the perpetrators to justice.
Proceedings were also taken of various kinds against several of the more
prominent promoters of sedition.

On the 15th of May, William Smith O'Brien was tried before Lord Chief
Justice Blackburn and a special jury, upon an _ex officio_ information,
charging him with having delivered a speech, on the 15th of March, in
the parish of St. Thomas, Dublin, for the purpose of exciting contempt
and hatred against the queen in Ireland, and inducing the people to rise
in rebellion. The traverser pleaded not guilty. There could be no doubt
that in point of fact and law he was guilty, for it would be difficult
to cull language from a seditious speech more pertinent to the charge
than that quoted by the attorney-general from the speech of Mr. O'Brien
on the 15th of March. He was ably defended by Mr. Butt, an eloquent
queen's counsel. The jury could not agree, and by the consent of the
attorney-general they were discharged. It was not expected that the
jury would agree in a verdict; there was a determination among the
disaffected that when summoned as jurors they would not give verdicts
in charges of this nature. The government were determined to procure
convictions, if possible, and the trial of Mr. O'Brien was followed by
an indictment of T. E. Meagher. He was also arraigned on an _ex officio_
information for a seditious speech delivered on the same occasion as
that which furnished O'Brien with an opportunity for his delinquent
oratory. When the jury returned into court they were asked if they had
agreed in their verdict; the foreman replied, "We are not, my lord." Mr.
Favel, one of the jurors, remarked, "We are all agreed but one, and he
is a Roman Catholic." The report of this trial produced a very great
sensation in England. Men everywhere remarked, "If a single Roman
Catholic on a jury prevents the course of justice, a remedy must be
found for such a state of things; there must be power accorded to the
crown." It was not generally understood in England that a Roman Catholic
had often little reason to hope for justice when high party Protestants
composed the jury.

In the Commission Court, before Mr. Baron Lefroy, and Mr. Justice Moore,
John Mitchell, proprietor of the _United Irishman_ newspaper, was
placed upon his trial. He had been arrested under the act passed in
the beginning of the year to meet such cases, entitled, "An act for the
better security of the crown and government." True bills were