204 



ANNUAL REGISTER, 1817. 



nett, one of Mr. O'Connor's coun- 

 sel, in reference to the panel, and 

 to the manner of the challenges ; 

 and after the usual formalities, the 

 names of the panel, which were 

 very numerous, were called over, 

 on a fine of fifty pounds. 



A considerable poition of time 

 was consumed in recalling the 

 pntiel, and owing to the many 

 challenges made on behalf of the 

 crown and prisoners. Notwith- 

 standing the number that ap- 

 peared to their names, the panel 

 became exhausted, and it was now 

 found necessary in order to com- 

 plete the jury (four of the number 

 of which were yet deficient) to 

 select fiom those challenged, pre- 

 viously to the following gentle- 

 men, who tried the issue, being 

 sworn : — 



John Ruxton, Esq. 



Henry Walsh, Esq. 



James Kellett, Esq. 



Henry Owens, Esq. 



William Henry, Esq. 



Christopher Carlcton, Esq. 



John Ross, Esq. 



Frederick Dyas, Esq. 



Robert Sterne Tighe, Esq. 



Thomas E. Barnes, Esq. 



John Otway Cuffe, Esq. and 



James Somerville, Esq. 

 The four gentlemen last men- 

 tioned were those who had been 

 objected to by the crown, but were 

 called and sworn after the panel 

 was exhausted. 



The jury having been sworn, the 

 prisoneis were formally given them 

 in charge. 



It was suggested by Mr. O'Con- 

 nor's counsel, that lists of the 

 several witnesses to be examined 

 on either side sliould be handed 

 ;n to the judge, in order tliat they 

 might be comrnanded to with- 



draw, until respectively called 

 upon to give evidence. In this 

 arrangement the court and coun- 

 sel for the prosecution readily 

 acquiesced, and they, the witnes- 

 ses, were ordered to retire accord- 

 ingly. 



The indictment having been read, 



Mr. Sergeant Jebb, as leading 

 counsel for the prosecution, stated 

 the case against the prisoners. The 

 learned counsel confined himself to 

 a simple relation of the facts which 

 grounded the alleged charges of 

 felony, and adverted in brief terms 

 to the evidence and circumstances 

 upon which he was instructed those 

 charges would be sustained. In 

 reference to Mr. O'Connor, per- 

 sonally, he regrette<l, as much as 

 5ny individual even amongst the 

 friends of that unfortunate Gen- 

 tleman, the unhappy situation in 

 which he was placed ; and sym- 

 patJiizing, as he did, in common 

 with those around him, in its pain- 

 fulness, he declared he should feel 

 the most sincere gratification in his 

 acquittal. 



Mr. Bartholomew St. Leger, of 

 Dublin, coal-factor, was the first 

 witness called. He was the person 

 from whom the watch and keys, 

 for which the prisonei's were ar- 

 raigned, werestolen, andhe merely 

 proved that the mail was robbed 

 on the 2d of October, 1812, at , 

 Cappagh-hill; that he was a pas- 

 senger ; and that these articles 

 were taken from him. 



The next witnesses were John ' 

 Pollock, and Arthur Hill Corn- 

 wallis Pollock; Esqrs. Clerk of the I 

 Crown for the province of Leinstei', I 

 who proved the record of the con- l| 

 viction of Richard Waring (brother 

 tooneof the approvers) for the mail 

 robbery in question. 



Michael, 



