Aug. 20th, 1843. the same purpose. These meetings, by their numbers and organization, and by the order and discipline with which they were assembled and marshalled, assumed the form of military demonstrations. Menace and intimidation were plainly their object, not political discussion. The language of the liberator and his friends was designed to alienate the minds of the people from the English government and nation. Englishmen were designated as "Saxons: their laws and rulers were denounced: Irishmen who submitted to the yoke, were slaves and cowards. Justice was to be sought in arbitration courts, appointed by themselves, and not in the constituted tribunals. To give battle to the English, was no uncommon theme of repeal oratory. "If he had to go to battle," said O'Connell, at Roscommon, "he should have the strong and steady tee-totallers with him: the teetotal bands would play before them, and animate them in the time of peril: their wives and daughters, thanking God for their sobriety, would be praying for their safety; and he told them there was not an army in the world that he would not fight, with his tee-totallers. Yes, tee-totalism was the first sure ground on which rested their hope of sweeping away Saxon domination, and giving Ireland to the Irish."1 This was not constitutional agitation, but disaffection and revolt. Oct. 8th, At length, a monster meeting having been announced to take place at Clontarf, near Dublin, the government issued a proclamation 2 to prevent it; and by necessary military precautions, effectually arrested the dangerous demonstration. The exertions of the government were seconded by Mr. O'Connell himself, who issued a no 1843. 1 Ann. Reg., 1843, p. 234; Ibid., 1844, p. 335, et seq. Trial of Mr. O'Connell; summing up of chief justice, &c. 2 The proclamation stated "that the motives and objects of the persons to be assembled thereat, are not the fair legal exercise of constitutional rights and privileges, but to bring into hatred and contempt the government and constitution of the United Kingdom, as by law established, and to accomplish alterations in the laws and constitution of the realm, by intimidation, and the demonstration of physical force." tice abandoning the meeting, and used all his influence to prevent the assembling of the repealers. O'Connell peal leaders. Jan. 15th, This immediate danger having been averted, the government resolved to bring Mr. O'Connell and his Trial of Mr. confederates to justice, for their defiance of the and the relaw; and on the 14th of October, Mr. O'Connell, his son, and eight of his friends were arrested and held to bail on charges of conspiracy, sedition, and the unlawful assembling of large 'numbers of persons for the purpose of obtaining a repeal of the Union by intimidation and the exhibition of physical force.1 From this moment Mr. O'Connell moderated his language, abjured the use Nov. 2d, of the irritating term of "Saxon," exhorted his 1843. followers to tranquillity and submission; and gave tokens of his readiness even to abandon the cause of repeal itself.2 At length the trial was commenced; but, at the out- Trial comset, a painful incident, due to the peculiar condi- menced, tion of Ireland, deprived it of much of its moral 1844. weight, and raised imputations of unfairness. The old feud between Catholic and Protestant was the foundation of the repeal movement: it embittered every political struggle; and notoriously interfered with the administration of justice. Neither party expected justice from the other. And in this trial, eleven Catholics having been challenged by the crown, the jury was composed exclusively of Protestants. The leader of the Catholic party, the man who had triumphed over Protestant ascendency, was to be tried by his foes. After a trial of twenty-five days, in which the proceedings of the agitators were fully disclosed, Mr. O'Connell was found guilty upon all, or parts of all, the counts of the indictment; and the other defendants (except Father Tierney) May 30th, on nearly all. Mr. O'Connell was sentenced to a year's imprisonment, to pay a fine of 2000l., and to give 1 Ann. Reg., 1843, p. 237. 2 Ibid., p. 238. 8 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., lxxiii. 435; lxxvi. 1956, &c. 1844. 8 security for good behavior for seven years. The other de fendants were sentenced to somewhat lighter punishments; and Mr. Tierney was not called up for judgment. The writ of error. Mr.' O'Connell was now old, and in prison. Who can wonder that he met with compassion and sympathy? His friends complained that he had been unfairly tried; and the lawfulness of his conviction was immediately questioned by a writ of error. Many who condemned the dangerous excesses of the repeal agitation, remembered his former services to his country, his towering genius, and rare endowments; and grieved that such a man should be laid low. After four months' imprisonment, however, the judgment of the court below was reversed by the House of Lords, on the writ of error, and the repealers were once more at liberty. The liberator was borne from his prison, in triumph, through the streets of Dublin. He was received with tumultuous applause at meetings, where he still promised a repeal of the Union: his rent continued to be collected but the agitation no longer threatened danger to the state. Even the miscarriage of the prosecution favored the cause of order. If one who had defied the government of England could yet rely upon the impartial equity of its highest court, where was the injustice of the hated Saxon? And having escaped by technical errors in the indictment, and not by any shortcomings of the law itself, O'Connell was sensible that he could not again venture to transgress the bounds of lawful agitation. Failure of the tion. Henceforth the cause of repeal gradually languished and died out. Having no support but factious violence, repeal agita- working upon general discontent and many social maladies, it might indeed have led to tumults, bloodshed, and civil war, but never to the coercion of the government and legislature of England. Revived a few years later by Mr. Smith O'Brien, it again perished in an abortive and ridiculous insurrection.1 Conclusion of repeal agitation, 1848. Mr. Smith 1 Ann. Reg., 1848, p. 95; Chron., p. 95. 1 During the repeal agitation in Ireland, other combinations, in both countries, were not without peril to the Orange peace of society. In Ireland, Catholics and Prot- lodges. estants had long been opposed, like two hostile races; and while the former had been struggling to throw off their civil disabilities, to lessen the burden of tithes, to humble the Protestant Church, to enlarge their own influence, and lastly, to secure an absolute domination by casting off the Protestant legislature of the United Kingdom, the latter had combined, with not less earnestness, to maintain that Protestant ascendency, which was assailed and endangered. So far back as 1795, Orange societies had been established in Ireland, and particularly in the north, where the population was chiefly Protestant. Early in the present century they were extended to England, and an active correspondence was maintained between the societies of the two kingdoms. As the agitation of the Catholics increased, the confederation expanded. Checked, for a time, in Ireland, together with the Catholic Association, by the Act of 1825, it assumed, in 1828, the imposing character of a national institution. The Duke of Cumberland was inaugurated, in London, as grand master: commissions and warrants were made out under the great seal of the order: office-bearers were designated, in the language of royalty, as "trusty and well-beloved:" large subscriptions were collected; and lodges founded in every part of the empire, whence delegates were sent to the grand lodge. Peers, members of the House of Commons, country gentlemen, magistrates, clergy, and officers in the army and navy, were the patrons and promoters of this organization. The members were exclusively Protestants: they were admitted with a religious ceremony, and taught secret signs and pass-words. In the following year, all the hopes of Orangemen were suddenly dashed, and the objects of the institution frustrated, by the surrender of the Protestant cita 2 1 Infra, Chap. XVI. (Ireland). 2 Commons' Report, 1835, p. vi.-x. but del by the ministers of the crown. Hitherto their loyalty had scarcely been exceeded by their Protestant zeal; now the violence and folly of some of their most active, but least discreet members, brought imputations even upon their fidelity to the crown. Such men were possessed of the most extravagant illusions. It was pretended that the Duke of Wellington was preparing to seize upon the crown, as military dictator; and idle plots were even fomented to set aside the succession of the Duke of Clarence, as insane, and the prospective claims of the infant Princess Victoria, as a female and a minor, in order that the Duke of Cumberland might reign, as a Protestant monarch, over a Protestant people.1 Treason lurked amid their follies. Meanwhile, the organization was extended until it numbered 1500 lodges compris ing 220,000 Orangemen in Ireland; and 381 lodges in Great Britain, with 140,000 members. There were thirty Orange lodges in the army at home, and many others in the colonies,2 which had been held without the knowledge of the commanding officers of regiments. Parliamentary inquiries, 1835. Secret as were the proceedings of the Grand Orange Society, the processions of its lodges in Ireland, and its extensive ramifications elsewhere, could not fail to arouse suspicion and alarm; and at length, in 1835, the magnitude and dangerous character of the organization were fully exposed by a committee of the House of Commons. It was shown to provoke animosities, to interfere with the administration of justice, and to endanger the disciOrange lodges pline of the army. Mr. Hume urged the necescondemned, sity of prompt measures for suppressing Orange and other secret associations in the army; and so fully was the case established, that the House concurred in an address to the king, praying him to suppress political in the army, 1835. 1 Hans. Deb., xxxi. 797, 807; Ann. Reg., 1836, p. 11. 2 Commons' Report, 1835, xi.-xv., xxvii.; Ann. Reg., 1835, chap. xii.; Martineau's History, ii. 266-275. 8 Report, p. xviii. |