to this remarkable and harassing case from first to last, and had
sufficient opportunities of acquainting ourselves with its exact legal
position. We deem it of great importance to enable our readers, whether
lay or professional, to form, with moderate attention, a sound judgment
for themselves upon questions which may possibly become the subject of
early parliamentary discussion--Whether the recent decision of the House
of Lords, a very bold one unquestionably, was nevertheless a correct
one, and consequently entitling the tribunal by whom it was pronounced,
to the continued respect and confidence of the country? This is, in
truth, a grave question, of universal concern, of permanent interest,
and requiring a fearless, an honest, and a careful examination.

The reversal of the judgment against Mr O'Connell and his companions,
was received throughout the kingdom with perfect amazement. No one was
prepared for it. Up to the very last moment, even till Lord Denman had
in his judgment decisively indicated the conclusion at which he had
arrived on the main point in the case, we have the best reason for
believing that there was not a single person in the House of Lords--with
the possible exception of Lords Denman, Cottenham, and Campbell--who
expected a reversal of the judgment. So much has the public press been
taken by surprise, that, with the exception of a fierce controversy
between the _Standard_, and _Morning Herald_, and the _Morning
Chronicle_, which was conducted with great acuteness and learning, we
are not aware of any explanation since offered by the leading organs of
public opinion--the TIMES has preserved a total silence--as to the legal
sufficiency or insufficiency of the grounds on which this memorable
judgment of reversal proceeded. We shall endeavour to do so; for while
it is on this side of the Channel perfectly notorious that the
traversers have been proved guilty of the enormous misdemeanours with
which they were charged--guilty in law and guilty in fact--on the other
side of the Channel we find, since commencing this article, that the
chief delinquent, Daniel O'Connell, has the amazing audacity, repeatedly
and deliberately, to declare in public that he has been "ACQUITTED ON
THE MERITS!" Without pausing to find words which would fitly
characterize such conduct, we shall content ourselves with the following
judicial declaration made by Lord Brougham in giving judgment in the
House of Lords, a declaration