ll in person in the house itself. The
speaker, Charles Manners-Sutton, declared that he could not properly be
admitted to be sworn under the new law, upon which O'Connell claimed a
hearing. A long and futile discussion followed as to whether he should
be heard at the table or at the bar. In the end he was heard at the bar,
and produced a very favourable impression upon his opponents as well as
his friends by the ingenuity of his arguments and the studied moderation
of his tone. His case, however, was manifestly untenable from a legal
point of view, and a new writ was ordered to be issued for the county of
Clare.

Then was shown both the folly of stirring up so needlessly the
inflammable materials of Irish sedition and the futility of imagining
that catholic emancipation, right or wrong, would prove a healing
measure. Having exhibited the better side of his character in his speech
before the house of commons, O'Connell exhibited its worst side without
stint or shame in his addresses to the Irish peasantry. Skilfully
avoiding the language of sheer treason, he set no bounds to his coarse
and outrageous vituperation of the nation which had sacrificed even its
conscience to appease Ireland; nor did he shrink from denouncing
Wellington and Peel as "those men who, false to their own party, can
never be true to us". The note which he struck has never ceased to
vibrate in the hearts of the excitable people which he might have
educated into loyal citizenship, and the spirit which he evoked has been
the evil genius of Ireland from his day to our own. He openly unfurled
the standard of repeal, but the repeal he demanded did not involve the
creation of an Irish republic. Ireland was still to be connected with
Great Britain by "the golden link of the crown," and though agitation
was carried to the verge of rebellion, the great agitator never actually
advised his dupes to rise in arms for a war of independence. Short of
this he did all in his power, and with too much success, to inflame them
with a malignant hatred of the sister country. If the promoters of
catholic emancipation had ever looked for any reward beyond the inward
satisfaction of having done a righteous act, they were speedily and
wofully undeceived.

FOOTNOTES:

[83] Wellington to Peel, January 9, 1828, in Parker, _Sir Robert Peel_,
ii., 27.

[84] Lecky, _History of Ireland_, v., 358-60, _n._; Stapleton, _Life of
Canning_, ii., 131-34.

[85] Eldon to Sir William S