On handing in the report, I mentioned the doubts entertained by Sir Colman O’Loghlen.  Mr. O’Connell suggested that the report should be deferred until he could consult Sir Colman.  The suggestion was agreed to, and time given for reconsideration.  Mr. O’Connell himself examined the question, he said, with great attention.  He was assisted by Mr. Clements in his researches, and at the end of the fortnight he came down to the committee with a report of his own, distinctly and emphatically contradicting ours, upon both branches of the case.  He delivered it to the chairman (Mr. S. O’Brien), with exultation, as a great constitutional discovery of unspeakable importance to the liberties of Ireland.  The committee received it in the same spirit.  I ventured to question the soundness of his opinion, and maintain my own, it was considered a daring thing to do in those times; but the question seemed to me so clear that I could not abandon my views without treachery to my conviction.  The discussion was very short, and ended in personality, wherein he insinuated something about unworthy motives.  No scene of my life made the same impression on me.  I felt keenly his reproaches, but still more keenly the impolicy and imprudence of the step into which the country was precipitated.  I requested that the question should be again postponed, and the opinion of some eminent men outside the Association taken.  I was overruled, and even laughed at—­it was “doubting Mr. O’Connell.”  Mr. O’Connell said, “I’ll test this question ’meo periculo.’” The resolution passed amid cheers, and was recorded next day amid the louder and more vehement cheers of the Association.  The country re-echoed the boast, and the House of Commons was, by a formal and solemn vote of the entire nation, set at defiance.  The conflict was pre-arranged, even to its minute details.  Mr. O’Brien was to proceed to London, where disobedience would be more marked and decisive; and Mr. John O’Connell was to remain in Ireland, where he could take advantage of an additional obstacle to the exercise of its authority to the House.  So the matter stood when Mr. Hume, through what motive it is not easy to see, neglected or abandoned his notice.  The country regarded this as a confession of weakness by the House, and gloried in a new triumph achieved by the genius of Mr. O’Connell.  He himself thought he had found a great and solid basis for future action, and hinted at the prospect of being able to raise upon it a parliamentary structure, having imprescriptible and indefeasible authority, and only requiring the sanction of the crown.

A short time after the withdrawal of Mr. Hume’s motion, the question was again raised in another form.  The chairman of the Committee of Selection for Railways addressed a circular, among others, to Messrs. S. O’Brien and John O’Connell, requiring their attendance at the selection of special Railway Committees.  The correspondent of the Freeman’s Journal, thus writes in forwarding their replies:—­