man yourself, but an humble maker of United Irishmen, a promoter of the cause?---Am I bound to answer that? mended it to him. I do not ask you; you said that already. I do not wish to bring you and Mac Cann toI certainly recom-gether. Would you believe the evidence?— I cannot say; that might depend upon other circumstances. Were you not a promoter of the cause ?--I might be one in that way. Do you know the society, that Reynolds first entered into ?---I do not. Perhaps you think Reynolds is upon his trial: Do you know Mac Cann ?--I have no intimacy with him. I do not ask whether you were his play-fellow; but had you such an acquaintance with him, as to ask him, good morning, Mr. Mac Cann ?--I never asked him that question. Or good evening ?---Never. Did you ever see him?---Once I went of a message from Mr. Reynolds to Mr. MacCann, and I never saw him but that time. Was it to deliver a letter or a verbal message?-A verbal message. Then do you believe he was a United Irishman?--I believed it, when I heard he was taken up, and I believed it before, because I was sent to him about the pikes. Then if you believe he was a United Irishman, you would not disbelieve it, because Reynolds swore to it ?---1 would not, if I believed it before. Court.---Had you the same opinion of Reynolds before you brought the message as you have now?---No, I had not. When did you bring that message?---About a year ago. [Here the evidence closed on the part of the prisoner.] of the Crown. A verbal message to drink tea or to dine William Cope, esq. examined again on the par with him. Do you recollect the purport of it? --I recollect the purport to be---it does not criminate the prisoner, it only criminates my. self Come, what was it?---He sent me to Mr. Mac Cann to know if he could get a pike sharpened; and Mac Cann did not acknowledge to have any thing to do with it. By virtue of your oath, did not Mac Cann then ask you for it ?---No. Did he turn you out?---He did not act in any remarkable manner. So then, he had never seen you before; What did you say to him?---I cannot recollect exactly; but I understood, he would not do them, he was above work of that sort. What did you say to him ?--I said that Mr. Reynolds sent me to him to have pikes sharpened. You asked him what he was?--I asked, "Where was Mac Cann,” in Mr. Jackson's. And when you saw him, you asked him about the pikes?---Yes. What did you say?--I asked him to have pikes sharpened; and he said he could not, or would not. You know Thomas Reynolds?--I do. Many years?---Yes. From what you know of his general character, do you think him a man to be believed upon his oath ?---Upon my oath, I believe he is. William Cope, esq. cross-examined. Do you not think a man engaging in a society of this nature has injured his credit?--There are many erroneous things that a man will do; but still, after a man has been re-instated with his God and his country, I think he is to be believed. Do you think this witness to be re-instated with his God?--I cannot say for that; but from the contrition I see him in, I should hope he will receive mercy from God, as all repenting sinners will. Do you found your opinion upon his conduct as a traitor?---Upon my word, I found my opinion upon the transactions respecting myself. Why did you not mention that upon your When the foreman would not do the busi-direct examination?---Because I was not asked. ness, did you ask the master of the shop ?---I did not know him. You knew him as well as the foreman ?--I was directed into the office of Mac Cann. If Thomas Reynolds would swear, that Mac Cann was a United Irishman, would you believe it?---Unless I had other reasons to believe it, I know so many objections to his ve racity and honesty. He took the oath of a United Irishman? --He did, I believe. And betrayed the cause?-He did. Would not that give you a bad opinion of him?--It would, if I did not entertain a bad opinion of him before. If Reynolds swore Mac Cann was a United Irishman, would you believe it?---Not from that alone. You have heard a charge to-day about a bond. Do you believe that charge to be false? --I do believe every word respecting Reynolds being guilty of forgery is all falsc. When did you hear of it first?--I disbelieve every syllable of it; and the reason I have for it, is, that he gave notes for the bond, and has paid them, or most of them. If he swore that he paid off that bond, would he swear true?-He would; because he paid it in a certain specie. Are the notes paid ?---I understand he paid them as they became due. As a mercantile man do you not know, that a bond is a better security than a note ?---As. a mercantile man, I do not, because a note is a negotiable security, and money may be had upon it. A bond is not so transferable. But it may come back with a protest ?--These did not, because they were paid. Is not a man guilty of perjury who breaks the oath of allegiance?---I think so. And do you think a man guilty of perjury deserving of credit ?---Certainly not. William Furlong, esq. sworn. Do you know Mr. Thomas Reynolds ?---I do. How long?-Seven years and upwards. Have you had dealings with him?—I have, many. What is your opinion with respect to his general character, as to his deserving credit upon his oath ?-I have always had a good opinion of his general character. Would you give credit to his oath in a court of Justice?—I would give credit to his oath, notwithstanding what I have heard alleged to his prejudice. William Furlong, esq. cross-examined. Were you in Court during the examination to-day?-No. Then what you alluded to was what you have heard in common conversation ?-Yes. If you heard that he had taken the oath of allegiance, and had afterwards taken a traitorous engagement in violation of that oath, would you think him deserving of credit upon his oath here?—I think it is very possible, that a man who has taken the oath of allegiance, and at a subsequent period has taken the oath of a United Irishman, may, seeing the misery and calamity in which his country has been involved by it, repent of it, and adhere to his oath of allegiance as more obligatory upon him and may deserve credit, by bearing allegiance to his king, and becoming faithful to his country. [Here the case closed on both sides.] Mr. Curran spoke at considerable length to the evidence for the prisoner. Mr. Saurin replied on the part of the crown. SUMMING UP. Mr. Baron Smith.-Gentlemen of the Jury; -When I consider the very important duties which you have to discharge to the prisoner and to God--to your king and your country; and when I consider the very exhausted state in which I now am, I do most heartily rejoice, that you have heard from the prisoner's counsel every observation which could be made in his favour, and from the counsel for the crown every observation which the prosecution called for. Gentlemen, the prisoner stands indicted for high treason-the greatest offence known to our law an offence tending to the subversion of the government of the country, and indeed of all social order :---But, gentlemen, if the offence be of an higher degree than ordinary, certainly the proof ought not to be VOL. XXVII. less than in other cases; and if there be any ground of distinction, the magnitude of the offence ought rather to call for stronger evidence. The indictment contains two counts specifying two species of treason, defined by the statute 25 Edward 3rd. One is for compassing and imagining the death of the king; the second is for adhering to the king's enemies; and, gentlemen, several overt acts, thirteen in number in the present case, are laid in support of each species of treason. With regard to the offence of compassing and imagining the death of the king, there the law means to act upon the imagination of the heart, and to punish the will for the deed. But the justice of the law has taken special care, that still there must be one overt act proved sufficient to show that this imagination of the heart tending directly or indirectly, to the destruction of the sovereign has been acted upon. So soon as measures appear to have been taken for the purpose of effectuating that wicked intention, then the law considers it in the same degree of guilt, as if it had been actually effectuated. And here, gentlemen, let me observe, that it is not by any means necessary, that a conspiracy, or combination to take away the king's life should be a direct, immediate intention of attacking his person, and thereby depriving him of existence; for it is now undoubtedly settled law, not to be controverted or debated, that any conspiracy tending to bring the life of the sovereign into danger is such a compassing of his death as will draw down the punishment of treason upon the offender. Therefore a conspiracy to levy war---to raise rebellion-furnishing armis, ammunition, men, provisions or intelligence to a foreign enemy-compelling the sovereign by force to change his measures ;---a conspiracy to overthrow the government, or change the constitution by force, are all overt acts sufficient to draw down the punishment of treason upon the offender. I mentioned, that in the present case, there are thirteen overt acts laid in the indictment; the eighth, however, it has been conceded by the counsel for the crown, cannot be substantiated. Therefore your attention is to be directed to the remaining twelve. I will very briefly state to you what these overt acts are. [Here the learned judge stated the overt acts from the indictment.} These several overt acts are laid in support of the treasons charged, and it was necessary to state such of them in the indictment as evidence would be applied to, in order that the prisoner might be apprised of what would be attempted to be proved against him, and be prepared to defend himself, if he could. If any one of these overts shall appear to you to have been proved sufficiently and satisfactorily, according to your consciences, acting upon your oaths, it will be your duty to find the prisoner guilty. But whether there has been 2 G such evidence is your sole province to deter-finally come forward here and given that tes mine. I will endeavour to assist you in timony which you have heard. It was stated forming that determination, by reciting the to be gross perjury; it was assimilated to the evidence from my notes, making a few obser- case of a man who had been sworn to give evivations, occasionally, as I go on, reserving an dence in a court of justice, and been afterwards opportunity, if I shall be able, at the conclu- convicted of perjury, and it was said and said, sion, to make some observations, perhaps truly that such a man could never afterwards, less embarrassed, than those which I may be received to give evidence; so the law unsubmit to you in going through the evi-doubtedly is. But the present case is obviously dencedistinguishable from the case put; Reynolds had taken the oath of allegiance it is true, nor can his violation of it by taking the united oath be justified in any respect; but as to the se [The learned judge then read the evidence from his notes---when he came to the part relating to the object of the meet-cond oath, that of an United Irishman, it is ings--he said,] You will observe, gentlemen, that the prisoner's counsel argued, that Mr. Reynolds did not specify any person from whom he received intimation of the object of the United Irishmen: but you will see from the evidence, that he stated the object of all the meetings to be "to overthrow the government and constitution of the country; to establish a republican form of government in its place, and to favour a landing of the French to forward these views." Now it seems to me, so far as the witness deserves credit, that his evidence is as pointed and precise as it could be to ascertain his source of information with regard to the object of all these meetings-he saw and he knew their object to be that which he stated, having heard it discussed at each and every meeting; so that saying he heard it at one particular meeting, or at another, or from some particular person, instead of strengthening, would have weakened his evidence, because he learned it by attending all the different meetings, there hearing the end and object of their institution, and repeatedly mentioned by the body collectively. very different indeed from an oath taken in à court of justice. A man takes an oath there calm and uninfluenced, apprised of its consequences, nor can he break it, without a violation of the laws of God and man-In giving evidence he does nothing, but what a good, conscientious, and honest man ought to do But a man taking the oath of an United Irishman may act under seduction, or the influence of persons who have acquired an unwarrantable power over his mind; and he takes an oath," which is more honoured in the breach, than in the observance." Suppose a man should take an oath, that he would imbrue his hands in the blood of his sovereign, or that he would assist in the destruction of thousands of his fellow subjects; could it be said he was bound by such an oath? Or that if he violated it, such violation would be at all similar to the violation of an oath taken by à witness in a court of justice? There is no di vine, who would not tell any man who had taken such an oath as I have supposed, that it would be meritorious to violate it, and that such violation would be pleasing in the eye of God and man. Neither ought the taking of As to the meeting at Bond's, it is highly an oath under the influence of seduction, or material; for if the meeting which Reynolds the terror of death, or other violent mischief, gave information of before the 12th of March to be considered as a deliberate violation of did actually take place, either the witness must the oath of allegiance, or at all analogous to have sworn truly, or Mr. Cope must have fal- wilful or corrupt perjury, so as to render à sified, or the witness must have been a pro- witness altogether incredible, although it may phet-He either learned from the, prisoner be a circumstance very proper to be considered that the meeting was to take place upon the by a jury when they come to appreciate the 12th of March, or he must have predicted that degree of credit to be given to the witness. event, for there is no colour of ground for sup-It certainly does not render him incompetent, posing he had learned it from any other person than the prisoner. As to the frauds and other acts of profligacy with which the witness, Reynolds, has been charged, some of them he admittedothers he denied; and I must say, that if he even had committed those which he denied, it would not follow of necessity, that he was undeserving of credit on his oath; though certainly if those charges, which he denied, had been proved against him, such circumstance ought to have weight with you in estimating the degree of credit, which you would give to his evidence. Gentlemen, great stress was laid upon the witness having first taken the oath of allegiance, then that of the United Irishmen, and having and the prisoner's counsel only argued it as going to his credit, though the effect of the argument would be just the same as if the witness had been held incompetent. The mischiefs of such a doctrine would be endless; because if a man who had taken the oath of allegiance, and afterwards that of a United Irishman were to be totally discredited for ever after, all lenity on the part of government would be utterly abortive; because if such a man could only purchase redemption by everlasting infamy, it can scarcely be supposed that he would ever seek to avail himself of the royal mercy. [After the learned judge had stated the whole of the evidence, and observed upon different passages of it incidentally, he said,] Here the case was rested on all hands, and I will now trouble you with only one or two observations more--Two species of evidence have been adduced on the part of the crown: one parol, the other written. Whether the former deserves credit is for your judgment solely. If the testimony of the witness, Reynolds, shall in your opinion, be worthy of belief, in my apprehension, it goes the length of maintaining all, or almost all, of the twelve overt acts laid in the indictment. There is scarcely any, if indeed one of the twelve, that it does not establish. But it is sufficient, if it establish any one; that, if proved to your satisfaction, will call for a verdict of conviction. The witness mentioned, that the object of the meetings was, to overturn the government and constitution-to establish a republic and to aid the French, when they came to forward these purposes. Then, gentlemen, it is for you to consider, whether that evidence of Reynolds deserves your credit or not? In estimating his credit, you will recollect the manner in which he gave his testimony:-you will compare the parts of his testimony with each other, and you will compare the whole of it with the evidence of Mr. Cope. You will also consider, whether the written evidence has or has not been proved in such a manner as to leave no doubt of its authenticity upon your minds? Observations have been made upon it, with regard to the effect it ought to have and how far you should be influenced by it. So far as I have been able to collect the law from the best authorities, papers written in prosecution of certain determinate purposes that are treasonable, and with which purposes they are plainly connected, are undoubtedly admissible evidence: some of the letters and papers produced here are in the hand-writing of the prisoner. You are to consider, whether the matters contained in them were committed to writing in prosecution of any certain, determinate purposes of treason. The holding of the meeting was stated by the witness, Reynolds, to be for the purpose of aiding the French and subverting the government by force. Clearly, these were treasonable purposes; but it is for you to consider upon the evidence, whether these purposes were then in the contemplation of the prisoner-and whether the letters and papers given in evidence were plainly connected with those purposes or not. Some of the papers are returns of men, money, ammunition and arms. What were they connected with? Were they or were they not connected with the purposes of subverting the present government, and establishing a republican form of government in its place? or of assisting the French, if they came here to forward these traitorous designs? These papers appearing in the manner in which they do, were written in prosecution of the plans stated by Reynolds, if you give credit to his testimony. But, gentlemen, it is your sole province to judge of his credit; you are to take into consideration those circumstances which go to diminish his credit, and those which go to confirm and corroborate his testimony; and upon considering the evidence on one side and the other, if you think Reynolds entitled to credit you will be bound to find a verdict of conviction, but if you entertain a fair and conscientious doubt as to his credit, and as to the sufficiency of the evidence in support of the indictment, you ought certainly in favour of life to acquit the prisoner; and here, gentlemen, I repeat, that you have a very momentous duty to discharge; and I am happy that this duty rests upon men so very competent to its discharge. The jury retired for five minutes and brought in a verdict-Guilty. Mr. Attorney General.-My lords, it is my duty to pray the judgment of the Court. [The prisoner was put to the bar.} The Clerk of the Crown read the indictment, and asked him what he had to say, why judg ment of death and execution should not be awarded against him according to law. Mr. Mac Cann. My lords, I have nothing at all to say, but that some parts of the evidence held out against me this day are not true; particularly, that evidence of Harris, whom I never saw in a committee, as I meet that great Judge who is to judge me. I have nothing more to say; but hope your lordships will grant me as much indulgence as you can to prepare for my awful fate. I have much thanks to give to the gentlemen for their defence of me-I wish I had now more to give them. Mr. Baron Smith.-John Mac Cann, you have been convicted by a jury of your country upon clear and full evidence, of the highest and foulest crime that it is possible for man in civilized society to be guilty of-by exciting and fomenting a rebellion, calculated to subvert the government of the country-one of the most benign governments, and one of the happiest constitutions that ever was devised by man:-A rebellion, that in its conse. quences you must have seen, would have destroyed all the happiness and all the comforts of social life-that must have covered what I suppose to be your native land with devastation and horror, and drenched it in blood;-and I am sorry to say, that that offence, of which you have been thus found guilty, has in too great a degree had these mischievous effects which I have mentioned. Thousands and ten thousands of your unhappy fellowcreatures have all fallen victims to that foul and abominable conspiracy of which you have been convicted. It gave birth to that rebellion which has convulsed the land, but which through the blessing of God, by the laudable exertions of government, the spirit of the king's troops, and the loyalty of his subjects, is in a good measure suppressed. God knows, I do not wish to aggravate any feeling of your mind, though I earnestly wish to impress you with a due sense of your crime; in hopes, that it might stimulate you to make the best atonement you can, to your injured king and your offended country-and induce you to consider and reflect upon the awful account you are in a short time to give, and to make your preparation for that change of condition, which must soon-very soon take place. I do hope, that any exhortation of mine may be unnecessary for this purpose-I do hope, that you will have the assistance of those whose | exhortations will be much more impressive than any which I could now deliver. It only remains for me to discharge that duty which is incumbent on me—and an awful duty it is-by pronouncing on you—the dreadful sentence of the law. [The learned judge then pronounced the usual sentence upon a conviction for high treason.] The prisoner was executed pursuant to his sentence on Thursday the 19th of July, 1798, at the front of the prison in Green-street. 633. Proceedings on the Trial of WILLIAM MICHAEL BYRNE, for High Treason; before the Court holden at Dublin, under a Special Commission of Oyer and Terminer, on Thursday the 5th, Friday 20th, and Saturday 21st days of July: 38 GEORGE III. A. D. 1798.* 66 ON Thursday, July 5th, 1798, William Mi- " undoubted lord off and from the royal state chael Byrne was brought up to the bar, and "crown title power and government of this arraigned upon the following indictment:- "his kingdom of Ireland to depose and de"County of the City of "The Jurors, &c." prive and the said lord the king to kill and "Dublin to wit present and say, put to death and that to fulfil and bring to "that William Michael Byrne late of Park-"effect his most wicked and treasonable ima"hill in the county of Wicklow gentleman a "ginations and compassings aforesaid he the "subject of our said lord the king and not "said William Michael Byrne as such false "having the fear of God in his heart nor the "traitor as aforesaid with force and arms on "duty of his allegiance considering but being" the 20th day of May in the 38th year of the "moved and seduced by the instigation of "reign aforesaid and on divers other days and "the devil as a false traitor against our said" times as well before as after at the parish "lord the king his supreme true lawful and" of Saint Michael the Archangel in the "undoubted lord the cordial love and true af-" county of the city of Dublin falsely mali"fection which every subject of our said lord "ciously and traitorously did assemble meet "the king should bear towards our said lord conspire agree and consult together with "the king wholly withdrawing and contriving" divers other false traitors whose names are "and with all his strength intending the "to the said jurors unknown to stir up raise "peace and common tranquillity of this his" and make rebellion and war against our "kingdom of Ireland to disturb and the go-" said lord the king within this his kingdom "vernment of our said lord the king of this" of Ireland and to procure great quantities of "kingdom of Ireland to subvert and overturn" arms and ammunition guns pistols swords "and our said lord the king off and from the "pikes gunpowder and shot for the purpose "royal state title honour imperial crown and "of the said rebellion and to procure and "government of this his kingdom of Ireland" cause great numbers of armed men to rise "to depose and deprive and our said lord the "and prosecute and wage war against our "king to death and final destruction to bring" said lord the king within this kingdom "on the 20th day of May in the 38th year of "And further to fulfil &c. he the said Wil"the reign of our said lord the king and on "liam Michael Byrne with force and arms on "divers other days and times as well before "the same day and year and at the place "as after that day at the parish of Saint Mi- "aforesaid falsely maliciously and traitorously "chael the Archangel in the said county of" did assemble meet conspire consult and "the city of Dublin with force and arms to "wit with swords sticks staves and soforth "falsely wickedly and traitorously did compass imagine and intend our said lord the king then and there his supreme lawful and 66 Reported by William Ridgeway, esq. bar rister at law. "agree together with divers other false trai"tors unknown to depose and dethrone the "said lord the king and him off and from his "royal state authority and government of this "kingdom to deprive and put "And further to fulfil &c. he the said Wil"liam Michael Byrne with force and arms the day and year and at the place aforesaid |
