Do you remember a meeting held in December last in the neighbourhood of that town? Was a MS. account of the proceedings at that meeting afterwards brought to you to be printed?-Part of it. nock, held on the 7th December 1816, for the Do you know, if in point of fact, petitions were drawn up and signed by the persons who were at the meeting?-I could not say. Did you sign any of the petitions yourself? -No. Did you understand from what passed, that it was the intention of M'Laren to induce the people, and you as one of them, to petition the legislature, or to excite violence and disturb ance? Lord Advocate.-I object to this question. Lord Justice Clerk.-The understanding or opinion of any witness is not to be listened to in evidence. Mr. Grant.-What did you collect to be the object of M'Laren's speech? Lord Advocate.-If this course of examination go on, there can be no objection to my re-examining the witness. I did not finish my examination of him, but on the idea that I could not put such questions. Mr. Clerk. We have put a question, and we should not be interrupted. The lord advocate puts in his claim to put such questions. But he must not interrupt us in order to make an examination himself. Court. He has no such intention. Mr. Grant.-I put this other question: In point of fact, did this speech excite the people to commotion or disturbance ?-No. There was none upon that occasion ?— None. Was it the tendency of M'Laren's speech, from what you observed, and from what passed, to create commotion or disturbance, or to induce petitions to be sent to the Prince Regent and the two houses of parliament ?-It was to induce the people to petition the Prince Regent and the two houses of parliament. Did you attend the meeting?-No. was [Pamphlet handed to the witness.] That was printed in my office. Who brought it? The part I saw brought by David Andrew, I think. Was any body in company with him?-I think not. Court. Has Andrew any more names than one?-I do not know. Mr. Solicitor General.-Did you see him in the other room to-day?—I did." Who attended the press while this MS. was printed?-I did not see, as the printing-office is at a distance from the shop, and I was only occasionally there. Did Thomas Baird attend the printing?—I think I saw him once or twice; I am certain once. Are you able to say whether this publication is a true copy of the MS. that was brought to you?-I cannot say. Who printed it?-Thomas Murray, a man whom I employ. Have you been paid for the printing?-No. Who is to pay you?-The persons who employed me. Who are they?—I look to Mr. David Andrew, Mr. Andrew Finnie, and Mr. Baird. Lord Advocate.-What was done with the publication after the printing?-Copies were taken from me in quantities: Mr. Baird got a quantity, and Mr. Finnie and others got quantities. Mr. Solicitor General.-How many copies were printed?-About 400 I think. How many did Baird get?—I cannot say. Can you say about what number?-There might be four, five, or six dozen. Lord Advocate.-Do you know M'Laren ?— Within this short time. Did he ever complain of his speech being printed inaccurately?—No, I never spoke to in my life, to my knowledge. Did he express himself in any way with re-him gard to the person of the Prince Regent in that speech? Not that I remember of. When he advised them to lay their petitions at the foot of the throne, did he say any thing of the august prince?—I do not remember any thing of the throne; but he mentioned his august prince. In what terms?-In favourable terms. In terms perfectly legal and becoming a good subject ?—Yes. Hugh Crawford sworn.-Examined by Mr. Solicitor General. Thomas Murray sworn.-Examined by Are you journeyman to Mr. Crawford ?-Mr. [The pamphlet was shown to the witness.] Was that printed at Mr. Crawford's printing office ?—Yes. By you ?—Yes. Is it a correct copy of the MS. given you for the purpose of being printed?-There were some alterations in the proofs. Corrections of the press?-Yes. What alterations ?-Typographical errors: and perhaps in some sentences grammatical alterations. Were there any alterations of the sense? None that I remember of. Who gave in the MS.?-The first part I received from Mr. Crawford. Who gave you the rest?-I received it at different times. From whom?-It was sometimes given in when I was not in the office, and sometimes when I was in it. Who gave you any part of it?-Mr. David Andrew. Did Mr. Webster bring any of it?-Once, I remember. Who came to superintend the printing, and to inquire after it?-That person. Any body else ?-No. Mr. Baird ?-He was twice or three times at the utmost. For the purpose of inquiring about the publication?-He was several times in the office. What did he do when he came ?-He came to the office along with Mr. David Andrew to look over the first proof. Did they make any alterations?-One was proposed by Mr. Baird. What was it?—I do not know. Can you point it out in the publication ?— No, for I never had it in my hand but now and before the sheriff of Ayr. Was any alteration made in consequence? None. Why was it not made ?-It was a grammatical alteration that was proposed, I thought the alteration proposed was wrong, and I had a right to make the pamphlet grammatical. What became of the MS. from which the publication was printed?-It went as all of them do, it was destroyed; I was not desired to preserve it. Lord Advocate.-Look at the passage on page 7. " to with allegiance," was that blank in the MS.?-If I remember rightly, that part of the MS. was erased, written over again, then erased and interlined; and I do not know but I ordered my apprentice to leave the blank, as I could not make it out. To make the sentence join properly, I left it blank. Did Mr. Baird, when he came and looked over the MS., object to the blank, or state any thing?-He never looked over it. You said Mr. Baird came with Mr. Andrew and looked over the first proof. Did he make any observation about the blank there left?— That was not in the first proof; the proof I spoke of was the proof of the first pages of the pamphlet. Thomas Murray cross-examined by Mr. Jeffrey for Thomas Baird. Were the proof sheets sent to any one to be revised?-They were. To whom?-To Mr. David Andrew. Any to Mr. Baird ?-Never, to my remembrance. [Part of the MS. was shown to the witness.] Mr. Drummond. Did you ever see that before?-I never saw it before; it never came into my hands. Thomas Murray cross-examined by Mr. Grant for Alexander McLaren. Was any part of the MS. pencilled?—I do not remember; the MS. was very imperfect, and was partly well and partly ill written; it was partly in quarto and partly in folio, in different hands. Do you remember the part that contains the blank, what size of the paper was there?-It was folio. I remember it quite well. There were two sheets of foolscap paper written on without being folded. Was it of the size of this, folded and written on as this?— [A sheet of folio paper shown the witness.] Yes. James Johnstone sworn.-Examined by Do you remember a public meeting at Dean park, near Kilmarnock ?—Yes. Do you know that there was a committee to prepare and adjust the business of that meeting?—I do. Of whom did it consist ?-I really cannot tell; of a number of persons; of myself for one. Was Mr. M'Laren one ?-Yes. Were any resolutions prepared before the public meeting?—Yes. Were they read to the meeting which took place?—Yes. You attended that meeting?—I did. Who first spoke ?—Alexander M'Laren. after that public meeting?—Yes, that evenWas there any meeting of this committee ing. For what purpose?—The particular purpose resolutions and speeches. was, to consider whether they should print their Who attended that meeting? Were the panels there ?-I think so. and resolutions?—Yes. Was it resolved there to print the speeches speeches?-I believe so, but I did not see them The several speakers gave in copies of their given in. thing but my own speech. Did you see any thing at all given in ?—No Were you present when the proofs of the proceedings were revised?—I was not present at the revision of any of them. [The pamphlet was shown to the witness.] Is that the publication of the proceedings which took place at Dean-park at the time you mention ?—I suppose so. By whom does it appear to be printed?— Was it resolved at the committee that he Did you never read the pamphlet? -No. Not even your own speech?-No; I gave it to Mr. Walter Andrew to revise. Are these the resolutions that were read to the meeting?—I have glanced at them. I cannot say particularly they are the resolutions, but generally I believe so. Lord Advocate. You are acquainted with M'Laren?-Yes. He was a member of the committee? Yes. You have, of course, had conversations with him about the meeting and the publication?Yes, in a general way. Did you ever hear if Baird or he complained of inaccuracy in the statement given of the proceedings-Yes; Alexander McLaren. What did he say?-That one sentence at the end of his speech in the printed account, and cited in the indictment was not in the original MS. He said it runs in this way: speaking of the petition being presented to the Prince Regent, "he hoped he would lend his gracious ear to it, as he was bound to do by the constitution; but if he did not do so, then to hell with allegiance." I think he said this was not in the original speech. Did you hear his speech?-Only the sound of it. Did you hear any of the words of it during the meeting?-I cannot say I did. What did M'Laren say was the inaccuracy? -He complained of the latter part of the sentence altogether being in it at all, because it was not in the MS. Did he complain of the word "hell ?" Mr. Clerk.-I object to the question. There is no such word in the publication. Mr. Clerk-Nobody is more competent to put regular questions to witnesses than my lord advocate, but I cannot permit him to proceed irregularly. What was the question put? Whether M'Laren complained of hell being in the MS. That was implying that the words were in the printed pamphlet, and nobody is entitled to suggest a false fact to a witness. No fact must be assumed in putting a question to a witness. recollection what the question was to which I Lord Advocate.-I wish the Court to keep in wished to get an answer-whether or no M'Laren complained of being misrepresented by "hell" being in the printed copy. My friend now admits that the question was not irregular. Mr. Clerk.-The question is not as it was put originally. Lord Advocate.-I put it to the Court that such was the question. Lord Justice Clerk.—I do not see any thing out of form here. Lord Advocate. The opposite counsel were out of form in interrupting me, and they have rendered the question useless. If they again interrupt me, let them first desire the witness to be removed. [Witness brought back.] In what way did he say he was misrepresented?-I did not say so. I say he complained of the latter part of the sentence being put in, because it was not in the MS. Then he did not complain of being misrepresented?—Yes, in one word that he did not pronounce the word " their," or our," ," which comes in before" allegiance." You are looking at the printed statement. Did you not say that you had not seen it before?-I did not say I had not seen it; I said I had not read it. Lord Justice Clerk.-He says M'Laren complained of being misrepresented with respect to a word before "allegiance," and he is entitled to look at the pamphlet. [The witness was ordered to withdraw.] Lord Advocate.-The drift of the examination I was carrying on at the time was, to Witness.-As far as my judgment leads me bring out of the witness what was the conversation between him and M'Laren-whether to take notice, he complained of any thing inM'Laren objected to certain parts of the pub-giance," because it was not in his original MS. tervening between the word "to" and "allelication which he is alleged to have done. The Ile never intended to say it; it was merely a witness said he never read that publication. I word of some Play that occurred to his memory, am entitled to put the question, in order to and he let it out. ascertain the witness's recollection; and particularly, whether M'Laren complained of any word being in the MS. I submit that the question I put is competent, viz. whether M'Laren complained of "hell to allegiance" being in the MS. The thing, I admit, is now irremediable, because my learned friend has instructed the witness by stating that there is no such word in the publication; but I say it was ir regular in my learned friend to interrupt me and thus to prepare the witness. Mr. Solicitor General.-Did he tell you, then, how the passage should have been printed?-He told me the identical words he used. The last words of the sentence were, to hell allegiance." 66 Lord Advocate.-Did he complain of the passage as stated in the indictment?—Yes; he gave the indictment to me to read. Lord Justice Clerk. He said the passage was not correctly given either in the indictment | with better times. What were then the geor the printed account?-Exactly. neral wages?-About 12s. a week, from 12s. to Did you not hear him at any other time make any remarks?-Yes, I have heard him several times complain, and say it was a pity the last sentence had been put in. Spoken, or put in ?—It was a pity it had been spoken at all. Were you present at the meeting about the printing?—Yes. ? Was any objection made to that passage I was against the printing altogether, not that I thought there was any thing wrong in the publication; but judging from my own, I supposed all the speeches were made up in a hurried way, and would not stand the scrutiny of the public eye. Do you remember Mr. Baird making any objections to the publication?-I do not particularly. Do you know any thing of the reasons stated for or against the printing?-The publication was to defray the expenses incurred at the public meeting.. Was the sale of the publication intrusted to any particular persons?-To the committee in general, 14s. I need not therefore ask if there was the greatest possible distress at Kilmarnock?— There can be no doubt of it. You talked of the meeting which was held near Kilmarnock. What was its object? Solely to petition the Prince Regent, and both Houses of Parliament, to consider the grievances of the country. It was our opinion, that one great reason of them was the defective state of the representation, more particularly in our part of the country; and therefore we particularly recommended attention to that. Were any other objects in view besides petitioning, any other means thought of in order to obtain redress of these grievances ?—None. Was any conversation ever held in your presence by M'Laren that tended to any other purpose than what is in the petition? None. Did you ever hear from him any hint, that induced you to believe he entertained disloyal opinions, or seditious intentions ?-Never. Have you occasion to know whether he was of a peaceable and orderly disposition and habit of life?-I never heard or saw any thing to the contrary. How long have you been acquainted with him?-These eight years. Does it consist with your knowledge that he was a member of a volunteer corps at Glasgow ? I have heard that he was. Do you know of his being in the local militia, or Kilmarnock volunteer corps?—He was in the rifle corps at Kilmarnock. Was the public meeting conducted in an orderly and peaceable manner?—I considered it so. It was with no other intention I under [The MS. of the witness's speech was shown took the management, and that any gentleman to him.] Was that written before or after the meeting ?-Before. You officiated as chairman at the meeting? -Yes. will see from my speech. What was the state of the weather?-It was very coarse. There was hail, and wind, and snow. Perhaps that was the reason you did not hear the speech?---That was the reason; I just James Johnstone cross-examined by Mr. Grant heard the sound, but not the words. for Alexander M'Laren. You are a muslin agent?-Yes. For any of the Glasgow houses?—Yes. From that circumstance, have you an opportunity of being much acquainted with the situation of the manufacturers in Kilmarnock? -I think so. At present now, what may the most active weaver be able to clear in the course of a week?-At present things are rather better than they were some time ago. From a calculation I have made, an active weaver may at present gain about 5s. 6d. a week. What might he be able to gain a week on an average of the last year?-From 4s. to 4s. 6d. How many hours work a day was necessary to gain this sum?-At least from 14 to 15 hours. You have compared this period of distress It was not weather well calculated for any person hearing a speech distinctly?—It was very bad indeed. You said you were present at a meeting of the committee, when it was proposed to print the proceedings, and that M'Laren was there, and that you objected to the printing. Did any other person object?-Mr. M'Laren objected particularly to the printing of his speech. What passed upon that occasion?—There was a great deal of altercation as to the printing; and it was at last agreed that those who had made speeches should give them to a committee appointed to superintend the printing. Did Mr. McLaren still object to his speech being printed ?-He said, though the rest were printed, he did not see any reason for printing his, as it was made up in a hurried manner, and that he had no intention that morning of speaking at all. Were you present at any meeting of the committee previous to the public meeting, for arranging about the public meeting ?—Yes, I was at them all, I think. At a previous meeting were any steps taken as to appointing a person to open the proceedings at the public meeting?-It was discussed; and after a great deal of discussion, M'Laren agreed, that if no other person came forward, he would do it; and he mentioned to me since the meeting, he had no idea he should open the business, as another person had given a kind of promise to do it, and that person not appearing on the field, he went to a publichouse and prepared some observations. I saw him the night beforet he meeting, when he told me he had hopes another person would open it. Do you know who that other person was ?— Yes, M'Laren told me. Was the name of that other person publicly mentioned ?—No, it was not. Was either of you a member of the committee that superintended the printing ?—None of us. Do you know anything of a disturbance that took place about meal previous to the meeting? -I heard of it. You said you have known him eight years. Did you ever know him to be connected with any body of men assembled for any seditious or illegal purpose?-Never, so far as I knew him, otherwise I would never have kept company with him. You are an extensive agent?—There are some much more extensive than I am. Have you ever heard M'Laren was a member of any society for any purpose ?-Of none but this committee. Court.-Does this committee still continue? -No, the committee does not continue. Mr. Grant. Was this committee open for any person to go to ?-We never had a meeting which was not open; and there were always some others present besides the members of the committee. Any one was asked to attend. Were any precautions taken to keep your proceedings secret from the magistrates? None. Was it ever hinted or proposed that it would be necessary to keep the proceedings secret from the magistrates?-Never. In point of fact, were the magistrates made acquainted with the intention of the meeting? -I believe so. I called and told Mr. Baird I would not attend unless the magistrates were made acquainted with the intended meeting, VOL. XXXIII. He was appointed to tell them. Mr. Baird said he had called on the magistrate, but had not found him, and he said he would go again, and I understood from him he did go again. Was there, according to your knowledge, any obstruction offered by the magistrates to the meeting?-I saw none. Do you know whether, in point of fact, petitions, founded on the resolutions adopted at that meeting were prepared to the Prince Regent and the two Houses of Parliament ?They were. Did you read them over?-I think nearly. I heard them all read. Does it consist with your knowledge that they were forwarded?—I was told so by Mr. Baird. I read in the public papers that they were presented. If I were to show you a printed copy of the petition, should you remember it? Lord Advocate.-Nothing is said in the indictment about the petition. Mr. Clerk.-Much will be said in defence upon this very fact about which we are examining the witness. Lord Advocate.-Defences have been given in for the panels, and no notice is taken in them of productions being to be made. Your lordships will take notice of this. I only wish you may keep this in view. Lord Justice Clerk.-We must receive whatever may go to exculpate the panels. [The account of the petition in a printed copy of the Journals of the House of Commons was handed to the witness.] Mr. Grant.-Were these the terms of the petition?-As far as my judgment serves me, that is the substance of the petition. Have you any doubts whether this is the same petition?-I have none at all. None can suppose my memory is such as to say these are the identical words. Your answer is quite proper. I have put a cross at the margin. Say whether you recollect particularly that the words there form part of the petition? Lord Advocate.-I consented to a few ques tions being put to the witness, but I now object to any farther questions that are not cross. Mr. Grant. I am just finishing this part of the examination. I have only to read a passage, and ask the witness whether he remembers it. "When we came to discover those alarming facts, our hearts stood appalled, as if we had trod on a volcano: We looked around for the cause, and we found it in the very corrupt and defective representation of the people in parliament. We found, that the Commons House, whose members ought to be chosen annually by the people-should be the organ of the people's voice-the guardians of their rights and of the public purse-had lost all control over the servants of the Crown, and Ꭰ |