searching of that place was left to Walsh's back-his successor on Alderman Darley. the backs of Walsh's legs. His statement of some of the circumstances of the division of the booty was similar to that of Owens. He alleged, however, that the adjustment did not take place until about five o'clock in the evening, and that from the time Mr. O'Connor placed himself on the ditch until that hour he took no refreshment. Mr. Wallace asked, whether the rest of the gang had not taken refreshment. Witness answered they had. Then, said Mr. W., it appears you acted very unceremoniously towards your captain. On being again questioned about M'Keon's advice relative to robberies, he admitted that it was against all crimes of that description, as they would only lead to the gallows. He was reminded by Counsel that he gave a different statement before, to which he replied that M'Keon advised both for and against robberies. On being cross-examined by Mr. Wallace, he repeated that the blunderbusses were quite exposed. Richard Waring, the other approver, was examined at much length. A great portion of his evidence relative to the circumstances of the robbery, &c. agreed with that given by Owens. He said that he was not present at the consultation at Dangan, having had to go for a blunderbuss which he had concealed in a bog. He stated, that on the return of the party from the robbery, Mr. O'Connor had opened the gate for them, hoping that they had good luck; and that he (Mr. O'Connor) had held the blunderbuss of one of the party while he went into M'Keon's house to light his pipe. He distinctly affirmed that M'Keon advised him to cease robbing houses for arms, &c. as it was an unprofitable pursuit, and take up the better occupation of mailrobbing. He stated that he, as well as his associate Owens, was concerned in innumerable crimipalties. He had taken the Carder's oath at the instigation of Mr. O'Connor, but his descrip-tion of it was different from that which Owens had given. It bound persons, according to his statement, merely to support anarchy and put down monarchy." He was present at the carding of Walsh, who had been held while the witness performed with his own hand that operation. Walsh, however, was not left long in his hands. He said he had "only two or three touches at him," the instrument of torture being given to abler and better hands. He operated on VOL. LIX. John Allen, farmer, was the next witness. He remembered the 4th of October, 1812. He saw Mr. O'Connor on that day, having received a note from that gentleman, desiring him to call on him. Mr. O'Connor asked whether he had not heard of the mail-robbery of the 2d, and he answered, he had. He then asked, what would witness think if he heard the mail had been found on Dangan demesne? Witness answered, he should be sorry to hear it was the case, as, from the circumstance of a bag having before been found there, it would have a bad appearance in the country. O'Connor then brought him into a room, and showed him, lying on a table, the mail bags, some newspapers, lottery tickets, P broken broken notes, &c. He further asked witness, whether he could keep a secret? To which he replied, that he never abused any confidence that was reposed in him. O'Connor then asked him, if he had not been security for the gaoler of Trim, and whether he was not, in consequence, likely to be a sufferer by the escape of Heavy and Savage? Witness replied, he was security. O'Connor then said, that he had reason to know that Savage was lurking about Dangan, and that he would put witness in the way of securing him. On being asked whether any oath was proposed to him. by O'Connor, he said there was not. O'Connor had a red book in his hand at the time of asking him whether he could keep a secret, but proposed no oath. O'Connor had asked him what he would advise him to do with the bags, and witness answered, to send them to the postmaster of Summerhill. On his cross-examination, this witness stated, that he considered the secret he had to keep was, that Mr. O'Connor had interfered in procuring the re-taking of Savage. He further asserted, that he took Mr. O'Connor's interposition on this occasion to be an act of kindness, and intended to show his gratitude to the witness, and his brother-in-law, the gaoler, for acts of civility received, while he (Mr. O'Connor) was confined in Trim gaol for an assault, for which he had been convicted. Mr. Lube was next called.Being asked had he given any advice to Owens on the subject of the present prosecution, said, that any professionally private communion he had with Owens he was not at liberty to disclose, meaning, as we suppose, in his capacity as a clergyman; that Owens had asked him (Mr. Lube) "if it would be criminal in him (Owens) to make a discovery in order to save his own life, for that proposals had been made to him to that effect?" that he (Mr. Lube) asked Owens, had he any discovery of importance to make? that Owens answered in the affirmative; that he (Mr. Lube) immediately laid a solemn injunction on Owens, not to name the parties to him (Mr. Lube), inasmuch and for that it did not belong to him to be made acquainted with it; but added, that if he (Owens) knew of any gang of robbers who were disturbing the peace of the country, he (Owens) would "do well" to " divulge it," and that, provided he adhered to truth," he (Mr. Lube) saw nothing criminal in it. [This conversation, Mr. Lube said, took place in the presence of a third person, one Reynolds; and after, as we have above stated, proposals had been made to Owens to save his life.] Mr. Lube, having been asked how long he had been attending Owens after his conviction, before the above conversation took place, replied, about three weeks; and to a question, did Owens at that time entertain any hopes of a reprieve? replied, he did not; nor did he (Mr. Lube) hold out any hopes to him. Question by Mr. M'Nally.-Did witness believe it was with a view to save his life that Owens gave the information? Mr. Lube said, he 'verily believed it was.' Robert Gilbert, a Dublin police officer, stated that he arrested Mr. O'Connor, O'Connor, at Palace Anne, in the county of Cork, the house of Mr. Barnard, a magistrate of that county. He shewed the warrant to Barnard. When Mr. O'C. saw it, he said it was illegal, inasmuch as the word "felonious" was not in it. He believed Mr. O'C. made that observation for the purpose of showing the offence with which he was charged was bailable. Witness thought it was bailable. He did not know against whom he had the warrant, until he went to Cork, and thought, when he saw Mr. O'Connor, and the respectable house he was in, he might have made a mistake as to the person. On asking Mr. O C. whether he was of Dangan, he answered he was. On his cross-examination this witness admitted Mr. O'C. was repeatedly out of his custody. He thought that if Mr. O'C. had resisted he would have been unable to bring him to Dublin, though he was determined, if there had been any serious opposition, to have shot Mr. O'C. While Mr. O'C. had been out of witness's custody, he was in that of a Captain White Witness was asked whether he had not brought handcuffs with him from Dublin, and was not of opinion that he would render himself agreeable to persons in power if he had treated his prisoner with indiguity. He answered, that bringing the handcuffs was accidental, as when he left town he knew not whom he was going to arrest. He received no instructions respecting treatment when he set out. The case on behalf of the Crown having closed, Mr. M'Nally, as counsel for M'Keon, said it was not necessary for him to call a single witness. Mr. Wallace, as leading counsel for Mr. O'Connor, said he would pursue the same course as Mr. M'Nally, if life only was at stake; but here, the honour of a gentleman, which was more dear than life itself, was at stake, and for that purpose alone he would call witnesses, by whom Mr. O'Connor's character would be SO purged, that malice itself dare not raise its shaft against him. He Francis Burdett O'Connor, Esq. was then called. The two blunderbusses above spoken of were produced; he stated that he had found them in a rabbit-hole in the demesne of Dangan, in the November following the mail robbery; they were then in their present state, without locks. brought them to a house occupied by his brother and two sisters. Subsequently his brother removed to a new house, and these blunderbusses, were brought away, he supposed by the workmen, with other lumber out of the storeroom in which they were originally deposited, and put into the room where his brother slept, in the new house, and laid against the fire place. He was present when the plundered mail-bags were discovered in the wood of Dangan, and information of the circumstance was sent to the postoffice. There was no cross-examination of this witness. Leonard M'Nally, Esq. deposed, that he attended at the Naas Assizes, where the Owenses were tried. Mr. O'Connor was there, and examined as a witness. He said he once thought the priP 2 soners soners were persons of good character, but had changed his opinion of them. Mr. Bernard M'Guire, attorney, corroborated Mr. M'Nally's testimony. John Pratt Winter, Esq. a magistrate of the county of Meath, stated, that on his return from the fair of Ballinasloe, after the mail robbery, he had used active endeavours to discover the perpetrators of the deed. He received information that M'Keon was concerned, on which he proceeded to the house of Mr. O'Connor. Mr. O'Connor immediately went with him in search of M'Keon, and having found him where he was superintending some work, they closely examined him, and proceeded to his house, and made diligent search, without being able to discover any thing that could tend to show he (M'Keon) was in the smallest degree concerned in the outrage. Mr. O'Connor afterwards called on him, and offered to give all the aid in his power in bringing the robbers to justice, though he seldom inter fered in matters of the kind. Michael Parry, Esq. agent to Mr. O'Connor, deposed, that on the 2d of November, 1811, he had remitted to Mr. O'C. 47931.; that on the 17th of August, 1812, he remitted him 1400l.; and that, on the 27th of September, 1812, he sent him 500l. for the purpose of purchasing cattle at the fair of Ballinasloe. He had enclosed the 500l. in a letter to Mr. O'C., and had written to the Bank of Ireland, making them acquainted with the circumstance, and desiring them not to pay the notes to any order but that of Mr. O'Con nor. His letter to Mr. O'C. was then in Court, and he said he would, if permitted, refer to it. The letter was handed to him, and he read from it a mention of the enclosure of the money. Since the commencement of his intercourse with Mr. O'Connor, their money-dealings amounted to 25,000l., and that at the time of the alleged robbery he would have transmitted him 2000l. if he wanted it. In the course of his dealings he never met. with a more honourable or upright man. Witness further stated, that the amount of Mr. O'Connor's rental in Cork was 1800l. per annum. Jeremiah Keller, Esq. barrister at law, stated he had known Mr. O'Connor for a 'great number of years, during which they had been intimate friends. Mr. O'Connor was formerly of the Munster bar. Speaking generally of his character, he conceived it to be excellent. He would mention an instance of his disinterestedness and generosity. He had married a lady in early life without a fortune, notwithstanding which he had made a most liberal settlement upon her. Witness knew him afterwards to support the lady's father in a creditable style, which he continued to do until his death. He thought it next to an impossibility that he would be guilty of such an act as had been imputed to him. Sir Francis Burdett said, he was acquainted with Mr. O'Connor since 1796, about the period he (Sir F.) had returned to England. He always entertained the highest opinion of his honour and principles. On being asked whether he had any money transactions with Mr. Mr. O'Connor, he answered it was unpleasant to allude to such matters, but as it was conceived to be useful to Mr. O'Connor's defence, he would mention, that embarrassments, which he need not particularize, had rendered different small advances to Mr. O'Connor necessary, and of which he, Sir Francis, had never made any memorandum. A circumstance having, at one time, occurred, which he would not then explain, he had written to Mr. O'Connor to place 400l. to his credit at his banker's. Mr. O'Connor in answer wrote to him, saying he had not a demand for 400l. but 1000l., and enclosed him his bond for that amount. On witness's next meeting him, he told Mr. O'C. he had entirely misunderstood his intentions, and returning the bond, desired him to pay the money at his convenience. Witness said he was once before in Ireland for a short time, and that his present visit was for the purpose of serving Mr. O'C. as far as he was able. He was then asked from what he had known of Mr. O'Connor, and calling him as he did his friend, what were his feelings on hearing of the charge of felony which had been preferred against him. Sir Francis replied with great emphasis, "I thought I should have sunk into the earth." Counsel observed that it was well known the witness was a gentleman of large fortune, and asked him whether or not he would have advanced him money if he had applied to him, at the period of the imputed offence? Sir Francis replied, "I know not the sum of money that I would not have placed at his disposal if he had applied to me." The learned judge (Daly) addressed a few words to the jury. He said there was certainly legal evidence to go to the jury; but, in the course of his experience, he never knew a charge so strongly rebutted as that which it was produced to sustain. If the jury felt any reasonable doubts, he would recapitulate the evidence; but if they thought with him, it was unnecessary for him to do so. The foreman of the jury replied, that himself and his brethren were all of his lordship's opinion. The verdict of acquittal was immediately pronounced; it excited the extremest joy-the manifestations of it in the court were of an unusual kind, the waving of hats, handkerchiefs, and sticks. The effect without was instantaneous. The town caught the enthusiasm of the auditory within, and shouts of joy interrupted, for a considerable time, the closing of this very interesting scene. OLD BAILEY, JULY 7. Child Stealing.-Harriet Molineux Hamilton was indicted for feloniously and maliciously taking, stealing, and carrying away a certain male child of the age of six months, the son of Henry Porter, with intent to deprive the said Henry Porter of the custody of the said child. In other counts the prisoner was charged with stealing certain wearing apparel of the said child, the property of the said Henry Porter. The prisoner was brought into court at about 10 o'clock, extremely well dressed. At her de sire |