manly reproof had declared to be in a state of licentiousness that rendered it formidable to all but the enemy; every act of furious retaliation to be expected from a peasantry inflamed by revenge and despair, and, in consequence of the loss of their leaders, surrendered to the auspices of their own impetuous passions, distinguished and disgraced this fatal conflict.* After a short and sanguinary struggle, the insurgents were crushed. The numbers of them who perished in the field, or on the scaffold, or were exiled, are said to have amounted to 50,000;-the losses upon the side of the crown have been computed at 20,000 lives;—a solemn and memorable fact:-70,000 subjects sacrificed in a single year, whose energies, had other maxims of government prevailed, might have been devoted to what it is equally the interest of subjects and governments to promote-the cause of rational freedom, the possession of which can alone inspire a manly and enlightened attachment to the laws and the state.

The high state of passion and resentment which prevailed at this unfortunate period may be collected from the single fact that in the House of Commons a member suggested that military executions should have a retrospective operation, and that the state prisoners, who had been for several weeks in the hands of government, should be summarily disposed of; but the secretary, Lord Castlereagh) with becoming dignity and humanity, vehemently discountenanced so shocking a proposal.-C. [There is something ludicrous in any one's gravely speaking of the "humanity" of Castlereagh !—M.]

CHAPTER XI.

Trial of Henry and John Sheares.

As soon as the public safety was secured (it was long before tranquillity was restored) by the defeat of the insurgents, a general amnesty was granted to all, except the actual leaders of the conspiracy, who should surrender their arms, and take the oath of allegiance to the King. Several of the leaders were in the hands of the Government, and it was now decided that the most conspicuous of them should be brought to immediate trial, in order that their fates should give a final blow to any still remaining hopes of their adherents.

The first of the persons thus selected were two young gentlemen, brothers, and members of the Irish bar, Henry and John Sheares. Their previous history contains nothing peculiar. They were both of respectable and amiable characters. The elder of them "had given many hostages to fortune;" but with the ardour incidental to their years, and to the times, they had been induced to look beyond those sources of private happiness which they appear to have abundantly enjoyed, and to engage in the political speculations that were now to be expiated with their lives. When the original members of the Irish executive were committed to prison, in the month of March, the Sheareses were among those who were chosen to supply their place, and they took a very active part in arranging the plan of the approaching insurrection.

* The Sheareses were arrested on the 21st of May, 1798, two days before the rising of the people. They were two Cork gentlemen, "barristers by profession," says Davis, "both men of liberal education, but of very unequal characters. Henry, the cldest, was mild, changeful, weak: John was fiery and firm, and of much greater abilities.”—M.

Of all these proceedings the Government obtained accurate information through a Captain Armstrong, an officer of the Irish militia, who had succeeded in insinuating himself into their confidence, for the purpose of discovery.* They were accordingly arrested two days previous to the explosion, and were now summoned to abide their trial for high treason.

Mr. Curran's defence of these unfortunate brothers was suppressed at the period, and is generally supposed to have altogether perished. A report of the trial has, however, been preserved, from which an account of the share that he bore in it shall now be given.f

The prisoners were brought to the bar, and arraigned, on the 4th of July, 1798. In this stage of the proceedings, a very interesting and important discussion took place. Their counsel having discovered that one of the grand jury, who had found the bill of indictment, was a naturalized Frenchman,§ pleaded that

*Of Captain Armstrong, Davis says, "This frightful wretch had sought the acquaintance of the Sheareses-made it-encouraged their prospects-assisted them with military hints-professed tender love for them-mixed with their family, and used to dandle Henry Sheares's children. *** He shared their hospitality-urged on their schemes-came

to condole with them in prison-and then assassinated them with his oath." John Warneford Armstrong was Captain in the King's County Militia. He made the acquaintance of the Sheareses to get them into his clutches, and dined with John the day before the arrest. He had actually known them only ten days before that. Barrington says that Henry Sheares "was a participator in the treason, and aided in procuring emissaries to seduce the troops at Loughlinston. There Captain Armstrong became acquainted with the two brothers-pledged to them his friendship-persuaded them he would seduce his regiment-gained their implicit confidence-faithfully fulfilled the counter-plot-devised several secret meetings-and worked up sufficient guilt to sacrifice the lives of both."-M.

The father of the Sheareses, a Banker in Cork, had been a member of the Irish Parliament, and in that capacity had succeeded in carrying an act (5th George III.) by which was conceded to prisoners the right to have counsel assigned them by the Court and to have a copy of the indictment. Under this statute, Mr. Curran and Mr. McNally were assigned as counsel to John Sheares, and Mr. Plunket for Henry Sheares.-M.

The trial took place before Lord Carleton, Barons Smith and George, and Justice Daly.-M.

§ It was McNally who filed the plea that John Decluzeau, one of the jurors who found the bills, for High Treason, against the Sheareses and for others, was an alien, not naturalized. The Crown lawyers argued against this plea, and then, in reply, Curran spoke in its support.-M.

fact against its legality. The following are parts of Mr. Curran's argument upon the occasion:

*

"My lords; the law of this country has declared, that in order to the conviction of any man, not only of any charge of the higher species of criminal offences, but of any criminal charge whatsoever, he must be convicted upon the finding of two juries; first, of the grand jury, who determine upon the guilt in one point of view; and, secondly, by the corroborative finding of the petty jury, who establish that guilt in a more direct manner; and it is the law of this country, that the jurors, who shall so find, whether upon the grand or upon the petty inquest, shall be probi et legales homines omni exceptione majores. They must be open to no legal objection of personal incompetence; they must be capable of having freehold property, and in order to have freehold property, they must not be open to the objection of being born under the jurisdiction of a foreign prince, or owing allegiance to any foreign power. Because the law of this country, and indeed the law of every country in Europe, has thought it an indispensable precaution, to trust no man with the weight or influence which territorial possession may give him contrary to that allegiance which ought to flow from such possession of property in the country. This observation is emphatically forcible in every branch of the criminal law; but in the law of treason, it has a degree of force and cogency that fails in every inferior class of offence; because the very point to be inquired into in treason is the nature of allegiance. The general nature of allegiance may be pretty clear to every man. Every man, however unlearned he may be, can easily acquire such a notion of allegiance, whether natural and born. with him, or whether it be temporary and contracted by emigration into another country; he may acquire a vague, untechnical

* Different statutes of Charles II. Geo. I. and Geo. III. enact, that naturalized aliens, performing certain specified conditions, "shall be deemed liege, free, and natural subjects, to all intents and purposes;" with a proviso "that they shall not be enabled to serve in Parliament, nor to be of his majesty's privy council, nor to hold any office of trust, civil or military, in the kingdom.-C.

1%

idea of allegiance, for his immediate personal conduct. But I am warranted in saying that the constitution does not suppose that any foreigner has any direct idea of allegiance but what he owes to his original prince. The constitution supposes, and takes for granted, that no foreigner has such an idea of our peculiar and precise allegiance, as qualifies him to act as a juror, where that is the question, to be inquired into; and I found myself upon this known principle, that though the benignity of the English law has, in many cases, where strangers are tried, given a jury, half composed of foreigners and half natives, that benefit is denied to any man accused of treason, for the reason I have stated;, because, says Sir W. Blackstone, 'aliens are very improper judges of the breach of allegiance. A foreigner is a most improper judge of what the allegiance is which binds an English subject to his constitution. And, therefore, upon that idea of utter incompetency in a stranger, is every foreigner directly removed and repelled from exercising a function that he is supposed utterly unable to discharge. If one Frenchman shall be suffered to find a bill of indictment between our Lord the King and his subjects, by a parity of reasoning may twenty-three men of the same descent be put into the box, with authority to find a bill of indictment. By the same reason, that the court may communicate with one man whose language they do not know, may they communicate with twenty-three natives of twenty-three different countries and languages. How far do I mean to carry this? Thus far: that every statute, or means by which allegiance may be shaken off, and any kind of benefit or privilege conferred upon an emigrating foreigner, is for ever to be considered by a court of justice with relation to that natural incompetency to perform certain trusts, which is taken for granted and established by the law of England.

'Therefore, my lord, my clients have pleaded, that the bill of indictment to which they have been called upon to answer has

*4 Bl. Com. 852.-C.