the purpose of obtaining some remedy against such monstrous injustice as is suffered from this impost.

In a parish in Waterford, containing 3640 inhabitants, amongst that number of persons there are but four Protestant families, yet the Catholic inhabitants are assessed in the sum of £2600 per annum, for supporting a church for the use of those four families! There would be also a petition praying for a mitigation of the tithe system; one for a real revision of the magistracy; one for the revision of corporations; and, above all, one for the reform of that system of practical corruption so unblushingly practised in the Dublin corporation, or "city nuisance;" and then the Catholics will join them in seeking for the removal of the other greatest nuisance that ever cursed a city-the Paving Board.

SATURDAY, JULY 3.

COUNSELLOR SCANLAN in the Chair.

A LETTER. was read from Frederick William Conway, Esq., (the late respected proprietor and editor of the Dublin Evening Post, but then only editor of that journal), resigning, as one of the secretaries of the Association.

Mr. O'Connell paid Mr. Conway a marked compliment, and moved him the thanks of the Association for his very eminent services in the Catholic cause. Several other gentlemen spoke in high commendation of that gentleman, and the motion being put from the chair, was carried unanimously.

MR. O'CONNELL then rose and said, he regretted much that he had to occupy the attention of the gentlemen assembled with natters of a personal nature; at a moment when so many important subjects of public interest were pressing upon them for discussion.

It was, however, after all not a matter of little importance to the Association, that the character and conduct of its members, especially of those who had to come forward often before the public, should be vindicated from wanton and undeserved attacks. They could not be successfully assailed and disgraced, without some portion of their discredit falling upon the Association, which allowed them to take a prominent part in its proceedings. He should, therefore, without delaying them with any further preface, throw himself upon the kindness of the Association, while he observed upon some calumnies that had been recently circuated against him by a portion of the Irish press.

Before he entered upon his own case, he should just advert to the charge against his friend, Counsellor Coppinger, who, it was stated, had brought an action against Mr. Magee, the proprietor of the Evening Post. Now the Mr. Coppinger who was plaintiff in that action, was a young gentleman, a merchant of Cork, and although it was stated with great confidence, that Mr. Magee was left to pay £500 damages and costs upon that occasion; the fact was, that he never had occasion to pay one penny on account of that verdict; for, in the first place, the damages wero not for £500 but £60. He (Mr. O'Connell) was the person employed to negotiate the transaction between Mr. Magee and the real defendant, who not wishing to appear in the transaction, ordered his law agents, Messrs. Allen and Ware, to defend the action. They did so, and upon the verdict and the costs being ascertained, the real defendant authorised him (Mr. O'C.) to request of Mr. Magee to accept a bill at twenty-one days for £140 damages and costs, drawn upon him by Messrs. Allen and Ware, in order that the transaction might have all the necessary forms, as if Mr. Magee was the real defendant.

That bill for £140 he (Mr. O'C.) paid, and could have it produced with the necessary receipt upon it.

So much for that calumny; and now he should proceed to those that affected himself more immediately.

He was sorry to say, that he had found it necessary to bring an action against two newspapers, for the malignant libels he should now call their attention to. It was his first determination to apply for a criminal information against them, because that course would give him an opportunity of denying those charges, upon oath; but, upon reflection, he abandoned that idea, because the defendants would not have an opportunity of proving their allegations, and, according to a principle of the British law, acted upon in the courts, but which he (Mr. O'C.) had always condemned and contended against, the defendants would be considered equally culpable whether those charges were true or false; but he challenged inquiry, and for that purpose determined on bringing his action, and if they have a case, they will obtain their costs, and he that ignominy, odium, and dis grace, which should follow upon establishing such charges.

Then, indeed, he should acknowledge himself undeserving the consideration of the Catholic people.

For the purpose of rebutting these calumnies distinctly, and meeting them broadly without any reservation, he would divide them under four heads:

The first charge was, "That a person named Harding Tracy had him completely in his power; that he knew, and could prove him to be the author of the publication for which he was prosecuted; that he destroyed the manuscript at his request; and that he (Tracy) afterwards procured a part of that manuScript!!! That he was a model of firmness and constancy, and refused to betray him, although earnestly requested by government to do so."

With respect to that statement, he should set out by assuring the meeting that every word in it was false and unfounded— that in short there was not only not a single particle of truth in it, but that the direct contrary was the truth and the fact. The Evening Mail said that the speech published in the Cork Mercantile Chronicle, was not spoken. The speech was written as nearly in substance and words, as it was spoken. It adverted to Napoleon's having regained his throne, which he Mr. O'Connell had attributed not to that great man's military talents, but to the gratitude and admiration of the French people, for the code of civil laws which he had instituted, and the perfect administration of justice between man and man, which he had established, and which the Bourbons have been forced to continue. And he then had gone on to contrast that code of laws, in their principles and effects, with those of other kingdoms. Saurin took up that speech, and whenever France was mentioned he inuendoed Ireland, and whenever the word French occurred, he set it forth in the information, as meaning thereby the Irish.

Perhaps in ordinary times a defendant in such a case might have appealed to a jury with confidence, but those were not such times, and Mr. Saurin was Attorney-General. The proprietor of the Cork Chronicle, Mr. Healy, became a bankrupt after the information was filed; and in order to preserve the paper and property for Healy's family, Doctor England, the present pious, learned, and amiable Catholic Bishop of Charleston, in America, benevolently stepped forward, and at a public sale purchased the interest and rights of proprietorship of that journal.

Mr. Saurin did not think it right to come upon Dr. England, and as the proprietor was in the situation just mentioned, he abandoned the information against him and filed one against Tracy, the printer of the paper, in hopes that he would be enabled, by punishing that poor man, to trace the manuscript of the speech to him (Mr. O'Connell). Under these circumstances he waited upon Dr. England, as the then proprietor of the paper,

and the protector and friend of Healy. Doctor England advised that he (Mr. O'Connell) should pay the law expenses; and if the defendant was found guilty, leave the provision for the defendant to the proprietor of the paper.

Tracy did not plead; and Saurin, in a speech of some hours, expended all his gall and vituperation in personalities against aim (Mr. O'C.) He referred to the newspapers of the day to show whether he did not stand with his arms folded, listening patiently to Mr. Saurin, and when he (Mr. O'C.) replied to him, not one word escaped his lips in allusion to the personalities of the Attorney-General. He restrained his indignation, and abandoned retaliation, fearing it might have an unfavourable effect upon Tracy.

As soon as Tracy was sentenced, he applied to government for pardon, stating that he was but the printer, and could not give any information of the person who supplied the speech. He also made an affidavit to that effect, but it was not considered sufficiently strong, and he made a second, which was drawn for him by Mr. Eneas M'Donnell, in as full and explicit terms as it was possible, and repeated that, to his knowledge, he (Mr. O'C.) had no connexion with the publication. After a considerable time taken to consider the second application, it was declared not sufficient, and a third affidavit was drawn, but without better effect; and then the poor man, who was honest, said, “What I have stated are the facts, as far as I know, and as you are not satisfied with the manner or form in which I state them, draw up an affidavit in the strongest terms you like, draw it up yourself, and provided it is in substance what I have already declared, I will swear to it." The government had an affidavit drawn up accordingly, in their own terms; and when it was found that Tracy could not assist in tracing the manuscript, he was discharged, upon the condition of his not returning to Cork.

Now was it consistent with the fact, or was it possible, that a man who was discharged upon his own affidavit that he had no knowledge of, nor any means of knowing that he (Mr. O'Connell) was the person who furnished the report, could have any portion of the manuscript in his hands, and have so romantically and heroically refused to give it up, or that if he had done so, he would have received an immediate pardon?

Really party spirit should not carry men to such an extraordinary and monstrous length beyond truth, with the view of defamation. After Tracy had got out of prison, Mr. Townsend, who had a friendship for him, gave him employment, and he

Ived for seven years afterwards. The Correspondent hated him (Mr. O'C.) as much then as it does now; and is it likely they would have let the opportunity pass without publishing the circumstances, when they had the man in their employ to prove the facts, and when he would have received money as well as liberty?

If the Correspondent had done so, he (Mr. O'Connell) would have brought Tracy to prove his affidavits denying what they now charged him with. He believed it was hardly necessary to say, after what he had stated, that nothing could be more utterly false than the charge he had just replied to. (Hear, hear.) The second charge was, "That Tracy lay in prison couched on straw, a cell his chamber, and was left to starve in the society of felons."

With respect to Tracy lying on straw, he could not say; but if he did, he had a strange fancy, for he (Mr, O'Connell) paid half-a-guinea a week to provide him with a feather bed. If ho associated with felons, his taste and habits must have been naturally depraved, for he (Mr. O'C.) paid forty shillings a week for Tracy's board at the same table with Mr. Eneas M'Donnell. (Hear, hear.) And he shared the same bottle and the same table with that respectable gentleman at his (Mr. O'Connell's) expense, although Dr. England said he should not do so. Mr. Eneas M'Donnell could prove the fact, for he (Mr. O'C.) gave him the money to pay for Tracy; and to the hour of Tracy's death, he was not aware but it was Mr. M'Donnell who supported him. The simple reason why not, was, that it was well to conceal the fact from Mr. Saurin, lest that knowing he paid for Tracy, the poor fellow might be kept in for the purpose of punishing him (Mr. O'C.) by mulcting him in the payment of that weekly sum.

He wanted no gratitude from Tracy, who most thankfully.acknowledged Mr. M'Donnell's kindness; and if more money was not expended on Tracy, it was not his fault, for he told Mr. M. to let him have everything that could contribute to his comfort (Hear)-nor would he now have mentioned those circumstances, but that he had been taunted with having neglected Tracy.

With respect to the third charge: "That Tracy's wife and family were left to starve, whilst he was in prison" and the Correspondent adds, "that his weekly wages were stopped by the proprietor of the Cork Mercantile Chronicle, during his imprisonIent." If this charge were true, it would have been a most