in opposition to twenty men of bad reputation; but in the assistant-barrister's court, it sometimes happens that the man whc swears most has most credit. The conscientious witness will hesitate to go further than his belief, if he is not morally sure; but the perjurer, if not at first up to the necessary point, when questioned by the assistant-barrister, is soon brought just within the requisite length to justify the barrister's decree. If he be an honest barrister, he is either confounded by the swearing of numbers on one side, or is delicate in deciding upon his single opinion, against the oaths of many, upon the testimony of one. But amongst twelve men that difficulty does not exist; for they each keep the other in countenance. Many wise men have thought it would be better that no tribunal should exist for the recovery of small debts; and that those who gave such credits incautiously, should lose them, rather than such a facility should be given for abusing the solemn appeal to the God of Truth.

Before he concluded upon the subject of tithes, he would mention a new hardship to which the peasant would be liable, if the principle contended for by Parson Morgan were established.

When tithes were received in kind, it was considered sufficient the peasant should leave every tenth ridge, or tenth spade, and send notice when about to remove his portion; but if he is to forfeit his right to pay in kind, because he should have previously taken any off the ground before serving notice, then he must daily call upon the clergyman before he has dug his daily portion for the use of his family. The peasant begins to dig his potatoes, for his own use, in July, and continues till November, when he gets them in for the winter.

Mr. O'Connell then moved, that on that day week a committee should be appointed to prepare a petition to parliament, praying for an act to oblige the clergyman to take his tithe in kind, when in potatoes; and that the old mode of serving notice, when removing the crop, shall be sufficient.

The HON. COLONEL BUTLER spoke in support of Mr. O'Connell's opinions, and cited some cases of hardship.

MR. SCANLAN objected to the taking up of the tithe question by the Association; as being thus made what might be called a party grievance, the co-operation of others aggrieved by it, but differing from them in other matters, could

not be obtained.

MR. DWYER Supported Mr. Scanlan's views; expressing at the same time his belief that to meddle with the tithe question "would rouse the jealousy of the Protestant mind."

MR. O'CONNELL, in reply to the gentleman who had spoken

against the motion, observed that their objection was rather to its form than substance.

No man could be called the friend of the Irish peasantry, who would not seek to mitigate the horrors of the tithe system, which they did not hesitate to censure amongst themselves; nor should the Catholics be dismayed by intelligence (which did not require the respectable authority of Mr. Dwyer to confirm,) that Orange malignity would be increased by Catholics touching upon the subject of tithes.

The Catholics had suffered grievously by their apathy; but it was an experiment, and the consequence was that bigotry reared its thousand heads, and the genius of sectarian persecution stalked forth at noon-day. The Catholic question retrograded. Grey, Bennett, and Denman, the champions of reform, joined the ranks of Orangemen in persecuting the Irish AttorneyGeneral, who was abused because he had honestly and fearlessly advocated religious liberty in Ireland.

The Catholics had no reason to fear the secession of their Protestant friends, because they (the Catholics) grappled boldly with their oppressors-nor had they to dread opposition from England, the parent of freedom, who, when she saw men emulous to prove themselves worthy of being her sons, would cheer them in their course.

There was not an honest man in the country that would refuse his support to the association, because they had extended their minds to do good to all, to universal utility, and not confine their efforts to sectarian grievances.

The opposition was then withdrawn, and the motion passed unanimously.

In pursuance of it, Mr. O'Connell moved for his committee upon Saturday, the 21st of November, being the day of adjournment.

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 21ST, 1823.

COUNSELLOR FITZSIMON in the Chair.

MR. O'CONNELL, in rising to move for the appointment of the Committee to prepare the petition to parliament for an act to facilitate the mode of offering tithe in kind, felt great pleasure in being able to state, that no measure of the Catholic Associa

tion was likely to give such general satisfaction, as a petition upon the subject of tithes.

Since he last mentioned the subject, he had learned that the difficulties from the clergyman's refusal of tithe in kind, were not confined to the south of Ireland, but existed also in Leinster; and that Protestant as well as Catholic smarted from the tortures of the tithe system.

The Rev. Mr. Morgan, of whom he made mention upon the last occasion, was resolved to persevere in his refusal of taking tithe in kind, though no less than thirty persons had left it for him, in all whom he served citations to the Bishop's Court. He (Mr. O'Connell) had his information from a most respectable professional gentleman named Carr, of Wexford, and who had authorized him to make use of his name, and refer to the facts in any petition to parliament. When the thirty persons, cite by Mr. Morgan, attended the court, one of the surrogates, Dr. Elgee, was absent, owing to a recent family affliction-his father had died a few days before. Of this circumstance the thirty persons were not apprised, and they had brought with them three hundred witnesses. The grief and affliction of Dr. Elgee. every one would give him credit for. He could not (it was said upon the opening of the court) take his seat, and the other surrogate refused to hear a single cause in his brother judge's ab sence, though Mr. O'Dogherty, king's counsel and recorder of Waterford, was brought down specially by Mr. Carr, upon a fee of thirty guineas.

Suddenly, it was found that Dr. Elgee's grief had subsided, and that he would sit; and upon his doing so, how did he proceed to business? Why, by calling on a case to which there was no appearance! It was the case of a gentleman, named Frizell, who, from some particular cause, could not appear personally, but by his attorney, who had paid five guineas to a proctor for permission to use his name. Upon Dr. Elgee's being told who appeared for Mr. Frizell, he inquired had he (the attorney) his proxy (a form of appointing a proctor's proxy), for no attorney will be permitted to practise in a bishop's court, unless he has gone to the expense of qualifying as a proctor. Well, there was no proxy; and the attorney who had paid the five guineas to the proctor would not be heard, and as soon as the doctor had despatched Mr. Frizell and his five guineas, he grew sorrowful again; his grief returned, and it was impossible he could hear Mr. Dogherty, the king's counsel, on the part of thirty persons attended by three hundred witnesses.

The effect of the doctor's grief having subsided was the dismissal of the counsel at thirty guineas, the attorney at five guineas, and the three hundred and thirty persons who attended at the loss of their time; and the only case he would hear was the one in which there was no appearance.

He (Mr. O'C.) submitted, could there be anything conceived more cruel than the operation of a machine that moved by such a system.

Mr. O'Connell then moved the appointment of the committee, when the following gentlemen were nominated :—

Messrs. Shiel, Ronayne, Mullen, Clinch. John M'Donnell, Lynch, and Corley, with the. mover and seconder.

MR. SHIEL then brought forward and spoke to a motion for "a Connnittee to devise the necessary measures for recovering, through the medium of the existing laws, the Catholics' rights to admission into Protestant corporations."

COUNSELLOR RONAYNE (the late Dominick Ronayne, M.P. for Clonmel) seconded the motion.

Mr. O'Connell, before the question was put in the negative, begged to observe, that it was now thirty years since Catholics became entitled to the freedom of the city, and yet there was no instance of a Catholic having that privilege from the Corporation.

He could with confidence assure the Catholics there was n legal obstacle to their possessing and exercising that right; but whenever he had mentioned it, he found the most disgraceful apathy prevail, and sometimes the objection started that is now occasionally urged, namely, to confine themselves to seeking for general emancipation by the hacknied mode of an annual peti tion.

He at one time called a meeting of respectable Catholic merchants and others at a place, not that where the Catholics were used to assemble. They all appeared sensible of the importance of the object, talked a great deal, but did nothing—and at ength he (Mr. O'C.) disgusted at such inertness, set about and discovered a Catholic named Cole, who was qualified to claim his freedom. He (Mr. O'C.) commenced legal proceedings, and Mr. Costello, as an attorney, lent his assistance; whilst he (Mr. O'C.) was seconded at the bar by Mr. Woulfe. He (Mr. O'C.) paid the expenses; and just as they had attained their point in the King's Bench, poor Cole died, and upon that occasion, Sir. Harcourt Lees announced in his paper, that Providence had. specially interfered to preserve the Corporation from the contamination of Popery by the admission of a Catholic amongst them.

VO II

Ꭱ

It was not like the recent miracles by which persons were restored from infirmity to health; but in this it was a transference from health to death. This was one of Sir Harcourt Lee's miracles; a transformation not at all unlikely to result from Orange contact. Such miracles are of frequent occurrence in the North of Ireland.

There were, however, at present five individuals who were qualified for claiming their freedom, which was of great practical utility to the Catholic cause; and he trusted the question would not be permitted to sleep through the criminal indifference of some, and the inefficient support of others; who by their occasional co-operation and long abstraction from Catholic affairs, practically combine with the enemy; and who. though they may not have any great portion of talent, yet by keeping it neutral, take from the support of the Catholics, and consequently aid the opposition to their endeavours for Emancipation.

After a speech from Mr. Hugh Connor, Mr. Shiel's motion was put from the Chair, and unanimously passed.

Messrs. Mullen, Ford, David Lynch, and Counsellors Hayes and M'Laughlin, were, by him, appointed as the Committee.

Mr. O'Connell then stated that he should, upon the next day of meeting move —“That the association do meet daily, for one fortnight, in the month of January next, for the despatch of business, previously to the next session of parliament."

SATURDAY, 29TH NOVEMBER, 1823.

O'CONOR DON in the Chair.

THE secretary announced that the Right Rev. Dr. Murray had been pleased to accede to the request of the Churchyard Committee, for his patronage, advice, and co-operation The routine business being gone through

MR. O'CONNELL stated, that the Committee appointed to devise measures for asserting the Catholics' right of freedom into corporations, had already discovered upwards of a hundred Catholics entitled to their freedom; and it was intended, if the corporation offered any litigious opposition to their admittance, to try a few cases, in all of which the corporations, if defeated will have to pay the costs, and thereby goad them in the tenderest point.