member. I did not fully understand the words which he used at the time. Was there any thing about Belshazzar?— The prince was compared with Belshazzar. By the panel in his preaching?—Yes. What point of resemblance did he find between them?-Belshazzar had polluted the vessels of the sanctuary or temple of Jerusalem, in drinking out of the vessels, he and his lords, and wives, and concubines, to the honour of idols. How did he compare the regent to him?Because he also had rioted. Did he say any thing about any other king? -About the king of France. The late, or the present king of France?— Louis the Sixteenth. What of him?-As far as I can recollect, or could understand, he said that he was advised by his own Court, and the other Courts of Europe, against his own people. Court. What do you say?—That by following the advice of his counsellors, he lost his life, and is either in hell or purgatory. Mr. Drummond.-Did he connect such reflections with our king or prince regent?Our prince, he said, like the king of France, would not listen to the wishes of his people. What wishes had the prince not listened to? -The voice of his people, or cries of poor petitioners who had petitioned him. Court.-Do you mean to say upon oath, that though a comparison was made between the prince and Belshazzar, you cannot state the points of comparison ?-I cannot come upon them at present. John Waddell sworn.-Examined by Do you know the prisoner Douglas?—I have seen the gentleman several times. Did you go to hear him preach ?—Yes. When?-Ten or twelve weeks ago. End of March-End of March, or beginning of April. Did you go often?-Three evenings. Upon what subject or text did he preach.The fifth chapter of Daniel. All the three evenings upon the same chapter?-The two first upon the same chapter, and upon the same text. I do not recollect particularly as to the third. Did he say anything about the king, or the prince regent upon these occasions?I heard him speak of the prince regent. There is an impression on my mind, that he said the prince regent is as fit for a gibbet as a throne. Jury. Did he say these words, or do you think he meant them?-I thought he said so at the time: but there was a good deal of confusion, and he spoke very hurriedly. Your impression is, that he said them?-I think he did. Court. What do you mean by a good deal of confusion?From the pressure of the people that were in the lobby, or entrance to the seats. John Waddell cross-examined by Mr. Jeffrey. Are you any relation to James Waddell ?Brother. Was he with you upon these occasions?-No. Do you refer in the answer which you have given above to the first or second night you heard Douglas?—The first. the time the service began ?—It was begun beCourt.-Were you constantly present from fore I went in. How long might you be there?—About an hour and a half, or twenty minutes. Will you be so good as tell us if you recollect any other passage either of his prayers or sermon but this that you mentioned ?—Nothing that struck me with any kind of force. How did he treat of this fifth chapter of Daniel ?-That is what I cannot exactly recapitulate. Do you remember anything that preceded or that followed these remarkable expressions that have been given us?-Relative to the prince regent? Yes?-I did not hear the expressions previous to that. Can you tell us what made him use such strong expressions?-I thought I heard him utter them, but I did not hear what he said previously. What followed?—I do not recollect indeed. Are we to understand that you cannot tell any one thing he said but what you have mentioned ?-Nothing else that he said that first night. You say you went again ?—That night fortnight. Do you recollect anything he said that night fortnight?-Yes, I recollect he used the expressions, speaking of the battle of Waterloo, that some of those connected with it might consider it an honour, but for his part he would rather consider it as a disgrace. Nothing else, sir?—Nothing. How did he treat the chapter of Daniel that what I have mentioned. I heard him very innight?--I do not recollect anything more than distinctly. Was that from the noise, or from his mode of speaking?-From the noise, and his mode of speaking, and from the pressure of the congregation. When you heard these remarkable expressions you have spoken to, did you mention them to any one at the time?-Not at the time. Not that night to anybody?-To none that I recollect of. When did you mention it ?-I could not exactly say. I heard such things mentioned by others. There was just a general kind of speaking about him. Whether did you, or when did you, mention the expressions to anybody else?—I believe I have mentioned them: but I do not remember when, or where, or to whom. The following Declarations of the panel were then read: At Glasgow March, 15th, 1817. "In presence of Robert Hamilton, Esq., advocate Sheriff-depute of Lanarkshire, compeared Niel Douglas, Universalist preacher, inGlasgow; who being examined, declares, That for the last eleven years he has been a preacherin Glasgow, and during that period has had Sabbath evening lectures and sermons, which, for about the last five years, he has delivered in the Andersonian Institution Class-room, and his audience has been, particularly for the last seven or eight months, very numerous and respectable: That his precentor's name is Nickolson, who is employed in the warehouse of Mr. Robertson, a quaker, a manufacturer, in Commercial-buildings, Candleriggs: That M'Dowal Pate used occasionally to precent, and he did so lately, and he is not certain but he did so last Sabbath: That he keeps no copy of his sermons or lectures, but he premeditates, and, by the assistance of notes, endeavours to adhere as close as possible; and he is not conscious of having made any improper deviation from the object of his text: That for the last two years the declarant in his evening sermons has commented or preached from the book of Daniel; and last Sabbath evening his text was in the latter part of the 5th chapter of the book of Daniel: That before he commenced the service, David Young, one of his deacons, informed him that three spies were supposed to be in the room: That the declarant accordingly mentioned this to the audience, and nevertheless proceeded with the discourse : That the declarant had no notes of that discourse, or of any other since his last illness: That James M'Ewan used to sit in the declarant's meeting-house, but the declarant never heard from him or any other, of any secret association being formed, or means used for procuring a reform in parliament: That at different times the declarant has published some little tracts, some of which treat of the politics and state and condition of the country; and, in his evening sermons, he, as circumstances suggest, has occasionally taken opportunity to animadvert upon these topics, but he never did so with any invidious intention: That in some of his late discourses he spoke of a cloud which hung over this country, and would soon burst; by which he meant nothing more than the misery and wretched state of the community from want, as also the great VOL. XXXIII. progress of infidelity; and he prayed that it might not be allowed to burst: That the declarant prayed for the prince-regent and that he might profit by the afflictions of his father; but he does not recollect of having said, that notwithstanding of what the prince had seen of his father for these seven years past he had not amended his ways: That in this discourse he did not say that seats were sold in the House of Commons as merchandize, or that there was a great deal of corruption in that house, or that several members of it were thieves and plunderers, and divided the spoil of their rich neighbours among them; but he recollects thanking God that there were still some members in our senate who dignified their own character in maintaining the rights of the people: That he took occasion to express his disapproval of the suspension of the Habeas Corpus act, as a measure by which the accused were deprived of the means of their own vindication; but he does not recollect of saying that the country had been condemned without witnesses, judge or jury; and the declarant is still of opinion that parliament never acted so imprudently as passing such an act on an occasion when the minds of the people were so aggravated: That the declarant did identify Britain with the mystical Babylon mentioned in the 18th chapter of the Revelations; and he is not singular in this, as many commentators think with him, that Britain, not Rome, which last was not a maritime nation, is meant by the Babylon there mentioned: That when speaking of the Habeas Corpus act being suspended, he observed, that bad as the Jews were, they did not condemn our Saviour without a form of trial; but he does not recollect of saying anything by way of contrast as to the present execution of the law since the passing of this act : That in this discourse he did not condemn the expedition to Holland: That he does not consider that the battle of Waterloo was a matter of rejoicing, but on the contrary, and he believes he did say so. Denies that he spoke anything of the profligacy of our rulers, of the unjust administration of the laws, of a laxness in the administration, or that he called the members of the House of Commons thieves or plunderers. (Signed) "NIEL DOUGLAS. "R. HAMILTON." going declaration being read over to him, he begs leave to make the following corrections on it: That he is sixty-seven years of age, and has been a preacher twelve years in Glasgow; for the eight last of these the congregation has been assembled in the Andersonian Institutionroom: That instead of David Young saying that the persons were spies, he said there were three persons suspected to be spies; and with these corrections he adheres to his former declaration. Declares, That in reading a passage in the 27th chapter of Ezekiel, where it mentions that the rowers have brought us into deep waters,' the declarant expressed a wish and prayer that our rulers might not be allowed to row the vessel of state into deep waters, and left to perish between the straits; and if so, he prayed that a greater than man might be a pilot to a safe haven. On further recollection he did not on this occasion mention the rulers of the nation: That in his discourse he animadverted on the impropriety of this nation's conduct in regard to the late wars, and in the support which they had thereby given to the Bourbon family, and to idolatry: That he never recollects of saying that the present period was the millennium of corruption. And being interrogated, What reason and view he has in animadverting so often on political matters and the measures of government in his sermons and comments on Scripture, and particularly when the same are addressed to the lower orders of the people, and at a period when, he confesses, they are at present suffering from want? declares, That he does not comment often upon the said subjects: but when in his discourses they come upon him, he cannot restrain expressing the spirit of God. And being interrogated, How he expects to remedy the abuses he complains of by harangues to his hearers, instead of addressing and admonishing those persons with whose actions he is displeased? declares, That when expounding the Scripture, he has felt it his duty to point out to the people those measures of the government of his country which he has seen, for this some time back, to be drawing down the vengeance of heaven upon this country, which measures he has observed for some years to have been followed by our government, and the suspension of the Habeas Corpus act is a crowning one, and as such he has held it. And the following he begs may be taken down as part of his declaration, and that it may reach the ears of the rulers of this nation: That his royal highness has more to apprehend from the measures of his official servants than from the madness of his people; which expression, as to the madness of the people, is used in the prayers of the Church of England as to the recent escape of his royal highness, as the declarant thinks with great impropriety, but he never made this declaration in public: That the declarant has published different little tracts, and, among others, one intituled, Causes of our Public Calamity;' another, intituled, 'The Baptist; and a third, intituled, A Word in Season,' each of which the declarant got printed, and a few of each of the copies have been at different times sold by the door-keeper of the meetinghouse after sermons; and to the said productions there is now affixed a sealed label, which is doqueted and subscribed by the declarant, sheriff-examinator, and clerk, as relative hereto: That of these publications there were about five hundred printed, and there might be forty copies at the least sold of them, but of the precise number he cannot be certain: That the name of the door-keeper, to whom the declarant has given his tracts to be sold, is Samuel Gourlie, a weaver in the Westergate of Glasgow. Declares, That he has frequently inculcated on his hearers, and declared in public, that no Iman who had the fear of God would be concerned in the pulling down of one government and setting up another, and that those who did so were destitute of the fear of God; and that so far from approving any violent measures to oppose our rulers, or compel the legislature to adopt any popular measure, he is convinced in his conscience that Christianity condemns all wars whatever. And being interrogated, If he was never afraid that the introduction of these political subjects into his sermons, and especially his avowed condemnation of the measures of government and of the legislature, would create a spirit of discontent amongst the people, and his hearers in particular? declares, That in the course of his lectures upon Daniel, he was naturally led to make these remarks; but he always cautioned his hearers against every thing that might tend to disturb the peace and good order of society. In witness, &c. "DUNCAN CLARK, witness. "JOHN LESLIE, witness. (Signed) "NIEL DOUGLAS. "R. HAMILTON." "At Glasgow, 18th March, 1817. "In presence of Robert Hamilton, Esq. advocate, Sheriff-depute of Lanarkshire, and in the petition and complaint presented, &c. compeared Niel Douglas, present prisoner in the tolbooth of Glasgow; who being examined, and his declaration emitted on the 15th and 17th days of March instant, being read over to him, declares and adheres thereto; and farther declares, That his religious creed differs from that of the church of Scotland t about Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar?—Yes. You remember that ?—Yes. Do you remember his making any comtunate sovereign king George, and that into which Nebuchadnezzar fell?—Yes, I remember an imperfect parallel which he drew. In what respect did he make the parallel between them?-As to the duration of their derangement. Did he begin suddenly upon that subject, or had he gone regularly through Daniel?He had been going regularly through Daniel. Do you remember hearing him say any thing about the cause of this infliction of Providence on our sovereign?—No, he specified none. Did he say that he was smitten by divine vengeance on account of his infidelity or sins? You are sure of that?-I am certain of it. Did he mention anything of his recovery?— Yes, he prayed and fervently wished the king might be again restored to his throne; and if not to his throne on earth, to a throne in heaven. only in this, of his believing in the universal restoration of mankind, and he acknowledges no head as supreme in the ⚫ church except Christ. And being inter-parison between the condition of our unforrogated, If it is customary with ministers of his persuasion of secession, to mingle their discourses with political observations or censures on measures adopted by government, when these last happen to be disapproved of by the preacher? declares, That he feels it to be his duty, as a preacher in the sight of God, as a subject and servant of the Prince of Peace, to testify in his doctrine against whatever offends God, violates his law, infringes the essential right of his subjects, and is prejudicial to the best interests of mankind, and believes that to be the duty of every professed minister of Christ. And being shewn a sheet on which are written-Never. certain heads of discourse, which begins with Jesus said,' declares, That the same contains his speech delivered at a meeting at Anderston, held for the purpose of having it resolved whether they should petition for reform, and it was copied by a young lad, an apprentice to a writer in town, with the exception of the lower part of the fourth page, which is written by himself: That it was intended his speech should be published in the newspapers, but it was never done, and the said paper is doqueted and subscribed by the declarant, and sheriffexaminator, and clerk, as relative hereto. And being shewn a hand-bill, which is now doqueted and signed, as relative to this declaration, and which announces the publication of the Baptist, &c. declares, That he got five hundred of these published, and he got one of them pasted upon the door of his meeting-house, but there never was any other of them used; and if the Court require it, he will not make use of them till better times, as he has no wish, however innocently, to give cause of offence. In witness, &c. "GEORGE DUNCAN, witness. "JAMES THOMSON, witness. (Signed) "NIEL DOUGLAS. In the course of his lecture, while led to notice the king's unfortunate malady, did he utter any expression of reprobation or blame towards the king?—No. Did he speak of him with respect?—Yes, always with respect. Was he in the habit of praying for his majesty ?-Yes, generally; he never missed a day in my recollection without praying for the king.. Was there any thing in these prayers that implied blame upon the king?—No. To what effect did he pray?-I do not recollect the exact words. You have attended the established church sometimes?—Yes. You have heard them pray there for the king?-Yes. To the same general effect?-I think Mr. Douglas was more particular. In what respect?-He prayed more fervently for him than those I had heard. Do you remember, on these occasions, while going on with his scriptural history, his saying any thing of the prince regent?—No, I do not recollect. Did you ever hear him say the prince regent was a worshipper of Bacchus ?—I never did. Can you take it upon you to swear, whether Do you know Mr. Douglas at the bar he ever said the prince regent was a poor there? Yes. Are you a hearer of his?-Yes, Sir. A regular attender at his place of worship? -I have attended his preaching about eighteen months. Do you remember whether you attended his lectures or preachings on the Sunday-evenings in the begining of March last?-Yes. Every Sunday-evening during that time? Yes, I believe I did. Do you remember his lecture from Daniel infatuated, bewitched, or wretched prince?— I could answer upon oath he never did. Did you pay particular attention to the political expression of Mr. Douglas's sermons about the time I have mentioned ?—Yes. Had you any particular cause for this?— Upon the night of the 9th of March I paid particular attention to what he said. I was informed there were spies present, and I paid attention lest he should utter any thing that might be charged against him. Did you hear him upon any occasion about that time say any thing about the Houses of parliament, especially the House of Commons? -No, Sir. Did you ever hear him say the House of Commons was corrupt or unjust?—No, I never did. Did you ever hear him say the members of that House were thieves and robbers ?-No, I never did. Have you heard him about that time, or at any other time, make remarks about the administration of the law in this country?-No, he always spoke with high respect of the law. Did you ever hear what he said on the administration of the law?-He bestowed as great encomiums upon the administration of the law as language can express, or ingenuity invent. Frequently, Sir?-Always. You say he did this generally; you were going on to mention an instance? He said after his son's trial, that he was happy he was a native of a country where the law was impartially administered. This was after his son's conviction ?—Yes. Do you know what he had been tried for ?— Swindling. He said it was his high satisfaction to be a native of a country where the law is so impartially administered. Did he say this from the pulpit?—Yes. In express reference to his son's trial and conviction ?-Yes. He mentioned them ?—Yes, he did. Are you sure this was said seriously, and that there was no irony in what was said?It was said quite seriously. Are you acquainted with Mr. Douglas in private life?—Yes. From what you have heard him say uniformly in the pulpit, and on other occasions, what were his habitual expressions about the soverign and the prince regent?-He always spoke with great respect of them. Was he an advocate for a reform in parliament?—Yes, for a constitutional reform. Did he ever mention publicly or otherwise, his sentiments as to the means of pursuing this object? Yes, by petition. Did he express his sentiments about the use of violence or force of any kind ?-Yes, he deprecated it very much. Did he say any thing of the riots?-Yes, when riots were in the Calton, he desired his hearers not to give any countenance to them. Did he do this earnestly, Sir ?—Yes. Upon these occasions, during February or March, can you take it upon you to swear, whether in the pulpit he ever said that the prince regent was as fit for a gibbet as a throne?-He never did; I can answer it upon oath. William Warrell sworn.-Examined by Are you a weaver ?—Yes. Do you know Mr. Douglas there?—Yes, I know him. You know he preaches the gospel ?—Yes. You were accustomed to attend him?-For about thirteen months. The last thirteen months?-Yes, sir. You recollect doing so during his ordinary discourses, last February and March ?-Yes. Do you recollect his lecturing or preaching from Daniel ?—Yes. About Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar?Yes. Did he lecture upon these just when he came to them in his course of lecturing, or did he go out of his course to get at them?—He took them as they came. Do you remember, whether when talking of Nebuchadnezzar on that occasion, he made any comparison between him and our king?Yes, with respect to the length of their sufferings. Merely, or principally upon that ?-Principally upon the length of their sufferings. Do you remember his assigning any reason why Providence afflicted our sovereign ?-He said, that for the sins of the nation, the head was afflicted. Did you understand he said or not, that his majesty was afflicted in this way for his own sins? I never heard him mention that. Did he mention the fact of Nebuchadnezzar having been restored to his throne and reason? -Yes. Did he express any wish that such a result should happen to George the third ?-He prayed for it frequently. Was he in the practice in his discourses of speaking respectfully of the king ?-Remarkably so. Was he accustomed to pray with apparent sincerity and earnestness for the king ?-With great sincerity. Do you know him in private?—I never was at his house more than three times altogether. Was he in the habit of recommending to his audience to love the king as he seemed to do?-He was in the habit of impressing that upon our minds; he ordered us to pray for him. Did you ever hear him mention the House of Commons?-Yes, I have heard him mention the House of Commons. Did you ever hear him say the members were thieves and robbers?—No. Did you ever hear him use language of that tendency?—No, never. Did you ever hear him make use of the expression, thieves and robbers, to any description of men at all?-I believe he did when speaking of patronage, of those who did not come in at the door; he said that those who do not come in at the door, come in some other way. And he applied this?—Not to the ministers of state, but to the ministers of the gospel. Did you ever hear him talk of the mode in |