r;) from
the _Common Pleas_, Chief-Justice Tindal, and Justices Coltman and
Maule; from the _Exchequer_, Barons Parke, Alderson, and Gurney. Lord
Chief-Baron Pollock did not attend, having advised the Crown in early
stages of the case, as Attorney-General: Mr Justice Erskine was ill; and
the remaining three common law judges, Justices Wightman, Rolfe, and
Cresswell, were required to preside in the respective courts at _Nisi
Prius_. With these necessary exceptions, the whole judicial force--so to
speak--of England assisted in the deliberations of the House of Lords.
The "_law_" peers who constantly attended, were the Lord Chancellor,
Lords Brougham, Cottenham, and Campbell. It has been remarked as
singular, that Lord Langdale (the Master of the Rolls) did not attend in
his place on so important an occasion, and take his share in the
responsibility of the decision. Possibly he considered himself not
qualified by his _equity_ practice and experience to decide upon the
niceties of criminal pleading. Several lay peers also attended--of whom
some, particularly Lord Redesdale, attended regularly. The appeal lasted
for many days, frequently from ten o'clock in the morning till a late
hour in the evening; but the patience and attention of the peers and
judges--we speak from personal observation--was exemplary. For the crown
the case was argued by the English and Irish Attorney-Generals, (Sir W.
W. Follett and Mr T. B. C. Smith;) for O'Connell and his companions, by
Sir Thomas Wilde, Mr M. D. Hill, Mr Fitzroy Kelly, and Mr Peacock, all
of whom evinced a degree of astuteness and learning commensurate with
the occasion of their exertions. If ever a case was thoroughly
discussed, it was surely this. If ever "justice to Ireland" was done at
the expense of the "delay of justice to England," it was on this
occasion. When the argument had closed, the Lord Chancellor proposed
written questions, eleven in number, to the judges, who begged for time
to answer them, which was granted. Seven out of the eleven related to
the merest technical objections, and which were unanimously declared by
the judges to be untenable; the law lords (except with reference to the
sixth question, as to the overruling the challenge to the array)
concurring in their opinions. Lord Denman here differed with the judges,
stating that Mr Justice Coleridge also entertained doubts upon the
subject; Lords Cottenham and Campbell shared their doubts, expressly
stating, howe