respectable corporation of Dublin to the Lordlieutenant on his escape?--I do. Have you any recollection of the gentlemen who signed the requisition, or any of them, for calling that meeting?-It was signed by a great number, and amongst the rest by my self. Do you recollect being asked the other day, about a Mr. Moore, who was one of the grand jury?—I do. Mr. Goulburn said, they were assembled to inquire into the conduct of the sheriff of Dublin, and he could not see how such a question was at all referable to his conduct. The inquiry would be interminable, if they did not adhere to that which was alone the subject of in-name, but I think it is very likely that he did. quiry. Sir J. Stewart defended the relevancy of the question he had put, and denied that the examination could be narrowed in the way recommended by his hon. friend. The Chairman thought it was utterly impossible to lay down any strict line as to the nature of the questions that should or should not be put. A question which did not at first appear relevant, might lead to very important inferences. Mr.J. Williams argued, that a parliamentary inquiry demanded a greater latitude than an inquiry in a court of justice. Was not he one of those who signed that requisition, and one of the first?--I do not know; there were a great number, and I signed my name, and the names of two others who directed me to do so. I did not see his Do you know whether any of the grand jury, and if so, how many, signed that requisition?—I cannot charge my memory with that. Do you know Mr. Chambers, a solicitor of Dublin?-I do. He was the solicitor for Mr. Forbes, one of the persons indicted?—He was. Is that the gentleman who now sits at the side of the sheriff, as his confidential adviser ? That is the gentleman. By Mr. Nolan.-Do you know whether, being elected as common-council-man is not considered as an exemption from serving on the commission grand juries?—I do not know that it operates as an exemption. Is it considered as a favour for a common in-council-man to be put upon a commission grand jury?—I had rather understood it to be a favour to be off of it. Colonel Barry contended, that they would do nothing if they confined the quiry to the conduct of the sheriff. He had put questions which did not go to that point, but which he could not consider as irrelevant. One learned member (Mr. Brougham) had declared his intention to conduct the committee into an inquiry with respect to the whole state of the administration of justice in Ireland. With such a declaration as this before them, how could an extended examination be avoided? Mr. J. Grattan observed, that if they were to go into an inquiry into the conduct of the guild of merchants, and of the Lord-lieutenant of Ireland, the investigation would be without end. The Chairman strongly recommended that hon. members would, in their ques tions, as far as possible, limit their quiry to matters of strict fact. Do you know, whether the usual practice is, for the sheriff to return an open panel, or a signed one, for the grand jury?—A signed panel. Do you mean that the panel is signed in the first instance, or that it is first returned, without signature, and afterwards signed in court?-Signed in the first instance. Were you present at the time that this grand jury was returned?—The sheriff handed me the panel. Were you in court at the time, and did he hand it to the proper officer?-The sheriff handed it to me as the proper officer. Do you recollect any observation made by the court considering the number of traversers, as to the propriety or impropriety of returning so small a panel?-I do not. According to the practice in Dublin, after a in-grand jury panel is signed by the sheriff, can any be added to it ?-If there is not a sufficient number on the panel as returned, the sheriff frequently adds to it. Sir J. Mackintosh wished the recommendation, as far as practicable, to be adopted. Still he thought that acts of the grand jury might eventually affect and involve the conduct of the sheriff. [The witness was again called in.] By Sir J. Stewart.-Do you recollect an address from the lord mayor and a body of the With reference to the common jury panel, the jury to try, is that returned as a signed panel?—It most usually is. After it is signed, can any persons be added to it regularly?—I have known the sheriff directed to take his name from the panel, in order that he might have an opportunity of enlarging it, By Colonel Barry.-Were you by at the time the petit jury were called before the court?--I was in the court of King's-bench when the jury were called over to try the exofficio information. Do you recollect any observation being made by the court at that time, as to the smallness of the panel returned?—I cannot distinctly bring it to my recollection." Any thing said as to the number of traversers?-At some period or other I remember the observation falling from the court, but when, distinctly, I cannot bring to my recollection, What was that observation?-It was with reference to the small number of jurors returned. Was it stating that they were too small?— Yes, with reference to the smallness of the number. Finding fault with the smallness of the number? That was the impression that it made upon me. Was not that at a subsequent commission? -It was not at a commission at all. It was not at the commission where this grand jury was impanelled?-It was at the trial of the ex-officio information. It had nothing to do with the grand jury with reference to which you have been examined?-No. Who was the presiding sheriff to that commission? It was a trial at bar, in the court of King's-bench; the same sheriff who return. ed the grand jury. If the panel had been double the number that it was, would it have made any alteration in the persons who were sworn on the grand jury at the commission?—of course those that followed afterwards, would not have been called when the first six-and-twenty of the grand jury appeared. By Mr. Brownlow.-Do you know how many of the January grand panel are to be found upon the preceding panel in October?-I think sixteen. You stated that you were in the court of King's-bench when the jury were impanelled to try the ex-officio information?-When the jury were called over; I was brought there as a witness. Did his majesty's attorney general challenge a great number upon that panel?-There were a number set by on the part of the crown. Do not you believe that 29 were the number? There were a good many, but I cannot speak to the number. Do you know who was the foreman of that jury?—I do not recollect. Do you think Mr. Francis Mills was the foreman ?-I believe he was. Was Mr. Francis Mills upon the commission grand jury panel in January?—I do not know. [The witness referred to the panel] I find that he is. Then the foreman of the jury, to try the exofficio informations, was one of the grand panel of January 1823 ?—He was. Do you not recollect, that many were called before his name was called?—I do not. You were understood to say you were there; but you do not recollect that circumstance ?--I do not. Do you know whether Thomas Fry was on both juries?-[The witness referred to the panel] I find that he is. Do you know whether Mr. Moore is not brother-in-law to the provost of Trinity college in Dublin?-I do not know. Do you know Mr. Moore, the solicitor, in Dublin; a neighbour of yours?—Yes, perfectly well. Do you not know that he is brother to the gentleman on the panel ?—I really do not know, but I always understood he was a most respectable gentleman. By Sir N. Colthurst.--Do you recollect any of the Bank directors of Dublin having been challenged by the Crown on the petit jury?—I cannot bring to my recollection any such cir cumstance. Then, in point of fact, the law officer of the crown felt it incumbent upon him to object to a greater number upon this panel than on usual occasions?-Yes, it appeared so. By Mr. J. Williams.-What number did Mr. Mills appear upon the commission grand jury panel? No. 29. What was Mr. Fry's number upon that panel? No. 37. Do you recollect the number specified in the precept?-The precept, I think, mentions twenty-four. Do you know, whether the two jurors who served upon the er officio information, and who had been upon the grand jury panel, had been among the number of those who were or were not sworn?-The Two persons, Mills and Fry, were not sworn on the grand jury; they were merely on the panel. Within these few years, has it not been usual to call Roman Catholics on grand juries?—I have known it occur frequently, latterly. You act as clerk of the Crown in a great many counties, and in a great many of those counties do you not recollect Roman Catholics being called upon the grand panel promiscuously with others?—I have; and sworn. Were you present when the result of the trial of the ex-officio information was announced in the court, by the withdrawal of a juror?—I was not. You have no knowledge of any ulterior proceedings being intimated by any person, to be taken after the result of a juror being withdrawn?-I have not. Mr. Terence O'Reilly called in and examined Will you have the goodness to see, whether By Mr. J. Williams.—What is your situation? Mr. Francis Mills was upon that panel?--An attorney, in Dublin. Where have you resided carrying on that profession?-In the city of Dublin. Were you residing in Dublin at the time that the commission jury was sworn in January last? I was. Do you remember when the bills went before the grand jury?-Perfectly. Were you in the court, or in the neighbour-hood of the court at that time, when the bills were before the jury?-Alternately in the court and in the neighbourhood of the court during the first and second days of the commission. On either of those days did you see Mr. sheriff Thorpe ?-Frequently. Were you present when it was announced that the bills were ignored?—I was. To whom was that announced ?-In the office of the clerk of the crown, Mr. Allen and Green's office in Green-street; in an office adjoining the court-house, in the same building with the court-house in Green-street, Dublin. Were you in that office at that time?-I was. Were any other persons there?—There were. Can you name any of them ?—It was an office of public intercourse, and a great number of persons occasionally go in, and retire; at that particular instant I do not recollect that there were many persons; the conversation alluded to, was directed chiefly to a gentleman of the name of Ward, a professional gentle man. Was sheriff Thorpe in that office ?-He was. How near to the time of the news arriving of the bills being ignored?-From an hour to three quarters of an hour previous. Did you hear Mr. Sheriff Thorpe make any observation to Mr. Ward, or to any other person, at the time you have now alluded to ?-He came into the office where I was, and said, "There will be no bills found: have not I managed it well? and my business being done I have no further here." How was he dressed at that time?-He had 'his appointments of sheriff, his cocked hat and sword. He took those off; the hat I am not quite positive about; he put on his surtout and immediately went away, as if to communicate the news elsewhere. Did you hear him say any thing else?- No. Do you know any other person who was present at the time, besides Mr. Ward?-There was Mr. Macnamara an attorney. Did you mean to say that he had nothing further to do there ?-Yes; at that place. By Col. Barry.-How many persons were there in the room?-Sheriff Thorpe, myself, Mr. Macnamara, and Mr. Ward. Do you suppose there were any others in the room I dare say there were, but as to the identity of them, I cannot speak to that. Were there any clerks in the room ?--I am quite sure there were not then; I was standing behind the counter, and there were but three there; and it is the usual place where clerks were, that I was. Did Mr. Sheriff Thorpe say this in a loud tone, of voice?-He did, in an exulting man ner. Did he speak it as loud as you are speaking now?-I rather think not. But so that it could be heard by any person who was in the room?-Yes. Had you any conversation with Mr. Ward about the probable finding of the jury?—I am not quite certain; Mr. Ward will of course tell you if I did. Did you make any observation to Mr. Ward afterwards, respecting the declaration of Mr. Sheriff Thorpe ?-I am not quite sure whether I did. Have you ever mentioned to any person that you had a conversation with Mr. Ward?—No, never. When did you first mention this declaration of Mr. Sheriff Thorpe after you heard it ?-Whenever the subject came to be discussed. When did it come to be discussed ?-It occurred very often. When did you first mention it?—I do not recollect having mentioned it at any particular time so that I could state it exactly, until I was applied to as to giving evidence as to another fact, which I was not competent to do; and I stated my incompetency to do it. Who applied to you to give evidence as to that fact?A Mr. Costelow, an attorney. Was it a fact connected with this inquiry?— It was certainly connected with this inquiry; respecting some juror, or something of that sort. To whom did you mention this fact first ?— Το young Mr. Plunket, the attorney general's son. When?-On Monday or Tuesday last. Do you remember any particular person to whom you mentioned it previously to Monday last?—I do not. Do you believe that you mentioned it to any one in the interim ?—I did to many. You do not remember them ?—I do not. But you are clear you had no conversation with Mr. Ward upon the subject ?-Perfectly clear. After Mr. Thorpe left the room?-After Mr. Thorpe left the room. You did not mention it to him?-I did not. What induced you to communicate with Mr. Costelow upon the subject?-I never communicated willingly with Mr. Costelow; he stopped me in the hall of the court where we were in the habit of meeting each other, and asked me whether I recollected the circumstance which occurred at the commission. What circumstance was that ?-With respect to a juror that wanted or wished to be on the grand jury of January 1823; and I told him I was quite ignorant on that subject, and could give no evidence whatever of it; that I was most anxious not to give any evidence upon the subject, and that I would feel greatly obliged to him not to press any thing upon me; that I was circumstanced in a way now that it would be vital to my interests in a variety of ways to come forward. Was that grand juror's name Poole?-It was. When had you this conversation with Mr. Costelow?-The same day that I had the communication with the attorney-general's son. About Monday or Tuesday last. By Mr. Brownlow.-Do you come here by order of this House ?-I come here by order of the crown solicitor, who told me, with young Mr. Plunkett, there had been an order moved for; and in order to get a speedy return I came here in order to give my evidence, and get back to my professional pursuits and my family. The order of this House never reached you? -It did not. Then you are a volunteer?-I am, so far. When did you leave Dublin?-On Friday morning. Where have you been since your arrival in London ?-In one of the hotels. What hotel is it? I do not recollect the name precisely. Is it the Salopian?-That is the name of it. Have you been talking with any one since you came to London, with reference to the evidence you are to give in this House?I have. Is it Mr. Blake ?That is the gentleman. Were you with him to-day?—I was Who told you to go to Mr. Blake ?—I called at the attorney-general's this morning, and told him that I had arrived; he was not aware that I had, I believe, until I did come. He felt obliged, he said, for my prompt attendance, and requested I would call on Mr. Blake; which I did. What did he mean by your prompt attendance?-Coming, probably, without the order of this House. And he begged you to go to Mr. Blake?— He did. And you went to Mr. Blake accordingly?— I did. What conversation had you with Mr. Blake? -I wrote down for him the evidence I could give. Did he not ask you what you could give, as to such and such questions ?-He did not. What did he do with the written evidence you wrote down ?-I do not know. Did he talk to you at all upon the subject of the evidence you could give?Yes, he did. What did he say ?-He asked me the evidence I could give; and I said, the shortest way will be, for me to write it down; and he said, it would; and I wrote it down. And you had no further conversation with him -No. By Mr. Brougham.-You have not lived in Cotton-garden since you came here [a laugh]? -I do not recollect that I have. Had you any particular acquaintance with young Mr. Plunkett ?No. Or with Mr. Plunkett, his majesty's attorney general for Ireland ?—I never spoke to him, b on professional business. Have you any acquaintance with any memb of this House?—I have the honour of knowin many of the members of this House; not int mately. Are there any you know more than others? I think I know Mister Ellis more than other By Mr. J. Williams.-You have stated, th Mr. Sheriff Thorpe, and Mr. Ward, and you self, were behind the desk at which the cler of the office are usually placed, at the time th conversation took place?—Yes. Did Mr. Sheriff Thorpe address this conve sation to Mr. Ward, as to a person with who he was intimate?-Yes, I conceived it so. By Mr. Scarlett.-You have said you we unwilling to give any evidence, were you right understood?-Yes, perfectly so; for I was circumstanced that nothing but a sense of du would oblige me to do it; I come here at ve great inconvenience to my private concerns. By Mr. Grattan.-Do you mean to say, th you expressed to Mr. Costelow your disinclin tion to attend?-I did, and to Mr. Plunkett, to and to every person who spoke to me upon t occasion. By Mr. Brownlow.-Were you acquaint with Mr. Sheriff Thorpe's person at the tir he came into the office P-I knew him as sheri but I never knew him until he was made sh riff. You have said that Mr. Sheriff Thorpe sai the business had been very well managed; w there any allusion to the jury at that time?conceive that he alluded to the management impanelling the jury, by the expressions that used. By Mr. C. Calvert.-You were understo to say, that the words he used were, "the will be no bills found?"-Those were the word And he said that in a loud tone?—Yes. By a Member.-And you had no previo knowledge of him, except in his capacity sheriff?—Yes, I knew his person as sheriff. How came it that you never mentioned it any person until you mentioned it to M Plunkett,jun.?-I have mentioned it frequentl but the particular persons I am not prepar to name. You have not named any person except M Plunket, jun., to whom you have mentioned i -There were a great number of persons prese besides those: Mr. Macnamara and Mr. War those can vouch for it. You cannot name any other individual whom you mentioned it, except to young M Plunkett?-No. By Sir J. Mackintosh.-Did you state M Sheriff Thorpe to have used those words in a exulting tone, and in a voice loud enough be heard by you ?-He did. Are you rightly understood in having begu to say, that you probably had conversed, sin the occurrence of that interview, with M Macnamara, the other gentleman present?That is precisely my evidence. room. Did you hear the whole of the conversation at the very instant, there were very few in the that passed between the sheriff and Mr. Ward? I am not quite sure; they seemed to be very intimate, and I would not obtrude myself any thing more than that which was said so loud. Mr. Dillon Macnamara called in, and examined By Mr. Scarlett.-What is your profession? Are you sure there was nothing said pre--A solicitor and attorney. viously to that you have repeated?-Certainly not, By a Member. You say that the sheriff left the room as if to communicate the news; what news do you mean?-The news of the bills being thrown out, against the rioters. Did you not say that this conversation passed three quarters of an hour before the bills were thrown out?--I do. How do you reconcile it, that the sheriff should leave the office to carry the news of the bills being thrown out, three quarters of an hour before they had been thrown out ?-To communicate to his friends in the city, that the bills had been, or would be, thrown out. Do you know whether Mr. Sheriff Thorpe had been previously in the grand jury room? -I do not. Were you in court when the bills were returned?-I was not; but I was so near that I knew it immediately: I was in the office that just the hall divided. How long was that after Mr. Sheriff Thorpe came into the office?-About three quarters of an hour. Will you take upon you to say it was not three o'clock when Mr. Sheriff Thorpe came into the office?-I do not think it was. Do you know whether Mr. Sheriff Thorpe had been in the habit of employing Mr. Ward as his attorney?—I know nothing about it. By Mr. Brownlow.-After you first heard it, and between that time and the time of communicating it to Mr. Plunket, had you not made many persons, or some persons, acquainted with the information you possessed? -I do not know any person that I communicated it to; but Mr. Macnamara, being present, was aware of my knowledge of the transaction. You have already stated, that you had communicated it to many persons?--I did. You now tell us you never communicated it to any person?—I say, I do not know any person that I can name at this instant, that I communicated it to. By Mr. Denman.-Did any person come from the grand jury room to Mr. Sheriff Thorpe, about that period?-Not that I saw. Was there any thing from which you could infer, that Mr. Sheriff Thorpe had received any particular information with regard to the probability of the bills being thrown out? Nothing but his coming into the room, and announcing this.” By Mr. J. Williams.-Was there any thing particular in the manner of Mr. Sheriff Thorpe when he came in?-He came in, in an exulting manner, and announced it at once; every body that was there might have heard it; I believe, Were you near the court at the time when the commission grand jury, in January last, were sitting upon the bills that were before them?-I was. Did you, upon that occasion, see Mr. Sheriff Thorpe ?--I did. Where did you see him ?—At various times in court during the day, attending to his duty as sheriff. Do you remember seeing him at any time in the clerk of the peace's office, adjacent to the court?-I did. What time of the day might that be?-I think it was between two and three o'clock. I cannot be precise as to the time; about the hour of three I should think. Do you remember who were present in the room when you saw him there? No. Can you name any persons that were present?-Mr. O'Reilly was present; there were several persons in and out of the room that day, all day; whether they were present at that precise period I cannot undertake to say. Do you recollect Mr. Sheriff Thorpe coming into the room, whilst you and Mr. O'Reilly was there?-I do. Did he make use of any expression in your hearing? He did. State what you recollect him to have said?— He might have said various things; but relative to the bills, he mentioned, that they were ignored; or, that there were no bills. To whom did he address that remark?-He expressed it to some friend who was there; Mr. O'Reilly mentioned to me who that gentleman was, but I could not say positively that that was the gentleman; if I was allowed to speak upon my belief, I believe it was. You believe it was whom?-A Mr. Ward. Did you hear any question put to him, on any remark made by that gentleman to him?He asked him, had the bills come down from the grand jury; he said no, but you may make your mind perfectly easy as to the result. Was there any thing particular in his tone, or manner, when he said that ?-He seemed to be well pleased at it. Did he stay in the office?—No, I think he went away almost immediately after. Do you remember how he was dressed when he came into the office, or whether he changed: his dress before he left it?—I made no remark at the time as to his changing his dress. Was there any conversation that occurred immediately afterwards between you and other persons, upon the subject? There was a ge neral conversation in the private room, saying, that they anticipated the result of those bills, inasmuch as there were persons on the jury who would not find true bills against the persons |