between different classes of her Majesty's subjects, and especially to promote amongst her Majesty's subjects in Ireland feelings of ill-will and hostility against her Majesty's subjects in other parts of the United Kingdom, especially in England; and to excite discontent and disaffection amongst divers of her Majesty's subjects serving in the army; and to cause, and aid in causing, divers subjects to meet and assemble together in large numbers at various times and at different places, within Ireland, for the unlawful and seditious purpose of obtaining by means of the exhibition and demonstration of great physical force at such meetings, changes and alterations in the government laws and constitution as by law established; and to bring into hatred and disrepute the courts by law established in Ireland for the administration of justice, and to diminish the confidence of her Majesty's subjects in the administration of the law therein—with intent to induce her Majesty's subjects to withdraw the adjudication of their differences with, and claims upon, each other from the cognisance of the courts of law, and subject the same to the judgment and determination of other tribunals to be constituted and contrived for that purpose.

FOURTH COUNT.

For conspiring to raise and create discontent and disaffection amongst the Queen's subjects, and to excite such subjects to hatred and contempt of, and to unlawful and seditious opposition to the government and consti-tution; and also to stir up jealousies, hatred, and ill-will, between different classes of the subjects, and especially to promote amongst the subjects in Ireland, feelings of ill-will and hostility towards the subjects in other parts of the United Kingdom, and especially in England; and to cause, and aid in causing, divers subjects to meet and assemble in large numbers at various times and different places, in Ireland, for the unlawful and seditious purpose of obtaining, by means of the intimidation to be thereby caused, and by means of the exhibition and demonstration of great physical force at such meetings, changes in the government and constitution as by law established.

FIFTH COUNT.

For conspiring to raise and create discontent and disaffection amongst the subjects, and to excite the subjects to hatred and contempt of, and unlawful and seditious opposition to the government and constitution; and also to stir up jealousies, hatred, and ill-will, between different classes of the subjects, and especially feelings of ill-will and hostility against her Majesty's subjects in England.

SIXTH COUNT.

For conspiring to cause, and aid in causing, divers subjects to meet and assemble in large numbers, at various times, and at different places in

ABSTRACT OF INDICTMENT.

Ireland, for the unlawful and seditious purpose of obtaining, by the exhibition of great physical force at such meetings, changes and alterations in the government laws and constitution as by Law established.

SEVENTH COUNT.

For conspiring to cause, and aid in causing, divers subjects of the Queen to meet in large numbers, at various times and at different places in Ireland, for the unlawful and seditious purpose of obtaining, by means of the intimidation to be thereby caused, and by means of the exhibition of great physical force at such meetings, changes and alterations in the government, laws, and constitution of this realm as by law established; and especially by the means aforesaid, to bring about and accomplish a dissolution of the legislative union now subsisting between Great Britain and Ireland.

EIGHTH COUNT.

For conspiring to bring into hatred and disrepute the tribunals by law established in Ireland for the administration of justice, and to diminish the confidence of her Majesty's subjects in the administration of the law therein, with intent to induce the subjects to withdraw the adjudication of their differences with, and claims upon each other, from the cognisance of the tribunals by law established, and to submit the same to the judgment and determination of other tribunals, to be constituted and contrived for that purpose.

NINTH COUNT.

For conspiring to bring into hatred and disrepute the tribunals by law established in Ireland for the administration of justice; to diminish the confidence of her Majesty's subjects in Ireland in the administration of the law therein; and to assume and usurp the prerogative of the crown in the establishment of courts for the administration of the law.

TENTH COUNT.

For conspiring to bring into hatred and disrepute the tribunals by law established in Ireland, for the administration of justice; and to diminish the confidence of her Majesty's subjects in Ireland, in the administration of the law therein.

ELEVENTH COUNT:

For conspiring to cause and procure large numbers of persons to meet together in divers places, and at divers times, in Ireland; and by means of unlawful, seditious, and inflammatory speeches and addresses to be made and delivered at the said several places on the said several times, and also by means of publishing, and causing to be published to and amongst her Majesty's subjects divers unlawful and seditious writings and compositions, to intimidate the lords spiritual and temporal, and the commons of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, and thereby to effect and bring about changes and alterations in the laws and constitution of this realm as now by law established.

STATE TRIALS,

JANUARY 15, 1844.

The Chief Justice, and Judges Burton, Crampton, and Perrin, took their seats on the bench at five minutes past ten o'clock,

The Attorney General, Solicitor General, Sergeant Warren, Messrs. Brewster, Martley, Bennett, Freeman, Q. C., Holmes, Smyly, Baker, and Napier, appeared for the crown.

The following counsel attended for the traversers:—

ssrs. O'Hagan,

Messrs. Moore. Q. C., Sheil, Whiteside, M'Donough. "Tonahan, Fitzgibbon, Henn, Hatchell, Sir Colman O'Loghlen, and Close, Clements, M'Carthy, Moriarty, O'Hea, and Perrin.

The Crown Solicitor and his assistants, and Messrs Mahony, Cantwell, Gartlan, and Ford, the attorneys for the traversers were also in attend

ance.

The names of the traversers having been called over,

Mr. Cantwell-My lords, I was attorney for the Rev. Peter James Tyrrell, and I have to state to you that the reverend defendant has been summoned before the judge of judges. His soul and body are alike beyond the power of this court.

Mr. O'Connell and the other traversers entered the conrt about half past ten o'clock.

Clerk of the Crown-Crier, make proclamation for a jury. Gentlemen, answer to your names.

Several of the persons whose names were in the panel applied to be exempted on the ground of ill health, and gave evidence to support their application.

The Clerk of the Crown then proceeded to swear the jury, the traversers being all in court. Mr. O'Connell sat near his counsel, and wore his wig and gown. The following traversers sat at the side bar :-John O'Connell, M.P.; Thomas Steele, Dr. John Gray, Richard Barrett, T. M. Ray, Rev. Mr. Tierney, and Charles Gavan Duffy.

Clerk of the Crown- The book to James Hamilton, of Ormond quay. Sir Colman O'Loghlen handed in a challenge to the array on the part of Daniel O'Connell, inasmuch as the names of sixty persons declared to be qualified by the Recorder on the revision of the jurors' list were omitted.

Challenges were given in on the part of the several other traversers.

The Attorney General having required time to consider what course he would take, retired from court with the crown counsel. On their return into court he demurred to the challenge.

Sir Colman O'Loughlen was heard in support of the challenge.

Mr. Fitzgibbon, Q.C., followed on the same side. He proceeded to say that the court had decided that time should not be occupied by hearing counsel for each of the traversers, and if anything was particularly plain

B

in the jury law, it was evident from the anxiety the legislature evinced in framing the act, that special jurors should be fairly and properly constituted, so as to satisfy every individual in the country that justice would be fairly administered. The first thing the act required was, for the collectors to furnish proper lists to the clerk of the peace, and these lists were to be left for three weeks open for public inspection, that, names improperly placed on them should be struck out, and those omitted supplied. These lists should contain the names of all persons qualified, as the act directed, and that act contemplated that every man, woman, and child in the community was interested in their proper revision. We have had here instances of two persons who have been taken off this small panel for an error in their names, of which we are not accused, not because they are not the individuals summoned, but because their names are wrongly stated in the list, which shows that every person ought to have a correct copy of the list. The Attorney General has said that a mistake in this general list, if it was not well and properly constituted, which had not been done in this case, which has not been caused by the crown, should not affect the proceedings. Does he mean that this averment is any answer to the challenge? Would it be an answer if it was put on parchment. Even so I do not think it would. It has been said that there is some fraud on the part of whoever omitted those names, but the traversers do not shrink from endeavouring to find out who those parties are. If he (the Attorney General) chose to do so, he had an opportunity of trying to discover who those parties were, and whether there was any fraud committed or not, and it is no answer to our challenge that the fraud has not been committed by the sheriff or the crown. All persons accused of crime are entitled to be tried by a jury legally constituted in omnibus-it is no answer to give a person about to be tried, to say, "it has been illegally done, no doubt, but your accusers are no parties to it." Is that any answer any man of common sense ? It is, in my mind, no answer to him, nor are the crown to take advantage of a fraud which has been committed. Some individual, I care not who, has been dexterous enough to take away a portion of the list revised by the Recorder; it may be his footman-and, in consequence, 59 names have been omitted; near a tithe of the whole panel. I'll assume that it has been done by the Recorder's footman. Now what the Attorney General says is, if so he ought to be punished; but what does the law say? It says to the Recorder---you shall cause a correct general list to be made out and delivered; it does not say by what means, but you (the Recorder) shall do it. The question is did he cause that to be done? It is plain he did not; some person unknown to the crown, I won't say unknown to the Recorder, has suppressed a number of those names. He (the Recorder) should not have left those lists accessible to any one who would not take as much care of them as he would himself, but he has left them to the mercy of a person who has decimated them, by taking away one tithe of them. He could conceive many excuses he could give for not doing it. He might say that he was in a hurry, that he was going to London, that he could not stay here until he did his duty, but at all events he did not do his duty-at all events, the list he caused to be made out was not the list the law said he ought to cause to be made out. Now, he was in a hurry, or he was blind, he was

to