THE SPLIT WITH MR. MITCHEL.--HIS TRIAL, CONVICTION, SENTENCE AND
SPEECH.--THE "FELON" AND "TRIBUNE" ESTABLISHED.--ARREST OF MESSRS.
MARTIN, O'DOHERTY, WILLIAMS AND DUFFY.--CONVICTION OF MR. MARTIN.--HIS
SPEECH.--CONVICTION, SENTENCE AND SPEECH OF MR. O'DOHERTY.--DISSOLUTION
OF THE CONFEDERATION.--THE LEAGUE
At the opening of the new year, which was destined to be its last, the
Confederation, though yet regarded with coldness by the Catholic
Hierarchy, was in full career. Its members had won the respect of every
educated man in the land, however widely most of them may have differed
from it in political faith. Among the middle classes of the Catholics,
all that were left uncorrupted fell into its ranks, and embraced its
belief. Men began to regard as possible everything which enthusiasm
advanced with such unhesitating courage and devoted self-sacrifice. Mr.
Mitchel delivered some lectures on land tenure and the poor-law system,
which startled thoughtful and unthinking men alike. He had previously
made an able and sincere effort in the Irish Council to compel the
landlord class to some redeeming act of good sense and good will, which
their own true interests required as well as the agonies of the starving
tenantry. He was met by ignorance, stolidity and scorn. A timid and
narrow measure of improvement in the relation between landlord and
tenant had been proposed, and ably supported by Messrs. Ferguson,
Ireland and O'Loghlen; and such was the obstinate aversion to all
amelioration, on the part of the landlords, that they abstained from
resisting Mr. Mitchel's amendment, lest they would be thereby committed
to the milder reform proposed by Mr. Ferguson. His motion was lost only
by a majority of two several of the five-pound Repeal representatives,
who brawled at tenant-right meetings, and one member of the
Confederation, Mr. M'Gee, being included in the majority.
The result of the division produced a marked change in Mr. Mitchel's
career. His lectures on land-tenure in Europe, displayed the bold
outlines and distinctive characteristics of his principles. His hopes
from the Irish landlords, of whatever shade of politics, had ever
afterwards vanished. He believed them incapable of being influenced by
commonsense or good feeling; and he turned to the people, with full
confidence in their fidelity and strength. All further attempts to
conciliate the upper classes, he regarded as foolish, feeble and
cowardly. He continued to reassert the substance of his lectures in
another form, in the pages of the _Nation_, of which he was at the time
editor-in-chief--that is, of which he wrote the greatest portion,
especially of its leading articles. Some of these articles gave rise to
a difference of opinion between him and Mr. Duffy, who, as responsible
owner and editor, had the sole control of the _Nation_. There were not
wanting men to take advantage of the difference and fan the flame.
Charles Duffy had messages conveyed to him, to the effect that a rumour
was abroad charging him with treachery; and to John Mitchel, perhaps by
the same agents of dissension, it was stated that he, too, was
suspected. It is unfortunately characteristic of Irishmen to be
suspicious; and it was the object of one of Mr. O'Connell's eternal
lessons to perpetuate and extend this degrading national vice. Whether
the representations made to either of these friends were the result of
national prejudice, or proceeded from a baser motive, it is scarce worth
while to inquire. A separation ensued. Mr. Reilly adopted the resolution
of his friend Mr. Mitchel. Mr. M'Gee adhered to Mr. Duffy; and a new
career and distinct fortunes opened to the enterprise of the four men,
whose united efforts elevated the popularity of the _Nation_ to a height
never before enjoyed by an Irish journal.
The early differences between the two great journalists suggested to Mr.
Duffy, and to others, the necessity of drawing up a programme for the
guidance of the Confederation. A committee was appointed, consisting of
several members, including all the leading advocates of both the policy
of Mr. Duffy and that of Mr. Mitchel. The report was principally the
production of Mr. Duffy. It was in part modified by others; but Mr.
Mitchel, who objected to its principle, refused to take any part in its
modification. It was afterwards submitted to the council of the
Confederation; and there gave rise to a long, earnest and, to some
extent, an angry discussion. It was under consideration for several
successive nights, the debate lasting sometimes until three o'clock in
the morning. The principle of the report embraced the belief that moral
means and agencies to effect Ireland's liberties were not yet exhausted,
and should be further tried; and the agencies through which the
experiment was to be tested were indicated in detail. The principle of
the amendment proposed by Mr. Mitchel involved a preparation for and an
appeal to arms as the only resource available to the country. After a
long and anxious debate, the question of adopting the report passed in
the affirmative by a considerable majority. The details then came under
discussion, and, paragraph by paragraph, alterations were proposed and
adopted. The discussion on these matters was still more prolonged and
vehement. The principle of the entire was questioned indirectly by
various amendments of form; but it was always affirmed by a majority.
The report had, however, undergone such modifications and alterations
that its original promoters lost all interest in its passing; and at the
final stage, it was rejected, as well as I remember, without a division.
At all events, it was rejected, and, I believe, with the concurrence of
Mr. Duffy, who afterwards published the original draft in the _Nation_.
It was on that occasion the celebrated resolutions, afterwards the
subject of the three nights' discussion at the Rotunda, were drafted and
proposed by Mr. O'Brien. They were at once adopted, Mr. Mitchel alone
dissenting. This may be the fittest opportunity distinctly and
definitely to settle the question, which has recently arisen, in
reference to these resolutions. On the several occasions of Mr. Duffy's
trial, they have been given in evidence as proof of his loyalty, on the
assumption that they emanated from him, and that it was through his
influence the body was led to adopt them. Again, it seems to have been
inferred--indeed, it has been so stated repeatedly, by persons who boast
of his confidence--that it was owing to his arrest and absence from the
council of the Confederation, that measure of fatal rashness was
adopted, of which he became the first victim; although it was his
discretion and ability that kept the "Jacquerie," who then obtained the
ascendant, in check from the beginning.
This is partly a statement of fact, and partly an inference. The fact is
not true, and the inference is fallacious. The resolutions were not Mr.
Duffy's. On the contrary, one main object with those who adopted them,
without discussion, was to avoid the expression of an opinion on several
abstract principles forming the groundwork of his report. Secondly, he
exercised little or no influence in the debate which led to their
adoption by the Confederation. Thirdly, they were warmly sustained by
the influence, personal and otherwise, as well as by the exertion and
ability of the very men who, according to a recent contemptible sneer,
"improvised a revolution." Every one of them, Mr. O'Brien, Mr. Meagher,
Mr. Dillon, Mr. O'Gorman, and myself, spoke in favour of them, and
against Mr. Mitchel's amendment. And, finally, even if this were not so
and that the rashness of the outbreak really involved deep culpability,
Mr. Duffy cannot claim exemption from his share of the blame.
I subjoin the Resolutions and Amendment. The division took place at ten
o'clock, on Saturday morning, February the 5th, 1848, when the former
were adopted, by a majority of 318 to 188:--
"Resolved: That inasmuch as letters, published by two members of
this Council, have brought into question the principles of the
Irish Confederation, and have given rise to an imputation that
we are desirous to produce a general disorganisation of society
in this country, and to overthrow social order, we deem it right
again to place before the public the following fundamental rule,
as that which constitutes the basis of action proposed to our
fellow-countrymen, by the Irish Confederation:--
RULE
"That a society be now formed, under the title of 'The Irish
Confederation,' for the purpose of protecting our national
interests, and obtaining the legislative independence of
Ireland, by the force of opinion, by the combination of all
classes of Irishmen, and the exercise of all the political,
social and moral influences within our reach.
"II. That (under present circumstances) the only hope of the
liberation of this country lies in a movement in which all
classes and creeds of Irishmen shall be fairly represented, and
by which the interests of none shall be endangered.
"III. That inasmuch as English legislation threatens all
Irishmen with a common ruin, we entertain a confident hope their
common necessities will speedily unite Irishmen in an effort to
get rid of it.
"IV. That we earnestly deprecate the expression of any
sentiments in the Confederation, calculated to repel or alarm
any section of our fellow-countrymen.
"V. That we disclaim, as we have disclaimed, any intention of
involving our country in civil war, or of invading the just
rights of any portion of its people.
"VI. That the Confederation has not recommended, nor does it
recommend, resistance to the payment of rates and rents, but, on
the contrary, unequivocally condemns such recommendations.
"VII. That, in protesting against the disarmament of the Irish
people, under the Coercion Bill lately enacted, and in
maintaining that the right to bear arms, and to use them for
legitimate purposes, is one of the primary attributes of
liberty, we have had no intention or desire to encourage any
portion of the population of this country in the perpetration of
crimes, such as those which have recently brought disgrace upon
the Irish people; and which have tended, in no trifling degree,
to retard the success of our efforts in the cause of national
freedom.
"VIII. That to hold out to the Irish people the hope that, in
this present broken and divided condition, they can liberate
their country by an appeal to arms, and consequently to divert
them from constitutional action, would be, in our opinion, a
fatal misdirection of the public mind.
"IX. That this Confederation was established to obtain an Irish
Parliament by the combination of classes, and by the force of
opinion, exercised in constitutional operations; and that no
means of a contrary character can be recommended or promoted
through its organisation, while its present fundamental rules
remain unaltered.
"X. That while we deem it right thus emphatically to disavow the
principles propounded in the publications referred to in the
resolutions, we at the same time equally distinctly repudiate
all right to control _the private opinions_ of any member of our
body, provided they do not affect the legal or moral
responsibility of the Irish Confederation."
AMENDMENT
"That this Confederation does not feel called upon to promote
either a condemnation or approval of any doctrines promulgated
by any of its members, in letters, speeches, or otherwise;
because the seventh fundamental rule of the Confederation
expressly provides, 'That inasmuch as the essential bond of
union amongst us is the assertion of Ireland's right to an
independent legislature, no member of the Irish Confederation
shall be bound to the adoption of any principle involved in any
resolution, or promulgated by any speaker in the society, or
any journal advocating its policy, to which he has not given his
special consent, save only the foregoing fundamental principles
of the society.'"
But nothing could be more remote from the fact than the assumption that
those who supported the Rotunda resolutions were opposed to Mr. Mitchel
in principle. If that ground were not expressly repudiated, Mr. Mitchel
would have been sustained by a majority of two to one. Every speaker who
exercised any influence on the meeting, took occasion emphatically to
disclaim it. They did not deprecate the right or the duty of taking up
arms against the English Government; but they said: While we approve of
the end in view, we condemn the means, and precisely because we think
them the most surely calculated of any that could be devised, to
frustrate the object. This was the distinct ground, specifically,
clearly and unmistakably stated, on which the amendment of Mr. Mitchel
was opposed and it was the only ground on which it could be opposed;
with sincerity or success. The use, therefore, which was made of the
resolutions on Mr. Duffy's trial was false and unsustainable in every
point of view.
There is no disposition and no desire to quarrel with the line of
defence adopted by Mr. Duffy. It is conceded freely that any defence
which his counsel, some of the ablest and most honourable men at the bar
in Ireland, or elsewhere recommended was justifiable. But coupling that
part of the defence with the evidence given on the same trial, by
pensioners and parasites[8] of the British Government, and with the
commentaries that afterwards appeared from the pens of some of Mr.
Duffy's friends, the whole was calculated to leave on the public mind an
impression, not only utterly inconsistent with the truth, but pernicious
and fatal in its influence on the future of the country, if indeed she
is ever to have a future.
This impression inevitably would be that Mr. Duffy modelled and moulded
the proceedings of the Confederation at his mere pleasure; that Mr.
Duffy was not alone averse to revolution, but actually conservatively
loyal; and that, in the spirit of that loyalty, he controlled the whole
body, and kept an insensate "Jacquerie," which existed within it, in
check--that it was only when he was sent to prison this Jacquerie
obtained the ascendant, and that Mr. Duffy was the victim of their
intemperate folly. However agreeable all this may be to personal vanity,
Mr. Duffy must feel compelled to reject it as audacious and unmeaning
flattery. There is much more at stake than the estimate of private
character--the highest interests of truth. They require that it should
be made known and incontestably established that every word of the
above--fact and inference--is unfounded. As to the statement that Mr.
Duffy was made the victim of others' intemperance, its converse could be
much more easily sustained. But it satisfies every requirement of truth
simply to state that, morally speaking, Mr. Duffy was equally
responsible for the late outbreak, with those who perilled their lives
and lost their liberty forever in the struggle.
The _United Irishman_ started under auspices more flattering than ever
cheered the birth of a similar enterprise. The man in Dublin, who did
not read the first number, might indeed be pronounced a bigot or a
fool. Every word struck with the force and terror of lightning. So great
was the sale of the first number that the press was kept busy for three
days and nights. When the second was announced, a guard of police was
necessary to keep order and peace among the newsvendors around the
office door. In every corner of the island the influence of the _United
Irishman_ was instant and simultaneous. The letters to the Ulster
farmers caused a sensation as universal and profound as the letters to
Lord Clarendon excited sentiments of wonder and alarm. Thomas Devin
Reilly's powers, too, never before tested in this range of literature,
astonished even the warmest admirers of his genius. The journal at once
attained a standard of eminence, political, literary and poetical, never
accorded to a production of the kind, published in Ireland. For the days
in which they were written, the songs and essays of Thomas Davis
contained greater depth, and a holier purpose. They seemed to flow, too,
from a diviner inspiration; were of a wider, calmer and more generous
scope. But the times were different; and it was as if the spirit of
fire, burning at the bases of man's social hopes throughout Europe,
breathed its prophetic glow on the heart of John Mitchel, conscious that
he, of all men, in a prostrate land, could find it befitting utterance.
It must not be omitted that the muse of "Mary," of "Eva," and of poor
Clarence Mangan, considerably enhanced the high estimate of the _United
Irishman_.
In the presence of such an oracle of defiance and vengeance, the
Government for a while stood aghast. But the urgency of the times
admitted of no temporising policy. Messrs. O'Brien, Meagher and
Mitchel, were selected for prosecution; but the latter was honoured with
a double suit--one for an article, and the other for a speech. The
morning they were called upon to enter into security, all Dublin was
startled as if by a spell. The streets were crowded by a dense and
anxious mass of men. The police-office in a short time became
inaccessible. Mr. O'Connell's two sons, and the staff of the old
Association, anticipated the crowd, and occupied the seats around the
bench. When Mr. O'Brien was called on, the O'Connells offered to become
his security. The fact was trumpeted by the journals, yet living on the
garbage of Conciliation Hall. But the offer, if sincere, might then be
productive of important consequences. It was not sincere; a fact
sufficiently attested by the Messrs. O'Connell's necessary consciousness
that Mr. O'Brien would not come without his bail. In truth, it was known
to all Dublin that he even found a difficulty in reconciling the
conflicting claims of several gentlemen who aspired to that honour. So
it was, too, with Mr. Meagher and Mr. Mitchel. All those gentlemen
hurried to tender their services, as soon as they heard that bail would
be required, the Messrs. O'Connell alone selecting the public court for
the display of their magnanimity. It is needless to add that their
courtesy was declined; and they must have left the police-office that
day in the wake of the crowd, oppressed with the conviction that the
confidence of the Irish people had passed for ever from their house.
[Illustration: Thomas Francis Meagher (A Sketch in May: 1848)]
[Illustration: John Martin (About 1865)]
This prosecution marked a new epoch in the Irish movement. It was
determined at once to meet it boldly--to extenuate nothing, to
retract nothing--to take advantage of no legal subterfuge; but dare the
issue promptly, openly and fully. Mr. O'Brien at first refused to be
defended by counsel. He was with great difficulty prevailed upon to
change his determination; and, when it was known that he was willing to
accept professional assistance, at least twenty of the ablest young men
at the bar volunteered their services; and the traversers saw arrayed at
their side an amount of professional ability and chivalry such as was
never united on such an occasion. The most respectable solicitors in the
profession, too, contended for the honour of being their recorded
attorneys. The juries disagreed in both cases; and the charge against
Mitchel lapsed into that more formidable prosecution which sealed his
fate.
Mitchel's arrest under the Treason Felony Act was not unexpected. But as
soon as it was ascertained that he was lodged in Newgate, his fate
engaged the entire care of his co-Confederates. The question at once
arose whether, if a rescue were attempted, there were resources to
ensure even a decent stand. It was ascertained that the supply of arms
and ammunition was scanty and imperfect, and the supply of food still
scantier. The people had been decimated by three years of famine: and no
want could be more appalling than the want of food. On inquiry, it was
found that there was not provision for three days in the capital, which
depended on daily arrivals for its daily bread. Throughout the country,
the supply was even more precarious. The Government had in their own
hands the uncontrolled power of preventing the arrival of a single grain
of corn; and, if so minded, could starve the island in a fortnight,
supposing the people were even able to possess themselves of all the
cattle in the country.
These were some of the considerations which influenced the decision of
Mr. Mitchel's comrades. Whether the opinion were or were not a correct
one, they acted on the conviction that, under all circumstances, any
attempt to rescue him would eventuate in a street row which would entail
not only defeat but disgrace. If they could but persuade themselves that
a blow might be struck, even though defeat and death followed, they most
certainly would have attempted it. It was generally understood, on the
day before the trial, that the idea of a rescue was abandoned; and the
trial commenced amidst gloomy presentiments and blighted hopes. After
hours of quibbling and legal fencing, a jury was selected, by the crown,
to convict. From the moment they went through the blasphemous process of
swearing to give a true verdict, John Mitchel's fate was sealed.
I pass over the details, and come to the last act in the infamous drama,
called his trial.
The following account of the closing scene is not mine. Feeling
inadequate to describe a scene of which even a distant recollection is
exciting, I asked a friend who felt the deepest interest in the trial to
describe it. With what he has written I entirely agree, save one
sentence. He says that it was owing to the action of the council of the
Confederation John Mitchel's personal friends were allowed to be
assaulted, with impunity, by the police. I do not think so. With respect
to the decision of the council, I feel bound to assume my share of its
responsibility, although I yielded to it with the utmost reluctance and
regret:--
On the morning of Saturday, the 27th May, 1849, the court was crowded to
a greater excess than usual, even in those days. About the empty dock
were the personal friends of Mr. Mitchel, those who agreed with him, and
those who did not. A little retired on either side sat John Martin, and
John Kenyon--in front were William H. Mitchel, brother of the prisoner
and his only relative in court, T. Devin Reilly, Thomas F. Meagher, John
B. Dillon, Michael Doheny, Richard O'Gorman, Martin O'Flaherty (Mr.
Mitchel's attorney), Charles O'Hara and others whom we have forgotten.
A little in advance, on the left of the dock, were the stalls reserved
during the sham trial for the counsel for the defence. As yet they were
only occupied by the junior advocates, Sir Colman O'Loghlen and John
O'Hagan. The benches at the right of the dock, and nearer to the bench,
reserved for the Attorney-General and his retainers, were vacant. The
Sheriff and his white stick occupied their box, and the galleries to the
right and left were crowded with jurymen--those who "had done their
business," and those who were eager for employment to do more. The bench
of the judges held two empty chairs. And police officers and other
mercenaries, dotted thickly over the court, "concluded and set off the
arrangements."
An old man, low of stature, and stooped, passed through a side door, and
walked slowly and decrepidly into the benches of the prisoner's counsel.
Whispers, and then applause from the galleries, were heard and passed
by him unheeded. Quietly and unostentatiously he moved to his seat--the
junior advocates, and all the Confederates in the body of the court,
rising and bowing to him in silence. It was the solitary Republican of
the United Irish day, Robert Holmes, coming to discharge his last duty
to the great Republican of a younger century.
The applause of the galleries was hushed by the crier's voice--"Silence!
take off your hats"; and on the right stalked in the gaunt figure of
James Henry Monahan. Triumph, animosity and fear marked his night-bird
face. Even yet it was hoped the great opponent of his "government," whom
by rascality alone he could convict, would strike his colours, and sue
for mercy. Even yet it was feared that a rescue would be attempted. How
possible the former was, the reader may judge. The latter was rendered
impossible by the council of the Confederation, and the few who
cherished the design in the council's despite, had attempted an _emeute_
the night previous, and were beaten and placed _hors de combat_. As
Monahan and his retainers entered, the red face of Lefroy oozed through
the bench curtains, and followed by the pale Moore, "the court was
seated."
As yet the dock was empty, save that the jailor of Newgate and his
deputy occupied each a corner.
There was a dead silence.
"Jailor, put forward John Mitchel," said the official, whose duty is to
make such orders.
A grating of bolts--a rustling of chains, were heard behind. The low
door-way at the back of the dock opened, and between turnkeys Mitchel
entered.
Ascending the steps to the front of the dock, and lifting, as he
advanced, the glazed dark cap he wore during his imprisonment, as
gracefully as if he entered a drawing-room, he took his stand in a firm
but easy attitude. His appearance was equally removed from bravado and
fear. His features, usually placid and pale, had a rigid clearness about
them that day we can never forget. They seemed, from their transparency
and firmness, like some wondrous imagination of the artist's chisel, in
which the marble, fancying itself human, had begun to breathe. The eye
was calm and bright--the mouth, the feature round which danger loves to
play, though easy, motionless, and with lips apart, had about it an air
of immobility and quiet scorn, which was not the effect of muscular
action, but of nature in repose. And in his whole appearance, features,
attitude and look, there was a conscious pride and superiority over his
opponents, which, though unpresuming and urbane, seemed to speak louder
than words--"I am the victor here to-day."
He saluted quietly those friends about the dock he had not that day
seen, conversing with one or two, and bowing to those at a distance. He
then directed his eyes to the court.
After some preliminary forms, Baron Lefroy commenced operations, by
stating that he had called the case the first that morning, in order to
give time for any application to be made in court by, or on behalf of,
the prisoner of the crown.
Again there was a silence of some minutes. The judges looked at each
other inquiringly. The crown prosecutor watched the prisoner's counsel.
Upon the prisoner himself all other eyes were fixed.
There was no reply.
"Business proceeded." The "Clerk of the Crown," rising to ask the usual
question--"If Mr. Mitchel had anything to say why judgment should not be
passed upon him?"
"I _have_," he answered, and after a momentary look at judges, jury-box
and sheriff, he slowly continued: "I have to say that I have been tried
by a packed jury--by the jury of a partisan sheriff--by a jury not
empanelled, even according to the law of England, I have been found
guilty by a packed jury obtained by a juggle--a jury not empanelled by a
sheriff, but by a juggler."
Here he was interrupted by the sheriff rising, and, in high indignation,
claiming the protection of the court.
"That is the reason," continued Mitchel, "that is the reason why I
object to the sentence being passed on me."
"That imputation," interrupted Lefroy, "upon the conduct of the sheriff
I must pronounce to be most unwarranted and unfounded." And this
discriminating judge continued to show that the imputation was
so--concluding with the assertion that the sheriff "had done his duty in
the case." Then without pausing, he proceeded to the usual lecture, full
of hypocritical cant with which British judges usually preface their
awards, however infamous. He alluded to the personal condition of Mr.
Mitchel, and expressed his regrets that a person of such merits should
be in such circumstances, Then having dilated on the enormity of the
offence, he assured Mr. Mitchel that he had been found guilty of many
heinous charges against the Queen and the Imperial Crown, and among
others, of felonious intending to levy war upon that gentlewoman, and
that the evidence was furnished by the prisoner's self. "How,
therefore," he continued, "you think yourself justified in calling it
the verdict of a packed jury, and thus imputing perjury to twelve of
your countrymen--deliberate and wilful perjury--"
"No," interrupted the prisoner, "I did not impute perjury to the jury."
"I understood," said the speaker on the bench, "that you had stated, in
arrest of judgment, that you had been found guilty by a packed jury."
"I did," was the reply.
Robert Holmes rose, during the judge's speech, and said, "My lords, with
the greatest respect, what I said was, that though he might be
statutably guilty, he was not, in my opinion, morally guilty. I repeat
that opinion now."
This avowal, so boldly and firmly made by the veteran Republican, was
answered by all the audience, not pensioned, with plaudits.
Baron Lefroy would say no more on that point, only that the court could
not acquiesce in a line of defence "which appeared to it very little
short of, or amounting to, as objectionable matter as that for which the
prisoner had been found guilty.
"I," replied the aged advocate, "I am answerable for that under your Act
of Parliament."
Loud applause followed. "Are there no policemen in court?" shouted
Baron Lefroy. The High Sheriff "had given strict orders," he said, "to
have all removed who would interrupt." "Make prisoners of them," said
the judge. "I wish you to understand," he continued, still excited, and
addressing Mr. Mitchel, who during these episodes, stood unmoved, "that
we have with the utmost anxiety and with a view to come to a decision
upon the measure of punishment which it would be our duty to impose,
postponed the passing of sentence on you until this morning." Then,
having stated the various considerations which induced him to believe
that the punishment should be lenient, and the equally various
considerations which induced him to believe the contrary, Lefroy
concluded as follows: "We had to consider all this--to look at the
magnitude of the crime, and to look also at the consideration, that if
this were not the first case brought under the Act, our duty might have
obliged us to carry out the penalty it awards to the utmost extent; but,
taking into consideration, that this is the first conviction under the
Act--though the offence has been as clearly proved as any offence under
the Act could be--the sentence of the court is, that you be transported
beyond the seas for the term of fourteen years."
The listeners to the hypocritical sentence which concluded Lefroy's
speech, heard the sentence with astonishment and indignation. Mr.
Mitchel merely asked, apparently without any astonishment, if he might
now address some remarks to the court. The leave asked was granted, and
a silence still as death awaited the prisoner.
"The law," he said, in his usual manly tone, and unexcited manner, "the
law has now done its part, and the Queen of England, her crown and
government in Ireland are now secure--'pursuant to Act of Parliament.' I
have done my part, also. Three months ago I promised Lord Clarendon and
his government in this country, that I would provoke him into his
'courts of justice,' as places of this kind are called, and that I would
force him publicly and notoriously to pack a jury against me to convict
me, or else that I would walk out a free man from this dock to meet him
in another field.
"My lord, I knew I was setting my life on that cast; but I warned him
that, in either case, the victory would be with me; and the victory is
with me. Neither the jury, nor the judges, nor any other man in this
court, presumes to imagine that it is a criminal who stands in this
dock."
He was interrupted with the plaudits of the auditory; and again
continued:--
"I have kept my word. I have shown what the law is made of in Ireland. I
have shown that her majesty's government sustains itself in Ireland by
packed juries, by partisan judges, by perjured sheriffs--"
Here he was interrupted by Lefroy, who said, "the court could not sit
there to hear him arraign the jurors of the country, the sheriffs of the
country, the administration of justice, the tenure by which the crown of
England holds that country. The trial was over. Everything the prisoner
had to say previous to the judgment, the court was ready to hear, and
did hear. They could not suffer him (Mr. Mitchel) to stand at that bar
to repeat, very nearly, a repetition of the offence for which he had
been sentenced."
"I will not say," Mr. Mitchel continued, "anything more of that kind.
But I say this--"
Lefroy again interrupted him, to the effect that, within certain limits
the prisoner might proceed.
"I have acted," he then said, "I have acted all through this business,
from the first, under a strong sense of duty. I do not regret anything I
have done, and I believe that the course which I have opened is only
commenced. The Roman," he continued in one of those bursts of eloquence,
with which he used to electrify men, stretching forth his clenched hand
and arm, "the Roman who saw his hand burning to ashes before the tyrant,
promised that three hundred should follow out his enterprise. Can I not
promise for one, for two, for three, aye for hundreds?"
Here he pointed to his friends, Reilly, Martin, and Meagher. A burst of
wild enthusiasm followed.
"Officer! officer! remove Mr. Mitchel," was heard from Lefroy. A rush
was made on the dock, and the foremost ranks sprung from the galleries,
with out-stretched arms to vow with him too. The judges rushed in terror
from the benches--the turnkeys seized the hero, and in a scene of wild
confusion he half walked, and was half forced through the low, dark
door-way in the rear, waving his hand in a quiet farewell. The bolts
grated, the gate slammed, and he was seen no more.
Men stood in affright, and looked in each others' faces wonderingly.
They had seen a Roman sacrifice in this modern world, and they were
mute.
An hour elapsed--the excited crowd had passed away; and the partisan
judges, nervous and ill at ease, ventured upon the bench again.
They were seated, and seemed to be settling down to get through
"business" as well as they could, when Mr. Holmes, whose defence of Mr.
Mitchel had been so offensive to them, rose. "My lords," he said, "I
think I had a perfect right to use the language I did yesterday. I wish
now to state that what I said yesterday as an advocate, I adopt to-day,
as my own opinion. I here avow all I have said; and, perhaps, under this
late Act of Parliament, her Majesty's Attorney-General, if I have
violated the law, may think it his duty to proceed against me in that
way. But if I have violated the law in anything I said, I must, with
great respect to the court, assert that I had a perfect right to state
what I stated; and now I say in deliberation, that the sentiments I
expressed with respect to England, and her treatment of this country,
are my sentiments, and I here openly avow them. The Attorney-General is
present--I retract nothing--these are my well-judged sentiments--these
are my opinions, as to the relative position of England and Ireland, and
if I have, as you seem to insinuate, violated the law by stating those
opinions, I now deliberately do so again. Let her Majesty's
Attorney-General do _his_ duty to his government, I have done _mine_ to
my country."
Such was the conclusion of the trial of John Mitchel. The brother-in-law
and friend of Robert Emmet, the republican of our fathers' days, came to
attest the justice of the republican of our own, and to vie with him in
defying and scorning the infamous laws of England.
It is needless to say that the English officials did not dare accept the
challenge so nobly and defiantly flung down before the very dock whence
one victim had just been borne.
I feel tempted to add a word of a scene that intervened, in which I took
a part. When the sheriff recovered his self-possession, he ordered
several to be arrested; among others, Mr. Meagher. The officer who
seized him acted rudely and violently, which led to further confusion,
and the exchange of blows. At last Mr. Meagher and myself were secured
and removed to prison. When order was restored, we were brought out
before the court, and asked for an expression of regret. I answered,
that having heard Mr. Mitchel express, in the dock, sentiments in which
I entirely concurred, I took immediate occasion to mark my most distinct
and emphatic approval. In doing this I had no intention of an affront to
the court. But as to retract, or regret, no punishment in the power of
that or any other court to inflict, would compel me to do either one or
the other.
Mr. Meagher repeated the same thing. We were then reprimanded and sent
back. Soon after we were recalled, and upon motion of Mr. Dillon and Sir
Colman O'Loghlen, on behalf of Mr. Meagher, who stated that he would
express his regret for the contempt of court, but nothing else, we were
both released, although I persisted in refusing even to join in the
expression of regret made _for_ but not _by_ Mr. Meagher.
On the same day on which the above scene took place, John Mitchel was
borne in irons from the land of his love, the wife of his bosom, and the
children of his heart.
Immediately after, the council of the Confederation was reduced to
twenty-one; and everything wore a sterner aspect, as if, whether they
willed it or no, an imperious obligation required fulfilment at their
hands. The slight disunion, which the fate of John Mitchel created,
between those who favoured and opposed his rescue, quickly disappeared,
and both parties only emulated each other in the activity and
earnestness of preparation. Among the agencies of progress, suggested by
the crisis, were two new journals--the _Felon_, edited by John Martin
and T.D. Reilly, assisted by Mr. Brenan, and the _Tribune_, edited by
Richard Dalton Williams and Kevin Izod O'Doherty, of which Mr. Savage
and Dr. Antisell were joint proprietors, and to which they were joint
contributors, with S.J. Meany and myself. The great object of the first
was to follow in the footsteps of the _United Irishman_, and that of the
latter was to urge the same principles upon a more republican basis. The
_Felon_ soon acquired additional interest from the daring principles and
extraordinary ability of Mr. James F. Lalor, who had become a joint
contributor with the recognised editors. Of the _Tribune_ it would not
become me to speak; perhaps no more is needed than that in the race to
doom it was not outsped.
On the 8th of July, John Martin surrendered. Messrs. Duffy and O'Doherty
were arrested on the same evening, and Mr. Williams on the following
morning.
Although the trials that followed did not take place until long after
the events which form the principal subject of this narrative, a brief
account of them will not be inappropriate here.
Mr. O'Doherty was the first placed on his trial. The jury was of the
stamp usual in such cases in Ireland. But a point of great importance
was raised by his counsel, as to the publisher's _intention_ to commit
the felony, which they insisted should be proved, to bring his case
within the provision of the Treason Felony Act. The court, composed of
Chief Baron Pigot and Baron Pennefather, gave an opinion favourable to
this construction, and the jury refused to convict, for which the Castle
Organ did not hesitate to pronounce them perjurers. Every one supposed
and rejoiced that Mr. O'Doherty had escaped; but the vengeance of the
Attorney-General was far from satisfied, and he had ample satisfaction
on a future day.
On the 16th of August, John Martin was placed at the bar, before the
same judges. The instincts of the official, exasperated by defeat,
exercised a keener vigilance in selecting a jury; and one was finally
sworn that did not disappoint his sagacity. They found a verdict of
guilty without hesitation; but recommended the prisoner to mercy, which
in that case was a distinct contradiction of their oaths. The
composition of the jury, and the character of the prosecution, will be
best understood by a perusal of the subjoined speech. No higher proof
could be given of his purity of purpose, elevation of sentiment, and
goodness of heart. On the 19th of August he was called up to receive
sentence He stood in the spot hallowed by the footprints of Robert
Emmet and John Mitchel; nor was the heart he brought to the same
sacrifice less worthy than theirs. Upon his benevolent countenance or
stout heart, the appliances of terror around him had no effect. He stood
unmoved and unawed, in the glorious consciousness that he had fulfilled
his duty to his friend and to his country.
When asked what he had to say why sentence should not be passed upon
him, he replied:--
"MY LORDS: I have no imputation to cast upon the bench, neither
have I anything of unfairness toward myself to charge the jury
with. I think the judges desired to do their duty fairly, as
upright judges and men, and that the twelve men who were put
into the box, not to try, but to convict me, voted honestly
according to their prejudices. I have no personal enmity against
the sheriff, sub-sheriff, or any other gentleman connected with
the arrangements of the jury panel, nor against the
Attorney-General, or any other person engaged in the proceedings
called my trial. But, my lords, I consider _I have not yet been
tried!_ There have been certain formalities carried on here for
three days, _but I have not been put upon my country, according
to the constitution said to exist in Ireland!_
"Twelve of my countrymen, 'indifferently chosen,' have not been
put into the jury-box to try me, but twelve men, who, I believe,
have been selected by the parties who represent the crown, for
the purpose of _convicting_, and not of _trying_ me.
"Every person knows that what I have stated is the fact; and I
would represent to the judges, most respectfully, that they, as
honourable judges, and as upright citizens, ought to see that
the administration of justice in this country is above
suspicion. I have nothing more to say with regard to the trial;
but I would be thankful to the court for permission to say a few
words after sentence is passed."
Chief Baron and Baron Pennefather: "No. We cannot hear anything from you
after sentence is pronounced."
"Then, my lords, permit me to say, that admitting the narrow and
confined constitutional doctrines, which I have heard preached
in this court, to be right, _I am not guilty of the charge
according to this Act!_ In the article of mine, on which the
jury framed their verdict, which was written in prison, and
published in the last number of my paper, what I desired to do
was this, to advise and encourage my countrymen to keep their
arms; because that is their inalienable right, which no Act of
Parliament, no proclamation can take away from them. It is, I
repeat, their inalienable right. I advised them to keep their
arms; and further, I advised them to use their arms in their own
defence against all assailants--even assailants that might come
to attack them unconstitutionally and improperly, using the
Queen's name as their sanction.
"My object in all my proceeding has been simply to establish the
independence of Ireland for the benefit of all the people of
Ireland--noblemen, clergymen, judges, professional men--in fact,
all Irishmen. I sought that object first, because I thought it
was our right; because I thought, and think still, national
independence was the right of the people of this country. And
secondly, I admit, that being a man who loves retirement, I
never would have engaged in politics did I not think it
necessary to do all in my power to make an end of the horrible
scenes the country presents--the pauperism, and starvation, and
crime, and vice, and the hatred of all classes against each
other. I thought there should be an end to that horrible system,
which while it lasted, gave me no peace of mind, for I could
not enjoy anything in my country, so long as I saw my countrymen
forced to be vicious, forced to hate each other, and degraded to
the level of paupers and brutes. This is the reason I engaged in
politics.
[Illustration: Kevin Izod O'Doherty]
"I acknowledge, as the Solicitor-General has said, that I was
but a weak assailant of the English power. I am not a good
writer, and I am no orator. I had only two weeks' experience in
conducting a newspaper until I was put into jail. But I am
satisfied to direct the attention of my countrymen to everything
I have ever written, and to rest my character on a fair
examination of what I have put forward as my opinions. I shall
say nothing in vindication of my motives but this, that every
fair and honest man, no matter how prejudiced he may be, if he
calmly considers what I have written and said, will be satisfied
that my motives were pure and honourable. I have nothing more to
say."
The Chief Baron, in passing sentence, alluded to the jury's
"recommendation to mercy."
Mr. Martin: "I cannot condescend to accept mercy where I believe I have
been morally right. I want justice, not mercy."
He was then sentenced to ten years' transportation.
On two successive occasions, the jury empanelled by the Government, and
carefully packed to serve their end, refused to convict Mr. O'Doherty.
He was placed on his trial, a third time, on the 30th of October,
prosecuted with the same enduring malignity, and a verdict of guilty,
suspected to be the result of a fraud practised on the jury, was
returned. Mr. Williams, who was joint proprietor of the _Tribune_, and
jointly responsible, was acquitted after a protracted trial on the 3rd
of November, the jury being of opinion that although the articles given
in evidence were felonious, there was no proof to satisfy them that the
proprietors, when publishing them, did so with a felonious intent. This
distinction arose in consequence of the fair and candid construction of
the Felony Act, given by Chief Baron Pigot and Baron Pennefather, on Mr.
O'Doherty's first trial, to the effect that the jury should be satisfied
of the publisher's felonious intent; a construction which the present
judges 'Crampton and Torrens' would not dare to contradict.
Notwithstanding this, just as the words, "Not guilty," were pronounced
by the jury, in Mr. Williams' case, despite the most flagrant and
audacious bullying of the bench, Mr. O'Doherty was called up for
judgment. Among all the martyr-band whom this year consigned to doom,
not one behaved himself with truer or nobler heroism; not one, either,
whose fate commands a deeper sympathy. Under thirty years of age,
largely gifted, with most respectable connections, a high place in
society, brilliant prospects, and so unostentatious in his enthusiasm
that it was only then his country heard of his devotion, and learned his
worth; there he stood with as lofty consciousness and as brave a heart
as ever consecrated the scaffold or the battle-plain.
Judge Crampton pronounced the sentence. Nature has supplied his lordship
with characteristics of countenance admirably befitting such a scene.
Had he been only elevated to the kindred office of actual executioner,
he would have been spared the expense of a mask; for without it, no one
could look into his eyes. Of course, he was teeming with compassion and
regret, which jointly resulted in a sentence of transportation for TEN
YEARS. Mr. O'Doherty, who stood unmoved, after a few preliminary
observations in reference to the unfairness of his trial, spoke as
follows:--
"I would feel much obliged if your lordship would permit me to
mention a few more words with reference to my motives throughout
this affair. I had but one object and purpose in view. I did
feel deeply for the sufferings and privations endured by my
fellow-countrymen. I did wish, by all means, consistent with a
manly and honourable resistance, to assist in putting an end to
that suffering. It is very true, and I will confess it, that I
desired an open resistance of the people to that government,
which, in my judgment, entailed these sufferings upon them. I
have used the words open and honourable resistance in order that
I might refer to one of the articles brought in evidence against
me, in which the writer suggests such things as flinging burning
hoops on the soldiery. My lords, these are no sentiments of
mine. I did not write that article. I did not see it or know of
it until I read it when published in the paper. But I did not
bring the writer of it here on the table. Why? I knew that if I
were to do so, it would be only handing him over at the
court-house doors to what one of the witnesses has very properly
called the fangs of the Attorney-General. With respect to myself
I have no fears. I trust I will be enabled to bear my sentence
with all the forbearance due to what I believe to be the opinion
of twelve conscientious enemies to me, and I will bear with due
patience the wrath of the Government whose mouthpiece they were;
but I will never cease to deplore the destiny that gave me birth
in this unhappy country, and compelled me, as an Irishman, to
receive at your hands a felon's doom for discharging what I
conceived, and what I still conceive, to be my duty."
Mr. Duffy's trial was postponed. His final escape is known to most of my
readers; but as I cannot approve of the character of his defence, I
prefer saying no more of it in this place.
It is here needful to refer to myself, a topic always disagreeable to
others, but painfully so on this occasion to me. The proposal to form a
league with the remaining members of the Association originated with
certain gentlemen, among whom the Rev. Mr. Miley held a prominent place,
who personally waited on Mr. O'Brien to testify their abhorrence of the
outrages offered to him in Limerick. Some very questionable politicians,
who watched with the eye of traffic the current of public opinion, and
sought to make the same profit of the reflux they had formerly made of
its unimpeded tide, attended on those occasions. Others, of purer
motives, and loftier patriotism, joined in these interviews, and
contrived to have them repeated. Among these were the poet, Samuel
Ferguson, and Richard Ireland, two recent and brilliant converts to the
cause of nationality. There were others, whom I need not name, of
equally unquestionable purity. But for several weeks, while these
interviews were held, there was no exact delegation from either the
Confederation or Association. I am not, indeed, aware whether any such
delegation was ever formally given or assumed. However, negotiations
proceeded, and though they were never brought to a satisfactory
adjustment, the dissolution of the Confederation was formally proposed
and adopted. On that day the greatest hope of Ireland perished.
The generosity of the suicide on the part of the Confederation was met
by a new chicane. Though every member, whose character and talents could
for a moment redeem the deformity, dulness and decrepitude of the Repeal
Association, had passed from its ranks and enrolled themselves in the
new League, it resolved to struggle on, acting as a check and a stain by
its anility and crookedness, on the rising hopes of the country. During
the discussions that led to the formation of the league, it was
emphatically announced by certain members of the Confederation that on
no ground and for no purpose would they abjure one principle they ever
announced. Above all, they avowed their purpose to urge on the country
the duty of armed resistance whenever its success appeared probable. The
Government heard of these avowals, and the time spent in captious
discussions about moral nonentities and legal quibbles, when the stake
was a nation's death or life, was diligently employed by the Government
in accumulating means of defence.
The motives of the principal promoters of the league are by no means
questioned here. On the contrary, it is freely admitted their
convictions were as sincere as they were fatal. The due appreciation of
that movement requires that a few leading facts and inferences upon
which it was based should be calmly considered. The first and most
important is the great change which had taken place in the feelings of
the country. The vast majority of the thinking population were ranged at
the side of the Confederation. So, too, was that of the people of the
rural districts. The intellectual leaders of the great Protestant party
had actually identified themselves with it, and a reconciliation with
the entire body of the Orangemen had been nearly effected. Most of the
men whose integrity and ability had preserved the lingering existence of
the Association, openly avowed their approval of its principles, and
such of them whose hearts were not mere empty sounds, would join its
members at a crisis.
Thus stood the facts. The considerations in favour of the junction were
these: Certain men of influence, who, contrary to their own convictions,
adhered to the Association, in the commencement through fear, and still
adhered to it through an unintelligible hankering after consistency,
pressed for an opportunity where they might abandon their former
associates without the appearance of abandoning their old principles.
There were others who followed a middle course, and were always with the
greater crowd and the more intense enthusiasm, who demanded the same
means of escape.
There was a consideration of some weight which no doubt influenced the
decision of the Confederates. It was this: the Roman Catholic clergymen
had given unmitigated opposition to the Confederation. Their hostility
had been the most formidable obstacle in its way; and it was assumed
that the presence of some leading churchmen among the Confederates,
would remove the distrust which the former opposition of the priesthood
had mainly tended to create.
These were the chief considerations at the affirmative side. On a less
pressing occasion, and at a former period, they might have been
forcible, nay, even conclusive. But the issue had been then narrowed to
one of actual force. John Mitchel was transported, and the most trusted
of his comrades had pledged their lives to redeem their brother felon at
any cost. Every consideration connected with the question should be
examined and determined on in reference to that position and that
pledge. Tested by them, the first above presented would thus resolve
itself: either these men whose characteristic had been indecision, were
sincere in seeking for an opportunity to redeem their patriotism by
their blood, or they were not. If they were, they would never be
restrained by the miserable fear of being charged with inconsistency. If
they were not, the cause would be cursed by their adhesion. The same
argument would apply to the priesthood with still more imperious force;
such of them as were actually sincere would be found at their post at
the hour of trial, in obedience to no form, but influenced by their own
conscientiousness. Such of them as were insincere would be true to no
obligation imposed by conventionality. Untrue to their convictions, they
could not be faithful to their words. And finally--an argument which
appears unanswerable and insuperable--Mr. John O'Connell and his
immediate followers had so solemnly abjured, denounced and cursed the
principles of the great majority with whom they were asked to league,
that they could not comply without such a debasement of character as to
compel the scorn of all men, not only to themselves, but all those with
whom they were united. It could not fail to strike any ordinary observer
that materials so incongruous and repulsive were incapable of cohesion;
and the consequence must be the distrust of the more ardent of their
followers at both sides.
These were my opinions. I pressed them at the time as strongly as I
could, and perhaps more urgently than I ought. But I was absent from
Dublin, and my remonstrances were vain. I would have retired in despair
had I not been too deeply engaged. The Rev. John Kenyon did actually
retire, influenced by the same motives which I refused to yield to,
solely because retirement would brand me with an imputation of
cowardice, which no explanation could ever efface. I refused all
connection with the League, but continued to act in concert with my
confederates, in establishing clubs and training the manhood of the
country for the stern trial before it. My position rendered bold,
undisguised and explicit language indispensable. This led to prosecution
and arrest. The charge was supposed to be high treason and Mr. Richard
O'Gorman wrote to me to inquire what I wished to have done in my behalf.
My answer was a distinct refusal to accept any aid from a body whose
constitution I could not approve. This circumstance is mentioned, not
because it deserves distinct attention, or even a place in this
narrative, but to prove that my objections to the dissolution of the
Confederation, and my feeling that it was a fatal step, are not of
recent growth, or founded on ex-post facto opinions. I feel bound to
add, however, that I stood alone, or almost alone, as far as I have been
able to hear. I dismiss the subject now, anxious to claim no praise, and
ready to submit to the blame that may attach to my course, such as it
was. I am only desirous, that in whatever memory of me my country may
preserve, the truth alone should determine the public estimation of my
conduct and character.
The League met, resolutions were adopted, and speeches made that meant
nothing. New men came together, looked each other in the face, and
turned away as if at the heart of each there was something with which he
could not trust the other. There was a short, feeble and false flourish,
and no more. Those who augured so sanguinely for its action and effect
were disappointed. But they shamed openly to relinquish a project for
sake of which they had made such sacrifices. By degrees, however, they
sought to rekindle the embers of that fire which with thoughtless hand
they aided to extinguish. The Government availing themselves of the
inactivity that prevailed, and acting on the information they received,
resolved to strike a second blow. Charles Duffy was arrested for an
article which the Castle Organ branded as shrinking and cowardly, and
which evidently lacked the burning spirit of the time. Immediately the
clubs, which continued a precarious and unintelligible existence, came
together and elected a directory of five from among their own members.
This directory consisted of Messrs. Dillon, Meagher, O'Gorman, Reilly,
and M'Gee. What their exact duty was does not sufficiently appear. But I
believe the fact to be that they never took counsel together.
Mr. Meagher and Mr. O'Gorman left town immediately. About that time I
was actively engaged in Tipperary. On the same day and hour Mr. Meagher
was arrested in Waterford and I in Cashel. An attempt was made to
rescue both of us, and by us both the effort was checked. I knew nothing
of what had occurred. I had been acting since the formation of the
League on my own judgment and responsibility. Independent of the fact
that the harvest was yet remote, and that we were tacitly pledged to
await its coming, my experience for the previous month satisfied me that
the people were far from being prepared; and I could not allow any
personal considerations to influence the country at such a crisis. Mr.
Meagher was governed by similar motives. It might have been better had
we acted otherwise, but with our then convictions, the least risk on our
own account would have been selfish and criminal; and rather than be
guilty of it we yielded to our fate. At the time each of us thought the
charge against him was at least felony. It turned out otherwise, and
though the magistrates who arrested and committed us refused to
entertain the question whether or not the offence was bailable, and
though we were both paraded through the country under an escort of
several hundred men, the Government directed we should be admitted to
bail. Mr. Meagher proceeded from Dublin to Limerick, where the
indictment against him was found; and on the same day I was liberated
from Nenagh Jail. Previous to my arrest, I had arranged to hold a
meeting on the summit of Slievenamon mountain. It was fixed for the day
after that on which I was liberated at Nenagh, which is at least fifty
miles from the place of meeting. I was not liberated until late in the
evening; but I resolved to be present at the meeting, and immediately
proceeded on my journey. I travelled all night, partly on horseback and
partly on foot, arriving at Cashel early in the morning. I there
learned that Mr. Meagher and some friends of his from Limerick had also
arrived with the same object as myself. We rode together to the
mountain, followed by several thousands, a distance of twenty miles.
Fifty thousand men at least clambered that steep mountain side, under a
scorching July sun. Four times as many would have been there to meet us,
but it had been widely rumoured none of us would be there; and in fact
most of those who came believed we were both in our prison-cells.
Besides this, efforts were made by men high in the confidence of the
leaders and the country to prevent the meeting altogether. To fix their
motives was difficult, but it would be hazardous to attribute to them
any but the best. Facts have since proved, however, that their
patriotism had even then begun to halt. The Rev. Mr. Byrne, of whom much
shall be said, hereafter, was foremost in this endeavour, and actually
dissuaded the people of Waterford, Carrick and Wexford from proceeding
to the mountain. These people all remained in Carrick, and Mr. Meagher
was informed that they were in a state of extreme excitement. This
intelligence determined him to leave the mountain suddenly and proceed
to meet his fellow-townsmen. Had all these been allowed to attend the
meeting, our resolution might have been very different from what it was.
But we were, in fact, disappointed and chagrined. The mountain-top had
been selected for many reasons. Principal among them were these: Public
meetings in Ireland had actually become a farce. We determined to hold
one from which all senseless and idle brawlers would be excluded. The
difficulty of ascending the hill would, we thought, sufficiently test
the courage and sincerity of our followers. Secondly, we wished for a
spot not accessible to her majesty's troops, so as to avoid a chance of
a collision. Thirdly, we thought it would be a precaution against
detectives; and finally, it was possible we might determine on some
bolder step when we saw our strength. The excitement in Carrick had
nearly become uncontrollable, when Mr. Meagher arrived there, and it was
deemed advisable to lead the people out of the town. The distance to
Waterford is twelve Irish miles, over the entire of which the procession
stretched; and so dense was the crowd that Mr. Meagher did not arrive in
Waterford sooner than three o'clock, next morning. It may well be
supposed that such a scene of excitement, heat and tumult, afforded but
little opportunity for deliberation. I was able to speak with my friend
only in brief snatches; and I did not afterward see him until it was too
late to take counsel for the future.
The meeting on that day, the evening scene at Carrick, and the arrival
in Waterford, were relied on by the English minister, as a perfect
justification for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. Others and
more powerful ones influenced the Cabinet; and foremost among these was
the great meeting at New York, which too clearly evidenced the purpose
of America, should the struggle proceed. I had no communication,
directly or indirectly, with any of my comrades after that day, save one
letter from Mr. O'Brien. This letter had reference solely to my
approaching trial, which he signified his wish to be present at. To this
letter I replied, informing him that it had been intimated to me that a
number of men would assemble, armed, near Nenagh, during the trial; and
I besought him to be there for the purpose of preventing an outbreak,
which I regarded as disastrous, unprepared as the people then were.
Neither the trial nor the meeting took place, and other events shaped
our destiny.[9] A few days after the Slievenamon meeting, it was
intimated to me that I was to be arrested on a second charge, the exact
nature of which was not stated. I could not doubt the accuracy of my
information, and being fully determined to preserve my liberty for the
coming struggle, which under any circumstances could not be long
delayed, I left home on the 22nd day of July, and proceeded through the
country to the foot of Slievenamon. Here I took up my quarters at a
farmer's house, where I remained two days and nights, in total ignorance
of the circumstances then rapidly hurrying the crisis wherein our fondly
cherished hopes were blasted.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 8: From the position in which Mr. Carleton is now placed, it
may be necessary to say that I do not allude to him.]
[Footnote 9: Since the above was written, I have heard it said that a
report, current about the time of Mr. O'Brien's conviction, had been
recently received here. The report was, that I promised Mr. O'Brien to
have 50,000 men to meet him; which was his principal inducement to act
as he did; and that I not only had not one man, but was myself absent
when he came. The absurdity of the rumour was sufficiently proved by the
fact that Mr. O'Brien did not come to me, or my part of the country, in
the first instance. The real truth is that I never directly or
indirectly, by word or letter, counselled the outbreak. Nay, more: I was
as ignorant of Mr. O'Brien's purpose as the President of these States.
At the time of Mr. Mitchel's trial, I believe I expressed a very strong
opinion in favour of rescuing him; and that opinion was grounded on the
belief that the whole people would rise up _en masse_, and in one wild
burst of vengeance, sweep their oppressors from the land. But neither
then nor afterwards, did Mr. O'Brien give me the least reason to believe
that he was prepared to resist the government in arms, save as far as he
concurred in acts which had a tendency to that end.
When first the report above referred to was circulated, I wrote the
strongest contradiction of it, and Mr. Meagher, with Mr. O'Brien's
sanction, addressed the following note to the editor of the Tipperary
_Vindicator_. I am sorry it should be in any way necessary to produce it
here; but as this is the last time I shall ever refer to this subject, I
thought it best to add this testimony to my own.
CLONMEL GAOL
"MR. MEAGHER fully authorises his friend, Mr. Lenihan, to state
that the exculpation which appeared in a recent number of his
paper, from Mr. Doheny, is the perfect truth.
"Mr. Meagher is most anxious to have this stated, for he has
felt for a long time deeply pained at many of the false reports
that have appeared against his friend--his dear and trusted
friend, Michael Doheny.
"One of the most grievous of these reports has been that very
false one, charging Mr. Doheny with having invited Mr. Smith
O'Brien to the county Tipperary. Nothing could have been more
false than this.
"Mr. Doheny, so far from inviting Mr. O'Brien to Tipperary, did
not, in fact, know of his being in the county at all, until Mr.
Meagher told him, and that was on Tuesday, July 25th.
(Signed) "THOMAS FRANCIS MEAGHER.
"Written a few hours after the passing of the sentence of death.
"_October 23, 1848._"]