damental rules. His only proof was this, and he did not then rely
on it: Lord John Russell stated in the House, "I am told that one party
among the Repealers are anxious for a separation from England." This is
his solitary proof, nor does it appear that he was not himself the
informant of the minister. But the positive proofs at the other side are
numerous and incontestable. I select a few. On the 13th of July Mr.
O'Gorman, in presence of Mr. O'Connell, said: "In order that there shall
be no misconception on the subject, as far as I am concerned, I say, at
once, I am no advocate for physical force. As a member of the
Association I am bound by its laws. One of these is, that its object is
not to be attained by the use of physical force, but by moral means
only." Mr. Mitchel, on that occasion, said: "This is a legally organised
and constitutional society seeking to attain its object, as all the
world knows, by peaceable means and none other. Constitutional agitation
is the very basis of it; and nobody who contemplates any other mode of
bringing about the independence of the country has a right to come here,
or consider himself a fit member of our Association." On the 28th of
July, Mr. Meagher said: "I do advocate the peaceful policy of the
Association. It is the only policy we can and should adopt. If it be
pursued with truth, with courage and with firmness of purpose, I do
firmly believe it will succeed."

Mr. M.J. Barry, on the 7th of June, said, "It is perfectly plain to all
that the purpose of the Association is to work out its object by means
of moral force, and that only." In my letter to Mr. Ray, written long
after the secession, I used these words: "The first (original rule of
the Association) implies a pledge and an obligation to which every
member of the Association bound himself. Any member, who violates it, or
would induce the Association to infringe it, must be false to his own
vow and treacherous to the Association, whence he should be expelled
with every mark of infamy."

These proofs are taken at random: they range over the time before, after
and contemporaneous with the secession. They could be multiplied one
hundredfold, and taken from the speeches and writings of every one of
the seceders. Yet that fact availed nothing--they were told, because
"they differed from the rules laid down by the Liberator, they ceased to
be members of the Association."

This is, in some sort, a digression. I return to the e