Indictment III

Mr William Bellew continues his Cross Examination of John Ruxton, of Dunleer, second Witness for the Crown: –

Q. Do you know whether Sir Patrick Bellew had any particular reason to apprehend an attack on the day you are speaking of, or any reason to induce him to prepare for a defence on that day, more than any other?

A. I do; when I was at the house some of the Defenders came to the gate to ask for the arms; they said they wished to have them peaceably and without alarming the family, and for that reason, three or four of them had been sent on by the others to ask for them, but if they were not given them, they must have them by force, and that there was a large body of Defenders from whom they had been sent, waiting for an answer at a little distance.

Q. Did you hear what answer was given?

A. I heard that Mr Francis Bellew told them they could not get them, and that if they insisted and attempted force, the family would defend themselves, and I heard that Sir Patrick Bellew had directed the same answer to be given.

Q. Do you recollect to have heard that any other person of the family had any conversation with the Defenders on that day?

A. I heard that you had a conversation with some of the Defenders at the gate of the house, I was there myself when a man armed, and on horseback, came by the gate of Barmeath, and heard you speak to him, and remonstrate with him on the impropriety of the conduct of the Defenders, urging them to stay quietly at home, and avoid meeting together, and tell them if they did so they would not be hurt.

Q. Did you ever hear of any association having been formed by the family of Barmeath, a little after the time you are speaking of? (Here the Court interrupted Mr William Bellew, saying that he must see that kind of question was not necessary as to the fact at issue.) Mr Bellew replied, that he felt very well that it was not, and that he also felt, that if an acquittal was his object, it was totally unnecessary for him to have asked a single question, but that he trusted that every person present would feel that an acquittal was the least part of what he had in view; that he felt strongly on seeing such a prosecution instituted, and wished to show, that the uniform exertions of his whole family had, so far from tending to promote sedition, been of a tendency directly contrary – and was desirous that it should appear publicly in the face of the county, what kind of prosecution this was; that under these circumstances, he trusted he should meet indulgence, and that the Court would allow him a latitude of examination, which in common cases perhaps would not be justifiable.

Mr Justice Chamberlain acquiesced, and said he would not stop him.

The question was then repeated and the witness answered, I did.

Q. Do you conceive that that association was of a nature to disturb the peace, or was it intended to support it?

A. I understood it was intended to support the peace and bring offenders to punishment.

Q. Do you know of any person having been taken up by this association?

A. I do.

Q. Do you know of any persons having been brought by them before a magistrate?

A. I do, I once met Mr Francis Bellew with some of the association conducting a person whom they had taken to a magistrate.

Q. Did you ever hear of any person taken by this association, having been committed by the magistrate and afterwards prosecuted?

A. I have.

Q. Did you ever hear of any such persons having been convicted?

A. I did, I believe there were three taken by that association, prosecuted and convicted at the last Spring assizes for this county, and since hung.

Q. Now, Sir, you have in the course of your profession been frequently at Barmeath, and I ask you, whether from every thing you saw or heard there at any time, and particularly on the day of which you are now speaking, and from any thing you ever saw or heard from the gentleman now on his trial, you had any reason to believe that either he or any of his family were likely to abet or support the Defenders?

A. None Sir, but on the contrary every reason to make me believe the reverse.

Q. From every circumstance you have heard from the witness who has been just examined, and from every thing you saw, heard or know, do you think it possible the gentleman now on his trial can have been the person described by the same witness to have met the Defenders at the Cross of Grange?

A. I am very clear, from having been at Barmeath that day, and from what I saw, that he cannot be the person.

This examination being finished, the Counsel for the Crown said they had no other witness to produce.

To be continued …