IRELAND.

Mr. Spiel applied to the Court of King's Bench, on Monday, to postpone the trial of Mr. Barrett, editor of the Pilot till next term, on several technical grounds, but the Court decided that the trial should be proceeded with.

On Tuesday, about eleven o'clock, Chief Justice Blishe and the three other Judges took their seats on the bench. Besides the Attorney- General and Solicitor-General, Mr. Sergeant Pennefather, Mr. Ser- geant Perrin, Mr. Hohnes, and three other cnunsel, were retained for the Crown. Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Shell, Mr. Woulffe, Mr. Pigott, and Mr. O'Dwyer were counsel for Mr. Barrett. A Jury of twelve Protestants was sworn ; and the defendant having pleaded Nut Guilty, the Attorney- General commenced his address. •

He laboured to convince the Jury that the delay in bringing the defendant to trial was unavoidable ; and declared that from the day when the Grand Jury found the bill of indictment, his exertions had been unceasing to have the case submitted to ajury. The publication which was alleged to contain a libel, pur- ported to be a letter from Mr. Daniel O'Connell ; but with that the Jury had nothing to do : the defendant was responsible for its publication, being the • re- gistered proprietor of the paper in which it appeared. The letter was dated the 4th of April, two days after the Royal assent was given to the Coercion Bill, and which was therefore the law of the land at the time when the letter was written. He admitted that the Coercion Bill was a severe and unconstitutional measure; but argued in support of its absolute necessity from the letter itself which was the subject of the indictment. He quoted some passages in which Whitefeet outrages were reprobated in the strongest terms, and stigmatized as "crimes demanding the vengeance of man, stud bringing down the punishment of God." He exposed the inconsistency of the letter-writer in protesting against a measure which these very crimes had rendered necessary ; and read a number of passages which he maintained were clearly of a libellous nature and most dan- gerous tendency. The Registrar of Newspapers in the Stamp officewas called to prove that Mr. Barrett was the registered proprietor of the Pilot; but Mr. O'Connell said that - he would at once admit that point. The Solicitor-General said there was another point on which he would wish to ask the witness one question : Did the witness understand the " Anglesea Algerinc Act" to mean the third of William the Fourth ?

" Mr. O'Connell—" It means, gentlemen, that very Act which the Attorney- General called unconstitutional." (Laughter.) Mr. O'Connell—" Before the publication is read, I mean to call for the postea of the last trial ; in order that we may have your Lordship's opinion upou it." Solicitor- General—" There is no postett."

Mr. O'Connell—" My learned friend is right ; I said postea—there was no record. I mean the record."

Solicitor-General—" The record may be brought in."

Mr. O'Connell—" No time will be lost by this, as in the mean time the pub- lication will be read. I suppose the Attorney-General means to call for having it read ; and I hope he will have some one who can read audibly." (Laughter. )

.Sulicitor-General—" Let the officer read it."

Mr. Sheil—" If you choose I will read it." (Laughter.)

The officer then read the entire letter.

Mr. Pigott said, upon looking at the record, their Lordships would find that it was defective—there was no continuance marked upon it.

The Solicitor-General said, on the making up the record, continuances were entered. If it was objected that the distringas was not entered on the record, the distriagas was in court, and never was on the record. The continuances being but matter of form, were put on the record on making it. After some further argument on this point, the Chief Justice decided that the trial should go on, but that the defendant should have the benefit of it hereafter. Mr. O'Connell then addressed the Jury at great length. He said that this trial was an attempt on the part of the Whig Ministry to prevent Irishmen from peaceably and tranquilly, -by a combination with each other, effecting the rege- neration of their country. This was a Cabinet prosecution. The Lord- Lieutenant wasiond of prosecutions; he had tried them before, and they had ended in a bottle of smoke. This was. a. State prosecution, instituted because the alleged libel denounced the baseness of the Whigs. "Nothing is laid in the four long skins of parchment, that comprise the indictment, of intention to libel the Whigs; and yet the strongest passages contained in the alleged libel are those which censure the Whigs, and above all, the sting contained in it is, that there is no satisfying Lord Plunkett. And yet there is no attempt here made to turn upon the publisher and call for punishment on him for libelling the Whigs. I wish they had done that directly. Gentlemen of the Jury, here is a libel on the Whigs, those blessed Whigs, who have produced such glorious and admirable results to England and Ireland since they obtained the administration of affairs! —those admirable Whigs, who, when they were out of office, decried every thing as an abuse which they have sanctioned in practice since they came into office ! Find a verdict fur the Whigs ; oh, find a verdict against us here for presuming to libel those most exquisite Whigs ! It is nut in terms a prosecution ffir libelling—it is directly charged there as a crime that they are abused ; but there is not a man amongst you who. must not perceive that it is in- tended as a revenge for the Whigs." It would be in vain to attempt to put down the cry for the Repeal of the Union by such prosecutions as this. He described in glowing colours the prosperity which would flow upon Ireland, should her Parliament once more assemble upon College Green. " Gentlemen of the Jury, are you prepared to stand between Ireland and those advantages? It is because such an object is sought for, that this publication is prosecuted. Look to this publication—look to it from one end to the other, and see what arc the leading topics. I do call upon you not to do that which the Attorney-General has done—to pick out a particular passage and view it by itself, not to weigh a single phrase by itself. Look at the publication altogether. We are not, and ought not to weigh in scales of gold, particular phrases, when we are looking to make a great people a nation. The Attorney-General, in his address to you, has imputed motives—that was his duty. Ile lots, too, in read- ing the document, quarrelled with the words Algeritie Act; and he has told you that there was great impropriety in applying such epithets to au act of Parlia- ment. Perhaps there is—perhaps it is not good taste ; but did you ever hear of such a thing as the Russell Purge? ' Did you ever hear of the ' Church Rob- bery, Bill ?' Will he call on you for a verdict against the man who uses such phrases ? Now, if in this: country of revolutions and strange changes, it should by any chance occur that I were for any one moment filling the office which he now fills—(Laughter)—if that should so chance, and that I with my feeble mind, and very inadequate abilities were discharging those duties which he now performs, and that there was in that box a Jury exclusively of Roman Catholics, and I called upon you to find a verdict against a defendant because he had been so monstrously audacious as to call that bill [ have adverted to, a ' Church Robbery Bill '—is there one of you who listened to me on such an occasion, who would not bless the Whigs fur having given you such an Attorney-General ?" (Loud laughter.) If the Attorney-General had done all in his power to expedite the trial, Mr. Barrett had done nothing to retard it. " Have you watched the proceedings in this case? On Saturday, there appeared in the newspapers a requisition, with the signatures of fifty-two individuals, calling for a discussion on the Repeal of the l'ffion, and a petition to Parliament on the subject. On the Monday mourn- ing billowing, the Attorney-General appears in Court, and applies for a day to be fixed for this trial. Do you understand that ? Is there one amongst you who does'not understand those proceedings ? In time North, the Whigs strike a magistrate off the roll, and they will not gratify a brother magistrate by telling why they 61 so. Why, what is this doing more than they do in Algiers?—but with this difference, that they strike off the head, awl if another asks the rea- son, they strike his head off also ! while here they oily strike one magistrate off the roll, and strike off another magistrate becau,e he merely asks the reason. (Laughter.) They inta,t think us mad when they think they can get us to aid them. Can you now, then, tell the meaning of this prosecution? The real object is to suppress, if possible, all agitation on the subject of the Repeal of the Union. And I now ask you, is it a crime to agitate that question ? The Union is but an art of Parliament—is it not right to discuss it? " Mr. O'Con- nell then read the while of the letter ; commenting upon it, as be went along —enforcing the opinions it contained, and endeavouring to show that it had not a dangerous tendency, but the reverse. In this part of his speech, be took occasion to pass it high eulogi um upon Mt. Lefroy's character ; and described the insulting treatment lie had encountered in the House of Commons. He also quoted the _Evening Mail with approbation. " That journal asked—what advantage has Leland gained from the Union?" It is a very proper question, and never yet has been answered until this day. This prosecution is the answer. The advantage is, that it prevents Protestants and Catholics from uniting; that it puts down Mr. Lefroy, and if there be a Member of the city of Dublin of the same name with myself, from speaking his sentiments. Be warned the Jury, and men of all parties, that the Coercion Act might be brought intu operation against them any day that the Government chose. The man who asserted that the letter was a libel to-day, might he sent to prison himself to-morrow. He quoted the speeches of Chief Justice Bushe, and Judge Jcbb, then on the bench, and of Lord Pluukett sod Mr. Saurin, delivered when the Union with England was discussed in the Irish Parliament ; and argued that there could be nothing criminal in repeating the substance of those arguments.

After Mr. O'Connell had concluded, the Solicitor-General applied for an adjournment till the next day ; which, after some demur on the part of the defendant's counsel, was agreed to.

The proceedings were resumed on Wednesday.

The Solicitor-General spoke with much earnestness on the subjects of Repeal and agitation. He bid great stress upon the fact of the letter having been writ- ten two days alley the Coercion Act became time law of the land. Mr. O'Con- nell, he said, had exhibited a most wonderful change in his political opinions on this occasion. He had not only complimented the Attorney-General, but Co- lonels Blacker and Verner : he had designated Mr. Lefroy as his dear and most particular friend he had even thrown CCilliplhnent3 into the jury box ; and the only way in which he had escaped from his etdogy was, that lie had never at any time been connected with the Tory party. And how long were those com- pliments to the Jury to last? Precisely so long as they remained in the jury- box. He was not the man who could one day pour forth his praises on any particular party or individuals, and on the very next day, perhaps, in another place, hold them up as objects of censure. It %vas now little matter which party in the State held the reins of governmen t—whether the Ministry was composed of Whig or Tory—the time had arrived when the honest, the orderly, anti the vir- tuous of all parties should unite to stem the tide of Radicalism and Revolutionary principle, which, if suffered to proceed, would overwhelm all the institutions of the country. He adverted to the agitation of the Repeal question. Mr. O'Connell had shrunk from the challenge given him in the House of Commons to debate the ques- tion, although he complained that the Coercion Bill was passed for the purpose of stifling its discussion. Let him bring forward time statements he had made here in the House of Commons; and he would find that Mr. Stanley and Mr. Spring Rice would upset all his calculations of debt and revenue found 2d upon one-ninths and two-seventeenths. He concluded by expressing his conviction that the Jury would arrive at a just and impartial decision.

The Chief Justice briefly charged the Jury. They were, he said, sufficiently acquainted with the law of libel, and did not require any advice from the Court. They wcre simply to find whether the publication was such as it was described in the indictment, or whether it came within the limits of legitimate discussion.

The Jury, after ten minutes' consultation, returned a verdict of

' Guilty ." but strongly recommended the defendant to the merciful c onsideration of the court.

The Foreman said that he was ready, if necessary, to state their reasons for their recommendation.

The Lord Chief Justice—" It is unnecessary." His Lordship. inquired whether the Crown had any objection that the traverser should remain out on his own recognizancesNintil the first day of next term.

Mr. Sergeant Pennefather—" No objection, my Lord."

The Court then adjourned. The points saved for the defendant, re- garding the record, are to be argued next term.

A case was heard in the Court of Exchequer on Saturday, which throws an interesting light on the vengeful litigation pursued by the Irish clergy in the superior courts, in support of their vested interest in tithes. The plaintiff was the Reverend Marcus Monk, Rector of Rathdowny, in the Queen's county, who sued for the sum of 31. 5s. ; and the defendant, Michael Duane, one of thirty-four parishioners who had all been served with writs for sums so small that they might each have been recovered by civil bill process, at an expense of a few shil- lings, before Mr. Schoales, Assistant-Barrister of the county. The plaintiff, however, preferred bringing the thirty-four defendants into the superior courts, where the costs of defending an action are at the least 201. Mr. Shell spoke with much energy. on behalf of the defendant, and insisted on the extreme hardship of Ins case.

There was no necessity for the plaintiff laying the venue in Dublin, as his parish of Rathdowny was under composition, and the proofs were therefore all local. The vestry-hooks, applotinent, certificates, &c. were all documents readily proveable before Mr. Schoales in the Civil Bill Court in the Queen's county ; and the very writs which brought the parties up to Dublin had been served by the process-server attached to that local court in the county ; so that every real objection to the plaintiff proceeding by civil bill was removed, and it was plain that his object was to oppress the defendant by the accumulation of costs. It was also stated in an affidavit of the defendant's attorney, that the plaintiff had been in the habit of recovering his tithes heretofore by civil bill process.

He cited a case in which the Court of King's Bench had restrained a landlord from proceeding in the superior courts, because the sum claimed brought the case within the jurisdiction of the Assistant-Bar- rister, being under 10/.—(by the late act it is extended to sums under 201.) lie therefore moved that the proceedings in the case might be stayed, upon the payment of the 31. 5s. with costs.

After counsel had been heard on the part of the plaintiff, Chief Baron Joy refused the defendant's application, with costs.

Sir. Shell uttered, in surprise—" With costs, my Lord? The Chief Baron replied, in his usual caustic manner—" Yes, with costs." The correspondent of the Tinues makes the following remarks upon this trial.

"It is whispered among the attornics who crowd the Hall this last day of term, that the above specimen of vengeful litigation will form an instructive example for the anti-tithe population in their legal wat fare with the clergy ; so that it is not at all improbable we shall see, next term, %Ilion.; reverend tithe- claimants (who refuse to touch a penny of the Item of the 1,0;10,0001. offered by Government to stop this unhallowed nut Itre with tin it docks, as 'the thing accursed' sphken of in the Dublin Erening Moil) hrmq_;lit int.) these expen- sive superior courts by cross suits instituted in contra-vindictiveness. Purr P.altly has a great disinclination to listen to the doctrinal points pressed on his attention by the Law-Church ; but whom due, exemplary practice of its teachers 'comes honte to his business, his bosom,' and his pocket, in the shape of an Exchequer decree loaded with 600 per rent. of costs on the arrears of tulles awarded against him by an unrelenting Chief Baron or Chief Justice, Ile will, in the natural course of such teaching, be vet y to become an apt scholar, and say with Shylock, It will be hard with me if I do not better the instruc- tion they give me.' It is understood that this subject will come before the public again in the shape of a motion in Parliament early next session, fur an Inquiry into the conduct of the Reverend Mr. Munk and others of his brethren who evince similar litigious propensities."

The Court of Common Pleas was occupied on Tuesday and Wed- nesday with an interesting trial of the Honourable Frederick Caven- dish, proprietor of the Castlebar Telegraph, or Connaught Ranger, at the suit of the Marquis of Sligo, for the publication of three libels (in the Castlebar Telegraph) on the 23d and 30th of January 1833, on the subject of the Marquis's procedinas in reference to the election which took place iii the preceding mouth, to the introduction of the extra Police in the barony of Gatlin, county of Mayo, and other local topics. The defendant spoke as leading counsel in his own defence for three hours, apparently in aggravation of the libels ; and was found guilty, and sentenced to pay 250/. damages. and Gd. costs, which is equivalent to about 1501. more. He has been now only three or four months out of gaol fur a previous libel on the Marquis of Sligo, and then paid a fine of 200/. on the same head.—Tinues Correspondent.