs I exaggerate that?a policeman who attended at Mullaghtnast in colored clothes, svyore that there was ferocious onslaught of people front t'arlow ; he swore positively that they committed violence on some gingerbread stands. (Laughter.) Ye?, exactly the amount of all the acts of violence committed at those meetings, was the overturning ol a ginger bread stand. (Kenewed laughter.) This, I submit, bespeaks a foregone conclusion, for if any other act of violence had been committed, it could have been readily proved. The ooor woman who suffered the loss by the violence has not compLined, and the whole amount of niiscluel done at those meetings resolves itself into a "ferocious onslaught" ?these were the words of the witness?upon a gingerbread stand (laughter). Yes, h is ridiculous ; out it is the prosecution that is so. There wns no violence at those meeting'?no tumult?M blttity nor assault?uo injury to property?no violation of food morals, or even of good manner*?and it is I IRK I IRNING, MARCH 10, 1844. curious that not a Kin;;le accident?not even a ca- in sua' accident?occurred at .my one of them. Yet ri| there are persons w lio t< !1 me thai 1 have infuriated d< ttiis people, tnat I have excited tliem till they are di ready to rebel. They whose conduct has been dt characterised by the aliaence of mischief to person w or property, whose mutual courtesy has been so re- oi rnarkuble that not even an accident occurred at pr iheir most cro wded Catherines! The crown matrons ? were there with their daughters; the young mo- oi tilers with their infants, and each, us she passed in ct safety through the multitude, felt her own ci wealines, and the helplessness o her own inlant. bt vvere her hest protection. Oh, it was de. *| liglidul to see how the crowd gave way at and formed a rampart of protection lor the d mothers and the children. Yes! for the bro- tt thers and fathers of those women were there, and pi so help me Heaven!?no, 1 withdraw the solemn- tl ity of asseveration, but no more emphatic proof ei could have been exhibited of determination to ob- * serve pence, quietness, and perfect tranquility,.ban it .i._ i i < ii? ...u:_i. ?. .u? ?,u?. ..?.i >11 1?T7 rtrtuitai iucnui? "HICU nrm uir: ??umc> ?*uu u the nurse, tn the full assurance of safety?that elec- |< trieal spirit of mutual kindliness in whose pure at- |< tnosuhere all was gentleness and courtesy. 1 turn 1, boldly and proclaim that there is not in the world d anothercountry where this could occur. Thepeo- ? j>le of Irelund are oppressed and impoverished.? c I'hey have been subjected to much contumely.? 1 The Times described them as a "filthy and felo- i niotis muititiide," but I proudly repeat that amongst H no other people could such scenes occur. It may t, be said that I am making an admission; but they o have been educated to it for lorty years, during the h agitation forpatholic Emancipation, andsusequent- o ly during the agitation for the Kepeal. They have h been sublimed into pacific determination, which, p than Heaven, has not been rufiled in the slightest fi degree by anything which has occurred in this t Court They abide your verdict, and though it | may be one which will disappoint them, there a will be no violation of the law. no, whatever may ^ be the fate ofjthe man whose glory it is to have ea t ucuted the people to peaceable,legal,constitutional, i and continuous exertion. I ask, now. has any one | been intimidated by those meetings 1 It has been 1 said that large meetings have a necessary tendency to intimidate. Now, nothing could be easier than to prove this?they had all the magistracy of the neighborhood-those who still continued in the magistracy?and much good may it do them?and whose continuunce in the magistracy proves them hostile to Repeal?the Crown could nave cajled upon (he gentry and upon the clergy of the Established Church. lie had plenty of timid people in pantaloons and petticoats, who might have been produced to establish intimidation, it any such tiling hud occurred. It was his busiues to have done so if in his power?the neglect to establish his case in so important a point would be a violation of his duty to the Crown. Vet not one such witness has been produced. Why! because not one could conscientiously swear that there has been anything appertaining to intimidation. There was, I repeat, nniple. opportunity of proof, and the negation of such evidence speaks trumpet-tongued of the absence of any thing approaching to intimidation. There were in every neighborhood plenty of people inimical to Emancipation, and who regretted its passing?there were people desirous to put down the Kepeal Association?there were persons who hnd the misfortune to be at enmity with their neighbors?there were the clergy of the Established Church, witnesses beyond imputation?why was not a single witness ol any of those classes produced to prove the occurrence or the feeling of intimidation 1 Because it was thoroughly certain that no such I allegation could be borne out; because no j such intimidation had existPiise. Gentlemen j Of the Jury how does the ease stand . Is it | fairly put before youl The police were on the ta- i hie, they deposed to the tranquility of the meetings; tliey felt bountl to swear that nil was quiet, and that even the most timid iuul no occlusion lor fear. If those meetings were illegal, why wan it that there was not one mandate of authority to out them down? There was no proclamation which we treated with neglect?there was no ministerial interference treated with the slightest neglect or disregard?no public officer or remonstrance treated with anything hut the utmost respect. If the meetings were daugerou* why were they not proclaimed! They were proclaimed at last?hut if they were dangerous wily were they not proclaimed before! Yet we are called conspirators?it we are, were we not so twelve months ago! Gentlemen, wc are bianded as conspirators because we have done our utmost to obey the law. Those meetings were tranquil?acknowledged so, and they had just come to a conclusion; there was to he an end of theni. and all the violent language which had so offended aoine. parties was iiiusneif ]tut the meetings were not illegal, they were peaceable,unboundedly so,and the Attorney Ueneral had put it in proof. Itisscarcely necessary forme to avow unyUiing?it might be better for me to conceal?but I have nothing to c onceal?I avow the whole 39 meetings uguinst inc. The government knew that these meetings were called, and I lor one will not impute totheAttorttey General that he lay bye lor the purpose of laying a Imp. 1 can snv no such thing. I do not heli -ve it possible, ami f feel bound to do him the common justice ol saying so. 1 feel further bound to tell you that that learned gentleman did not interfere, merely because he could not, and that because he hud no ground to stand upon I am told that I have used ail equivocal word in saying these meetings were quiet by design. My lords, 1 repeat it I fully adojit the expression?that design existed before it exists now, and, my lords, it will xist, notwithstanding any result of this trial. It is not front me, gentlemen, that the |>eople have gained this knowledge?they have been taught by bitter experience; their education has been so com pletc in this, that they cannot expect any amelioration of their condition with combination. Now, genilemen, what evidence of a conspiracy have yon 1 1 my none j but I leave it to you, upon your consciences, to say is there any evidence ! You, gentlemen, have the responsibility upon your own shoulders?you must an uvr to your Maker lor the verdict you shall return Now, gentlemen, I submit to you that there is no evidence before you at all. Yon have had nothing but newspaper evidence laid before you?Now 1 -ubi.iit to their lordships, that this is no evidence, unless a conspiracy has been proved. There has been no evidence laid before you but newspaper*, and I submit that those newspajHTs arc no evidence until the conspiracy is proved; which, apparently, cannot be done without thein. Where, gentlemen is any proof bringing me in connexion with any of the newspnpera F might, inlaw, appeal to their lord?hips, but I prefer to appeal to you open the facts. Now, gentlemen,you will remember the evidence you have before you; keepin mind thut the Repeal Association distinctly disavowed that any MM -paper wH?* the organ. That was n fyjL and you have it in proof before you. I'ndouhledly we will newspapers to various individuals; but what does that amount to ! Merely to this?thnt certain parties subscribe n certain sum of money to the Astnri if inn :inrl finr flmf emm li?* ilticipna th-.f a /lurtnin paper may be sent him, and we do it. He select* nix i \vn paper, and we do not in any way attempt to control Ilia judgment; hut no paper lias ever been the recognised organ ol the Association. The papers may have contained libels; but if they did, why did not the Attorney General prosecute them an such 1 The editors or proprietors were liable to the law of'lihol. Why did not the Attorney General bring them before a Jury lor the offence, ii he thought it was worth hit while? Now,gentlemen, we are charged with inciting to violence, and what is t he proof offered 1 You have had some garbled speeches of mine read to you; hut do they prove any intention of mine to incite to violence? I ask vou is there one that does not inculcate peace ? It (re always been my greatest etlbrt, and that has heel laid before you by my prosecutors. Two principles have actuated me through life, and they have been put brlore the world. Tliey have hern ins> rihed upon your banners; and I avow them no?v. The first is that " He who commits a crime givs strengih to the enemy." I avow it boldly? it is mine. And the second in, that " Whatever advantage we obtain it tntiHt lie obtained without the shedding of one drop of blood." G< nt'enien that lias been the tlieorv of my whole life. I would rather lorego any advantage tliHn that one drop of human blood should be shed. I have said it fifty timert? I have boasted of it?I have proclaimed it as loudly us ever public man proclaimed it?I have stood alone sometimes in disclaiming, in the moat direct terms, ali intention to resort to physical force?I have disclaimed it in all times, and under all contingencies except in the extreme case of an attack ol civil war, but in all other contingencies 1 have always said that not one single drop ol human blood should he shed. It has ever been iny pride during my political life|to avow this sentiment, Hnd I would nave abandoned, nnd I would now abandon, the sacred cause of Repeal if one drop of human blood was shed ; I proclaimed this feeling on mv part in the cause of Catholic emancipation ^ ex, 1 succeeded with emancipation by the mighty aid and power of that principle. Look, gentlemen of the jury, to the past history and progress of emancipation. Look to the settlement of that question. Not one drop ol blood wag spilled in obtaining it. Look to the struggles which have hitherto been made, and will yet be made, in the cause of repeal. Not one drop ol blood has been shed ' And ) it right?ie it wise to B9HBBB9HEBBBHBKHBBSnB99999B>9se 1ERA ternipt * man in such at peaceful career 1 Ju it ;hi #?r mil- to interrupt a man who tin* ever laid >wn this princip'e an the basis of In* public conict 1 la tt fight to come out and call that the mulct of a conspirator, and to treat hiin like a inan bo had reeortrd to forcible means 1 Ob, gentle, ep, 1 belong to a Christian pcrsuHsion, the grand inciple of which is that no quantity ol advantage -BO quantity ol benefit or advantage to the church, to the state itaelt - no not even to Heaves itaelt, to be permitted to be earned at the experse ol any 'iine whatever; that no moral offence can,not inly t ?9t justified, or even aa much palliated, by any UOUat of advantage so obtained; and if 1 have ay co-believer in that box, I need not rep-at iliat aetvme, because be will have professed that dooine himaelt. But why should I, aa a Christum man, roclaim one thing and practise another I But,gen emen of the Jury, you cannot believe it. No, the ntire tenor of my Ide show a the biticemy with rhich I made the announcement, 1 have announced ; over and over aRain?I have announced it so ften that 1 aay no circumstance ol my life can ?ave you to doubt the sincerity of my avowal. My hsa appearedautiicicnilyin the newspaia rs; n>v tril, uo man ever possessed ho much public conlitence as 1 have. 1 way 1 possess it, und no man ver possessed it so lon^, bo unreservedly. 1 have ibtiiiucd tlie confidence of the Koman Catholic iiity of every class: yes, not only of those who are ti poverty or distress, and look to a change, or to n amelioration of their condition, hut J hme ole riuied also the confidence ol the higher clames? I the Catholic clergy, and of the episcopacy. J :ive obtained that confidence by the assertion f this nrincinle, and hy the sincerity with which 1 ave adhered to it; they know with what sincer* ly I profess it. How long could I possess this con- j luence if I did not show by years of public activiy and energy, and the eontinuousnetw of my pubic conduct, that I deserved it 1 Gentlemen, I tand belore you, having earned that confidence vhich no man who ever wished to perjietrate a rrime could retain. No man could continue to reserve it under such circumstances. For neary forty years 1 have held to the principle avowed, and my sincerity has been unnitigated, complete, and entire. No, the voice of aluinny cannot malign nie. Oil! gentlemen, yon litter from tnc in religion, llut tell not those whose nitlt I profess that they have been deceived?tell hem not that they would countenance hypocrisy ind treachery. You cannot believe it-; the mblic without will not believe it; nn English lury will not believe it. Europe would be made to itartle at the proposition. I, a Koman Catholic, im placed here before a Protestant Jury, in the iresenceof the monarchs of the earth. I ask you vhether you will calmly pause in a matter which deludes the interests of very many Protestants of lie highest respectability, or whether you will tarlish your case by any verdict which shall throw a loubt upon the sincerity of my whole life, ami ii|?in the sincerity of my advocacy of principles ivhich it lias been the pride anil boast of my existence to avow?iny comfort in iny declining /ears, und is, and will be iny consolation before u uglier tribanul 1 Hilt no!?I do you injustice in imposing such a case. No, you are incapable of aking such a view as that. 1 may now observe npin the almost only remaining matter. 1 doubt,how*ver, whether niv sincerity has been impugned?it i? I i ....LI...i..i UHJI Iirvtri urru ["Uiun \j Mti|>uKMru?* am it ought not to be. Yes, gentlemen. 1 do say, it is impossible lor you to believe tliut 1 would desert those principles of which I boast, or that I should forsake that doctrine which has been the veiy lifeblood of my political existence, and that 1 should forsake all and entct into a conspiracy. No: 1 have been more successful, and 1 ant more successlul, by acting on the principles of justice, of charity, of obedience to the laws,and a total atihorrence nf force and violence. Noj vou cannot believe that I would desert every principle of my public life mid enter into a conspiracy. No; it would be too grossly inconsistent with anything whichever yet occurred in public conduct. But it is not on t is point alone?there are other incidents in my public life which will enable you to form abetter judgement ol my conduct. There is not one ?d you in thai box who does not remember the frightful state of the combination ol the working and trading classes. You know that before that combination was put down lives were eaculiccd in the public streets, violence was ottered to individuals and to property from day to day, and, if death did notensue in recent cases, it was accidental, rather than owing to the strict lorhearance on the part of the combinatory. The public authorities were insufficient to cope with them ! Now, it is said that 1 am a man ready to sacrifice a principle to popularity. I could easily have made myself popular among the combinatory. I opposed them, 1 stood alone in my opposition to them ; I did so at the peril of mv life. At a meeting at the Exchange, all these men were opposed to lite, and I owed the preservation of my life to a policeman. You remember, it all I What occurred I I contended with those who were so furiously against me. and I opposed the combination. 1 did all ibis at the expense of my popularity, and at the risk of my life. N it likely that I should take this part in order to play the hypocrite 1 ft was not in that case alone, tluit I acted thus; tor what do you find recorded oi'nie in the new*pa|>ers ? Why, my persevering and perpetual opposition to IIihhonism ?my condemnation of all secret soeieiies. Have you not seen, and do you not remember my warm denunciation of such societies, t?> the police?my publicly calling upon thein to stop the progress of llihbonism ! Oh,gentlemen, if 1 were a conspirator, would I not be glad to lie joined by conspirators 1 It my means were applied to what I wished to carry out, would I not have roused the ll ihhonmi n in various parts of Ireland f I had influence enough to do so. 1 had only to countenance it, and nohodv knows how fur it would have extended had 1 done sa. You have before you over und ovei again my discountenance of, and resistance to, v*. rret societies. (ienilemen, take these things info your consideration, and say, upon your conscience ?say, if you can, that that man is a lw?e hypocrite! lint you cannot say so?you would not so lariin-li your consciences. But this point in toy jsilili-al lite must have struck you:?I am, and have been, opjrosed to the laws for making provision lor the poor. I opposed poor lawsofevery kind. Willi the influence which I possessed, could I not have poverty against property, mill have insisted upon all the |x>or being ferl by the rich 1 I was tormented by my friends. 1 was sneered at and jeered by all?by many win; bad joined me. I ronsulted my conscience. I saw the real nature of a provision which only maker more destitution than it relieves ; and the effect of which must he to inflict a great burden on the properly of the country. 1 knew it was unfit for tin people, hut I am bound to say that when it passed into a law I did rot give it the smallest opposition 1 allowed lite experiment to be fairly tried, and many of those who had previously abused rue avowed that I was right and they were wrong. I a in ready now to facilitate and assist its working in every way 1 can: hut i goii.-ick ?o tin- nine wncn n wan unpopular, and when it was nut of society l>y those whom I estimated most. and whose good opinion I valued, ntid I appeal to that pnrt of my life a* an answer to thm foul charge of (onspiracy. (jenllenten, you must also recollect, tor it i.t in evidence. the manner of my answer to M Thiers' speech and nddi-sH. You heard that in the evidence of Mr. Ifoiul Hushes; una now, as 1 have mentioned hit name, let me ?ay word of Mr. Bond Hughes. fJentlemen, f was one of those the most active ngiiin?t that gcntli man. because I felt convinced at the time that he had sworn that wlnrh was not true. Now, I ant gin ' his name has heeu referred to, hccattse it nflorda nir tin- opportunity which 1 hid proud to nvnil myself of, to declare that I never sow a witness on the table who gave hi* evidence more fairly limn Mi . Hughe*, and 1 am firmly convinced that it wa? a mistake, which nuy honest man might have fallen into, that occasioned the apparent contradiction in his evidence. I knew this is not a pnrt o| the case, hut I am sure your lordshi|?a will think that I am not wrong in making this public avowal. If appears by hi:* report, also, how ftrmlv 1 rejected the only ground on which we could obtain sympathy from them, and that we declined Intake any eiipimrt froin them in the slightest degree disparaging to our religion. Tint that ts put still inor? strongly when yon recollect my strong denunciations of the Ameiican slave own*r*. You will recollect that at the time large sums of money were being collected in the slaveholding States of the Union. Remittances were in progress, and considerable progress had be#-n made in getting up an association in Chatlesion, S. Carolina. Hid I shrink Iroin d< ing my duty upon the slave i^uesiion I I'id I Hot use ttte strongest language ! Hid I not denounce a* the enemies of Hod and man. those rulptiis mul criminals'! Did I not die associating ourselves with them a* Mil -ik "fialiou Willi tflteiee, an-1 pickpockets, and felons! Did I not re-ort to InngiiHge the strongest ami inpst violent to cypres* mv denunciation of the horrible tiaflic in human beings ; of the execrable nature of the slave truth ?and of all the immorality and frightful conge tin-sees dial resulted iroin I lint infamous Iridic. I f wasa hypocrite I might have given them a taw smooth woids; but I denounced them, and therein showed that there was nothing of nypoensy ii hose public principle I have always advoca?od ID. | w?* Two I'cnU. that no assistance could he accepted l>v ua which should in the slightest degree interfere with our allegiance to out Sovereign Gentlemen, you will recollect also, that vie hud otters of supisiri Irom liie Republican ( arty in Frnnce, headed hy Ledru Rollin. It is u considerable aud every powerful parly. It is that party which hales the i-nglish most, with .111 irrational and ferocious hatred, arising moat probably trout the blow struck at their vanity at Waterloo? tliut is the party headed hy I.edru I ollin. Gentle nien. you have his letter, and you have tny answer. Did I see.? his support, or that of hi* party'! Did 1 mitigate even Irom the decisiveness of myanswer; did 1 appear unwilling to repent and readily avow ill No, gentlemen?I took a firm tone of loyalty? 1 rejeeted tlu-ir support?1 refused their ofler?I cautioned them against coining over here?1 refused everything thutw as incousiMent with my allegiance .ind is thai iii?- w uy that my hypocrtcv i? proved', yoii! Hut not alone with thut parly in France din the Irish iicoplf Ibng <>ti ull conuexion, hut even as regarded I he present Monarch of France, we refused all, even ilit- slightest sympathy. it has gone forth lo the world?ii bus been moved to you thut I hurled deliance, so lar iih an humble individual like myself could, against the .Monarch who at present governs the French rmiinn The learned Attorney < leneral, who with a good deal of ingetiiiiiy, introduced to your notice the report of the Secret I'oinnutiee of the House of Commons, in 1797. hiid he told votl that we were acting upon that plan. In 1797 they were looking for French sympathy and assistance?they had emissaries in France representing them there, and they bad probuly persons representing the French here ?they were looking for foreign force and foreign assistance, unci lie tells you that our objects were those of the I'nited Irishmen of 1797! Oil, gentlemen. they were diametrically the reverse. It may be that we look to the restoration of the elder branch of the House of Bourbon, known as Henry the 5th, but I should be sorry lo wait forn repeal nl the union till then. (Much laughter.) Not that T should disparage his tule, for 1 lor one believe (hat Europe will never he perfectly safe until that Branch of the family of the Bourbons is restored restored unon ihe piinciplea upon which the monarchy of HMS was restored. But 1 would not disnuruge the claim that 1 for n moment laughed at, l>ut 1 said this is a quarter from w hence we refuse the slightest assistance, and I hurled ihe indignation of rnymind against the man who would offer to the children of France to he educated by infidel professors, and refused them that religious education their parents wished them to receive. I will not. gentlemen, enter further into this |K?inf, hut you will see from those pii|?ersiny antagonism to the French government. But, gentlemen, there is another point in my conduct?my antagonism to the Chartists. Vou mar remember that when tlie Association was in full force, Ihe Chartists were in u state of insurrection in England?they were coming in their hundreds and thousands and tens of thousands into the manufacturing towns of England, and you will recolh ct further, that there was something farinating in the doctrines of Chartism for the poorer clawep, because it proposed in trnth and in substance, u violation of all the laws of property. If 1 hud meant anything wicked or criminal' would 1 not have befriended and supported the Chartists! On the contrary, did 1 not denounce them?did I not keep the Irish in England from joining them, and was there not an outrage actually committed in Manchester on account of the Irish holding aloof front them! Yer, gentlemen. 1 assisted the constituted authorities in England, by my influence over the Irish residing there. Why was it not gi-'en to you in evidence, thut the moment a member of our Association joined the Chartist institution in England his money was returned to him, und his name was struck out of our books. Now , gentlemen, if my object was popular insurW 1 urnu Ortviniifl f.?r u tini.iilnr mitliri'ulf good Heaven,let any man of you place himself iu my situation, uiid ask what lie couli! do, for the present is a cliuigt- of a popular insurrection. If I wished tor iiu insutrection would I not with to have streng It?would 1 not wish to have the system of Chartism aupnorted. 1 >id not I, on the other hand, meet it in Dublin?did I not hunt it out ot Dublin, and, it my outli were taken, I iirmly declare mv conscien ions conviction that, had I not intetlernf, Chartism woukl have spread from one end of the lend to another, lint 1 have opposed that, as 1 have opposed every thing that in n.consistent with the lutcgrity of my political principles. Thmik heaven, I successfully opposed and Uri. ted lt.aud while I have a tight to make you judge ot my actions snd motives, by referring to those leadn >g t< arurea ot my political life, I shall ever Njnicu thai 1 k< pt sue lety and property from that invasion. Geutli mm, there is arotlier part worthy ot your consideration, nameIv. my consistent sworn sllegiance to our Sovereign. Y< u find it in all these. n*-wep?peni. Her name is never mentioned hut with reipec', and always with enthusiasm and delight ; nay, when a speech wa? m?oe by her Majesty's minimi re, d?rogatory to our objects aud motives,don't youiind mu with most tedious pertinacity making a distinction between her Msj'siy at d her ministers. Ytu have heard it fitly times repean d, and at every meeting? 1 omitted it a< none, and I made in these cases a constitutional distinction between lieraell and her inunsit r>, and the Alton.ej General has iio right Ho say tit it ilmre was one particle oi disloyalty toward* her in ir.y observations upon the ijerch. Geiillemev, having taken ml these precaution*? having repealed these assertion* over and ovtr again, almost disgusting those who heard nie even to nausea, what then becomes of the Attorney Genrrul that 1 spoke disrespectfully of her Majesty * My lords, 1 thank heaven there is not a particle m 1 luscase to taint, in the slightest degree, our loyalty or tilleginnce Mow, my lords, us regards ni) >elf. I am come ihnt lime of life thai she can do moiling tor me ; hut there is not a man in execution hi this court who has taken hah the pants I have to inspire iiml win rh?* allegiance of the peopie ot Ireland There is one thing I think the Attorney General tided iinlnirlv in. lie reud the (pifsu's speech, anil then my newspaper eiieecli, utol the scolding ministers gave in*-, hiiiI then I mid ' I tidy would not let us go on. lie raid that 1 represented the liueen as a hshwoinan. Whatever heromes Ol the chw don't believe (lint. 1 confer I teel annoyed mid humiliated that such a elmcc should he noole against me. I !-|>esk in no tetrns til disrespect to the Attorney < leneral; hut 1 I utterly repudiate and deny that I ever spoke in di.-r? s|ceilul terms ot my Sovereign, -nil I -ay i it I" false to impute to me an intention <>i applying the offensive expression referred to ? the speech of Iter Majesty. ! did not treat it as her speech, hut as that o| her Ministers, who were constitutionally responsible lor it. J disclaim, abhor, and hate the imputation ol olimng a word ol I any thing in the least disrespectful towards my augo-f monarch. I'jtori all occasions 1 inculcated I principles < 1 sincere loyalty to the throne, and I distinctly separated all reference in my remarks between the js rson of the Gueen and her Ministers. I I have detained you longer than I had intended in referring to what has heretofore bernmv public conduct; but, in coming to a proper estimate ol my motives, it was necreaaiy to draw attention to my acts, and though my cX|>osition* may he leeDli -though my talents may be small, though niv m.i rgiesrnaybe decreasing,ami though my strength 111 y ti (Inclining, un<l yenr* increasing, still you mil find then as now implanted in mv breast n burning love for the prn--|>erity of Ireland, and the liberties of inv country. the pnblir to clings did tnke place; I do not ileny it. Their object was the rc|*-nl i I flic I'nion. Was that a bad ol>iect 1 1 deny that it waa. ''n the rci?trnry it was n most nw nil object for Ireland, so much so that before I sit il??n, I hope to demon, strate to eyerv one in f'mirt?the neutrality of the bench of course excepted?the absolute necessity for aneli u measure, and i's ctleris on the pro|a*rfy, i cominrrce, iind industp\ of your native land I hope that maiiy of the .T'arv whom I address, ?i,| lie induced frotn the etienrilt of the creel shall put I before them to toin in calling for the Repeal? (a l.iUgli. 1 It is mv ditty to put the facts hefore you, ami I will he nbie t<> show to demonstration thui . the l-ingb'h Parliament Iihs, from a remote period, . governed Ireland with a narrow icnlonsy of Irish ' pros|>eritj', ?"d in a grudging spirit of its independence. Then I will first refer you to the history of i our woollen manufactures, and to what did ha|?pen in the reign of a monnreh whose memory you I piohahlv hold in very great esteem. I will now now call your attentions to the transactions o| I7W'2, which wes looked upon as a final adjii tmeutof the relations lictween the two rmintries, and when an Irish Parliament was declared to for ever. I will next direct my observations to move the great prosperity which followed ss the result of legislative independence. I will then show yon tlint the measure of the f'uion wis forced upon the Irish people. I will demonstrate the manifold evils flowing from it, and the had effects on our irade and commerce, and will retrr you to the i existence of vast diatri?uxl mi?? ry throughout the i ' id: and I will prove to you dint the only remedy i lor us i me, and for avoiding separation from h:\gl uiil, is to ho found in tlie restoration of ?.ur native Parliament. Now, as to the ill-treatment ol I Ireland hy Knglattd, the fact jsso confessedly true r that it is scarcely necessary lor nic to aoducc any 1 prool of it ?if is scarcely nsrss?nr> f>>r me to detain t you hy unv remark uuon this |?nrt of the c.i"- ye? , [Couch/dm on t)n Uh page )

Other pages from this issue: