to her house on the night of the Tuesday immediately after the insur rection."

"John Robinson corroborated the testimony of the witness Doyle, relative to the small proclamation, which he identified."

"Joseph Palmer deposed that he was clerk to Mr. Colville, and lodged at his mother's house, at Harold's Cross. He recollected the apprehension of the prisoner, at his mother's house, by Major Sirr; and that he had lodged there the preceding spring, at which time, and wher. he was arrested, he went by the name of Hewitt. The prisoner came to lodge there, the second time, about three weeks before the last time; and was habited in a brown coat, white waistcoat, white pantaloons, hessian boots, and a black stock. The pantaloons were of cloth. Those who visited the prisoner inquired for him by the name of Hewitt. At the time he was arrested there was a label on the door of the house, expressive of its inhabitants. It was written by the witness, but the prisoner was omitted, at his request, because he said he was afraid government would take him up. The prisoner, in different conversations with the witness, explained why he feared being taken up. He acknowledged that he had been in Thomas-street on the night of the 23rd of July, and described the dress he wore on that occasion, part of which were the waistcoat, pantaloons, and boots already mentioned, and particularly his coat, which he described as a very handsome uniform. The prisoner had a conversation with witness about a magazine, and expressed much regret at the loss of the powder in the depôt. The proclamations were likewise mentioned by the prisoner, and he planned a mode of escape, in the event of any attempt to arrest him, by going through the parlour-window into the back-house, and from thence into the fields. Here the witness was shewn a paper, found upon a chair in the room in which the prisoner lodged, and asked if he knew whose handwriting it was-he replied, that he did not know, but was certain that it had not been written by any of his family, and that there was no other lodger in the house besides the prisoner.'

The examination of this witness being closed, extracts from several papers found in the possession of Emmet were then read.

Major Henry Charles Sirr stated-"I went, in the evening of the 25th of August, to the house of one Palmer. I had heard there was a stranger in the back parlour. I rode, accompanied by a man on foot; I desired the man to knock at the door. He did, and it was opened by a girl. I alighted, and ran directly into the back parlour. I saw the prisoner sitting at dinner: the woman of the house was there, and the girl who opened the door was the daughter of the woman of the house. I desired them to withdraw. I asked the prisoner his name; he told me his name was Cunningham. I gave him in charge to the man who accompanied me, and went into the next room to ask the woman and daughter about him; they told me his name was Hewitt. I went back, and asked how long he had been there? He said he came that morning. He had attempted to escape before I returned, for he was bloody, and the man said he knocked him down with a

a month.

pistol. I then went to Mrs. Palmer, who said he had lodged there for I then judged he was a person of some importance. When I first went in, there was a paper on the chair, which I put into my pocket. I then went to the canal bridge for a guard, having desired him to be in readiness as I passed by. I planted a sentry over him, and desired the non-commissioned officer to surround the house with sentries, while I searched it. I then examined Mrs. Palmer, and took down her account of the prisoner, during which time I heard a noise, as if an escape was attempted. I instantly ran to the back part of the house, as the most likely part for him to get out at; I saw him going off, and ordered a sentinel to fire, and then pursued myself, regardless of the order. The sentry snapped, but the musket did not go off. I overtook the prisoner, and he said, 'I surrender!' I searched him, and found some papers upon him.”

On the witness expressing concern at the necessity of the prisoner's being treated so roughly, he, the prisoner, observed, "that all was fair in war." The prisoner, when brought to the Castle, acknowledged that his name was Emmet.

The case for the crown having closed, and Emmet declined to enter into any defence, Mr. Conyngham Plunket rose to address the jury, previous to the judge's charge. To this the prisoner's legal advisers objected, as the counsel for the crown could not be said to have a right to reply to evidence, when no defence had been made. Lord Norbury, however, decided otherwise, and Mr. Plunket then addressed the court.

CHAPTER XXXIX.

СРЕЕСНО" THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL-LORD NORBURY'S CHARGE-FINDING OF THE JURY-EMMET'S CELEBRATED SPEECH-HIS EXECUTION-CONCLUDING REMARKS.

My Lords and Gentlemen of the Jury,

"You need not entertain any apprehension taat, at this hour of the day, I am disposed to take up a great deal of your time, by observing upon the evidence which has been given. In truth, if this were an ordinary case, and if the object of this prosecution did not include some more momentous interests than the mere question of the guilt or innocence of the unfortunate gentleman who stands a prisoner at the bar, I should have followed the example of his counsel, and should have declined making any observation upon the evidence. But, gentlemen, I do feel this to be a case of infinite importance indeed-it is a case important, like all others of this kind, by involving the life of a fellow-subject; but it is doubly and ten-fold important, because, from the evidence which has been given in the progress of it, the system of this conspiracy against the laws and constitution of the country has been developed in all its branches; and in observing upon the conduct of the prisoner at the bar, and bringing home the evidence of his guilt, I am bringing home guilt to a person who, I say, is the centre, the life-blood and soul of this atrocious conspiracy.

"Gentlemen, with respect to the evidence which has been offered upon the part of the crown to substantiate the guilt of the prisoner, I shall be very short indeed in recapitulating and observing upon itI shall have very little more to do than to follow the statement which was made by my learned and eloquent friend, who stated the case upon the part of the crown; because it appears to me that the outline which was given by him has been with an exactness and precision seldom to be met with, followed up by the proof. Gentlemen, what is the sum and substance of that evidence? I shall not detain you by detailing the particulars of it. You see the prisoner at the bar returning from foreign countries some time before hostilities were on the point of breaking out between these countries and France; at first avowing himself not disguising or concealing himself-he was then under no necessity of doing so; but when hostilities commenced, and when it was not improbable that foreign invasion might co-operate with domestic treason, you see him throwing off the name by which he was previously known, and disguising himself under new appellations and characters. You see him in the month of March or April going to an