MORE OF O'CONNELL'S INCONSISTENCIES.

AFTER a month's reflection and study, Mr. O'CONNELL has pro- duced another Letter for the readers of the Spectator: It is not quite so pleasant as the last; but it is equally curious, and a great deal longer. The truth must be told, Mr. O'CONNELL, among his -various acquirements, does not possess the art of writing con- cisely. Our correspondent is essentially an orator ; and oratory delights in amplification—in making " much ado about nothing," or little things to appear great.

TO THE SPECTATOR.

Merrion Square, Dublin, 8th December 1,7,33.

Sin—The state of the controversy between us is just this : you having more than once adopted an unfounded charge made • by others against me of political inconsistency, at length declared that I was ready to abandon all or any public principle at my-caprice or for my interest. Such was substantially your charge against me ; a grievous mid de- grading charge against any public man.

I immediately denied the truth of -that charge. I, in terms free friar disrespect, but distinct and firm, called on you for your proof:. I ex- pected you would either bring forward those proofs, or retract the ac- cusation.

You took sicklier of these courses : you retracted not the charge— you did not bring forward the proofs—you only promised that when you were at leisure you would search for them.

I submit to your more impartial judgment, that it would have been more consistent with that equity and fair dealing which would, I pre- sume, have been adopted in any other man's case but mine, to have first collected proofs, and siert made the accusation. • Reversing the order, andfirst making the charge, and next looking for evidence is— I say it with all becoming diffidence—not the most correct mode of proceeding.

Here the case rested between us; and would probably have so rested for ever, because I suspect your leisure to search -for proofs would 'never arrive. " Sed Diis aliter visum." One of. the "accursed," of :the ". Ames Damnies" of literature, a .nameless scribe in the Cour.ier newspaper, came to your aid. He. took up the task, as you expreis the 'thing., con amore; which means in plain English, with considerable .ma- lignity, and furnished you with no less than •twelite—counts we call them—in a bill of indictment against me. for the crime. of political in- consistency. You immediately published, these twelve charges: You adopted the far greater part of them ; indeed,. I think I may say, all but one ; that one you yourself knew could not be true to the extent; in 'which it was made. In fact, that charge is still more false thaw ,yon. could have imagined.

You headed the entire, and gave them the title of " O'CONNELVIS INCONSISTENCIES."

So stands the controversy between us at present. The.next stage is this : I utterly deny the inconsistencies imputed to me—I deny them one and all—I assert that the case. is made out against me in each and every of theSe charges by means solely of distinct and unequivocal false- hoods.

. You have deemed it right to publish this long catalogue of " Incon- sistencies" against 'me. I appeal to you seriously, whether it-would not be the most unjust thing imaginable to refuse me the means of con- futing those charges. I therefore think I have a clear right to ask for the insertion of this letter in your Paper.; L. however, content myself with declaring that I will accept of that insertion .as a favour. There shall be no discourtesy between us originating with me. I will be is brief as I possibly can, not using one superfluous word- I come at once to the charges.

Let us see. The first is in these words-

" First (although somewhat out of order in point of dote), see rtfer to one q' this gent!em,ti. a ,:peeehes, delivered two years ago at the' C0171 Exelarage, in which he ricsi,pazted consistency as a rascally phrase,' and expresSyd- his sups enie cot:too:pi' for it." •

I deny it, Sir. It is not only not true, but it is absurd: No man in his senses-could express contempt for consistency generally. _ I sholild be, what I think I am not—a foul—if I could either-despise or praise consistency generally ; because, it is plain to the commonest under- standing that consistency is a great virtue or a great vice, accordisqg tc. the subject-matter on which that consistency is exercised. Consistency in truth mid goodness is the perfection of -virtue ;. consistency 'in error and crime is the greatest aggravation of both the one and the other. There is, I know, a noble consistency of patriotisfn. There is also—I have experienced its attacks—a "rascally consistency" of falsehood and 'calumny.

The charge is absurd--but it is totally false. The accuser gives no "ear-mark "- to the speech he pretends to allride to, save_ that it WAS spoken at "the Corn Exchange; two years ago." To tiny one ac- quainted even in a slight degree with the investigation of evidence, the want of a more accurate description of the.snench adduced—" the day it was spoken the subject of the speech "—" the object of the meeting"—" the very words "—the absence of all of these would con.. vince him that the accuser was a mere inventor and fabribithr, and did not quote from any existing document. But I will not rest My'de-

Buser with any foundation whatsoever for his first calumny. thousand pounds a year ! ! ! that is all. . .

. This first charge, therefore, will be.declared by every honest and iin- 5th. "He escorted his Majesty to Kingstown "—quite untrue. I did either would not submit to his dictation, or bade defiance to his slander." paces.

. should be built for George the Fourth ; promised that a million should be raised for that purpose ; pledged himself to give one thousand _pounds a year from his own income towards that object; escorted his Majesty to

Perhaps, since the world began, there never were so many untruths no getting those who out down their names to pay their subscriptions. strung together in a single paragraph. I would give any money for one Nay, I persevered until after all hope was extinct ; nor did I abandon view of the "animal " who wrote that paragraph; what an accomplished the plan of a palace until we found it impossible to procure from one —! but no—I return to the charge. of the then Judges the sum of thirtyguineas, which he had affixed to his I have divided this charge into the topics it contains. The first, my name while the King was here. conduct in the Catholic cause ; the second, my conduct when and after I then, and not till then, gave up the palace in despair, and left the

the late King was in Dublin. bridge-builders to complete their plan ; having first paid in my own sub- As to the first part of the charge. It is, in the first place, utterly scription. The bridge has since been built. There is, therefore, no- untrue, and the very contrary of the fact, that I was guilty of tiny thing more untrue than the assertion that I forgot any promise of mine,

" inconsistencies" in my management of or conduct in' the Catholic or declined to fulfil it.

struggle. The truth is directly the reverse. I persevered for twenty- 9th. "He, not long after the Royal departure, inveighed against his Ma-

five long years of strife—of base calumny and personal peril—in the jesty in language which we cannot venture to transcribe." This, indeed, undeviating path of petition and of constitutional agitation ; I per- would establish me guilty of an inconsistency ; but it does no such severed from a beginning with small means ; I accumulated a nation thing. Why ? because it is totally false. • On the contrary, the fact

around me, and rendered success no longer doubtful. is, that I was reproached for years and years after the King's departure It is equally false, and, indeed, emphatically the contrary of the from Ireland, with being in the habit of speaking too favouraisly of the truth, that I disgusted and deterred from an alliance with me the King. I was taunted with my complacency, not only in prose but even Catholic gentry. On the contrary, I succeeded in obtaining, or, I in "immortal verse." But the fact is, before Emancipation, abuse of may well say, extorting Emancipation, simply because I bad already GEORGE the Fourth would have been such bad policy, that the enemies

succeeded in combining with me, and in cooperating with my exer- of religious liberty would gladly have availed themselves of any such lions, the entire body of the Catholics of Ireland—clergy, nobility, abuse to render the King more desperate in his opposition. gentry, mercantile classes, farmers, labourers, and artisans. It is part I do not see what delicacy the accuser could have in quoting as a of history, that Catholic Ireland, preparatory to emancipation, ex- matter of reproach to me, any invective I used against GEORGE the bibited a glorious spectacle of the moral combination of all classes and Fourth. If even this most sensitive gentleman—how sensitive Mr. all orders, from which all dissension and difference of opinion were must be !—was unwilling to quote the invective itself, he ' excluded : an unity of national action, hitherto unexampled, and of surely might have referred to the speech by date and subject-matter. which, I much fear, there will be few imitations. Yet why dwell on the circumstances which prove this charge to be And here is the man who principally brought about this, which has false ? I assert distinctly, that it is false in all its parts.

been often called by others " a moral miracle," calumniated by a Thus, in this second charge, there are no less than eleven falsehoods. nameless scribe, as having disgusted and dismissed the Catholic body ! Every distinct proposition in it is false, material whether they be or I will not, Sir, consent to be stripped of my Well-earned laurels. Be- immaterial. My scoundrel accuser cannot tell truth even by accident. fore my time, the Catholic aristocracy were almost always .hostile to Would I could discover who he is ! It is, indeed, discreditable in the the popular movements for religious liberty. JOHN KEoun—a man Courier newspaper to conceal the name of this " egregious liar ;" but celebrated in our village tale of incipient emancipation—lie who, in what can I expect from an English newspaper, in any case in which - 1790, 91, 92, and 93, wielded not the " fierce democracy" of the Ca- the fame of the advocate for Irish nationality is involved?

tholics, but its then timid and humble population, was not only not There are thus eleven falsehoods in this second charge. joined by the Catholic aristocracy, but was actually and directly op- First. It is false that I was guilty of any inconsistencies in conducting posed by them. Of that aristocracy, not less than sixty nine of the the Catholic cause. On the contrary, I conducted that cause in one principal nobility and gentry actually drew up, signed, and published, a consistent course of political conduct, which commenced with the - manifesto, directed to the Government, stating that they did not desire feeblest resources and ended in the most complete and unequivocal emancipation—that they were contented to remain as they were. The success. slavesl—the paltry slaves 1 I, Sir, had to contend with that spirit. I Second. It is false to the last degree of falsehood, that I disgusted was the principal framer of the Catholic Association—I did almost all and alienated the Catholic aristocracy. On the contrary, it was I its business in the Select Committees—I did the far greater part of its who for the first time conciliated and combined that aristocracy with public business—and the result was, that we combined into unity of the people, and rendered both, by that combination, quite irresistible. action ALL, ALL the Catholic people, lords and commoners, clergy Third. It is false that when GEORGE the Fourth was in Dublin, I and laity, and succeeded by means of that combination. procured any meeting at the Exchange relating to a public testimonial to After this, is it not too bad to be charged with having disgusted and him. On the contrary, the meeting for that purpose was procured by divided those that I conciliated and combined ? But let us proceed. the nobility, Liberal and Orange, both parties disliking me. . The next topic of calumny is the King's visit to Dublin. I will take Fourth. It is false that I proposed to .build a palace for the King; each allegation by itself, and show its futility. Allow me to number that proposal having come from Conservatives of the highest class and

them— grade—Lord CARBERY and Colonel Cuairx—over whom I could not 1st. "He procured a meeting to be held at the Exchange"—quite have any influence.

untrue. The meeting was held at the nomination of the Lord Mayor. FO. It is false that I promised that a million should be raised for It was procured by a requisition signed by near thirty noblemen and the purpose of building such palace. No such promise ever having Protestant Bishops. The Duke of LEINSTER, the Earl of ENNIS- been given by me to any person, and indeed no person having ever ILILLEN, Lord FARNHAM, Dr. FRENCH, the Protestant Archbishop required of me any such promise.

' of Tvam, &c. &c. were the leading requisitionists. My name was, as Sixth. It is false that I pledged myself to give one thousand pounds N ought • to be, low, very low down on the requisition. It is, there- a year towards that object. The fact being that I pledged myself to fore, as variant from the -truth as any thing Can be, to say that I pro- no more than twenty gtuneas a year,—which I would have readily paid. : eared that meeting. Here the real character of my accuser peeps forth. He hasa fact never . 9d: "Heproposed a palace should be built for George the Fourth"— denied—why should it?—to the extent of twenty guineas : lie at once ' quite untrue. The proposal respecting the palate was moved by Lord converts it into one thousand pounds! CLitimitaY ; seconded byp Colonel CUFFE. There were three plans for Seventh. It is false that I. escorted GEORGE the Fourth to Kings- a national testimonial en witted to the meeting. The one was for a town. 'lid not escort hint at all on that occasion. fence on, that point alone. I have taken all possible pains to enable Me to say, with the utmost confidence, that this Charge is a wilful fabri-

column, the second a palace, the third a bridge. I supported the second during the debate ; but it is not true that the proposal was mine. It

eation—as indeed they all are. was, as I have said, proposed by Lord CARBERRY, with whom I was The only " ear-mark," as I have said, to the speech is, that it was very slightly acquainted ; seconded by Colonel CUFFE, a gentleman, I spoken " two years ago, at the Corn Exchange." rhis was written believe, I never saw before that day or since, and never, spoke to in my about the 10th or 11th of November 1833. Well, two years ago ought life. See, then, how false it is to make me the procurer of the meet- to mean some time hi November 1831. But 1 will not stand upon ing and the proposer of the palace ! that; I have thrown in the entire year 1831, and the first six months Scl. "He promised that a million should be raised for that purpose" of 1832; I have procured the files of the Morning Register newspaper, —again a pure invention. I never made any such promise. and of the Pilot, the two papers which contain the fullest and most 4th. " He pledged himself to give one thousand pounds a year from his accurate reports of my speeches ; I have waded through—ah wo is own income for that purpose"—totally untrue. I did, indeed, make a me !—all the speeches I made at the Corn Exchange during the eigh- pledge to give an annual sum out of ray income, but it was an annual teen months I allude to ; and now I say, without fear of contradiction, sum of twenty guineas-221. 15s. of the then Irish currency—and no that there is not.one of those speeches which can furnish my vile ac- more ! The vile accuser turns twenty guineas a year into only one partial man to be, not only false, but frivolous and vexatious. not escort his Majesty at all that day. He was in the morning in the Now, Sir, for the second charge. It is longer, and gives me, there- county of Wicklow. I rode with some gentlemen to Kingstown, where fore, more advantages; because it is more specific and contains more we remained until the King's arrival. I did not see him at all until his assertions. I know how to grapple with it. All I desire is, that my arrival at Kingstown. accusers should be specific. , Here it is : . 6th. " He followed him (literally) into the sea, in order M present him " Secondly. We might detail the numerous inconsistencies by which, through- with a laurel crown." This is so circumstantially false, that it must be out the whole of his struggle for Catholic fleedom, he disgusted the gentry called literally a lie. I did not follow the King at all ; nor did I go of that persuasion, and deterred from an alliance with hint every man who nearer the water, when presenting the laurel crown, than about twenty Such is the first part of the second charge, quite unconnected with 7th. " He knelt in the water "—totally untrue. I presented the crown the remainder. It proceeds— to the King in a tent, the nearest part of which to the water was at " But we will not go further back than the visit of George the Fourth to • least twenty paces from the water's edge. I presented it at the end of Dublin in the year 1621. On that occasion, when his illiljestys expedition the tent furthest from the water, in as dry a place as ever King stood to Ireland was accompanied with very little English popularity, in conse- upon. I, of course, knelt on one knee in presenting the crown; but quenee of the recent ti ial of Queen Caroline, Mr. 0' Connell's conduct so far is it from being true that I was guilty of any unbecoming sers excited something more than surprise ecen amongst his warmest admirers. vility, that I did not even kiss the hand which the King held out to me He procured a meeting to be held at the Exchange; proposed a palace for that purpose. 8th. " He forgot his promises "—quite untrue. I made no promise,

save that of paying twenty guineas a year as my mite towards building

Kingstown ; followed him (literally) into the sea, in order to present him a palace; and so far was I from forgetting that promise, that I was one with a crown of laurel; hnelt in the water ; forgot his promises ; never of .the very, very few who attended the committee after the King's depar- dreamed of the palace; and, not long after the Royal departure, inveighed tare. There were plenty to attend whilst he was here ; but the moment against his Majesty in language which we cannot venture to transcribe.' he was gone, there was no getting the subscribers to meet—there was

Perhaps, since the world began, there never were so many untruths no getting those who out down their names to pay their subscriptions. strung together in a single paragraph. I would give any money for one Nay, I persevered until after all hope was extinct ; nor did I abandon —! but no—I return to the charge. of the then Judges the sum of thirtyguineas, which he had affixed to his I have divided this charge into the topics it contains. The first, my name while the King was here.

the late King was in Dublin. bridge-builders to complete their plan ; having first paid in my own sub- As to the first part of the charge. It is, in the first place, utterly scription. The bridge has since been built. There is, therefore, no- untrue, and the very contrary of the fact, that I was guilty of tiny thing more untrue than the assertion that I forgot any promise of mine, Eighth. It is false that I literally or at all followed the King into the sei, to present him with a laurel crown. I presented that crown to him high and dry more than twenty paces from the sea. Ninth. It is false that I knelt to the King in the water. I did kneel to him presenting the crown, but it was in a dry, comfortable, and highly- ornamented spot. Tenth. It is false that I forgot my promises, or any promise I made on that occasion. On the contrary, the only promise I made I fulfilled to the letter.

Eleventh. It is false that I inveighed against the King not long after his departure, in any language unfit to be described. On the contrary, for years after the departure of GEORGE the Fourth, I was more liable to the reproach of undue obsequiousness to the Royal person ; but for that my excuse is to he found in the interests of the cause of religious liberty, which compelled me to be silent when I could not praise, leaving me only the duty to praise as much us I could without a criminal departure from the truth, and every departure from the truth is essen- tially and in its nature .criminal.

Is it not cruel that I should' be thus replying to an anonymous tra- ducer? He is safe, because that most unprincipled newspaper, the Courier, protects the anonymous writer; and because I would rather

perish than avail myself of the present most odious libel-law in order to punish the publisher of these vile calumnies. If anything could palliate the present libel-law, it is that it has power to punish the pro- fligate publisher who thus protects the vile assassin-like calumniator even from the infamy that ought to attach to his-falsehoods. You, Sir, should reflect on these things : and, indeed, I think you are bound to

call on the Courier to name thedelinquent, that he may, in person, jus- tify, if he can, his calumnious charges ; and if not—as he certainly can- not—that he should be written down by name a calumniator and a liar.

There are eleven falsehoods in one single paragraph of accusation against me ! Do but reflect on this for one moment. If there had been one single reproachful act in my political life, think you that a

clever man would waste his time in accumulating eleven falsehoods in order to fabricate a charge against me. This really is my triumph—I feel it—I enjoy it, and I pity but do not hate those who give me that triumph; a triumph which arises from this—that malignity itself must resort to the amplest stores of fiction to fabricate an accusation against my integrity as a public man. There is one thought more of ineffable delight arisinn.° from this sub- ject. The part of my political career which required most tact and

judgment, was the management of the Catholic body preparatory to and

during the visit of GEORGE the Fourth in Ireland. If I have any merit for the success of the Catholic cause, it is principally to be found in the

mode in which I neutralized the most untoward events, and converted the most sinister appearances and circumstances into the utmost extent of practical usefulness to the cause of which I was the manager. It was the most critical moment of my political life, and that in which I 'had the good fortune to be most successful.

GEORGE the Fourth came to Ireland with the most ample prospects of national benefit. He came, as he assured us, as the father of all his people—to reconcile all his people to each other—to establish the liberty and prosperity of all the Irish. Nor did his actions whilst in Ireland

belie his declarations. For the first time for two centuries were the Catholics received by the Executive on terms of perfect equality with the Protestants. The Catholic Prelates were received by the King in their ecclesiastical costume, with their golden crosses and chains. It was the first official recognition of their spiritual dignity as prelates. To the Earl of Fixonr., as head of the Catholiti laity, the ribbon of the " Order of St. Patrick was given at an installation at which the King • himSelf presided. The rest of the Catholic laity were received and

- cherished precisely as the Protestants were ; and, to crown all, the ce- lebrated SIDMOUTII letter was issued, full of present kindness and grati-

tude to the Catholics, and of future hope and expectation of perfect conciliation,—a conciliation which every body knew could never be effected without legal and perfect equalization of political rights. How little can any person removed from the scene appreciate the difficulties I had then to encounter, and the management which was ne- cessary to prevent the Catholics from marring or being accused of mar- . ring these bright prospects ! How much of just resentment was it ne-

cessary-to suppress! How much of But I promised you to be as brief as possible. I will therefore abstain from following up this topic : yet I am entitled to this fact, that no part of my. political life obtained—and I will say, deserved—so Much of the gratitude and confidence of my countrymen, as the mode in which I was enabled to convert the King's visit to Ireland from being a source of weakness and discomfiture to the Catholics, into a further claim for practical re- lief and political equalization. This letter has, in spite of me, run into such length, that I must ne- cessarily close it. I have no doubt that you will give it insertion in your Paper. I am ready to follow it up, and to confute every other charge contained in your budget of alleged INCONSISTENCIES; but I am not disposed to be unreasonable. I have here given a few samples of the utter worthlessness of my accuser he may set himself up by re- sorting to the detail of evidence which could support his charges. If such evidence existed, it would be easily procured : if he does not come forward and do so, I really and truly am entitled to set him down as the most egregious of fidsificators; as the most Unqualified of fabricators, and of course as being a person to whom no further reply can be ne- cessary. • And yet I do vehemently desire to reply to each of the remaining ten charges. Say—will you, can you afford me space enough to take them 'tip one by one and confute them ? How anxiously do I desire to have your permission to do so ! Have you not given me a title to demand that space, when you transferred the entire accusations into your co- lumns ? But, I repeat it, I am not unreasonable ; I would not inter- fere with your interests or your other -duties: Say how much indul- gen& you can give me.

You, too; accuse me of anger • and irritability. How little do you knoW of me! How little do you know of the natural joyousness of my disposition ! of my hilarity of spirits ! I trust I have laughed louder

• A mistake. We said " passionate waywardness of temper ;" int not in the limited sense ore/wee. Our remark applied to the sway of impalas and feeling. insuffieientlf .eheeked by the judgment.—Eo.

and longer and more frequently than any other public man great or small in the British dominions.

Could you and will you discover for me the name of the writer in the Courier, the inventor of these calumnies? Surely his name ought act to be concealed from me.

I have the honour to be, your obedient servant,

DANIEL O'CONNELI.