Debate in Parliament on the State of Ireland - The Last Conquest of Ireland (Perhaps)
« previous page | book contents | start of this chapter | next page »
much unlike that which exists with respect to the connection between Russia and Poland.
"I do say that on this question it is of the greatest importance that the proceedings which the government have taken should be beyond impeachment, and that they should have obtained a victory in such a way that that victory should not be to them a greater disaster than a defeat. Has that been the result (cheers)? First, is it denied that Mr O'Connell has suffered wrong? Is it denied that if the law had been carried into effect without those irregularities and that negligence which has attended the Irish trials, Mr O'Connell's chance of aquittal would have been better?—no person denied that. The affidavit which has been produced, and which has not been contradicted, states that twenty-seven Catholics were excluded from the jury-list (hear, hear, from Mr Shiel). I know that all the technicalities of the law were on the side of the Crown; but my great charge against the government is, that they have merely regarded this question in a technical point of view. We know what the principle of the law is in cases where prejudice is likely to arise against an alien, and who is to be tried de medietate linguae. Is he to be tried by twelve Englishmen? No; our ancestors knew that that was not the way in which justice could be obtained;—they knew that the only proper way was to have one-half of the jurymen of the country in which the crime was committed, and the other half of the country to which the prisoner belonged. If any alien had been in the situation of Mr O'Connell, that law would have been observed. You are ready enough to call the Catholics of Ireland 'aliens,' when it suits your purpose; you are ready enough to treat them as aliens when it suits your purpose; but the first privilege, the only advantage, of alienage, you practically deny them (hear, hear, and loud cheers)."
This orator also was a member of the Administration in 1848; and he did not utter any of his fine indignation at what was done then: of which I shall hereafter give some account. Bear in mind these fair and liberal protestations of Russell and Macaulay, until we come down four years later in this history.
The debate lasted more than a week. O'Connell listened to it; and, at last, amidst breathless silence, arose. He did not confine himself to the narrow ground of the prosecution, but reviewed the whole career of British power in Ireland, with bitter and taunting comments. As to the prosecution, he treated it slightly and contemptuously:—
"I have at greater length than I intended, gone through the crimes of England since the Union—I will say the follies of England. I have but little more to say; but I have in the name of the people of Ireland,—and I do it in their name,—to protest against the late prosecution (loud cries of hear, hear, hear). And I protest, first against the nature ...continue reading »
« previous page | book contents | start of this chapter | next page »
Page 50