The New York Herald Newspaper, March 14, 1844, Page 2

the company concluded to aid the pe Dl ne Bg so faras their then situation would allow, and entered into the following agreement for that The Commissioners were to de- it x bonds of that state, with the state for security, with leave to it to hypothecate, pledge use them as they might desire, and thereupon the Company were to advance to them $128,000 in money, and give them letters of credit for $125,- 00 in addition. big was carried into Fy and the Gonpeny n becoming possessed of the bonds and in orde teohtain the funds agreed to be advanced by them, obtained a loan from Holford, Branker & Co., of this city, of abeut one hundred and thirty thousand dollars, and ultimately upon an arrangement with Holford & Co., Bankers, London, of about $325,- 000, which last negotiation was authorised by said Commissioners in their agreement with the ‘The Commissioners, in August, 1841, offered to repay the Company the amount advanced to them, - ‘and as they had not used the letters of credit, of: fored to return them to the Company, and asked a return of the bonds. This wasimpracticable, as the bonds had been sent to London under their sanc- tion and a return of them trom Holford & Co , of that city could not be obtained, and farther, the Company had an equitable claim aan. the Real Estate Bank of Arkansas for the diflerence between dollar and sterling bonds, assigned to them by Mr. Beers, which amounted to about seventy thousand dollars, which, together with the cash advances, and the letters of eredit (which it was not known they had not used) made the full amount which had been obtained from Holford & Co,, of Lon- don, which at the time it was made, it was expect- ed they (the Commissioners) would assume and thereby settle with the Company, after finding that Commissioners had not used the letters of credits and being desirous of protecting the inter- eat of all concerned, as far as possible, the finance committee ordered a conveyance of property in trust forthat porpose to Francis Griflin, Esq:, of this city. The property assigned consisted of three fomissory notes of C. W. Taylor, amounting to t=, secured by mortgage upon real estate at ama, and a claim upon the Real Estate Bank Of Arkantas for ubout $58,900. ‘The claime were a ee of the property assigned to the Compan yy Mr. Beers, the former President, and had wit! Other rty been placed in the hands of Mr Abijah Ricere Jr., by special power of attorney, to adjust and collect for account of the Company, andthe $75,000 claim against the Real Estate nk of Arkansas, was adjusted, recognized at! ,800 as above by the Commissioners. The ar- rangement of this trust was eflected by and be- (ween a special committee on the part of the Com- y. Mr. Mann acting for Mr. Beers, and the ! ny under the direction of said Committee, | and Francis Griffin, . acting for Holford & Co. | The claims (or @ portion of them) which were as- signed in trust to Mr. Griffin, would probably have bren an equitable eet off as against the Real Estate Bank. of Arkansas, so that in fact the effect of the {transaction was only to place these matters in such a position, as would enable a fair adjustment of them to take place. The trast called “‘The Tylee Trust.” was execu- ted onthe Ist day ot September, 1841, and was made to secure several of the directors against a rsonal guaranty which they had entered into on ehalf of the Company to secure debts due from it to several banks in Arkansas, and for which those Directors might be liable to the amount of above 18,000. The authority to transfer securities to in- lemnify the parties who had signed this guaranty, had been given by a vote of the Finance Commit- hich only ment of the effects ‘of the association under a few id of the debts due to monied repens ous or associations. Debts not pay- able on demand, or to monied corporatians, are ired by the act to be stated in detail, nor ro maneuee A which they are secured, but the amount is only to be given. I have been more par- ticular in my notice of this part of the receiver's publication, becauee his reference to this return is calculated to convey, and has been understood by the conductors of some of our Mablio journals to convey the impression, that the whole indebtedness of the Company on account of these bonds was fraudulently suppressed in thisdocument. Whether the Receiver intended to expose me to such a charge or not, I will not undertake to say, In either case, ifthe profeesion of his unwillingness “toimpeach or aesail the motives or intentions of the officers of the institution” contained in his statement be sincere, he will be pleased to see this matter go fully explained and vindicated, how- ever So mey regret that the manner in which he presented it to the public should have exposed me to the harsh and unfounded comments to which I have alluded. The only remaining topic in the statement of Mr. Leavitt, which calls for notice, is that relating to the assignment made by me as President to him as Receiver. | a Mr. Leavitt states that Thomas G. Talmage and William R-Cook were examined, under oath, and assigned and transferred the effects following, giv- ing a list of divers items, jeaxing ground for the ialrenee that this list contained all the property of the. company essigned to him. To correct this erroneous interence, I deem it proper to refer to a clause in the instruments of assignment, by which it will be seen that they conveyed and assigned to the Receiver not only the effects described in the Schedules, but also ‘all the property and effects and all the estate real and personal, and all the chozes in action and equitable interests whatsoever and wheresoever of the said the North American Trust and Banking Company.” The instrument of assignment was in the usual from, and was ap- proved by the master who had charge of the pro- ceedings. It is therefore evident that all the pro- perty, belonging to the Company and included in the various trusts as well asthe state bonds and other securities hypothecated as security for loans, were assigned to him, Co on) to the fi aleapood in- terests of the parties who had made advances to the company, and others having the like interests in the securities. It is proper to notice the facts alluded to in the Receiver’s statement, which follows: ‘It thus appears that this company i indebted for any circulating notes issued under the special provision of the act to authorize the bu- siness of Banking, that owes not exceeding $25,000 to its cash depositors, and not exceeding $1200 to its officers and clerks,and other ordinary incidental expenses.” The principal part of this cash deposite is the balance claimed to be due from the banks of Arkansas, against which the Receiver may find an ofiset in coupons passed due, and the balance of such deposits I believe to be nominal. I will state in. this connection that the whole amoung of actual indebtedness to the company was covered by securities, with the exception of about 250,000 which at the time it was confidently be- 1eved, would be paid from the excess ot property in the several trusts over the amount for which it had been assigned. i By a careful examination of the Receiver’s state- ment taken in connection with the assignment and transfer of the property and effects of the company to him by the officers, it will be found that he ac- knowledges to have found securities in the several tee several inonths prior to the authority, for the game purpose, granted on the 7th of June, 1841, | and aguin repeated by the Finance Committee on the 3]st of August in the same vear. The legality of this trust was questioned, and a billin Chancery filed to set it aide, and the gen- tleman for whose benefit it was made not seeing fit to contest it, it was set aside, but the object for which it was made was just. But another objec- tion is urged against the three last trusts, namely, that they were made pending the proceedings in Chancery for enjoining the institution and appoint- ing areceiver. All the arrangements in question, Rewever, were completed before the 31st of Au- gust, § the Ist day of Septeniber, 1841, and the in- yUnction suspending the company’s proceedings ‘was not served upon me until the 3d day of Sep- tember 1841. It is well, however, to remark that J was confined to my house in Brooklyn, with a se- vere attack of bilious fever, during the entire rponth of August, 1841, and the meeting of the Fi- nance Committee during the latter part of that month, were held at my house. My illness pre- vented me.from the performance of my ordinary official duties tor more than a month prior to the company’s being enjoined, which circumstance considerably delayed the execution of these trusts. . Two other topicsremain te be noticed. The first is the semi-annual report made to the Comptroller on the first Monday of January 1841. The Receiver charges: 1. that ‘it does not state the creation of the trusts; 2. That the 1800 bonds under the first three trusts, amounting to $2,000,000, are not men- tioned among the debts, while all the assigned bonds and mortgages, and their securities, were in- cluded among the effects of the Association ;” thus msinuating that the retum did not disclose the ac- tual condition of the Company. I,maintain that. the report in question did give the actual condition of the Company, as to its pro- perty and sts effects, and that the true amounts of its debts, with all the certainty that could be ob- tained from the books and the information posses- aed by ite officers. _ It was made up with great care by an experienced accountant, according to the requirements of the law, and in the form prescribed by the Comptroller, and its correctness was vouched for under outh by the person who made it up, before it was sworn to by me. That the public may clearly understand the mat- ter, I cepy an extract from the returns made to the Comptrolier of the State, on the first. Monday of January, 1841, showing the amount of the liability of the Company under their respective heads, viz : $331 02 79,161 62 1,737,270 37 Liabilities payante in sterling in London, 2,711 687 30 Due to epositors, 122,235 10 ‘The amount of bills or other evidences of debt, issued by sseciation as circula- ting notes, of the denomination of $100 and under, 1,990 00 $4,652,665 41 At the time it was made, the Yates trust had not been created, and of course could not be noticed. . The trust created betore and existing upon the first Monday of January, 1841, were the million trust and first and second half million trustsand the Blatchford and Murray trust. The trust deeds in all these trusts contained clauses that the securities were to be held for the benefit of the Company, until default should be made in the payment of the obligations secured under the trusts, and until such default the Compa- ny were entitled to the interest upon the bonds and mortgages arsigned. Previous to the first Monday in January, 1841, no default had occurred in the payment ot the obligations, and the Receiver him- self informs the public “that the officers always in- sistea that these bonds and mortgages were kept in the banking house and were held by the trustees for the Company until default was made in the pay- ments of the interest or principal of the bonds made under the trust deeds against them.” Pre- vious to this time none of the bonds under the two half million trusts had been sold, but were all held in pledge by varions parties as collateral securi- ities for debts due by the Association ; the bonds under the million trust had been forwarded to Lon- don inthe latter part of April, and early part of May 1840, to Messra. Palmer, McKillop, Dent & Co., who commenced the disposition of them ; but, as no account of sales of the disposal of such bonds was rendered by them until the 30th d: f December, 1840, (dated London, andl? INA account did not come to hand until Feb- ruary, 1841. consequently their avails could not be in the January retnrn. This account sales and account current of Palmer, McKillop, Dent & Co- was handed overto the Receiver when he took pow. session of the papers of the Company, and is presum- ed now to be im his possession The report in question states the debts of the Company, as will be seen by the above extract 4,652,665,41; and that this amount includes all the debts represented, or in any way secured by | disposed of, at’that time was $1,600,000,00. the bonds of $2,000,000 made under the three trusts, In addition, the return also states, that the debts | 000, and the depreciation in the other securities of of the company, $2,711,687 30 were for “ liabilities | the company, and the | payable in sterling in London,” thus pointing to the particular liabilities which led to, or were connect- | siderable, in addit ed with the bonds in question. And although the bonds themselves were not (for the reasons above &iven) expressly mentioned as outstanding obliga- tions of the company, yet itis seen that al} the debis for which they outstanding tiabilities, Tt was proper to inclu in the trust among the assets of the bank. were simply pledged, not sold, or absolutely parted with and were in the joint possession of the second cashier, Mr Tylee, and the truste: yin the banking house of thé company, and were the very assets which were relied on to meet a part of the debts stated in the report. The statute does not require, nor has it ever Been the practice of associations or banking institutions, in their returns to the Comp troller, to mention any pledges or hypothecations o property made in the transaction of their business nor are they required even to discriminate between the securities placed by them in the hands of thr Gomptioller as seenrity for cireulating bills an: their-securitios ingeneral. The object of making these returns was simply to comply with the provi- were held were fully and | confine myself to the topics which. tend to explain truly stated, and that the return would have been | my own official acts ‘and : erroneous and false if, in addition to the debts the failure of the institution. enumerated, it had also represented the bonds as | active business during the disastrous period of the e the mortgages embraced | wide-spread rum which involve They | tions and individuals, and swept away the hird trusts including the amount in the possession of Wm G, Wood Esq.,, amounting to..... $5,114,190 73 In_state bonds in the possession of Messrs. Palmer, McKillop, Dent & Co. and others in Europe, held as collateral security amounting at Par to about the sum of.........+ And by an addition of the amounts of the several claims, in the sche- dules to the assignments to him (exclusive of the office furniture) there will be found the nominal amount of about ........e.0+ sees 1,500,000 00 305,000 00 Which taken together amount to.. —_ 6,919,19073 If he had examined what he calls the Holford Trust he would have found the pro) farts UeBaierTed to emount to $106,598 exclusive of interest, instead of $45,000 as is in hia statement, which accounts for an additional sum of......... 61,598 00 Which makes the amount of assets transferred to him by bis own statement and the last addiuen the sum of . erg eee From which is to be deducted the amount of the company’s debts (which are not givenin any part of the receiver’s statement) but which appeared to be in January 1841, nine months prior to his ap- intment $4,652,655 41 which fad however been considerably reduced prior to his appoint- ment. The actual indebtedness ot the company at the time of his appointment, I firmly believe did not exceed 6,980,788 73 4,500,000 00 Which leaves a balance of assets at the time of the transfer over the debts, of To which add the amount of losses which the Receiver states was charged as against the capital in the pelt Pie te the Comp- troller of 1841 2,490,788 73 522,714 89 And there isaccounted for 3,003,503 33 of the capital which he states at $3,281,900; leav- ang balance to be accounted for of $282,396, and which is made up in the amount charged to profit and loss during the period between the January return, and the time the receiver entered upon the discharge of his duties, and in the large amount of back interest due at that time upon the bonds and mortgages and other assets in the various trusts, The foregoing exhibit from the best data in my possession, and from the statement of the Receiver, will satisfactorily account for the property of the company at the time it was enjoined. his proper- ty although depreciated in value by general causes was still held by the company. Except the amount charged to profit and loss, subject to the equitable claims of the creditors in- terested under the trusts, and when such claims were disposed of, applicable to the claims of the general creditors and the stockholders. The preceding statements complete what T have designed to say respecting my connexion with the company and the Receiver’s Report ; but I will add a brief statement of the causes which produced the failure of the Coe Me Many things probably aided in producing the re- sult; but a prominent and leading cause was the rapid depreciation in the value and price of state stock, real estate, and other property in the years 1839, 1840 and 1841, to which may be added looses by bad debts, and the sums paid for commissions and interests on moneys borrowed by the company to meet its engagements. On the first Monday in January 1841, the"com- pany owned state bonds, chiefly Indiana, Arkansas and the Territory of Florida, amoun- $1,755,040 TINE tO 600 s0ss une peevares cove core They also held at this last date bonds and mortgages and real estate, including the securities embraced in the Trusts amounting to about...... They also owned other assets and property amounting to about,...... 1,700,000 ‘the value of all this property was estimated at about $86,500,000; and it was thought thatthe debis could be ‘paid, und about $2,000,000, saved to the stockholders if no further depreciation took place and the country became prosperous. It will be recollected that an unsuccessful at- tempt was made by the Banks of Pennsylvania, and the south and west, to resume spose payments in January, 1841; upon the failure of this attempt, and the final overthrow of the United States Bank, commenced a jeriod of pecuniary pressure, and a rapid depreciation in the prices of state stocks and aller property. Some state stocks were sold by the company aiter the first day of January 1841, and before the appointment of the Receiver, but it is safe to assume, that the amount of state ee le depreciation upon this amount of state bonds, at a forced sale would not have been less than $1,000,- 4,000,000 losses consequent on the ne of its debtors, was very con- n to the amount charged to T1841, (which may be seen ooks,) all of which must far insolvency of s« profit and loss inthe fy reference to the ¥ exceed $500,000. In the foregoing statement I have endeavored to the carses which led to Those who were in company’s existence, will sinaly remember the equally institu. earned property of the trious and enconomical ciiizens. Many companies with cash capitals, condu:ted and conducted bygentlemen of great experienc , integrity and prudence, lost a large portion of their capita's; others were seriously embarrassed, and found it impossible to meet a large portion of their ybligations at maturity, and, others were entirely wverthrown, their whole capital lost, and in addi- tion were unable to_meet any considerable portion ftheirlisbilittes. In this ¢vdamity (caused by tle hange of value,) banks, insurance and trust com- vunies and railroad companies experienced a com- montate. To these causes (thus operating) may be attributed the failure of the North American nds of our most indus- 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 3 , partial individual will seek occasion to impugn the motives of the board of directors, when no suspi- cion of fraud or bad faith can (im truth) rest upon their acts. This statement has been delayed much longer than I anticipated, from the necessity of recurring to private memoranda, as I have not had recourse to the books, documents and papers in the posses- sion of the Receiver (with a view to their examina- tion) since they were ded over to him in the month of Octeber, 1841. i Having thus performed a duty imposed upon me by the imperfect statement of the Receiver, I shall not hereafter notiee this subject in this manner. T have the satistaction to know that my manage- ment of the institution has undergone a most rigid examination by some of the largest creditors and stockholders, and that they have approved of my official acts, but if any other creditor orstockhold- er requires any further eens or information in my powerto give him, I will most cheerfully ac- company him te the office of the Receiver, and aid in the elucidation of any item contuined in the booksand f the company. eee eer ene THOS. G. TALMAGE. New York, 1th March, 1844. O’CONNELL’S SPEECH AT THE IRISH STATE TRIALS. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 5. Long before the doors of the Queen’s Bench were opened this morning they were surrounded by crowds of persons anxious to obtain admission We never saw curiosity excited to such a pitch, and we do not exaggerate when we state that seve- ral thousands weat away who were disappointed in obtaining places in the galleries and body of the Court. The arrangements made by the Sheriff were well calculated to maintain order and regula- rity. At ten o’clock precisely their Lordships took their seats on the bench, and as soon as the names of the traverseraand jury were called over, Mr. O’Conngut rose, and, having bowed to the bench, proceeded to speak as feilows:—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 de- mand a favorable verdict at your nands. I shall ask that verdict without disrespect on the one hand, or flattery on the other. I shall not appeal either to your passions or your feelings, but I trust that Tshall 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 basis upon which I shall rest, | 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 brilliant renee eloquence you have heard, I do not think that I would be war- ranted 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 I cannot, attempt to follow them, but I shall, I trust, submit to ou plain unanswerable facts that will come home to. your understanding and good sense and convince you that in anything I have done have transgressed no law, and was actrated solely by a desire to serve my country. Gentlemen of the Jury, I am here not as coe own client alone— my clients are the people of freland—I am here as counsel for the Irish nation—{ stand here as the ad- vocate of the righ’s, liberties, and privileges of that people ; and, my only sonal is, that they, or their rights, should be impeded by any thing I have done, or by my want of power to sustain their cause here this day. I trust, however, that | shall be able to convince you, that they ought not to suf. fer by any proceeding of which I liave been instru- mental Iam the advocate of Ireland, and the Irish people—I am, a Repealer—I avow it. Iam conscious of my integrity of purpose, and, I tell you, that when I_ commenced that line of conduct which has brought me before you this day, the ob- ject I had in view was the Repeal of that Union. Krell 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 T have the highest authority for saying so. 1 have the authority of one who had a seat on that bench, and who is now in his honored grave. I promise you, gentlemen, that 1 will be as brief as I possibly can—and I may repeat Ties that it would be un- fair towards you, after all yon 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 I have said ; on the contrary 1 am here to assert what I have often before stated in other places, at the same time cluiming the right of not being made accountable for the clum- sy mistakes of newspaper reporters, and newespa- T speeches squeezed into such a compass as might Rave suited the convemence ef those who published them. No doubt] may in the excitement of a mo- meni have said harsh things of individuals that, upon reflection, | would rather I had not said ; but the substance of all Ihave ever said I am now not onlyready to vindicate,but to reiterate again. Then, as to all my uctions, I am ready not only to avow them, bat to justify them, All that I have done was in the performance of what I believed to be a sacred duty, having no other object in view but the restoration of the Irish Parliament, and the od of the Irish People. I was looking for an Irish Parliament, because { founu that the [rish people had been cheated of this sacred right. I found that the Union was accomplished at a revolutionary pe- riod—the nation of Europe was disturbed by the infidel philosophy of France, and overrun by her great military {olde ibe dynasty of nations was changed—princes were banished and monarchies overthrown—it was at that period that Ireland was means, which, I believe, were pleasing in the sight of Heaven, and ought to be approved of by man.— That was the course that I pursued, and ought 1, gentlemen of the jury, to be ashamed to come in here this day to justify it? I know thatI labor un- der 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 lought not on that account to complain of them. This is not the time to discuss how you have been brought into that box, or if the Attorney General has done anything that the law did not sanction; but ] am here to address plain facts to your sense and under- standing I am here to wade to you with courtesy, but without flattery; and I 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 pre- judices, 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 aoe would be in that box to-day; if you professed the same faith that I do you would not be allowed to sit in judgment upon me. Imay say that all the differences which exist between us are aggravated by my being a Catholic, and that | have done more than any other man to put down Protes- tant ascendancy, of which some of you were, per- haps, 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 ami- versal liberty to all in which I glory ; nor does it make me feel for a moment that my cause shall not be safe in your hands. I glory in what | have done ; and, being now in the power of your hones- ty and integrity, appeal to you on these grounds sore. 2 feel perfectly sure that you will be guided only by common sense and justice in your verdict ; ptin dr is not in any way despairing of your justice that Ihave made these observations; but I must say that I would prefer that it had been otherwise for your own sakes and for 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 in- fluence in the case. Ihave now done with the sub- ject, and I come to the case itself. I must say that never knew of a more cutious case. It certainly is the strangest case of whch Ihave had any expe- rience ; itis not a case consisting of one fact, or of two facts, or of ten facts, but of the history of nine months. You are called on to go through all 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—a mass of matter which I defy the most brilliant understanding so to investigate and scan as totake in all its important points; those points which are necessary for forming a ground and just judgment upon the whole at v..e view. Where such a quantity of materials are placed be- for» it, the human memory fails, or, what is much worse than a iailure, it is apt to forget those facts which are of a rebutting and mitigatory character, and to bear away only those ones which form the prominent parts of the charge. Therefore, do 1 ar- raign thisprosecution, not from any hostility to the framers of it, but forthe utter impossibility in which it places the jury, todisengage from that mass of materials, the real facts of the case, on one side; and, on the other, to find out, ina word, the real question to be tried. Let us see what help I will be able toafiord youin the matter, and in the first place, let us see what are the affirmative, and what are the negative qualities of this prosecution—in other words, what ths prosecution is, and what it isnot. Gentlemen, this prosecution hinges on the shown you when, where, how, who were the men, cabalistic word “ conspiracy!’ and what is a con- spiracy ? IfT look into tionary for the mean- ing of it, I find that a conspiracy is “a private agreement between several i crime.”” Now, that isthe common sense definition of the word ; but it has been taken under the special protection of the gentlemen of the bar, and they, not content with the common sénse meee, take the word im a two-fold sense, im a way of their own; they have two hooks to their line—and tell you that you must spell out a_conspiracy by impli- cation, where you have no evidence of any agree- ment existing. Well, let us take the conspiracy which is alleged in the present case, and see what are its negative and affirmative qualities; let us see what ia the evidenee brought by the crown to es tablish i*. In the first place, it is admitted by the Crown itself that there is no secrecy in the matter —that the conspiracy does not consist of any pri- vate agreement—any secret society—they do not allege any private information—no, not even a sin- gle private conversation. Every thing was open, unconcealed, public, as clear to the eyes of the whole world as the noon-day sun. Its evidence was to be found in the columns of the Evening Mail quite as muchas in the Evening Post. It was raked up out of that secret abe of most secret in- formation—the new: r. The conspiracy was concocted in the face of the world, and the bellman sent about to invite all who wished tocome in and be witnesses—so it is not easy forone to defend oneself from the charge of conspiracy under such circum- stances. I submit there should be an agreement to constitute a conspiracy, and not such an agree- meant as is made in that way before the world—not an agreement which is made tor instance in the preeence, of the law officers of the Crown, of the learned Attorney-General, or Solicitor-General, or of her Majesty’s Sergeant-at-law. You see the ab- surdity, gentlemen, of calling such an agreement a conspiracy. Is it, indeed, commonsense?—is it to be endured by rational men that we should be told that such an agreement is a conspiracy? But when was the agreement made, or how, or where was it made? Was it im the winter season, or in sum- mer, in spring, or in autumn? Was it on a holiday, or a week-day? What was the hour, or day, or week, or year, om which it was entered into? Who was it that proposed it,or who seconded it? Gentle- men, I appeal to your common sense and reason—I you toplace yourselves in my position, and to suppose that you address a Catholic Jury, as I ad- dress you, and would you not feel—I will not call it indlgnation—but would you not laugh to scorn the idea, that such a Jury should find you guilty of a Sonmptiney under such ‘circumstances? There is not the sligl test evidence before you of any concoc- tion which would be required in the crime of con- spiracy. I don’t know whether even I am accused of having been present at the formation of the con- spiracy; but surely if so, some time ought to have been pointed out that I might have the benefit of an alibi, if 1 could make it out (laughter.) But here the charge is spread over 0 much time, and in so indefinite a way, that I should only take it as a toss-up whether or not I was present onthe occa- sion. Was the agreement in writing or was it a parole one? Keally, gentlemen, if an ac- tion at Nisi Prius were to be supported by such evidence, and that you were in the box to try the case if there were even no more than a £10 contract at stake, Task you could you find a verdict that the contract existed? It might be said, as it was toa 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 criminalcharge in your lordship’s court.” Gen- tlemen, it is not here a £10 contract which is at stake; but, as in the case of a contract, your honest view of the caze will be, that if a conspiracy exists it must be proved; and, if not proved—that it does not exist. The Attorney General, in good sooth, leaves it to our imagination to discover where the conspiracy exists. A conspiracy oughtto be a re- ality; but he leaves it altogether to you to imagine it. I don’t speak in any epataceiuent of his ta- Jents. I admit that he has shown much talem,and much ingenuity, and industry, in laying this case before you. He occupied ‘eleven hours—eleven mortal hours—in his statement, yet in what part of itdid he tell you where the conspiracy existed?— “Wait (said he) till Icome to the close;” and when he got to the close, ‘Go back (said he) to the be- ginning —go through the whole of it, and find out the conspiracy the best way you can.” It is not with any affectation that! say it, but ifany could | have found out the proofs of a Ce ey existing | it would be the Attorney General. Yes, he took 11 hours to throw those extracts into your box for you | to find out thatthere wasa conspiracy .iThere are the Pilot, Nation, and Freemen, read them—il is good enough for you, make out the conspiracy if you can out a the evidence they give. I rememberonce, on the Munster C.rcuit,the celebrated Egan was defend- ing a case which was stated by a Mr. Hoare, a gen- tleman 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 isan excuse | want—said, “I am sure you will not be led away by the dark oblivion ot a brow.” (A laugh )— “Why, Egan,” said some one to him, “that ignon- sense— why did you say ce?” “To be sure itis,” was his reply, ‘but isn’t it good enough for a jury?” peanentetay So eleven hours 1s good enough for you. Gentlemen, it is monstrous—it is criminali monstrous—to say that that isa conspiracy whic! takes eleven hours to develope it. Hardy was tried for constractive treason, and, to celebrate his ac- quittal, an anniversary was held. When the health of one of ‘the Jurors was drunk one of the Jurors, mot 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 really guilty of treason when so many words were used to tell it and such a long time to prove it (laugh. I have made up my mind to convict a man of hig! treason when the case is proved, but I won’t be tor letting an Attorney General ransack pe etete in order to make out acase.” (A laugh.) The case was owe 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 stript it of its verbage---he would, as a Barrister--for, though I am notin my wig and gewn, I'll stand up for the Bar still---have stated a plain case to the ory would have laid his hend on it---he would have what was the time---the date-—the circumstances--- but he leaves it all to yourselves to solve---it is good enough for you! (Loud laughter ) But no con- iracy or secrecy was even imputed, and you have, therefore, nothing Jeft but conjecture-~nothing to suppose happened in private---the entire is before you, and, therefore, I st.nd on this---if you know it all--there never was a case in which the Attorney General was so little entitled to call a Jury to spell out something beyond the case----something which you are left to guess at. Gentlemen, you may 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 somethin; dark and atrocious would come out—that they hed a clue to everything. [ do solemnly assure you Persons to commit a | or place, or position, but first, the accounts of meetings held, and next, the evidence of that fact from volumes of newspapers. We shall consider each of these by itself, but would you allow me to make this observation? As there is nothing secret, and as you know all, I ask you to consider what would tempt me, an old lawyer, to make a public spnsmancy and induce the Irish people to enter into itt {boasted that I kept the people from the meshes of the law—that was one of my boasts. You heard it read twenty times from mv speeches; and does one of you believe, under these circum- stances, that I entered into a public conepiracy ? If there was anything secret you must say the old lawyer saw it, and is there one of you can believe that? You may not have as favorable an opinion of me as those who know me bet- ter. You only know me and my principles through the medium of calumny—but there is not one of you who can think me such an idiot as to ruin the cause nearest my heart—the darling object of my ambition—the cause for which I refused to goon the bench—the cause for which 1 refused to go on the bench—the cause for which I refused the office of Master of the Rolls. There is, 1 know, a ques- tion whether or not I retused the office of Chief Ba- ron, but there is none of my refusal to be Master of the Rolls. 1 refused the dignity and leisure of the benech—with an accumulation of years upon my head—I know the short time I have to labor in my vocation. That eternity, and the approach of that judgment which will consign me to an eternity of weal or woe, cannot be ine poned ; and do you, can you, imagine I would be go cruel as to en- ter into such a conspiracy—into such a gross ab- surdity! Irish gentlemen, put your hands to your hearts and say—dves one of you believe that ? Par- don me if I will make too free with you ; but spell out the eleven hours, using your charges as you may, and say, can you find me guilty of a foul con- spiracy %. Your verdict may strike me—it may shor- ten the few days Ihave yet before me—but it can- not destroy the consciousness which I feel that I am entitled to your verdict. But, perhaps, gentle- men, the Attorney General wants you to believe that I am a conspirator, without Knowing it, like aman that has stumbled into a pit in the dark. Batit all occurred in the open day, and I could not fall without knowing it. you believe anything you must believe that I am a conspirator, without my own knowledge, and there can be no guilt with- out a guilty intention. But I scorn to rest my de- fence upon a paltry point flaw! The thing is too plain, too simple, to require it. It is a new inven- tion on this side of the water; some person here has been dreaming of it ; this imaginary conspiracy is now resting on your minds without the slightest particle of reality. Would slavery have been abol- ished 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 biuter and unrelenting enemies: There never was a more formidable party than the West Indian party in England, and they might have taken the newspapers, and from the reports given of their proceedings have, with equal propriety, have prose- cuted them for a conspiracy—they should have in- dicted Wilberforce, who bas written his name upon the most prominent pages of history, as the strenuous advocate of freedoin —and who wiil never be forgotten, whilst a feeling in favor of humanity exists— he should have been ind:eted for a conspiracy. The venerable Clarkson, , is yet alive, and upon the same principle should still be prosecuted asa conspirator. Convictue, and he is not free in his old age, Don’t take away, gen- tl-men, the only hope we have of giving expreesion to our wishes, our wante, or our grievancer, and drive from ns the right of free discussion By the names of Wilberforce, and Clarkson, I conjure you to dismiss trom your box every attempt to shut out free dweussion In reterence to the abolition of slavery, 1 rejoice to say that was a szareriu that movement; «ad though humble ard ungilted as I um, | had the honor to belon; to that conepiracy by which slavery wasabelish d. I certainly did pour out the lava of my indignation upon the supporters of that vile system It this doctrine of conepiracy had sooner been found our, [ suppose we would ut the present day sre the eame cruelty andferccity carrird ou towards the negro population ; but it was the Heaven-descended inspiration of bold humeni- ty thut hus established the treedom of man. What weuld become of the reform.io parliament? Would it have been given us ag far as we have got it, or would we now be promised another reform by the Queen's soeech, had it not been for these large public meetings? For Catholic emancipation, before it was granted, we held equally nih meetings, and there was an eminent lawyer at that day—and I hope the attorney-General will not imagine that 1 mean him any disrespect when I say that he was | his superior—who had as strong an antipathy to that measure—I mean William Saurin. He -watch- ed us, und he was defeated on one trial that he pro- secuted; but he never thought of turning it into a prosecution for a conspiracy. 1 was tried at that time for words I had spoken; but I was never tried fora conspiracy; we had our parish meetings, asd our county meetings; on the 17th of January, 1829, there was what I may terma simultaneous meeting held in every parish in heland at the same moment; and would not that have been evidence of a con- spiracy, if what you ure now called upon to believe is sufficient evidence? Upon that day every parish resolved that they would never give up the agita- tion of the question until their object was accom- plished. It was reserved, however, tor the present Attorney-General to discover that those meetings were evidence of a conspiracy. There is a very serious question for discussion at present in England ; that question is for the purpose of obtaining cheap bread for the poor.~I am not going to enter into that subject now, gentlemen, al- though I am fully prepared to doso. We have been charged with having collected money: the Anti Corn Law League and the Ai lavery Society have both collected money also; and the Anti- Corn Law League have been charged with incen- diarism, and other aegal acts, which I am far from charging them with; but similar charges have ne- ver been attributed to us. Is this precedent to be sent over to England, and the agitation to obtain cheap bread for the poor to be turned into a vile conspiracy? No, gentlemen, the Englishmen are safe. There will not be a juror sworn in England to try the case. 1] was mocking and jesting with you when I said Englishmen were in danger. They will be protected by their own Jury, and all that we ask or require is, that our Jury will protect us. In this mode will redress for the English people be worked out, despite of th who are now uneasy in the enjoyment of their-monopolies under the accumulate rege of public opinion. A celebrated French author says—and I do not quote him in spereval of the conduct of the French. for no man abhors more sincerely and more intensely than I do their infidel republicanism—one of their great men has said that “ you cannot make a revo- Jution with rose water.” He would effect it by blood. I, on the cx ry, by the peaceful influence of public opinion nploying not rose water, but genuine Irish spi as one of my ingredients (Laughter) I come now to consider the ma- chinery of the evidence brought forward to suatain this indictment. There have been two classes o} evidence—if lam not wrong in using the expres- that no legs than seven: gentlemen were pointed out as betraying me. Such a mun, it is said, was seen going into Mr. Kemmis’s office—another was at the Castle—a third was seen going into the house of a certain barrister, near your residence in Merrion.square. ‘Do not associate friends,” said he to me, ‘with Mr. so-and-so, he is a traitor—he will betray you;” and thus no less than seven suf- fered in their character exceedingly. My answer wae ey have nothing to betray—much good may do them if they go tothese places. If they in- vent theywill be paid well fer it. | ask you, gentle. men, did you not expect, when empannelled in that box, to hear something which you did not know before—some plot discovered—some 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, you have not been disappointed; but it you entertained the epeceton, ‘was ever disappoint- ment so complete 1 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 that 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 80 many—van- ished, nothiag to disclose, nothing discovered? It would have been the duty of the government, and they have plenty of resources to purchase true tes- timony—to prove a conspiracy, f it existed. We cannot.conceal from ourselvas that this is a kind of ministerial crime—that the questionis, 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 litle. That is the question. You perceive then, what interest in forwarding every part of the case—thefstrong stake- nterest they have to dis- cover the real facts existing—-the anxietyto discover and point out a conspiracy; tofollowthe conspirators into theircaves and recesses, and bring their diabo- lical acts to the light of day. No man could have a stronger motive in conducting the prosecution than the Attorney General. No man has go total- discover. It is impossible to answer it otherwise. Kvery motive which can influence power was brought to play—all the influence and authority of wealth—situations in the excise and customs —in the pellet 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 have no- thing now, let us see what the old is. The life, they say, of an oid coat is a new button (a laugh) ~ let us see if they stitched any old almanack on the old story read, There is nothing but repeal demonstrations. They rely on two things—first the meetings, and next the newspapers—to spell out the indefinable conspiracy which existed inthe imagination. They give you neither date, or time, sion—submitted to you by the Attorney General— monster meetings and newspaper publications, I will take up the consideration of each separately. lam not here to deny that those meetings took place. admit that they were multitudinous, va- tying in their numbers from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands. It has been said somewhere that the magnitude alone of a meeting makes it illegal. I will not discuss that question; I do not attach so much weight to the opinion as to consider it worthy of discussion. I admit thet those meetingstook place—that they were most numerously attended, and I boast of it. T ask was there any life of man, woman or child, or even of any animal, lost at any of those meet- ings? You will unanimously answer, no, not one. lask, was any man, woman or child struck, detain- ed orassaulted ? and you will again answer, no, not one. Pete person injured? not one. Was there any femafe, young or old, treated with indelicacy ot speech or conduct? not one. Was there a single shilling’s worth of property destryyed or injuredin any way? Notone. Oh, yes, there was I exaggerate that—a policeman who attended at Mullaghmast in colored clothes, swore that there was ferocious on- slaught of people from Carlow ; he swore positive- ly that they committed violence on some ginger- bread stands. (Laughter.) Yes, exactly the amount of all the acts of violence committed at those meetings, was the overturning of a ginger bread stand. (RKenewsd laughter.) This, I sub- mit, bespeaks a foregone conclusion, for if any other act of violence had been committed, it could have been rence proved. The poor woman who suffered the loss by the violence fae not compl.in- ed, and the whole amount of mischief done at those meetings resolves itself into a “ferocious onslaught” —these were the words of the witness—upon a gingerbread etand (laughter). Yee, it is ridiculous ; but it is the prosecution that is so. There was no violence at those meetings—no tumult—no battery nor aseault—no injury to property—no violation of good morals, or even of good manners—and it is curious that not a single accident—not even a ca- sual accident—occurred at any one of them. Yet there are persons who tell me that I have infuriated ly failed. And why? Because he had nothing tu | this people, tnat I have excited them till they are ready to rebel. They whose conduct has been characterised by the ubsence of mischief to person or property, whose mutual courtesy has been so re- markable that not even an accident occurred at iheir most crowded gatherings! The grown matrons were there with their daughters; the young mo- thers with their infants, and each, as she passed in safety through the multitude, felt. that her own weaknes, and the helplessness o her own infant, were her best protection. Oh, it was de lighttul. to. see how the crowd gave way and formed a rampart of protection for the mothers and the children Yes! for the bro- thers and fathers of those women were there, and so help me Heaven !—no, | withdraw the solemn- ity of asseveration, but no more emphatic proof could have been exhibited of determination to ob- serve peace, quietness, and perfect tranquility, than in the electrical feeling which sent the mother and the nurse, in the full assurance of safety—that elec- trical spirit of mutual kindliuees in whose pure at- joessbero all was gentleness and courtesy. I turn boldly and proclaim that there is not in the world anothercountry where this could occur. The peo- Re of Ireland are oppressed und impoverished.— ‘hey have been subjected te much eontumely.— The Times described them asa “filthy and felo- nious multitude,” but I proudly repeat that amongst no other people could such scenes oceur. It may be said that! am making an admission; but they have been educated to it for forty y during the agitation for Catholic Emancipation, and susequent- ly during the agitation for the Repeal. have been sublimed into pacific determination, which, than Heaven, has not been ruffled in the slightest degree by. anything which has occurred in this Court. ‘They abide your verdict, and though it may be one which will disappoint them, there will be no violation of the law, no, whatever ma: be the fate ofjthe man whose glory it isto have ed- ucated the peeple to peaceable,legal, constitutional, and continuous exertion, I ask, now. has any one been intimidated by those meetings? It has been said that large meetings have a necessary tendency to intimidate. Now, gery could be easier than to prove this—they had all the magistracy of the neighborhood— those who still continued in the ma- gistracy—and much good may it do them—and whose continuance in the magietrac’ ves them hostile to Repeal—the Crown could have called e entry and upon the clergy of the Establish- et Ghupett “Ye had plenty of tesid le in pan- taloons and petticoats, who might have been pro- duced to establish intimidation, if any euch thing had occurred. It was his busines 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. Yet not one sueh witness has been produced. Why? because not one could conscien- ously swear that there has been anything apper- taining to intimidation. There was, t at, am- ple opportunity of proof, and the negation of such evidence speaks trumpet-tongued of the absence of any thing approaching to inumidation. There were in every neighborhood plenty of people inimical to Emancipation, and who regretted its passing—there were people desirous to put down the Repeal As- sociation—there were persons who had the misfor- tune to be at enmity with their neighbors—there were the clergy of the EstablishedChurch, witaes- ses bavend imputation—why was not a single wit- ness of any of those classes produced to prove the occurrence or the feeling of intimidation ? cause it was thoroughly certain that no such allegation could borne out; beeause no such intimidation had existense. Gentlemen of the Jury how does the case stand: Is it fairly put fore yout The police were on the ta- ble, they deposed to the iw of the meetings; they felt bound to swear that all was quiet, an that even the most timid had no occasion for fear. If those meetings were illegal, why was it that there was not ene mandate of autherity to put them down? There was no proclamauon which we treated with neglect—there was no ministerial in- terference treated with the slightest neglect or dis- regard—no public officer or remonstrance treated with anything but the utmost respect. If the meet- ings were dangerous why were they not proclaim- ed? They were proclaimed at last—but if they were dangerous why were they not proclaimed before? Yet we are called conspirators—it we are, were we not so twelve months ago? Gentlemen, we are branded asconspirators because we h@ve done our utmest to obey the law. Those meetings were tranquil—acknowledged so, and they had just come to a conclusion; there was to be an end of them andall the violent language which had 0 offended some parties was finished. But the meetings were notillegal, they were ippace slilesunborndedly so,and the Attorney General had put itin proef. Itisscarce- ly necessary for me to avow anything—it might be better for me to conceal—but I have nothing to conceal—I uvow the whole 39 meetings against me. The sbveepieat knew that these meetings were called, and I for one will not impute totheAt- torney General that he lay bye for the purpose of laying a trap. Ican say no such thing. 1 do not believe it possible, and I feel bound to do him the common justice of saying so. I feel furtner bound to tell you that that learned gentleman did not in- terfere, merely because he could not, and that be- cause he had no ground to stand upon I am told that Ihave used an equivocal word in saying these meetings were quiet by design. My lords, I re- peat it, I fully adopt the expression—that desi existed before it exists now, and, my lords, it will exist, notwithstanding any result of this trial. Ic is not from me, gentlemen, that the people have ained this knowledge—they have been taught by itter experience; their education has been so com- plete in_ this, that they cannot expect any amelio- ration of their condition with combin: Now, gentlemen, what evidence of a conspiracy have you? say none; but I leave it to you, upon your consciences, to say is there any evi- dence? You, gentlemen, have the responsi- bility upon your own shoulders—yoy must an- swer to your Maker tor the verdict you shall return, Now, gentlemen, I submit yee that there is no evidence before you at all. You have had nothii but newspaper evidence laid before yoo—Now submit to their lordships, that this is no evidence, unless a coumpiracy has been proved. There haa been no evidence laid before you but newspapere, und Igubmit that those newspapers are no evidence until the conspiracy is proved; which, apparently, cannot be done without them. Where, gentlemen is any proof bringing me in connexion with any of the aware pore 1 might, in law, appeal to their lordships, but I prefer to arpeal to you open the facts. Now, gentlemen,you will remember the evi- dence vite have before you; keepin mind that the Repeal Association distinctly disavewed that any newspaper was the organ. That wasa fac, and you have it in proof before you. Undoubtedly we sent newspapers to various individuals; but what does that amount to? Merely to this—that certain parties subscribe a certain sum of money to the As- sociation, and for that sum he desires that a certain paper may be sent him, and we doit. He selects is «wn paper, and we do not in any way attempt to control his judgment; but no paper has ever been the recognised organ of the Asgociation. The papers may have contained libels; but if they did, why did not the Attorney General prosecute them as such? The editors or propieters were liable to the law of libel. Why did not the Attorney Gene- ral bring them before a Jury for the offence, if he thought it was worth his while? Now,gentlemen, weare charged with inciting to violence, and what is the proof offered? You have had some garbled speeches of mine read to you; but do they prove any intention of mine to incite to violence? I ask ce is there one that does not inculcate peace? It has always been my greatest effort, and that has been laid before you by my prosecutors. Two nce have actuated me through life, and they have been put before the world. They have been inscribed upon your banners; and I avow them now. The first is that ‘He who commits a crime gives strength to the enemy.” I avow it boldly— f | it is mine. And the second is, that ‘‘ Whatever advantage we obtain it must be obtained without the shedding of one drop of blood.” Gent'emen that has been the theory of my whole life. I would rather forego any advantage than that one drop of human blood should be shed. Ihave said it fifty times~I have boasted of it--I have proclaimed it as loudly as ever public man proclaimed. it--I have stood alone sometimes in diselarming, in the most 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 of civil war, but in all other contingencies I have always said that not one single drop of human blood should be shed. Ii has ever been my pride during my political life,to avow this sentiment, and I would have abandoned, and 1 would now aban- don, the sacred cause of Repes| if one drop of hu- man blood was shed; I proclaimed this feeling on my part in the cause of Catholic emancipation Yes, I succeeded with emancipation by the mighty aid and power of that principle. Look, gentlemen of the jury, to the past history and progress of eman- cipation. Look to the settlement of that question. Not one drop of blood was 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 of blood has been shed! And is it right—is it wise to interrupt a man in such a peaceful career? Is it right or wise to interrupt a wno has ever laid down this princip'e ae the basis of his public con- duct? Is stright to come out and call that the con- duct of a conspirator, and to treat him like & man who had resorted to forcible means? Oh, gentle- mer, I belong to a Chris'ian persuxsion, the grand p inciple ef which is that no quantity of advantage —no quantity of benefit or advantage te she chareh, or to the state itself- no not even to Heaven itself, can be permitted to be esraed at the exper se of any crime whatever ; thatno moral offence can, not only be not justified, or even as much puiliated, by any amount of advantage to obtained; and if I have any co-believer in that box, | need not repeat that doctrine, because he will have professed that doc- trine himeelt. But why should I, a8 a Christian man, proclaim one thing and practice another? But, gen- tlemen of the Jury, you cannot believe it. No, the entire tenor ¢f my lite shows the sircerity with which Imrde the announcement, Ibave announced it over and over again—1 have anvounced it so often that 1 eey no circumstance of my life can leave you to doubt the sincerity of my avowal. My lord, ithes appeared eufficientlyin the Bewrepapetn publi lord, no man ever possessed 80 much ic confi- dence as thave. I say I possess it, und no mon ever possessed it so long, so unreservedly. I have obtained the confidence of the Roman Catholic laity of every class: yes, not only of those who are 1m poverty or distress, and look to a change, or to an amelioration of their condition, but I have ob- tained also the confidence of the higher classee— of the Catholic elergy, and of the episcopacy. J have obtained that confidence by the assertion of this principle, and by the sinecrity with which L have adhered to it; they know wiih what sincer-