Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

and Mr. Paine were retained for the defendants. On the 19th of February, 1827, a bill of indictment was laid before the grand jury of the city of Dublin, charging Mr. Sheil with having uttered, and the proprietor and printer of the Morning Register with having published, a seditious libel. Some hours elapsed before they could agree, and while awaiting their decision, Mr. Sheil amused his counsel by an incessant flow of anecdote and humour, affording a singular contrast to the gravity of demeanour which others have manifested under similar circumstances. "We passed a remarkably pleasant day," writes one of those gentlemen; "it was a curious occasion for such pleasantry; but Sheil kept us in a continuous state of excitation and enjoyment by his most agreeable, lively, and engaging talk." He discussed without affectation the consequences which might ensue from an unfavourable result of the impending trial, and said that, although "some months' imprisonment might be a very serious infliction on the father of a large family, or a man in great business at the bar, in his comparative youth he thought he should be able to laugh away the hours with friends and visitors."*

*Letter from Mr. Justice Perrin to the author, 6th December, 1853.

At half-past two o'clock, Sir William Smith, foreman of the grand jury, appeared in court, and handed in the bill, which had been found to be "true." In about half-an-hour the Attorney-General entered the court, and called for the appearance of Richard Sheil. It was intimated that he was in attendance, and in a few minutes he appeared, accompanied by Mr. W. H. Curran.

The look and manner of Mr. Plunket indicated to those who knew him that he was not insensible to the personal and political reproaches which, in England as well as in Ireland, the prosecution had drawn down upon him. His old and attached friend, Mr. Peter Burrowes, sat beside him. The real sentiments of both were far more in unison with those of the accused than with any which could be supposed to animate the Government they professionally represented; but Mr. Plunket was committed to the proceeding, and knew not how to draw back.

Mr. Holmes applied for a copy of the indictment. This was objected to upon technical grounds by the counsel for the Crown; but the objection being over-ruled, a copy was handed to counsel for the traverser. It occupied forty folio sheets of parchment. On the following morning, the Solicitor-General

(Mr. Joy), addressing the court, intimated that, if the defendant desired to traverse in prox.-in other words, to avail himself of his right to defer entering his plea to the indictment until the next commission, the Crown would not object, provided its consent were asked, but they must contest the right, if asserted, as setting a dangerous precedent. Mr. Holmes and Mr. Perrin agreed that the right was, in point of law, incontestable under various statutes. Mr. O'Connell cited many authorities, and referred to the case of the Seven Bishops, who had been refused permission in 1688 to traverse in prox.-a decision solemnly declared unjust and illegal. "It is our undoubted right here, and we will not accept it as a favour." The court pronounced their unhesitating opinion that the right existed; and intimated that Mr. Sheil might stand out upon his own recognizance until the ensuing commission. On the evening of the same day the Attorney-General sailed for England.

CHAPTER XI.

1827.

Mr. Canning premier-Suspension of agitation-Nolle prosequi -King's counsel - Accident to Mr. Sheil while ridingDeath of Mr. Canning-Lord Manners-Renewal of agitation-Lord Anglesea Viceroy-Agrarian disturbancesWealth of the Established Church.

On the 27th February, six weeks after the death of the Duke of York, Lord Liverpool, who for fifteen years had held the office of Prime Minister, was struck with fatal illness. The bond which so long had held together the coalition of friends and opponents of religious liberty, was suddenly dissolved, and all parties awaited the result with breathless anxiety. The pause was long, and as day after day rolled by without any announcement of a solution, the public began to have a sense, though a dim and imperfect

one, of the difficulties that encompassed the situation. We now read the events of that singular interlude between the great acts of ostensible history, with the help of many lights that were then borne in the dark lanthorns of "private and confidential" communication. The King, engrossed, as usual, with selfish solicitude for his own ease and enjoyment, was full of fair and false words, alternately for Canning and for Eldon. He asked the advice of each apart, and affected to be swayed by both in turn. At first he was full of the idea that the leader of the Commons might easily be flattered into retaining the secondary post he had hitherto filled, by being allowed to choose his new superior. George IV. tried every means to persuade him that an anti-Catholic peer would alone be able to command a majority in the Lords, and that consequently there was no choice but to seek, if possible, another premier like Lord Liverpool. But Canning had grown weary of subserviency, and had taken his resolve. Instead of opposing his Majesty's proposal, he at once acquiesced in it so far as to declare that he would throw no difficulty in the way, and that he should cheerfully retire in order that the experiment might be fairly made of forming a cabinet united in resistance to all concession. But was this

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »