CHAPTER II.

As we have been speaking of relatives of Mr. O'Connell, the following brief notice of one towards whom he cherished a strong affection, will find an appropriate place here, from the Dublin Evening Post of Saturday, September 25, 1813:

"LIEUTENANT O'CONNELL.

"The successful storming of St. Sebastian (31st August), from the nature of the obstacles opposed by a scientific enemy, confessedly ranks first, in point of military achievement on the part of the allies. Many of our countrymen distinguished themselves most conspicuously upon that memorable occasion. The relatives of the fallen heroes, though under the influence of national or Spartan pride, must notwithstanding feel heart-rending grief, not loud but deep,' for the irreparable loss sustained in their domestic society.

"In no instance, perhaps, will this adversity be more poignantly felt than in the family of Lieutenant John O'Connell of the forty-third regiment, a near relative of the counsellor of that name, a brave and promising youth, whose talents as a soldier would indubitably, one day or other, do honour to his country, when those disabilities under which the greater part of his Majesty's Irish subjects labour should have been removed.

"He volunteered on the forlorn hope at the ever-memorable siege of Badajoz, where he was severely wounded; and on the attack on St. Sebastian, he sought a post of danger, where he gloriously fell in the arms of victory.

"The meritorious death of this young officer leads the writer of this to take notice of a circumstance well worthy of remark in the Irish character that although a difference of political principles at home may prevail for a time, yet when their country demands their aid, every sentiment is abandoned but those of loyalty and union. Party is regarded as subordinate, or as the reverie of an idle dream;' all prejudice is abandoned, and nothing appears but a desire to defend the king, the country, and the constitution—thus refuting the base calumnies of some, who would say that a difference of religious opinions constitutes a difference of loyalty; and who would cloud the imagination of the young

soldier with mistaken ideas, tending only to mislead his opinions, and throw an insuperable barrier in the path of his military career."

Mr. O'Connell's affection for this gallant young man, which had been manifested in more than words-having extended to the equipping and furnishing him with all necessary matters, when joining the army-was most fervidly and devotedly reciprocated by its object.

What a condition was that of the Irish Catholic soldier at the time in question! He might fight; nay, he did fight, bleed, die for England-in England's wars; and the chains of his fellow-Catholics, and of his country, were all the more firmly riveted by his sacrifices!

Nay, at the present day—at the present day-how much better is his condition, and that of his country? As we write, our ears are still ringing with the thunder of the guns proclaiming the astonishing victories on the Sutlej-the acquisition of new Britain in India, the lists of slain and wounded are filled with empires for names of the "Papist Irishry"-and at the same moment a tyrannous coercion bill for Ireland is in progress through parliament !

As we have alluded to the pending coercion bill, a few passages in one of the newspapers from which we have been quoting will strike the reader, from their applicability to the present mo

ment :

"The Irish government applied this year (1813) for their celebrated insurrection bill the British parliament granted it. They never passed such an act before.

"Since William the Norman, no such command had issued from any constituted authority in England. It was exactly the mandate of the Norman conqueror, put into the forms of a British statute, in the year 1813. Let the people be disarmed, and in bed by sun-set. No man shall have the right of being abroad after sun-set; but every agent of every magistrate shall have the right of forcible entry, after the shortest notice that his discretion may suggest. His discretion! That is, the discretion of any constable, drunk alike with liquor and loyalty!

66

Why! the Norman Conqueror acted with more consideration. He knew that he was promulgating his commands to a people who could not understand his language; he therefore ordered a bell to toll

as notice to the people that the time of retiring had arrived.' But in this instance the parliament of England issued its command, requiring the Irish, without any external signal or notice, instantly to conform to an extraordinary and incredible restriction.

"There never was a measure in any civilized country more severe and less necessary. It invests the Lord Lieutenant with a tyranny the most absolute that man could exercise.

"The people complain. Either they have cause or they have not. If they have not cause for complaint, why should the government give them cause, by suspending the constitution? If they have cause for complaint, why should you give them greater cause, by suspending the constitution?"

Thirty three years ago, the foregoing was written; and is not the whole charge of the Repealers against England substantiated by the fact, that these sentences are as directly applicable to-dayare as justified and warranted by the fact at this moment, as when written in 1813? Nay, strictures even more bitter and stronger worded, are due to the present instance of mis-legislation.

Under the measure brought forward this year (1846) by the government, we find a license of tyranny given to the Lord-Lieutenant far exceeding that which drew forth the superlatives of the indignant newspaper writer in 1813. It is now proposed to give the head of the Irish executive power, not only to proclaim a district, but any part of a neighbouring district that he may judge it convenient so to do; and to levy what fine he likes, by what tools or instruments he chooses, from the wretched occupants of the soil-(landlords, and all owners in possession, being carefully saved exempt)-in the district or districts that he may so have chosen, of his own sovereign will and pleasure, to proclaim!

How long is this to go on? For very shame, ought this to be the legislation for Ireland, at the end of forty-five years, that England has had to shew her wisdom, her superior knowledge of managing the affairs of other nations-her greatness of soul-her benevolence!!!

During the progress of the autumn, Catholic meetings were held in various parts of Ireland besides those already noticed;

and resolutions similar in substance to what had been passed elsewhere, were universally adopted.

Mr. O'Connell's conduct, therefore, in respect of the Veto question, at the trial of Magee, and all other occasions that he had come before the public, was stamped with the seal of general approbation and concurrence.

Late in October, he returned to Dublin, in time to attend the second meeting of the Catholic Board, after its re-assembling for the winter "campaign."

Richard Shiel—the present Right Honourable Richard Lalor Shiel, M.P. for Dungarvan, and late Vice-President of the Board of Trade, was now beginning to appear more frequently at these meetings; and at that now in question one instance, though a slight one, occurred, of those temporary differences which for a period were occasionally visible between him and Mr. O'Connell, giving rise to excited feelings, that have long since subsided into the warmest and most permanent feelings of mutual regard and affection.

The trifling instance we allude to was a dispute about the power of the Catholic Board to alter, and, with such alteration, definitively adopt, in the name of the Catholic public, resolutions and a form of petition, which had previously been submitted to an aggregate meeting, and there decided upon.

Mr. Shiel made, however, very little resistance to Mr. O'Connell's proposition on this occasion, and the altered resolutions and petitions were adopted; and means ordered to be taken for giving them circulation, and procuring signatures.

On Saturday, October 30th, 1813, there was an animated discussion of some length respecting a Mr. Kennedy, whose conduct there, and at the Kilkenny Catholic Board, had excited serious. animadversion. As usual, Mr. O'Connell contrived to get the Board and the individual out of the unpleasant circumstances in which they were mutually involved, without sacrifice on the part of either.

In this, the highest and most difficult part of the duties of at popular leader, Mr. O'Connell's tact has been confessedly preeminent throughout his career.

His efforts have, however, sometimes been neutralized by the obstinacy of one or other of the parties involved in the dispute of the moment; and in the case before us they were rendered nought by Mr. Kennedy's very unwise perseverance in forcing himself and his deeds upon the notice of the Board at their next meeting, 5th November. The result was a complete establishment of the charges made against him by the Kilkenny Board, and an invitation to him to consider himself no longer a member of that of Dublin.

On the next following Saturday, Mr. O'Connell proposed a resolution for general adoption by the Catholics of Ireland, declaring against the introduction of any measure into Parliament, affecting in any way Catholic discipline, without previous examination and approval of it by the Catholic prelates.

His object was to endeavour to smoothen the way to the mistaken "security"-men to return to Catholic agitation; and so to effect a restoration of entire harmony in the Catholic body. But a violent opposition having arisen to the resolution, on the ground that it might be interpreted as an indirect approval of some form of "securities," Mr. O'Connell, though unconvinced of its having any such tendency, withdrew it, and so had to abandon for a season the hope of restoring unanimity to the popular councils.

On the 19th of November, the unfortunate John Magee was brought up in custody to plead in the King's Bench to an indictment for publishing the resolutions of the Kilkenny Catholics, in which, while complimenting him and his counsel, they assailed the Duke of Richmond.

The Attorney-General strongly opposed Mr. O'Connell's motion to the court, that Mr. Magee, who had entered his plea of "not guilty," should be allowed to "traverse in prox," in the usual way.

Mr. Justice Day ineffectually suggested to the AttorneyGeneral the fitness of acceding, if for no other reason than the advanced state of the term, and pressure of business.

"ATTORNEY-GENERAL (SAURIN)-My lord, I certainly will not consent. If counsel for the traverser can show, that in point of law, he has the