cellor; the earl of Liverpool, first lord of the Treasury; Mr. Vansittart, chancellor of the Exchequer; the earl of Bathurst, secretary of State for the Colonial Department; lord Castlereagh, secretary of State for the Foreign Department; lord Sidmouth, secretary of State for the Home Department; the earl of Westmoreland, lord Privy Seal; lord Melville, first lord of the Admiralty; the duke of Wellington, master general of the Ordnance; Mr. Canning, first commissioner of the India Board; Mr. Robinson, president of the Board of Trade; Mr. Bathurst, chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster; Mr. Wellesley Pole, master of the Mint; and the earl of Mulgrave; all of whom, he says, are privy councillors, and persons employed in the most important offices in the administration of the executive government. He says, they are in common parlance called his majesty's ministers. He says, "On the Tuesday before the Wednesday of the intended dinner, I was riding in the Park, about two o'clock, preparatory to my attending a council at Carlton palace. I had no servant with me. A person addressed me near Grosvenor-gate, and said he had a letter addressed to lord Castlereagh, which he was desirous to convey to him: it was of considerable importance, and concerned both that noble lord and myself. The letter produced is the letter. The man (who was the last witness), at my desire gave me his address on this card," which his lordship produced. "He met me by appointment on Wednesday morning in the ring amongst the young plantations in Hyde-park. After this was communicated to me, I did not inform my servants that the dinner was not to take place, but I directed that the preparations should go on as if the dinner was to take place, until I wrote a note from the earl of Liverpool's, to my head servant, to say, that the cabinet would not dine there, but that the preparation should be going on as if it was intended they should; the party would have assembled if the dinner had taken place, between seven and half-past seven." He says further, that he had some previous general knowledge, and had some reason to expect, for some time past, that there was some intention of this kind, he does not know, nor has ever seen Edwards, upon whom so much observation has been made. Then John Baker, the butler, is called; he merely remembers a cabinet dinner being intended to be had at lord Harrowby's house on the 23rd of February last; the cabinet dinners had been suspended for some time. Cards of invitation were issued to the ministers on the 18th or 19th, that is, the Friday or the Saturday; he says preparations were made for dinner on the Wednesday, as usual, and he did not receive the intimation that his majesty's ministers would not dine there that day, until eight or ten minutes after eight o'clock. Then he mentions a circumstance which serves to account for what has been said, that they supposed the company had arrived, for he says the archbishop of York lives near to lord Harrowby, and there were carriages at his grace's door about six or seven o'clock: so that persons who were watching at a distance might suppose that these carriages were stopping at lord Harrowby's; perhaps you may think that may satisfactorily account for what was said at Cato-street, that some of the ministers were come. Thomas Monument says, that he is the brother of the witness, John Monument, and he confirms his brother as far as his knowledge extends. He says, that Thistlewood called upon his brother; he brought Brunt with him ; after they had come into the room they staid five or ten minutes, when they went out to gether and remained about two or three minutes, and then returned. Thistlewood and Brunt went away again. He says, "on the Tuesday before this affair, Tidd and Brunt called on my brother; my brother said, why Brunt I thought I had lost you, as it is so long since I saw you. Brunt said that the king's death had made a little alteration in their plans; my brother asked what those plans were, and Brunt said they had different objects in view. Brunt then asked my brother to meet him at Tyburn-turnpike on the next evening; my brother agreed; Brunt said to Tidd, suppose we give them an outline of the plan. Tidd made no answer. Brunt then told us to be at Tyburn-turnpike at six o'clock on the Wednesday evening; they gave us the pass-word-b, u, t,--and if any of their party were there they would answer t, o, n. I did not promise to go; they did not press me to go, and I did not go. Brunt called about five for my brother, but we were busy, and my brother could not go at that time. Brunt then told him to call upon Tidd, who lives in the Hole-in-the-wall passage, I did not see my brother after." This, gentlemen, is the evidence that has been laid before you, as confirmatory of the account given you by the witnesses, Adams, Hiden, Monument, and Dwyer: many of the facts sworn by Adams are sworn to by others; the communications made as to the treasonable purpose are such as no person not engaged in it could be likely to be acquainted with. Then they proceed to call some persons who prove Harrison was seen at this building at Cato-street, that he said he had taken it, and was going to clear it out and obtained some candles; and then they call the several police officers and an officer in the army, lieutenant Fitzclarence, to give an account of the arrest and apprehension of several of the persons there assembled, and the seizures there made of arms and other things. It does not appear, to me, necessary to go through, in detail, the testimony of these witnesses, because it is not material for you to consider by what particular individual a pistol was presented: it is important to observe that when the officers came to this place to apprehend the persons, many of them made a most desperate resistance; that is a circumstance deserving your consideration; but a minute detail of what this or that individual did, does not appear necessary to be given to you now, though it was necessary it should be laid be fore you in the first instance, by the examination of the witnesses. You find them in a stable: a man was seen on the spot, from whom a sword was taken, and a butcher's knife; that knife is the knife supposed to have been taken by Ings; it answers the description given of that knife. Wright was not able to secure Ings, and cannot say he was the person. It is further proved, however, that when Ings was apprehended, he was found to have a haversack slung to each shoulder, a belt buckled round him, and some cartridges, and a knife case. The circumstance of his having these two bags, is observed upon by the counsel for the prisoner, and it is suggested they are more fit for plunder than for such an abominable purpose as Adams described: it is not very material what purpose they were taken for, because he might not choose to say then that he meant to take the plate, and might say he took the bags for another purpose; but the fact of his having the bags is worthy of your attention as confirming Adams. You next have the account, by Taunton, of the apprehension of Brunt at his lodgings, and of the contents of the two baskets that were found, and it is important for you to attend to that. Taunton says, "I found Brunt in a front room up two pair of stairs, I searched the room and found nothing material: in the back room I found two baskets, one tied up in an apron. Brunt was then in the front room; I asked him as to the baskets, and he said he knew nothing about them." He chooses, therefore, to give an untrue account in that respect, for it is clear, by the testimony of the apprentice, that he did know about them, "he said the room did not belong to him: there was a pike staff in the room, and an iron pot with marks of tar at the bottom of it. When I found he denied the apartments I sent for the landlady, Mrs. Rogers, and asked her who those apartments belonged to? She said, that her niece, Eleanor Walker, had let them to a man she did not know, in the presence of Brunt. I asked Brunt who this man was; he said he had met him in a public house, what his name was he did not know. From this place I went to Tidd's in Hole-in-the-wall passage, near Gray's-inn-lane, where I found a very large box full of ball cartridges, 965, and a great quantity of gunpowder, and in a haversack there were 434 balls, 171 ball cartridges, and 69 ball cartridges without powder, with a ball in each cartridge, about three pounds of gunpowder in a paper, a coarse canvas bag with ten hand-grenades, and eleven flannel bags of powder, one pound each, ten flannel bags empty, a small bag with a powder flask and sixty-eight balls, four flints and twenty-seven pike handles." These are the things found at Tidd's, which Adams tells you was the dépôt. Then the baskets found at Brunt's, Taunton says, contained nine papers with rope yarn and tar, and some steel filings, four grenades, three papers with rope yarn and tar, two flannel bags of powder, one pound each, one paper with some powder in it, one leather bag with sixty-three balls in it. On cross-examination, he says "I found all these things on the 24th of February: Brunt was present when I found them. I went to Tidd's about half-past eight o'clock in the morning." Then another officer is called, and the several things found in Cato-street, and upon the persons who were apprehended there, are produced before you. You saw them, a considerable number of large handgrenades, several pike-heads, carbines, muskets, pistols, blunderbusses, sticks, and many other things which I need not enumerate. Then Morison is called, who says "this is the first sword I sharpened for Ings, I know it by a mark on the blade." Then Edward Hanson, a Serjeant in the Royal Artillery, was called, who took to pieces one of those things, which they call hand-grenades, and explained to you its nature and effect, and described it, as it undoubtedly is, as a very destructive instrument. This one had twelve pieces of iron in different parts of it, it was intended this should burst, and its contents fly about in all directions, to the great annoyance and probable destruction of the persons near. This closed the evidence on the part of the Crown. On the part of the prisoner, they called Mary Barker, a daughter of Tidd, to whom no questions were put in cross-examination, from a very commendable delicacy, as it appeared to me, on account of her near relationship to one of the prisoners; but you will judge whether her testimony does not confirm that of the witnesses for the Crown. She says, on the 24th of February, the police officers came to her father's, and found a box and other things; it was about half-past eight in the morning; they took away some pike-staves; they had been brought that morning; but she does not know by whom; whether she was present to see them or not, she does not recollect.—" I know Adams, I had seen him at my father's before; I know Edwards, I had seen him there often. The things were brought that morning. I had seen similar things there before that time; I should have judged them to be the same. Edwards had taken a part of them away; I do not know who took the rest : Edwards took part away on Wednesday; my father took none away. Edwards did not take any box: the box was brought a day or two before my father was taken." There was a box which you will recollect Taunton proved he found there, containing this great quantity of cartridges, powder, and things of that kind: she says, "I do not know who brought the box." According, therefore, to the testimony of this young woman, this box had been at that house some days before the night You when they were apprehended, and things | swear I have not been with him at the Rodsimilar to those lying before her, she had seen at ney's-head within these three months. I am a a former time at that house; that certainly bricklayer by trade. I have worked for a Mr. seems rather to confirm than contradict the Smith who lives at No. 22, Mortimer-street, testimony of the witnesses for the Crown. Cavendish-square, for thirteen years." Then, by way of beating down the credit of have, therefore, this witness Huckleston called, the witness Dwyer, they call a person named you see, to represent to you that Dwyer is not Edward Huckleston; he says he has known a man entitled to your credit; all that is said Dwyer for some years intimately, and he says, by him is contradicted: which of them tells "I do not think he is fit to be believed on his the truth it is for you to say. You are not oath." Upon his cross-examination, he says, merely to reject the testimony of one person "I have seen him have money, and, knowing because another comes forward and says somethat he was but a bricklayer, and had little or thing derogatory of him. You are to consider no work, I was surprised. I was in distress; which of the two is the person most entitled to he told me he would put me in the way to your credit. Dwyer, if he has told us the make plenty of money if I would go with him. truth, did make a communication. Huckleston I agreed; and he proposed that we should admits, though this abominable scheme was charge some gentleman with an unnatural of- communicated to him, he never went to a mafence; that he was to go up first, and then gistrate; but then, he says he was apprehensive that I was to join him. I left him, quite of being ill-treated, because there were many shocked at the idea. This was about three Irish in the neighbourhood. months ago. He said he had got 70l. at a time from one gentleman in St. James's-street, by only catching him by the collar, and accusing him. I met him next night at the Rodney'shead, and he called me a coward. I told him of the danger, and reminded him that his brother had been transported for the same thing. He said his brother did not know so well how to manage as he did :" he says, "from that time I have avoided him. I am a shoemaker, but am now articled to a cow-doctor, in Newman-mews. I first communicated this to my brother about a week ago. I did not mention it before, lest I might be ill-treated, as I had to go so much about among the cow-keepers. Some of the Irishmen have gone away now, and that induced me to summon up courage to mention it to my brother. When Dwyer made this proposal to me, it was two or three months ago; I did go part of the way with him, but when he told me, I was horror-struck, and got back as soon as I could." Then Dwyer is called up again, who says that all Huckleston has said is untrue: he says, "I have seen the man, but did not know his name was Huckleston. I have met him in Oxford-road, not in a public-house. I never proposed to him to charge any person with an unnatural offence. In February last, I worked in the parish mill, at Mary-le-bone, and got three shillings a day: I worked there twice in different weeks; I have a wife and children." On his cross-examination, he says, he did not recognize the last witness on his coming into Court, and say, "Oh, Huckleston ;" and it seems that that was a mistake on the part of the learned counsel who examined him; he says, "I did not know his name at all. I have seen him very often; he resorted to the end of James-street, and I lived in Gee's-court. I never went to a public-house with him. I resorted to the Rodney's-head; if I have seen him at the Rodney's-head, it must be some time ago. I have not repeatedly met him in a public-house. I don't know that I can swear I never saw him at a public-house. I will On the part of the prisoner, they next called Joseph Doane, who says he is called court reporter; he communicates to six newspapers what passes at the court properly so called, which he picks up from time to time as he can. He is shewn the New Times of the 22nd of February, containing an announcement of this dinner; he says he cannot speak to whether he wrote that at this distance of time, but from the wording of it, he rather thinks he did not prepare the notice of that cabinet dinner, because it contains the word "grand," which he would not have put in, as he knows the cabinet dinners are always the same. Then they call Andrew Mitchell, the printer of the New Times; he produces the manuscript of that article; he says, it did not come from Mr. Doane. "I received it from Mr. Lavenu, and this was the manuscript that was used upon this occasion." John Whitaker, who has searched several papers, says that the New Times is the only paper which contained an account of the dinner to be given at lord Harrowby's, and that was in a paper of the 22nd February. How that announcement or advertisement or whatever it may be, found its way into the newspaper, we do not know, and it would be in vain, perhaps, in this, as in many other cases, to endeavour to discover by what accident or means a matter of this nature finds its way into a newspaper. What inference is to be drawn from this testimony you must judge for yourselves. I confess it does not, in my mind, lead to any satisfactory conclusion one way or the other. The dinner undoubtedly was intended; that is stated by lord Harrowby and his servant; whether any body had heard of that dinner, and so thought fit to add it to other articles of the same description, or how it got into the paper, we do not know. This is the whole of the evidence that has been laid before you, on the part of the defendant. There are no witnesses called to impeach Adams, Monument, or Hiden. The impeachment of Adams and Monument must rest therefore on the part they acknowledge themselves to have taken in this transaction; and it is for you to judge whether their statement is true. If you are to believe one of these persons, you will consider whether it does not necessarily follow that what the others have told you is substantiated, because Hiden's account, though more cautious, is to the same import and effect as the others. You have had exhibited here before you upon the table, and proved to have been found, a quantity of arms, and other things to the extent that has been mentioned. It seems almost to be conceded, upon the evidence that has been laid before you, that the conspiracy to assassinate the king's ministers at that dinner was so substantiated by proof, that it could not be expected you should withhold your credit from it. If you are to believe that there was that wicked scheme and project intended, you will further consider whether it is reasonable to suppose that that was all that was intended; you will consider what the probability is. These persons are many of them unconnected, in most respects, with each other, certainly unconnected with the persons who conduct the affairs of his majesty's government; therefore you will consider whether it is not more natural to suppose that those who meditated this assassination, meditated it as part of a plan of a general simultaneous insurrection, which they hoped would result from it, than to suppose that they meditated this and this alone-whether it was intended to gratify their thirst for human blood, or whether it was a part of an ulterior plan. Upon that question it is fit you should attend to the great quantity, as well as to the nature of the weapons, and instruments of destruction which have been produced before you, which certainly are more in number than could be required or used for the purpose merely of that abominable visit and attempt that was to be made in the house of lord Harrowby. The hand-grenades are of a description to be used there the fire balls do not seem at all applicable. When you find all these materials collected together in the custody of some of these persons, some at one place, and some at another, you will take the whole into your serious consideration. If, upon the whole of this evidence, you shall feel satisfied that a conspiracy to levy war against his majesty, or to depose him, is made out by the evidence laid before you-if your consciences are satisfied of that, you will discharge the painful duty imposed upon you by pronouncing the prisoner guilty. If, upon a due examination of all the circumstances, attending to the observations of the very cloquent counsel who have addressed you on the part of the prisoners, your minds shall not be satisfied that they did entertain this criminal project which has been mentioned to you, you then will discharge a more pleasant duty, and acquit the prisoner. You will consider the case, and, I have no doubt, your verdict will do justice between the public and the prisoner. : Foreman of the Jury.—My lord, can we have a copy of the indictment? Lord Chief Justice Abbott.-Certainly. [It was handed to the Jury]. The Jury withdrew at a quarter before five, and in five minutes returned into court to request a copy of the act of parliament of the 36th Geo. 3rd. Lord Chief Justice Abbott.-Gentlemen, the act of parliament shall be put into your hands as you desire, but before I do so it is fit I should mention to you, that by its terms it is made to continue during the natural life of our late most gracious sovereign, and until the end of the next session of parliament after a demise of the Crown; it had not, therefore, expired before the present indictment, but by a later act it is made perpetual. I need not give you that, because this had not expired. A Juryman.-If your lordship will read it, it will be sufficient. Lord Chief Justice Abbott.-Certainly. The act begins by reciting-"We, your majesty's dutiful and loyal subjects, the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons of Great Britain, in this present parliament assembled, duly considering the daring outrages offered to your majesty's most sacred person, in your passage to and from your parliament at the opening of this present session; and also the continued attempts of evil and wicked disposed persons to disturb the tranquillity of this your majesty's kingdom, particularly by the multitude of seditious pamphlets and speeches daily printed, published, and dispersed, with unremitted industry, and with a transcendant boldness, in contempt of your majesty's royal person and dignity, and tending to the overthrow of the laws, government, and happy constitution of these realms, have judged that it is become necessary to provide a further remedy against all such treasonable and seditious practices and attempts. We, therefore, calling to mind the good and wholesome provisions which have at different times been made, by the wisdom of parliament, for the averting such dangers, and more especially for the security and preservation of the persons of the sovereigns of these realms, do most humbly beseech your majesty that it may be enacted; and be it enacted by the king's most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, that if any person or persons whatsoever, after the day of the passing of this act, during the natural life of our most gracious sovereign lord the king (whom Almighty God preserve and bless with a long and prosperous reign) and until the end of the next session of parliament, after a demise of the Crown, shall, within the realm or without, compass, imagine, invent, devise, *Stat. 57 Geo. 3rd c. 6. or intend death or destruction, or any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maim, or wounding, imprisonment or restraint of the person of the same, our sovereign lord the king, his heirs and successors-" Now, gentlemen, comes the part which forms the subject of one of the counts of the indictment: "or to depose him or them from the style, honour, or kingly name of the imperial Crown of this realm, or of any other of his majesty's dominions or countries, or to levy war against his majesty, his heirs or successors, within this realm, in order, by force or constraint, to compel him or them to change his or their measures or counsels," which is another, "or in order to put any force or constraint upon, or to intimidate or overawe both houses, or either house of parliament, or to remove or stir any fo reigner or stranger, with force, to invade this realm, or any other of his majesty's dominions or countries, under the obeisance of his majesty, his heirs and successors; and such compassings, imaginations, inventions, devices or intentions, or any of them shall express, utter, or declare, by publishing any printing or writing, or by any overt act or deed, being legally convicted thereof, upon the oaths of two lawful and credible witnesses upon trial, or otherwise convicted or attainted by due course of law; then every such person and persons, so as aforesaid offending, shall be deemed declared and adjudged to be a traitor, and traitors, and shall suffer pains of death, and also lose and forfeit, as in cases of high treason.", If you require any further explanation I will give it to you; but it seemed, I thought, to be taken for granted by the counsel on one side and the other, that the project, if proved, was a treasonable conspiracy to depose the king, or to levy war against the king. If they had succeeded so far as to establish a provisional government, the royal functions would have ceased. Any attempt by numbers, and by force, to compel his majesty to alter his measures and counsels, is most undoubtedly a levying of war within this act. An actual Clerk of Arraigns.-Shall I call the prisoner for judgment, my lord? Lord Chief Justice Abbott.-No, not now. Mr. Attorney General. It will be necessary that the jury should be summoned for Friday morning, as I fear there may have been some misunderstanding. the jury to attend again on Friday morning: Lord Chief Justice Abbott.-Send notice to the officer shall go round as far as he can. Foreman of the Jury-Will your lordship have the goodness to discharge us from attending the ensuing trials? with the other judges, we are of opinion, you Lord Chief Justice Abbott.-On consulting may be excused from serving on the next trial; we cannot say your attendance shall be excused on future trials. A Juryman (Mr. Goodchild).-We have had a very arduous duty to perform, and we shall hardly have time to recover ourselves. Lord Chief Justice Abbott. We hope something more will be done for but you; you will not be wanted before next Monday, at all events: further than that I cannot say. Mr. Goodchild.We do not press it further than that, my lord. that these trials will be resumed on Friday morning. Mr. Justice Richardson.-Let it be announced * See the following Cases. |