ally Roman Catholics; and we say this without disrespect to that
body, as will appear from what follows. It will often happen that men
are challenged as labouring under prejudices which disqualify them for
an impartial discharge of a juror's duty. But these prejudices may be
of two kinds. First, they may be the natural product of a certain
birth, education, and connexion; and these are cases in which it will
almost be a _duty_ for one so biased to have contracted something of a
permanent inability to judge fairly under circumstances which interest
his prejudices. But secondly, there are other prejudices, as, for
instance, of passions, of blind anger, or of selfish interest. Such
cases of prejudice are less honourable; and yet no man scruples to
tell another, under circumstances of this nature, that he cannot place
confidence in his impartiality. No offence is either meant or taken. A
trial is transferred from Radnorshire to Warwickshire in order to
secure justice: yet Radnorshire is not offended. And every day a
witness is told to stand down, when he is acknowledged to have the
slightest pecuniary interest in the case, without feeling himself
insulted. Yet the insinuation is a most gross one--that, because he
might be ten guineas richer or poorer by the event of the trial, he is
not capable of giving a fair testimony. This would be humiliating,
were it not seen that keen interests compel men to speak bluntly and
plainly: men cannot sacrifice their prospects of justice to ceremony
and form. Now, when a Roman Catholic is challenged as a juryman, it is
under the first and comparatively inoffensive mode of imputation. It
is not said--you are under a cloud of passion, or under a bias of
gross self-interest. But simply--you have certain religious opinions:
no imputation is made on your integrity. On the contrary, it is
honourable to you that you should be alive to the interests of your
class. Some think, and so may you, that separation from England would
elevate the Catholics; since, in such a case, undoubtedly your
religion would become predominant in Ireland. It is but natural,
therefore, that you should lean to the cause of those who favour
yours. In setting aside a Catholic as a juryman on the trial of
Repealers, this is the imputation made upon him. Now, what is there in
that to wound any man's feelings? Lastly, it is alleged that the
presiding judge summed up in terms unfavourable to the Repealers. Of
course he did; and,