As to the theory and practice of the deposing power, which, like many other extraordinary and romantic opinions was once fashionable in the world, but which is now universally exploded, I explained in my last letter, the nature of it with such care and attention, as will render any further discussion on the subject wholly unnecessary.The joy which the celebrated deed of St. Bartholemew's day, produced at Rome, is referred to by your correspondent as a proof of the general practice of the Holy See respecting the treatment of heretics. But I have to inform him, that though the fact is undeniable, it by no means justifies the conclusion which he has thought proper to draw. The doctrine and practice of the Catholic church do not depend on the solitary conduct of any man, however he may be distinguished by talents, celebrity, or rank. Even the personal conduct of a pope can no more be produced as an instance of the practice of the Catholic, religion, than the extravagant acts of a king can be referred to as a precedent of law and constitution. Let him therefore cease to produce the behaviour of Gregory XIII. on this tragical occasion as a proof of the practice of the Holy See If he wishes, however, to obtain some elucidation relative to this extraordinary occurrence, which no Catholic will attempt to justify, let him know that the pontiff first received his information of the massacre from the French ambassador in Rome, who represented the whole transaction in the most plausible and artful colours. The pope was informed that a desperate conspiracy had been planned by the calvinistic party, to exterminate the royal family of France, and to establish a republic on the ruins of the throne; that the conspirators were in the act of commencing their operations, and that the fatal deed, which ensued, was absolutely necessary as a measure of self defence. Your correspondent, after this explanation, will probably have the candour not to consider the extravagant joy which this artful representation of that infamous and inhuman deed gave Gregory XIII. as an indication of any practice dishonourable to the Holy See. (See histoire de Eglise par Bérault Bercastel. tom. 19. liv. 77, pp. 290 et seq. Also Milner's Letters to a Prebendary. Letter 4. p. 130. 2d edit.)-It is with sentiments of shame and astonishment, that I am doomed to follow your correspondent through the remaining part of his letter, and to correct those palpable falsehoods, which mark almost every sentence. He gravely asserts, on the authority of Sir Richard Musgrave, that the influence of the

priests during the rebellion was unbounded, that instead of employing their authority to check the people in their excesses, they gave them encouragement, particularly in the South; that of the superior clergy, the conduct of some was actually treasonable, of others very dubious, of none actively loyal; that Dr. Caulfield in particular appeared publicly in the streets, when the people fel before him on their knees, that he never attempted to stem their murderous fury, but that he appears to have aided in the conspiracy. How this gentle writer could employ in this case the authority of Sir Richard Mus grave, whose history is confessedly a tissue. of misrepresentations and false hoods, he best can explain. Certain it is that he has been betrayed by his guide into such a variety of errors as never disgraced a composition of the same length before. In describing the part which the priests bore in the rebellion, your correspondent has confounded the few of that respectable class, who in defiance of every law of heaven and earth, were en gaged in that unfortunate cause, with the great body of the Catholic clergy, that preserved their allegiance unshaken. At the time of the rebellion there were in Ireland about 2000 priests; and of this number about twenty, most of whom were persons of irregular conduet, joid the rebels. (Plowden's Hist. Review, Vol. II. part 2, p. 717 and 730.) When, therefore, he speaks of the encouragement given by the priests to rebel, and of their influence in dissuading th insurgents from the use of whiskey, lest it should lead to a discovery of these secrets, your readers will carefully distinguish the loyal conduct of the great body of the clergy, from the melancholy prevarication of a comparatively small number, which did not exceed a score. The attack of your correspondent on the loyalty of the superior clergy is of the most wanton nature, and stands contradicted by the clearest evidence of facts. Has he never seen the loyal address of the Catholic nobility, gentry, and clergy of Ireland to the lord lieutenant, dated 30th May, 1798, with his excellency's answer? Has he never read the declaration and remonstrance from all the Catholic bishops and their leading clergy and nobility, dated May 28, and published in the London Gazette of June 1, of the same year? Is he yet unacquainted with the spirited remon strances published by particular bishops in their own diocese; with the animated and foreible language which they employed to recall to a sense of duty, those of their flocks who were embarked in the fatal conspiracy? When he asks what ecclesiastical

censures were inflicted on those whom the lenity of the government passed by, had he never heard of the sentence of excommunication published June 22, 1798, throughout the archdiocess of Dublin, against all those who should give any direct or indirect sup port to the unnatural rebellion? (See all these papers reprinted by Coghlan, and sold No 37, Duke Street, Grosvenor Square.) — The man, Sir, who in descrbing the conduct of the Irish clergy during the rebellion, can pass over in silence these notorious facts, and produce without any shadow of proof, the most infamous charges against that worthy and excellent class of men, deserves to be exposed to the heaviest censure and reprobation of his countrymen. His accusation against Dr. Caulfield, the Catholic Bishop of Ferns, indicates if it be possible, an an additional degree of rancour and malignity. The account given by the Bishop of his own conduct, and confirmed by the most unexceptional authority, effectually destroys the infamous charges which have been brought against him, and entitles him to the thanks and benediction of his country.

(To be continued.)

Cobbett's Parliamentary Debates. VOL. I. is now completed, and will be ready for sale, half-bound in a neat and ap propriate manner, on Thursday next.-It will contain 25 Numbers, and the price half-bound will be 11 78 6d, The publishers are Mr. Bagshaw, Bow Street, Covent Garden, and Mr. Budd, Pall Mall.

In presenting this Volume to the public, it seems necessary to say a few words as to the plan of publication, and also as to the nature and arrangement of the contents, especially as there is so very great a difference between this work and every other, which, under a similar title or professing a similar purpose, has heretofore been undertaken in this country.-With regard to the first point, it is, as in the present instance, intended, always to divide the matter, arising in each Session, into two volumes, the first to comprise an account of the proceedings from the opening of the Session to the Easter Recess, and the second to com prise the proceedings from the end of that Recess to the close of the Session.-The nature and arrangement of the contents are as follows: I. Two Tables of Contents, one

relating to the House of Lords, the other to the House of Commons, each forming a brief chronicle of the whole of the proceedings in the two Houses respectively; to which Tables is added another, pointing out where the accounts and other documents are to be found, II. A complete List of the Members of the Parliament, as it stood at the opening of the Session; as also a List of His Majesty's Cabinet, and certain other Ministers, as it stood at the same time. III. The body of the work contains, in due chronological order, all the Debates, Minutes of minor Proceedings, Messages, Motions, Lists of Minorities, &c. IV. In a part of the Volume pointed out by the Table of Contents, will be found all the material Accoun's, Estimates, Returns, &c. &c. laid before Parliament; together with a List of the Acts passed during the period embrased by the Volume. V. At the close of the Volume are four Indices, viz. two of the Subjects of the several Debates, the one for the Lords, and the other for the Commons; and two of the Names of the several Speakers, following, with regard to the Houses, the same order as before.The Debates, in this work, are given at much greater length, and with much greats er precision, than it was ever before attempted to give Parliamentary Debates. Neither care, labour, nor expense has been spared. Aid of every useful kind has been resorted to, and, in most instances, with perfect success. The insertion of the substance of the minor proceedings, under the denomination of Minutes, will be found ve ry useful to the parliamentary reader and historian, while the selection and arrange ment of the several Accounts and Returns must be of inestimable value to all those who turn their attention to subjects of finance or political economy, to military or naval affairs, or, indeed, to any subject connected with the resources of the country. As the work has, in the short space of half a session, attained to such an extent of circulation, and such a degree of preeminence, as fully to warrant the supposition, that it is the only compilation at all likely to be regarded as an authentic record of the Legislative Proceedings of the present time, so the Editor confidently assures the Public, that success, however conspi cuous and flattering, will produce no relaxation in his labour or his care, but, that it will, on the contrary, operate as a stimulus to the attainment of still gseater perfection.

VOL. V. No. 23.]

865]

THE TRIAL

OF AN

ACTION FOR DAMAGES, Brought by Mr. Plunkett, Solicitor General of Ireland, against Mr. Cobbett, for publishing, in the Weekly Political Register of the 10th of December last, a Libel upon the said Mr. Plunkett. Tried in the Court of King's Bench, at Westminster, on Saturday, the 26th of May, 1804, before Lord Chief Justice Ellenborongh and a Special Jary.

Counsel for the Plaintiff. Mr. Erskine, Mr. Garrow, Mr. Dampier, and Mr. Nolan. Counsel for the Defendant. Mr. Adam and Mr. Richardson.

THE DECLARATION.

HILIARY TERM, IN THE FORTY-FOURTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF KING GEORGE THE THIRD.

Middlesex, to wit. William Conyngham Plunkett complains of William Cobbett, being in the custody of the Marshal of the Marshalsea of our Lord the King before the King himself. For that whereas the said William Conyngham now is, and from the time of his nativity hitherto, hath been a good, true, faithful, and honest subject of our Lord the King, and as such, hath always hitherto conducted himself. And whereas also the said William Conyngham, before and at the time of the publishing the false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libels hereinafter mentioned, was and yet is a barrister at law in that part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, called Ireland, practising there, and Solicitor General of our Lord the King in Ireland. And whereas also, before and at the time of the publishing the several false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libels hereinafter mentioned, the Right Honourable Philip, Earl of Hardwicke, was Lieutenant General of that part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, called Ireland, and was Governor General of that part of the said United Kingdom, called Ireland.

[866 And whereas also, before the publishing of the several false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libels hereinafter mentioned, one Robert Emmett had been in due manner tried in Ireland upon an indictment for high treason, on which said trial, he the said William Conyngham, was as such barrister at law as aforesaid, retained and employed on the part of the prosecution, and as such barrister, made observations upon the evidence given upon the said trial. And whereas also, the said Robert Emmett was in due manner convicted of high treason upon the said trial, and received the sentence of the law upon such his conviction. And whereas also, before the publishing of the several false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libels hereinafter mentioned, and before the union between Great Britain and Ireland, and while the said William Conyngham was such barrister as aforesaid, he, the said William Conyngham had been a member of the Commons Flouse of Parliament in Ireland, and had in the Commons House of Parliament in Ireland, as such member thereof, delivered his opinion upon various subjects there debated and discussed whereas also, the said William Conynghai, before and at the time of the publishing of the several false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libels hereinafter mentioned was much employed in his profession of a barrister at law, whereby he got great gains and profits, and was also much respected, consulted, and entrusted by divers persons holding high offices in the administration and government of Ireland, that is to say, at Westminster, in the said County of Middlesex, and bad always so behaved and conducted himself as deservedly to have gained and retained the esteem of all persons by whom he was so as aforesaid retained, employed, and entrusted to his great comfort and advancement in life. Yet the said William Cobbett well knowing the premises, but greatly envying the happy state and condition of the said William Conyngham, and contriving and maliciously intending to injure him in his said profession of a

And

"had made no defence, but, on the contrary, had acknowledged the charge, and "had submitted to his fate." (meaning thereby, that the said William Conyngham had acted in the manner above described in the said libel)"Lord Kenyon (meaning the said late Lord Kenyon) would have turned with horror from such a scene, in which, although guilt was in one part to be punished, yet in the whole drama, justice was confounded, humanity outraged, and loyalty insulted. Of Lord Kenyon, there

fore, (Cambricus most well know) it never could have been believed, that he himself would lead such a character (meaning the said William Conyngham) forward, introduce him (meaning the said William Conyngham) to the favour of a deceived Sovereign, clothe him (meaning the said William Conyngham) in robes, and load him (meaning the said William Conyngham) with the emoluments of office (meaning the said office of Solicitor General of our said Lord the King of Ireland). Lord Kenyon (meaning the said late Lord Kenyon) most have known that a noble Duke for having toasted at a drunken club, in a common tavern, to a noisy rabble," the sovereignty

of the people," was struck, by his Majesty's command, out of the privy council, and deprived of all his offices both civil and military. If, therefore, any man were to be found, (meaning that the said William Conyngham was that man) who, not at a dranken club, or to a brawling rabble, but in a grave and high assembly (meaning the said Commons House of Parliament in Ireland); not in the character of an inebriated toast-master, but in that of a sober constitutional lawyer, had insisted on the sovereignty of the people as a first principle of the English law; and had declared, that by law an appeal lay from the decision of the tellers of the Houses of Parliament, to that of the teliers of the na"tion," and, that if a particular law were disagreeable to the people, however it might have been enacted with all royal and parlia mentary solemnity, nevertheless, it was not binding, and the people by the general law were exempted from obedience to such a particular law, because the people were the supreme and ultimate judges of what was for their own benefit, (meaning that the said William Conyingham, had delivered such opinions as are above set forth, in the said libel in the Commons House of Parliament in Ireland) Lord Kenyon (meaning the said late Lord Kenyon) if he had been chancelJor in any kingdom in Europe, would have shrunk from recommending any such man

to the favour of a monarch, while there yet remained a shadow of monarchy visible in the world"

2d COUNT. And the said William Cobbett of his further malice against the said William Conyngham, and again contriving and maliciously intending to injure and pre-judice him as aforesaid. afterwards, to wit, on the same tenth day of December, in the said year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and three, at Westminster aforesaid, in the said County of Middlesex, did falsely and maliciously publish a certain other false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libe of, and concerning the said William Conyng-" ham, and of and concerning his conduct as a barrister at Law, upon the said trial of the said Robert Emmett, and of and concerning. the opinion which it is in that same libel a serted, the said late Lloyd, Lord Kenyon, now and at the time of the said trial of the said Robert Emmett, deceased, and of the publi cation of the said libel, would have enter tained of the said William Conyngham, had the said late Lord Kenyon been alive and present at the said trial of the said Robert Emmett, which same false, scandalous, malicicus, and defamatory libel was, and is in a certain part thereof as follows: to wit, "it any one man could be found, (meaning that the said William Conyngham was that man), of whom a young, but unhappy victim of the justly offended laws of his country, (meaning the said Robert Emmett) had, in the moment of his conviction and sentence, (meaning the aforesaid conviction of the said Robert Emmett of high treason, and his said sentence thereupon) uttered the following apostrophe: That viper!" (meaning the said William Conynghain) "whom my fa"ther nourished! He it was from whose

64