numbers who indulged in the private opinion that
ministers had never betrayed the cause of civil and
religious freedom, because they had never been entrusted
with it, or the confidence of the catholics of the united
kingdom, because they had never possessed it.—Mr.
KEOGH began his speech with this declaration:—"As
one of Her Majesty's counsel, whether learned or not
learned in the law, I now, holding the act of Parliament
in, my hand, do unhesitatingly accord to this most
reverend prelate [the chairman] the title of Lord
Archbishop of Armagh." He affirmed that if the act now
passed be carried into execution, the clergy could not
administer a single act of their religion without violating
the law. Let them send into parliament forty
representatives reasonably determined to stand together as
one man, and to say to the minister of the day that they
required such and such measures for Ireland, and above
all a repeal of that bill. If their representatives would
make no terms with the minister until he repealed that
act of parliament, or any other statute which
interfered with the religious freedom of Roman Catholics,
he would not again write a letter stating that the Roman
Catholic religion was "calculated to confine the intellect
and enslave the soul." Dr. Gillis, colleague of Dr.
Carruthers, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Edinburgh,
moved a resolution pledging the association to the use
of every legitimate means within the constitution for
the total repeal of the ecclesiastical titles act. Mr.
MOORE, M.P., for Mayo, seconded the resolution, and
spoke in a tone of defiance. Were half-a-dozen men in
England to be allowed to impede or annul the religious
worship of the Irish people? " We defy, spit upon, and
scorn their enactments. Our prelates shall continue to
be the bishops of their Irish sees, all statutes to the
contrary notwithstanding." Dr. Ullathorne, Roman
Catholic Bishop of Birmingham, moved, "That for the
above objects, we deem it necessary to establish a catholic
defence association, and that the same be and is hereby
established." His speech, too, breathed resistance.
It was his duty, he said, in every way he could to avoid
collision with any enactment, however penal or atrocious.
But where his duty warned him to obey the divine law
he must do so. He could not possibly withhold the
signature of his office—which was inseparable from his
person and was indicative of his title, though not in the
legal sense of the word—from certain documents, without
himself becoming a recreant to the church of God
and an apostate to his high office. Therefore, where he
could not otherwise fulfil his duty, he would append the
whole designation of his office; where it was needful it
should be done. Then as to the consequences of so
acting, he had come to the conclusion, after mature
deliberation, that he could not have recourse to the purse
which was confided to him for the support of the clergy
and the promotion of religion, for the payment of fines
inflicted by this penal enactment. He was prepared at
once to go to gaol. But should his spiritual children
feel the want of their pastor, it would be no acquiescence
in the penal act, but a strong protest against it, for them
to raise a fund—by a penny subscription suppose,—for
the purpose of delivering him out of gaol. He thought
the inhabitants of Birmingham would be ready to enter
into such a protest if needful, and that the government
would tire of prosecuting before they tired of delivering
him out of gaol. These sentiments were received with
loud cheers. Mr. John Reynolds seconded the motion
in a characteristic speech. "That little, fanatic, and
insolent Lord John Russell—not satisfied with
introducing the bill, rummaged history—all the lying
volumes that were compiled by all lying historians that
ever defiled their pens in lying against the religion of
the people—and delivered them in the shape of a speech
in the house of commons to five hundred of his
supporters, who swallowed it as political gospel." They
would not be satisfied with the repeal of the act, but
they will repeal the whigs from office. They intend to
appeal to every county and borough in Ireland. His
experience of five years in the house taught him,
although there were a few honest men amongst them,
that if the system prevailed which had prevailed for half
a century, it would be better that the honest men of
Ireland had no power to return representatives. They
would ask the honest men of Youghal, if they would
disgrace themselves by sending in that political slave
Chisholm Anstey; and the people of Drogheda, whether
they would disgrace themselves by re-electing a political
slave like Sir William Somerville. They would ask
similar questions with reference to Mr. Fitzstephen
Ffrench, and Mr. Clements, and the member for
Leitrim. (Hisses.) There were not twenty true
representatives among the hundred-and-five; and if that be
the case, how could they make a better battle than they
had made. After paying the expenses of the catholic
defence association, half the surplus would be devoted
to the lord primate and his brother bishops, to be
disposed of by them for the purpose of education; and the
balance they would hand over to honest men coming
forward for the representation of honest constituencies,
to pay a portion of the legal expenses of their election.
A resolution nominating a committee was moved by the
Roman Catholic bishop of Clonfert, and seconded by
Mr. Bianconi. Mr. Vincent Scully, M.P., moved the
preparation of an address to the catholics of the united
kingdom; and was seconded by Mr. John Rawson of
Lancashire,—who considered the meeting entitled to the
assistance of the dissenting body of England. Mr.
Sergeant Shee and Mr. Maguire proposed and carried
a vote of thanks to the Duke of Newcastle, the Earl of
Aberdeen, Lord Monteagle, Sir James Graham, Mr.
Gladstone, Mr. Sidney Herbert, Mr. Roundell Palmer,
and other distinguished protestants in parliament, who
sustained the cause of religious liberty. Dr. Cullen now
quitted the chair, and a vote of thanks was voted to him.
Three cheers each were given for each prelate of the
Irish Roman Catholic church; Mr. Reynolds reading
the names aloud with the prohibited titles; and with
that parting mark of "defiance to the government,"
the meeting dispersed.

On the following day, the 20th, there was a meeting
of the committee to proceed with the preparation of the
rules and regulations for the future government of the
body, and also to prepare the address of the Roman
catholics of the empire, in compliance with the resolution
of the aggregate meeting. "His grace the lord
archbishop of Armagh" took the chair, and, says the
Freeman's Journal "Considerable progress was made
in the draughting of the rules and regulations, and the
preparation of the address which will be submitted for
the perusal and amendment, before final adoption, of
the prelates of the united kingdom, and those members
of parliament who were on Tuesday nominated for that
purpose by the aggregate meeting. The 17th of
September has been fixed for the next meeting of the
committee, when the prelates and members will attend,
by which time the rules and the address will be finally
prepared."

NARRATIVE OF LAW AND CRIME.

Some excitement was created at the opening of the
Newcastle Assizes by the unusual conduct of the high
sheriff, Sir Horace St. Paul. Instead of escorting the
judges with the traditional pomp, a very plain clarence
carriage, without any ornament whatever, and having
a rumble behind, in which were two footmen in plain
liveries, was the only parade, if it can be so called, which
was afforded to the judges. The carriage-mountings
were plated, and the mountings of the harness on the
pair of horses were in brass; in fact, the harness was
that of a common stage-coach or omnibus. There were
no javelin-men, out-riders, trumpeters, or attendants of
any kind, beyond the driver on the box and the two
footmen in the rumble. Mr. Baron Platt felt this as
an indignity; and he referred to it in his charge to the
grand jury.—"I cannot leave you," he said "without
expressing my regret that in this great country, and in
this great county of Northumberland, the gentry are so
reduced as not to show the ordinary respect and loyalty
to the crown. It is not merely as judges that we come
here; we are ministers under the royal commission.
We have the honour to attend before you under the
commission or sign manual of Her Majesty: and in this
country, where any disloyalty or any disregard to the
administration of justice is considered a slur, I do regret
that the usual and ordinary garniture by which that