« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
tioned, that I have seldom seen an instance, where the punishment of the convict was to be transportation, in which I did not think that his situation was more enviable than that of the witness who prosecuted. As illustrative of that, it would not be a loss of the time of the Committee to hear the particular circumstances of a few witnesses who prosecuted at the late commission, and towards whom the government, I know, are most anxious to extend whatever protection they practically can. There is a man of the name of Thomas Miller, a Protestant, who prosecuted five persons to conviction; he was a farmer, holding fifty acres of land under a good lease, at 12s. an acre, having paid a considerable sum for the purchase of the interest; he was in his house in bed, at night, when his Catholic neighbour, a man of the name of Terrott, had his house violently attacked; Terrott made his escape, by bursting through a mud wall into another house, and ran off, and got some assistance from Miller, who rushed out in his shirt, giving the other man a gun, and having a double-barrelled pistol himself, and both ran immediately towards the house, where, having in vain sought Terrott, the party were ill-treating his wife and children ; a mob of at least twenty-four persons arrived, some of them armed, engaged in this outrage, immediately advanced towards them, and Terrot besought Miller to fire on them; but this man, conducting himself with a degree of humanity and coolness that did him infinite credit, abstained from doing so until they had burnt priming twice or three times at him; they then rushed upon Miller, and he shot the man who seized him by the collar; the pistol was then knocked out of Miller's hand, and they beat him dreadfully, and left him in fact for dead. This man had been previously very much respected and regarded by all his neighbours, including those from whom he differed in religious persuasion. The Chief Justice, in passing sentence on one of the convicts, used these words :much indebted to the representation made of you by that brave, gallant, and humane, and single-hearted character, Thomas Miller—that man who so nearly lost his life by the brutal and cruel violence of your associates, committed in your presence,
has stated you to be a young person of good conduct. I had a question put to him since your trial, with reference to that part of his evidence which represented you as stooping over his body and looking into his face, then within four inches of your own, and then weltering in his blood, whether that might not be attributed to a return of your good natural feeling, and to your wish to ascertain the extent of his danger; when that question was put to that honest man, he said at once, . I would be glad to think so, and I believe it was so.' The Committee are to learn, however, that this excellent man, [is] compelled to contemplate, and, if possible, to effect the immediate expatriation of himself and all his family. A memorial, stating the facts of this case, was presented to the government, and they have signified, that if he contemplates remaining on his farm, there will be a police protection afforded to him; he has also been offered (but whether he will receive it or not I cannot say) a donation of 301.
Does he live in a slated house ?-I am not aware. “Are you aware that the Irish Government, in similar cases to what you have stated, and where the parties lived in thatched houses, have given money to have their houses slated, and put in a state of defence ?— I should be very sorry to be understood, in what I have stated in reply to any previous question, or to this question, as at all advocating the case that the Irish Government are indifferent to the welfare of such persons; the contrary is distinctly my opinion and feeling; but I do not believe that the Irish Government are supplied with the proper means whereout to do that which their own wishes and good policy would lead them to do; they may in other cases, but I am not precisely aware in what particular cases they have furnished slated roofs in the manner mentioned, and I think it a wise thing to do. Two persons who gave evidence on the same trial, Terrott and Howse, have been offered the means of transporting themselves to America."—H. C., 1832, Nos. 5913-5,
Without the machinery of crown prosecutions, and the provision for witnesses in Ireland, the law, as far as
the repression of Whiteboy offences is concerned, would remain a dead letter; so complete is the system of terrorism directed against persons giving information in these cases.
It is, however, worthy of remark, that this intimidation is not extended to jurors : at the seasons even of the greatest disturbance, there has been no difficulty in inducing persons to serve on common juries, and to convict prisoners where the evidence has been sufficient.
M. Barrington, Esq.:
“ Have you given instances of the malignity of the people being infinitely greater towards magistrates who act under the Insurrection Act than towards jurors ; have you not known such instances ?-I have; I have never known instances of hostility to jurors, (at the same time that the persons who have been acting as jurors have been attacked, returning from the Insurrection Act, though they had been serving on a jury to try a capital offence, and on the Insurrection Act to try a transportable one*.] There is a rancour remaining in the country for years after, and a hostility against magistrates who act under the Insurrection Act; not the slightest against jurors.”-H. C., 1832, No. 253.
It is difficult to understand on what principle jurors have been treated so leniently, while witnesses have been persecuted with such unrelenting cruelty. Perhaps they may have been spared from the feeling that the task of a juryman is thrown upon him by the law, and is not sought after by himself: whereas a witness comes forward spontaneously, and of his own mere motion; and therefore he seems to be gratuitously abetting a system which is the object of popular hatred.
* There is some imperfection in the report of the part of this passage which is inclosed in brackets. Its general purport seems, however, clear.
There remains only to be mentioned the last stage in the Whiteboy system. When all means for the intimidation of informers and suppression of evidence have failed, and when the Whiteboy and the crown witnesses are both in safe custody, the only chance of saving the prisoner is to ensure that he shall be well defended at his trial. For this purpose, shortly before the assizes, people go round the country levying money by threats, and sometimes stating that they have to make up a precise sum. This is the only instance in which the Whiteboys take money ; and in this case, it will be observed, that the robbers take it for the benefit, not of themselves, but of others.
Mr. James Lawler, Kerry :
“ Is it the practice for this description of persons to go about and levy money upon the people ?-It was notorious; it was a matter of notoriety, that those persons who were called insurgents levied money upon the poor innocent wretched peasantry.
“ Do they fix the sum themselves ?–They used to get, as I have often heard, 5s. or any sum, according to their caprice, as they may choose to require, and the ability of the peasant
“ If a man refuses to pay, what happens ?—They tell them they will burn their houses, as was generally complained of by the peasantry about the country at that time.”—H. C., 1824,
The following speech of the Attorney-General, at Ennis, during the Clare Special Commission, will show in what an open and methodical manner this collection is sometimes made:
“ Michael Grady was indicted for feloniously, with force and by menaces, demanding money from various persons, with intent feloniously to steal the same.
“ The Attorney-General.—Gentlemen, the prisoner is the collector of the · Terry Alt Fund ;' and I will now give you a short history of his proceedings, the manner in which he collected this fund, (whether he accounted or not, I don't know,) for a few days before and for some days after the opening of the Special Commission. It became necessary, in order to protect those prisoners who are charged with insurrectionary crimes, to raise a sufficient pecuniary fund. Accordingly, the prisoner at the bar undertook, in the name and by the authority of the Lady Alts and Lady Clare, or both, to select a portion of the country, in the neighbourhood of Meelick, which he had regularly assessed, and put down in a book the names of the contributors to this fund, and the amount which every man was to be compelled to pay. He went about in discharge of this duty as regularly as any collector of the cess of the county would do in peaceable times. Indeed, he was infinitely more successful than any person employed in the collection of the public money. He went about, and as is the case with all taxcollectors, when refused, promised to call again. I shall, out of a great number of cases, mention the circumstances that occurred with a gentleman named Miller, to show the general character of this man's conduct. On the 28th of May, Mr. Miller, an half-pay officer, who has a farm near Meelick, was visited by a large body of armed men, whose object was to drive him from his farm. On the 30th of May, two days before the Commission opened in Clare, and while the Commission was actually sitting in Limerick, he was from home, and on his return was informed there was a man waiting for him a long time. On this the person came in (it was the prisoner), and being brought to the parlour, he told Mr. Miller he got a list from Lady Clare and Lady Alts, specifying each person, and the townland, from whom they were to collect subscriptions,—that he did not mean to compel him to pay,
but recommended him to do so, as it was possible, by complying, he would be restored to the possession of his farm. On this, Miller said, I don't think they have any claim on me,--they treated me very badly, and think it very odd they would come