The resolution was, therefore, uncalled for and unnecessary, as it was unsound and untrue.
Of this there is the clearest proof.

First, the negative proof is conclusive.

Mr.O'Connell did not name an act, or refer to a word of one single seceder, which would justify the imputation that they sought or desired to involve the Association in any expedient inconsistent with its fundamental 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.