On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    answer to this portion of the statement of the learned caoisel as there is to the part regarding myself . It -in no foundation . KrKenealejeaid . thatif he was misinformed , no mi sorry for having made the statement . . Mr Justice Erie said , the learned counsel had Ouch better confine himself to the evidence , and Bake his observations upon the ease , rather-ttaa « rter into ether matters which Were totally ^? li 2 ea ! ey . -The Attorne y General hid opened S » case as aa instance of the mUd aiid mercifol tdministrstioaofthela ^ and he also said that , by fills ner statute , no privileges were taken from the people except those of being hanged and disembowel-Sad . He should , however , before he sat down , ehow

    the jury that this new Crown and Felony Act deprived them of most important rights , and that it Has , in point of fact , the most penal act that ever gtsssd the Legislature . They lived ia strange times ; and he considered the e prosecutions enly one taore step by the government to destroy those rights sad privileges whioh hadraised Esgland to her proud position among the nations of the earth . He would ask them , did liberty of speech exist in England ? Let them reaemberthe miserable proiecuticna for sedition . He admitted that a great many fooliih , rasa , and violent thinp were said by tho * e patties ; bat a oiid and merciful government , desiring their happiness , wculd never have prosecuted them with such severity ; but it was evidently the object of the

    government to put down liberty of speech . Their tight to h ^ id public meetings was gone , and the Attorney General had raked up an old Act of Parliament cf the time of Charles IL—a period the most infamous in the history of the country—for that purpose . ThiB Act rendered it illegal for more than twenty persons to aastmble for any purpese whatever . This tad had the oalv effect that could be expected . The people were not allowed to meet in public , and they were driven to form secret associations . He implored th 3 jury to defend their rights , and he felt assured they would never thiak of convicting the jcung geutlenun at tha bar of the crime of levying wu upon such evidence as bad been adduced . The coveramest appeared to be determined to destroy the

    liberties of the people . At the commencement of the year , rader the pretence of a fear of invasion , they had madas large iaorease in their army and navy , eclely for the purpose of keeping down the people by force , and to carry out their own tyrannical objects , and that was also the object of these prosecutions . If the offence was anything it was high treason , but the government knew that juries were tco Sonest to cosvlct of high treason under such circnmstances , and , therefore , they called it felony , hoping thereby to entrap a conviction . The evidence against Hardy , Home Tooke , and Watson , was much stronger Than in this case , and yet the jury would not convict them . Why had the offence been reduced from high treason to felony ? It was because in high .

    treason some remains of ancient liberty were left to &s people . When a mas was tried foe high treason lie was entitled to have copie 3 of the depositions and a copy of the indictment , and a list of the jurors , so ikat he might peremptorily cballengeany improper person ; and he also had the right to have two counsel assigned him . All these privileges were takes away by this new Act of Parliament , and jet Sir J . Jarvi ? , the Whig Attorney General , told them it was a merciful act . He , however , told them &at it was a cruelty , and that it was much better lhat the prisoner , and the thirty miserable creatures included wish hia in the charge , should have been fried for treason , and have been hanged at once out of the way , if they had been convicted , than to be

    tried Bads ? ibh statute , which , deprived then of all . rights , end subjected them to be sent for the rest of their livss to tha most penal colony in her Majesty ' s dominion ? . The Attorney Gancral , either from ignorance or a : me other cause , had departed from the usual course in this case , and had not said a word opon the subject of the law relating to levying war and the meaning of the expression ; but he should supply tee emission , and had no doubt that the acts imputed to &e prisoner and his companions did not amount to that " c-flencs . He did not mean to deny that their proceedings were criminal and wioked ; he looked with equal detestation to any one present < spon the proceedings of the Chartists , and their threats of resorting to physical force ; but what he

    insisted upon was that their acts , in this instance , did nst amount to levying war , and , although he adznitied they deserved and onght to be punished , yet it should bs under the Act of Parliament against Tiotoug and tumultuous assemblages , and not for high treason . Tfco learned counsel then proceeded at great length to give his definition of what . ought to betaken as & levying of war within the meaning of the statute . He referred to the statnte passed in file 25 ± of Edward III ., which , he said , expressly referred to the act of levying war , in the ordinary aensg of ifco terra , by marching in military array and ,-organisaviea , and said nothing about conspiracy , or compaairg , or imagining , the terms introduced into the present Act of Parliament . There was-nothing

    about coaspinug in lhat Act , end no man under it could be convicted of hieh . treason , as was now sought to be done , because Eome one had said some * thing to EQUK ' twdvebe ten msnths before . In the teign of Qaeen Elizabeth , the act of levying war was defined to b ? the seeing by violence any of the Queen ' s ca ? tles or forts , or usurping in any other taaEner tfee roj a ! authority , and hesnould snow them , by the highest legal authorities ; what had heretofore iseneonsiiered a levying of war . They all knew iow Magna C ^ arta was obtained—by armed men insisting upon iheir ri ghts . That was levying war . The ware of tne Stuarts—between thehoosea of York and Lancaster—these were all actB of levying war . Bat did iks circumstances of the case before them

    amount to that sort of offence ? Here were a set of foolish felio-. ?? , tinkers , taitors . ' aad shoemakers , meeting together , providiag old pikes and swordB , and scch ruVo ! sb , and that was to be called levying irax . Why it ^ ss perfectly ridiculona . Lord Coke , one of the greatest judges that ever sat on the bench , and who , by the w&y . was one of the most corrupt men in the world while acting as the publio prceecutor , but whocertiin ! y , wken he had obtained the position he required , and had all along been working for , made an exeelkat ja-ige—who was a Tery dishonest Attorney Genera ! , but who became a very honest man when ie wa 3 elevated to the bsnch—he wished other Attorney G ? ne ? alB might be the sam »—( a laugh )—bad dearly and distinctly laid down the law upon the subject of levj ' ng war . He denned it in the terauof the ancient decisions , and said that there must be a

    rising of the people , with the objeot of destroying ell the prison ? , and releasing the prisoners , or of effecting any reformation ot their deeds without warrant , Qr of taking npnn themselves the royal Btyle or authority . Was there anything of the sort in this case ? Only let tee jury fancy Cafiay and his respectable wife aborning the royal style and authority . { A laugh . ) Mr Justice Erie observed that the learned counsel did not quite give the effect of the decision . The question would be , not whether all , bat whether any such , acts ? are consistent with the proceedings of the persons accused , and whether they were likely to result . The assumption of royal authority might be inconsistent with their proceedings , but waa it incansiBteEt to say ih&t Mr Cuffay might estertain the intention of breaking open the goals and releasing the criminals .

    Mr Kenealey proceeded . His lordship would eventually state to them his view of the law , but in hiaopiaicn the charge of levying war waa not made out . L'srd Coko t « aid thst there was a very great distinction between the offence of riot and tumultuous assembly and levying war . Now , he admitted tceso pc- - > n ' e had committed an cffeDce , and that t ' cey ought to ba punished , bat what he 3 aid was , they were sos guilty of the crime of levying war , asdhs h-vje d tae jury would say so by their verdict , lie . tttn went en to arguo that , in order to constitute a " itvying T ? ar , ( heramnst baa rising for a gc ;; erai < : sjtc { , either to destroy all prisons

    , all enclosures- masting houses , & } ., to constitute levying w . and that , if the intention was only to do any car : r- * mca ' ar aotofde 3 traotion . it woul ( not amount to tho (> ffasce . He cited the case of the Duke of Northumberland in the tioe or Henry IV ., who , wLcu bis eon Hotspur was in atins againBt the King , ffla . rn ' . ed out with a lar ^ e army , not certainly T oinia » tlis margeats , but leaving very Htth doubt what Ms inteation 3 were . Upon his ain being defeated ba retired io his own ea ? t ! e ; and upon hia ease bebg referred to his peers , they found , by their verdict , that the act he had committed did not amount to high treason , but merely to a

    mkde-• neanour . Mr Justice Erie hereinierpused , and said it would bo hia duty to lay down tbe law to the jury . The law > 7 a 3 the resuit of great learning aad fall and general inquiry , and the statement of small isolated p ? . ss * ge 3 * as only calculated to mislead the jury . Mr Kenealey . —Am I to usderaland that the jury arc ant to pay ? . ny attention to th ?? e facts ? Mr Justice Er ! c—I have staled wfcat 1 mean . Mr lvereiley thon referred U the trial of Hardy , and said ibat ia that cssa there wag evidecca to show a military et-ganisstion , and the evidence was altogether mach stranger than in this instance , and yet the jury scqnitte'l lam . He would read a portion of the evidence .

    Mr jir ticeKesioppjd the learned counsel , and said he was efcariy of opinion that he had no right to read any passage from a former trial , er tho decision of any fwmer jary . It was contrary to aU legal pre--edent to take such a course , and it was only calculated to mislead a jury , because they hadno means of ksowiEg what ctner acts were adduced , or what explanation was given of Buch passages . r ™* K ? nealey then went on to nrga , that th » effence aid nofcanoanfcto levjingwar , aadcontended that their ao s did not amount to high treason ^ and ttat it waaidla to aappoie these thirty foolish persons teally entsrtaiasd the intention of destroying the whole metropolis . He charged the government with getfangup the plot , andsaid it-was their dity ' when they received information of what wasgoingon , to hiTOCW ^ thcse moeirable mea iB tlw ptocoWina and not have enc-uraged them to proceed , and Oun « et » them n traitori . An honest governaent

    Untitled Article

    would never condesoend to empleyspieBandinforraen as thegovernment had done in this case ; bat he said it was clear their object was to put down the Charter by these means rather than by honest and open proceedings . He then commented upon the conduct of the approver , whom he stigmatised as infamous and unworthy of belief ; and he said that the statements wfaieb . Pawell represented were made at one of the meetings , that it was their intention to pnt down the power of the Queen and establish a Reoublio , was suggested by the police . The condaot of the police was pretty well known , and they had plenty of opportunities of observing their proceedings in a ccurt of justice , and how little regard they paid to an oath when their object was totbtain a conviction .

    Mr Justice Erie told the learned counsel he had co right to slander a body of men in this manner , and he added that he had observed the persons who were most ready to slander the police were generally the accomplices of criminals . Mr Kenealey . —Does your . Lordship apply that observation to me ? Mr Justice Erie . —I apply it generally . Mr Kenealy then proceeded with his address , urging that it was clear the plot had been got np by the police , and that Powell was obliged to swear what

    he did , or else his occupation as a spy would be gone . He concluded by calling upon the jury to teach the government a great and important lesson by their verdict—that they would show them they were not to pnt down the Charter by such infamous practices ai these—that they would by their verdict refuse to sanction the employment of such wretohes as Powell to entrap poor men to the commission of crime . If they did nst do so , aid they returned a verdict of guilty , he could only express his opinion that , by so doing , they would strike a deadly blow at the liberties of their country .

    The following witnesses were then called for the defence : — John English said : I know the prisoner . The paper ( produced ) , in which were inscribed a number ot words and signs is a copy of a paper I gave to the prisoner . I swear that it has nothing to do with Chartist proceedings . I adopted these signs because I had reason to believe my letter * were opened at the Post-office . Cross-examined b / the Attorney General;—lam a lithographic printer . I had lived in Eaafc-Btreet , Manchestet-square , for a week before I went to Ireland . I was in IreUwd about five weeks . I occupied another lodging for two or three weeks before I went to Ireland . I gave the prisoner this paper before I left London . I was ia Tipperary , DabliD , and Kildare . I was not at Slieveoamon . I am an Irishman—at least , I was born in London . I am an Irish Confederate . I don't know whether

    the prisoner is a Confederate . I suppose he is . My letters , I believe , were opened . I don ' t know that I was a suspected person . I only went to Ireland to see my friends . Witt you just explain the meaning of those words on the paper . Pikes , ' rifles , fire , barricades . Maboney , O'Brien , Slievenamon , poison , victories , kill English ? As 1 understood there wag a rising in Ireland , I thought I would give my friend information what was going on . Bat why should yon wish to do so by means of secret symbols ? It was a short hBnd . I did not want my letters to be opened . Then you swear that , ' going as ? on were into the very middle of the disturbed districts , you made nse of these symbols solely for ' shortness ? I do , and because I thought my letters would ba opened . Why should you use cyphers _ if you had only the honest purpose in view ef giving your friend information of what was going on ? I did not wish my letters to be read . Will yon explain the meaning of tbe shorthand writing at tha bottom of the naper ? I doa ' t understand it .

    - Mr Ksnealey . —On your oath had you any disloyal object in going to Ireland ? I swear I had aot . Mr J . Atkinson , law stationer , said—I have known the prissner twelve- or thirteen months . I always believed him to be a loyal subject and never heard him make use of any disloyal sentiments . > : Mr Gilbert said—I have known the prisoner Dine or ten years . He was not a Chartist in politics . He did not agree with the Charier . I never heard him expresi any disloyal sentiments in private . Cross-examined by the Attorney General—Did you in public ? I cannot say . 1 knew that he was an Irish Repealer and the secretary to the Davis Club . I am an Irish Repealer myself . I have heard him speak in public , bat he never made nse of any disloyal sentiment * .

    The witness was pressed to give an explanation of the first answer he had given , making the distinction between private and publio , but he appeared unable to do so . Jame 3 Barry , a journeyman tailor , said—I have known the prisoner seventeen months . I was a member of a Repeal Club , the prisoner I knew as the secretary of the Davis Club . That club never appointed a delegate to the Chartists . The rules of 19 dab were settled by two eminent counsel , Sir Colman O'Loghlen and Mr Holmes , and they were revised by Mr Anstey , M . P . for Youghal , and he was a member of the club . : The DaviB Club was subsequently dissolved , and merged into an association called the Irish League ,

    Cross-examined by tbe Attorney General . —I was a number ef the club for fifteen months . Atone meeting , Doheny , an Irish barrister , made a speech , which was very much applauded . He is the same person who is now ' out' in Ireland . I do not think ae was a member of the Davis Club . A man named Crowe wa 9 & member . He was tried and convicted for sedition . I was at the eame meeting , but I don't know whether the prisoner was there . At that meeting I read the paper in whioh the expression was used , 'To hell with the Queen . ' It was a report of a soldier being taken into custody in Ireland for using the expression . I am a tailor . I used to attend the Repeal meetings at the Chartist meeting house in Dean-street , but we had nothing to do with the Chartists , and I was not present at any meeting when Loonsy was sent as a delegate to the Chartists . I heard the Speech for whioh Linm ' ey

    was oonvicten of sedition . I never bought any arms , but I once raffed a musket . Where did you get that from ? My brother gave it to ' mei "What for ? He said he did not want it , and I might have it and ' r . ffld it if I pleased . Then you raffled it to get rid of it ? Ye 3 . At how much 1 member ? One shilling ; there were twenty-eight members . And who won it ? It was an Irishman . I don't know his n 3 me . Was he a Confederato ? I don't know . Do you know where he lived ? I do not . Who were the members of the raffla . Were they Confederates ? I don't know . Give us the names of some of them ? The witness mentioned three or four , and , on being pressed , he admitted that they ware Irish Confederates . Give U 3 the names of soma more of the members ? I object to say any more ' I consider it a private matter , and that it has nothing to do with this case .

    M . Le Flastrier , watchmaker , in-Chaneery-lane , said he had known the prisoner for some time , ant he had never heard Mm make use of any disloyal expressions . This was the case for the prisoner . The Attorney General proceeded to reply , and after commenting on the attack made upon him by Mr Kenealey , Baid , with regard to the circumstances of tha proseoution , he would only observe that he hoped it weald be a less > n to persons who conspired together for iaoh objects , that they could not do it without having traitors among them to expose their designs . The new statute only took away the ' glory' of a state prosecution , and reduced the charge io an ordinary felony . If he hid been the vindictive

    prosecutor that he was represented to be , he had plenty of opportunity afforded hiza by the circumstanoes of the case to have mads a stronger statement to the jury . Now _ with regard to the law . The prisjner was charged with two asts ; first , conspiring to levy war with intent to put constraint upon her Majesty , and compel her to change her councils ; and , secondly , to depose her Majesty from the style aud title of Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland by effecting a Repeal of tbe Union between the two countries , aud if the jury be-Sieved thit any of the overt acU which had been proved ware in furtherance of that design it would

    , ba their duty . to find the prisoner guilty upon the pretent indictment . Theoasos that fiad bsen cited by tho counsel fir tho defendant were totally inappli * cable to the case . The act of levying war did not consist in marching in numbers and with military display—three or four persons might , in the eye of the law , levy war , if they oomra ' itted certain acts . The argument for the defence that unless a general and universal object of destructi on existed it was not a levying of war wa 3 ataurd , and he was not Bur * prised that thess misguided rasa should act a 3 they did when their leaders gave them such , au interpretation of the law .

    Mr Kenealey said he was eo leader of the Char tists . The Attorney Geseral did not say tfcai he was . Whit J ; e did gay w . u , that ha v ? a 9 not surprised if these people were told that they might burn Limeriok , or Cork , or Waterford , and thai it would be no set of high treason if Dublin or any other city remained , bo that they might maesaore the whole of the London police , but if they did not kill tho rural police , it was no act of high treason . It was his duty , in contradiction to such idle s : atemente , to tell them , however , that if people rose in numbers to do any public injury , or to oppose by force the

    authorities and the government , it was treason , and he apprehended there would be no doubt on the pointi The Attorney General then referred to the teatinrony of the approver , and said that the counsel for fie defendant had said he was unworthy of bs > lief , because he had sot given information to the police sooner than he did when violence was proposed , but he would remind hint that he himself was present at a meetiag where moral force was postponed to tha day of judgment bj a resolution of the prieoner , and that ha did not give any information to the government to put them on their guard , and therefore'he thought this augktrnot to be pressed too hardly against the approver . . Mr Kenealey here rose , and said he did not know what right the Attorney General had to make these personal appeals . He had not made snob , reference

    Untitled Article

    to his private proceedings . He . had . not mentioned the Horahamafftir , for instance . Mr Justice Erie begged the learned counsel to reflect upon his conduot , and on the lsst observation that fell from him . Surely he could not think himself justified in such a course . Ho must feel that the privilege of an advocate ought nst to be thus abused . Mr Kenealey said the Attorney General had made many personal observations upon him daring the case , and had even gone , bo , far as tpjay that he blushed for bis conduot in presiding at the meetim ; that had been alluded to , and the Court did net interfere . .......

    Mr Justice Erie said that the remarksiwdeby the Attorney General were founded upoa the evidence , and he was quite justified in making them : , . The Attorney General then proceeded with his reply . He could assure the jury he had _ no wish to be personal , and desired to confine himself entirely to the evidence . Observations bad been made upon the conduct of the approver , an d he was desonbed as being unworthy of belief , and he waB bound to put the matter before the jury . He wuhed them to understand that he did not wiBh tosereen the accomplice ; he might be an infamous person or not , but the question waB did hisevidenoe And thecorroboratioa he had received make out the guilt of the prisoner ? Tbe government did not desire to employ such persona ,

    but they had no alternative . What could they do when they received information that a dangerous conspiracy was in exfatonce but get the best evidence they could to make out the case against the parties concerned ? What would the public have said if they had refused to interfere because the information came from a contaminated source , and the reBult had been the destruction of the livea and properly of peaceful citizens ? Would they not have blamed the govern * ment and considered it unworthy of suoh a name I It was impossible to obtain uncontaminated testimony in such a case ; but it appeared to him that the evidence of the approver had been confirmed in such a manner in almost every particular as to leave ne

    doubt of its truth . He then commented upon the evidence for the defence , remarking particularly upon the portion of it referring to tbe secret Bigns to be made use of ; and he asked them whether it waB possible to suppose that this , could be intended for the honest purpose represented , and he conoluded his reply by expressing an opinion tbat the case had been duly established , and that the jury would feel it was their imperative duty to ' return a verdiot of guilty . At the close of the address of the Attorney General , the further consideration of the case waa adjourned to Monday morning . . ., The jury were again taken to the London Coffeehouse where they remained in the charge of an officer . ¦ ¦ : .

    Mojidat . —The learned judges , Mr Justice Erie and Mr Justice Williams , . accompanied by Mr Baron Platt , took their Beats on the benohatten o ' clock , and the prisoner Dowling was immediately afterwards phoedat thebar . Mr Justice Erie then proceeded to sum up the case to the jury . The learned jadge said they had now arrived at that stage of this prottaoted inquiry when it beoame his duty to . lay before them the evidence that had been adduced in support of the charge , and the law relating to it , and he felt . assured they would give the matter that calm and deliberate attention whioh its importance deserved . As some time elapsed since the evidence was given , and as many matters had been introduced which were tc

    tally irrelevant to the question , whether the prisoner at the bar was guilty er not , he proposed first to rtate the nature of the charge , and explain the law relating to it , and he would then read over the whole of tbs evidence that had been adduced in support of it , and he would at the same time remind them , ; although for gentlemen of their station it was pob-Bibly unnecessary that he should do bo , that they must be guided in the deoision thoy came to eatjrely by the evidence and the evidence alone . The indictment charged , the prisoner , William Dowling , in the first instance ; generally , with conspiring with persons i whose names were given , and with other persons , to levy war against oar Lady the Queen , within that part ' of the realm called Englandin order

    , > y force and constraint , to cempel her to change her measures and counsels . This was the firut part of the charge imputing a criminal intention to the prisoner to levy war against the Queen ; and the remaining part of the charge consisted of overt aots , that wa 3 to say , acts done by the prisoner , or by the other persom associated with him , for the purpose of executing the , intention asqribedto him . ' The Jury muBtba satisfied of the existence of the intention , and that it waB proved by the evert aots given in evidence . He would no * explain to them the law with regard to the offance or charge ef levying war . The ixpression 'levying war , ' had been used in the statutes for many years , and its legal meaning was perfectly understood by those engaged in the ad *

    ministration of the law ; but ic was rather different to what would be understood by the term in common parlance . The term' war' might be understood in a variety of ways , and he would Btate what waa his interpretation of the term in a legal sense , If they should believe that the prisoner had the intention to assemble with numbers of persons armed , and prepared to resist any opposcra and to prevent the government from the exercise of any of its lawful posers , those aots would ba a levying of war . It was not necessary that the persons so assembled should be in military array , or exhibit any military discipline ,- arms , or banners ; and it was perfectly obvious that a large body ef undisci p lined persona possessing suoh arms as they might be enabled to

    procure , would be capable of effacting a moat formidable resistance to the authorities and the government , aud the law clearly considered suoh an act tantamount to levying war within the meaning of the statutes . They would observe that the crime merely consisted in the intention of the parties , and therefore the offence might be complete although no actual csnfliot took place . The distinction between these charges consisted entirely in the object for which the parties assembled—if they assembled for any particular er private purpose , from a dislike to one'individual , and in a building , it would be a riotoos assembly j but , if the aot intended was ofa public and general character , then the same proceeding amounted to a levying of war iiDon the crown , and

    he would remark that it was clear'there could be no more publio object than to endeavour to oppose the government and [ put constraint upon it . This wa 3 the intention imputed to the prisoner , and in his opinion it did not come within the scope of an indictment for riot ; but if it should be made out to the Batisfaotion of the jury , they would be justified in finding the prieoner guilty upon this count . If they believed the intention waB , by force , to interfere with the free action of the government in any way , it waa a levying of war , If the object waa to compel the government to grant what was called the People ' s Charter , or to compel a repeal of the statute for the umon of Great Britain and Ireland , or to interfere with and Jubarraas the government in the disposition of . tae troops , or in any way to paralyse and embarrass the

    government in its aotions—all these aots were clearly a levying of war . _ So also if they believed it was the intention of tha prisoner and his companions to make an armed insurrection in the metropolis , that would clearly be an act of opposition to the government , and the offence would be complete , ThiB was the manner in which he explained tbe law with regard to the criminal intention / and he would desoribe this patt of the case as an armed insurrection against the government of the description to which he had alludtd , and ha Bhould leave to them the question whether this part of the oharge had been established . Having alluded to this part of the charge he would no it state the law with regard to the overt acta . Th « lair required in indictments of this description that overt aota should"be ' stated in the indictment , tnd that those overt aots should be made out to the

    satisf action of the jury ; but although several overt acts might be stated , it was sufficient" that one of them should bs proved , if the jury ahouldbe of opinion tkat the act which was proved left no doubt of the criminal intention of the prisoner , and they would be justified in convicting him if such an act was made out . In the present instance , four overt acta wore stated in th 9 indiotinent , and with regard to ona of these acts , he apprehended that if the jury should be of opinion that fc had been proved , they would entertain no doubt that the prisoner really entertained the criminal intention imputed to him . Wita regard to the law upon the subject of conspiracy , it would be necessaiy for him to state that when it was clearly proved that two or more persons

    were engaged m an unlawful combination with other persons , the moment the fact of the conspiracy was established , the pet of one of the parties was the act of all , and they were all bound by tho aotsofeaoh other m furtherance of the original illegal objeot . If therefore , the jury should consider it to be proved that the prisoner did actually conepire with others to carry oat any illegal object after that act was established , the act of any of his co conspirators would , in the eye of the law , be evidence against him , and would be , and hehad no doubt they would think p »« perlyso , considered aa tha act of . the prisoner It might be that a person would actin suoh a manner as to stimulate others to tumultuous risings , insurrection , and violence ; he might provide money , and in point offaot be the prime mover of tha outhrnalr

    and yet might boc be found at the moment it took place 1 ; aud in Buoh a case no one could doubt that he would be responsible for the aots of hia co-oonspirators , although he had himself kept in the background . . The first overt aot charged in theindiotment was , that the prisoners and the others conjpired and confederated together to stir up insurrection and rebellion againBt the Quoek , and to overthrow the government andconstitution of the country as by law established . Thia was the overt aot to whioh he had alluded , when he said , that if it should be proved to the satisfaction of the jury , there could be no doubt of the guilt of the prisoner , and it was for tiem to decide whether tha evidence made out that oharge . The next overt act charged was , that the prisoners oonspired , confederated , &o ., together , and provided large quantities of arms , daggers , pikeB , pis-71 *? . » ^ aHd a lar « quantity of ammunition and ball-cartridges , intending to use them to fight with . and . kill th » troops of her Majesty aadtbepo <

    Untitled Article

    lice wboWere ' ftOting in ' ' the ' execution of their duty . The third overt aot alleged against the prisoner * was , that they oonspired together for the purpose of burning the police-stations , railway-stations , and . other buildings , and that they provided oombastiblea for that purpose . The fourth and last overt act charged the prisoner and other peisom with enrolling themselves as members' 6 f divers secret ; sooietiei , holding secret correspondence with each other , with the objeot ef exciting rebellion , insurrection , and war against the Queen . These were the four overt acts with regard to the criminal ' intention'to levy war , and these were all the observations he bad to make with regard to this portion of the oharge . The second count in ' the indictment' charged

    the prisoner , with other pereoni . with conspiring to depose our Sovereign Lady , the Queen , and deprive her of the style , title , and . Rsyal name ' of the Imperial Crown oi Great Britain and Ireland . He should not allude to what had been considered in former times as an interference with the Royal authority , because he considered it was " unnecessary / or him to do so . He would only observe that if they considered the evidenoe established an intention en the part of the prisoner and his companions to subvert the monarchical institution in England , and establish some other form of government in its place ! that would undoubtedly amount to the charge contained in the indiotment of intending to depose the Queen ; so , also , if they should believe it was the intention of the parties to

    sever Ireland from this country . by . force , it would make out the other oharge ef conspiracy to deprive her of her Royal style and title of Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland , If , therefore , they ehould believe that the aots ' done by the prisoner were in furtherance of that intention or either of those to which he had Just alluded , the second count of the indiotment would also be esta > bliehed . In reference to the character of the conspiracy , he would observe , tbat if it should appear that a number of peraopB conspired together to resist the government generally , but that some weredesirouB to overthrow the government altogether , and establish a republic-some to obtain any particular measure , Buch aa the Charter—others , perfeotly indifferent to what happened in England , but mewl ? desirous . that Ireland should be Bevered from the

    BntiBh empire-if they all agreed to co-operate and carry oat their general purposes ,. all parties concorned would in the 070 of the law be considered as adopting that general purpose , and would be amenable to the present oharge ; and the ' oircumstanceB to whioh he had alluded would be very good evidence , from which the jury might , infer the guilty intention of the parties . The same overt acts were introduced in support of both the charges J and the jury would decide whether those acts were proved , and whether they established the intention imputed to the prisoner . The learned judge ' , having made these observations , proceeded to read over the whole of the evidence that had been adduced on behalf cf the prosecution , and he . prefaoed the evideace given by Powell by stating , ' that , although he had been described as an accomplice , yet , if the jury should believe that , after the 10 th of April , when he

    became acquainted with tbe violent designs and intentions of the Chartist body , he honestly separated himself from them , and assisted in frustrating thei r evil inteations , he ought hardly to ba looked upon as aa accomplice , but rather deserved commendation for his condaot . It wav however ; clear "that he had acted with deception towards the " paries , and that , ' while apparently acting with thorn , he had been in communication with the police , and , " therefore , do doubt his evidence onght to be regarded with suspi cion . There waa a very proper feeling in the brea 3 ti of Englishmen upon the Bubject of spies and traitors , men who fomented plots and induced innooent perbogs to join in them , and no doubt suoh conduot wa s properly looked upon with disgust , but it was a ver y different ease where a than having joined with guilty persons repented and gave information to enable

    the government to frustrate their designs , and al . though he might afterwards pretend to go on with the original dejign for the purpose of making out the case , and puniahiag the guilty , but having , in reality ; no intention of farthering the evil de » Bign , and he considered that suoh a man rather deserved ' credit than condemnation . ' Having gone through the whole of the evidence he said that the counsel for the prisoner , he regretted , at the commencement of his address , had made a strong personal attack . upon tho Attorney General—he did not wish to cenaure , but he certainly regretted that the learned counsel had adopted this course , as he considered that in a court of justice , especially on suoh a solemn inquiry aa the present

    , personal attacks of that character ought not to have been introduoed , He likewise considered that the learned counsel was hardly justified in commenting upon the proceedings of the legislature and in stigmatising aa a bad law an not of parliament . that had reeeived its solemn sanotion . Ha did not see that there was any-ground for the complaints lhat had been made regardiug this act . It merely declared that an offence which formerly amounted to the crime of high treason should ba treated as an ordinary felony , and abolished the capital punishment , substituting transportation in its place .. It appeared to him that under the oircumstances , no one could say that this was a wanton prosecution , and it seemed to him that it was a very proper case to be submitted to a

    jury . It had been said , also , by the counsel tor the prisoner that the prisoner ought to have been indicted for riot , but it waB his duty to tell them that the evidence whioh had' been , adduoed would not . support a oharge of that description . The meetings of the parties were all held in private—nothing like a riot occurred ,, and there was no evidence to support a charge of riot , although suoh meetings were clearly in furtherance of- the ether design imputed to the prisoners . The learned j udge concluded b / stating to the jury that they ought to pay no attention to the observation of the defendant's counsel with regard to the result of this ic quiry being looked forward to with interest by foreign nations . They had nothing to do

    with any such opinion , nor with the evidence that had bsen given in other caves , or the decision of other juries . It was their . duty to be guided solely by the evidenoe that had been adduoed ia the case before them , and to decide whether that evidence supported the oharge against the prisoner . If it was their opinion that it did , they would say bo by . their verdict—if they had ; any reasonable doubt of the fact , the prisoner ought to have the benefit of saoh doubt , and it should be their only objeot to give a deoision ' whioh they believed to be founded on the truth , and by that course alone ooald they hope to deflect with satisfaction upon the result at whioh they would arrive in thia case .

    The jury retired at ten minutes to oao o ' clock taking with them all the papers and documents that had bean produced in evidenoe .

    TRIAL OF WILLIAM CUFFAY , L ^ CEY . AND FAY , . William Cuffay , Lacey , Fay , and Mullins were then arraigned at the bar , —Applications ware then made by the counsel for the several prisoners to postpone the trials of Laoey , Fay , and Mullins . That of Mullins only was postponed-The indictment against the prisoners , which was in precisely the same form as tho one agues !; Djwiiog , was then read , and the prisoners were oalled upon to plead . They all pleaded Not Guilty in a loud voieo , and Cuffrty added : 'I demand a fair trial by my peer 3 , aocordine'to the principles of Magna Charta , '—

    The prisoner Mullins was then removed from tho bar , and the trial of the others proceeded . Upon the name of the Orst juror being called , Mr Ballaatiao renewed the application made by Mr Kenealey on Friday , thaUhe juror should bssworn . and that ho should be permitted to examine him upon the voire dire . The prisoner had a right to knaw whether a person who was callud as a juror to try him was actuated by any improper motives , —Mr Iluddlestone and Mr Parry made a similar application on behalf of tlieir clients . —Air Baron PJatt , after aorao discussion , said he thought the first step to ba taken was to place twelve gentlemen in the box , and this was accordingly done . ¦ ____ __

    Mr Huddleatone then applied formally to tho court on behalf of Cuffay , that the whole pansl of jurors Bummoned to attend at the present eeaaion should be read over , in order that the prisoner mh j ht see who appeared . In support of his application he cited Townlej ' d cise , reported in' Chitty ' a Criminal Law , ' page 560 , whero that course waa adopted , and in re-Fere- 'ca to which Mr ( afterwarda Justice ) Forster said thia was doae after a much longer debate than tha matter deserved . ( A laugh . ) The Attorney General Barn he did not objeot to the panel of jurors being read over . Mr Straight then proceeded to read the entire list of jurors who had been summoned , and when ho had read a considerable number of namea , Mr Baliantine said he thought it right to state that it was the intention of the prisoners to fiever ia their challenges . — The Attorney General upon this said that as he did

    not think thare w , a 3 a suffijient numbar of jurors aummoned to ensnre a proper jury if tbe prisoners wore triad together , he should take the case of Cuffiy first . —Mr Parrysaid there wera a great many other jurors . —The summoning officersaid that two hundred jurors were in attendance in the avenues of the oourfc but th&re was not room for them-within it . —B won Platt said they must come into court , and get places as well as they oould . —Upon this announcement tho court was immediately crowded with jurors , and Mr Straight waa engaged for a considerable tijaa in readine through the whole list . Upon tho name of the first juror boing oalled Mr Ballantine ohaUenged him . The Attorney Ganeral eaid he had already intimated hu intention to try the prisoner Coffftyaloue , and as Mr Ballantine did not defend that prisoner ho ought not to intarfaiw pear for the prisoner Ouffiy he could aot ba hewd . l Mr BUlutue : Then I do appear for Ottffay . Sua

    Untitled Article

    or two jurymen were then challenged peremptorily by the learned counsel . — When ' the name of John Pickworth was called he was challenged by Mr Ballantine , on the ground that he waB not indifferent between the crown and the prisoner . —The Attorney General said he joined issue and pleaded that the juror was indifferent . —Two jurors were then swornto try the question , and Mr Pickworth was examined upon the voirt dire . —Mr Ballantine ( to the juror ) : I takethe liberty ef asking jou sir , whether , during the recent disturbances , jm acted aa ' a special constable ?—The Attorney , General objected to the question as being entirely irrelevant . —Baron Platt'concurred that tbe question was irrelevant : ' 'it'waBliko asking whether the party was a loyal man . —Mr Ballantine then asked the juror whether he hd at time

    » any ' expressed an opinion with regard to the guilt or innocence of the prisoners or as to whatouRhttobe the-result of the trial ?—The " juror said he had not done either . —The jury then found that the juror waB indifferent and he was sworn . —Upon the , name of John King and several other jurors beine oalled , the Bame proceeding took place .-William Pembroke wasohallenged forfaynur ---Mr Ballantine : Have you ever expressed any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the prisoner ° ^ /' ° r , as f 0 wha ought to be the result of this ! w ! r J u ! u' J *?' hve - expMMed an opinion that they ought all to be hanged . ( A laugh ) -Mr Ba i lan h -Iff ^ retire-The juror was then ordered to withdraw , and after considerable delay ! jury was at length formed .

    Mr Parry then said that although he had expressed 5 rf . »? ff l ° - l 6 T separately on behalf of the prisoner Fay , his only objeot was to get an unbiassed jury , and he had not the slightest intention to embarrass or delay the proceedings ot the oourt . He would now state that , on the part of that prisoner , he way content that the jury wkioh had bsen called should try him . m Ballantine said that Lacey was also willing to be ned by tbe same jury . : Cuffay here exclaimed , ' I wish it to ba understood that I do objeot to this jury . They are not my equals—I am only a journeyman mechanic ' Mr Ballantine : You must be quiet and leave it to UB . ..

    The Attorney General said he had no objection to proceed with the trial of the three prisoners , and Laoy and Fay were accordingly placed at the bar by the side of Cuffay . He addressed the jury , and said he regretted very much that the exigencies of jaatica required the , attendance of bo large a number of gentlemen in their position , no doubt to their great inconvenience ; and he at the same time trusted that the proceedings which . they had just witnessed with regard to ^ the ckoice of the jury would not' have the . effeot of prejudicing the prisoners , booause it was a course " perfectly 'in accordance with the law , and . which , . the prisoners were entitled to adopt . He then proceeded to state the circumstances under which the charge waa preferred against the prisoners ; but , as the faoti were precisely the same as in the former case , it will be unnecessary to repeat them .

    The evidenoe wasithen gone into . W . Cross , a pojice-oonstabler proved that he an prehended : the prisoner Fay on the 13 th August , and tbat as they were going to the police-office , the prisoner told himihat he had been secretary to one of the Chaitiit Associations . Sergeant Thompson deposed that he went to a gawet . ocoupiedby Cuffay on the 18 jh August , and took him into ouBtody : He told him that he was oharged'with felonyijn conspiring against the Queen and he replied , ' . It is quite sum ' aient , I understand what I am charged with , ' He then went to a drawer in the room and fumbled about for some time , and then took out a pistol whioh ho endeavoured to pass te his wife , but witness laid hold of him . and . nfknr

    a struggle , got the pistol from him . It was loaded with gunpowder and ball , and primed . He also found a flag and banner , which he produoad , and on whioh were inscribed the words ' Westminster District ' Sergeant Weat proved that on the following day he searched a cockloft in Cuffay ' 6 house , and found a pikestaff , whioh he produced . Charles Tilden deposed that he became a member of the Chartist Association on the 29 ; h of last May , and Cuffay was hia class-leader . He belonged to the Daan-street locality . In June he had a conversation with Cuffay about cartridges , and Cuffay wished him to make some ; ¦ He told him he had got rib gun , and the prisoner answered that , ' when the time came , they uhonldget plenty of atmB from the gunmakera '

    shops . They likewise had a conversation abiut ginger beer bottles filled with gunpowder and pieces of iron , and Cuffay said they would be very geod things . for the Chartists' wives to throw out of the windows , while their husbands were engaged with the police . Cuffay likewise showed him a pike-head and staff , which he said was * after the Mitchel fashion . He also told him that there was a rebellion in Ireland ; and the soldiers would all soon be sant away , and Lmdon would ba in their haoda ; and he said he hoped that witness would not flinch when the day came . —CrO : S . examined : He was very anxious to ba placed under such a redoubtable leader & % Cuffay , and he expected if he obeyed his orders he should become a general , and perhaps eventually a

    president of tbe commonwealth . ( A laugh ) He had been oharged with being drunk , an'd about seven years ago , while engaged in looking at the statue of King' James , a policeman interfered with him and he was obstinate , and stood by tho statue from njne o ' clock in the morning till five , and then he was locked up for looking at King James . ( Laughter ) The magistrate ordered him to find bail on this occasion , and he was in prison for three weeks . He joined the Chartists as a moral force maa , and he purchased gunpowder at Cuffay ' a request , in order to see if he could not find out something to stop their proceedings . He considered the ginger-beer bottle business physioal force , and-not moral foroe . He mentioned the ginger bottles to

    lead him on to think that he was sincere . He offered to sharpen the pike head from the same motive , and ho always determined to betray the physical force movement . Ha was in communication with the government before he said anything about sharpening the pike , and he communicated from time to time what was going on . He knew nothing of Powell , and never saw him . He ; did not expect to be v aid for what he did , atd he became a spy and informer for tho good of the publio . He went to Cuffay ' s house a quarter of an hour after he was apprehended . Knew there wa 3 a cook-loft to his garret , but had never notioed it particularly , and of

    oourse ho did not put the pike handle into that loft . He was in regular employment with a respeotable tradesmen at the time of these proceedings , and was earning 28 i . per waak . ; Did not expect to ba paid for anything except his loss of time , but he ehould not be ashamed to take anything the government might give him . On one ocoasion he saw Cuffay casting bullets in his garret . Ha was using a tobacoo pipe and a pair of pliers for the purpose . . Neither Mrs Cuffay nor any of the little Cuffija were in the room . ( A laugh . ) Re-oxatniaad : He was apprehended for loitering about Whitehall-gardens , and not giving a aatiafaotor ; account of himself .

    At the olose of tho exiraination of this witness tho jury in the former case came into court , and handed in a written paper to the banoh , in which they expressed a wish for tha oaurt to read over those portions of the ovidonos which confirmed the statement of the accamplica . Mr Juatice Williams said , that his learned brother Erlo , who tried the case , and who had more particularly directed hh attention to it , had left the court , but he would endeavour , aj well a 3 he could , to do what the jury required . The Attorney Ganeral BU ^ astad , that as it was now past seven o ' olook , and as it would not bo advisable to break into the evidence of the next v ? itnas 3 , it would ba batter at onca to adjourn the oass of Cuffay and the 9 ther prisoners .

    Mr Baron PaUsaitl , that as there did not appear to beany probability of getting thvougli the case that night , perhaps that would ba the batter oourao . The furthor proceedings in the trial of Cuffiy were accordingly ' adjourned , thejury bain ? takoa , as in tha former case , to tha London Cjffje-hoase , in this charge of an officar . Mr Juatioa Williams than procoeded to address the jury inthecase ' of Djwling , and read from his Eotea those portions of the evidenoe which wera relied upon by . the orown -as confirming tha testimony of the accomplice . Mr Kenoaioy . at the close of tho learned judge ' s address , complained that he had not bean allowed to adopt a similar course in challenging the jury that had been permitted to Mr B allautme in tha case before the court that day . Ue had inada tha sama application , but it was rofused .

    Mr Justioo Williams said , that the learned , counsel had applied tor a hat of the jury , that wa 3 tha appli- '• cation which had beea refused . > Mr Kanoaley asserted , that he had asked parmisaura to take orecnely the sarno course tint had been adopted by Mr Ballanine , and he now requested that the court would direct the faot to be placed upon tae record . " Tha court refused to acoeda to the requaat The jury than again retired at halt-past ei ° ht 0 clock , and returned into oourt at half past nine when they gave a verdiot of Guilty against tha prisoner upon tha aeooad oouatofthe indictmant TMSDtt .-Mr B « on Platt and Mr Justice Wil . hams toak their Beats en the banch at ton o ' cloak , aud the evidenoe for the proaaaution , ia tho case of these prisoners , was resumed .

    Thoraa 3 Powell , tha approver waa examine k » Mr Bodkin , but as the evid ' eigim S ? X £ 5 the same in every particular as that given on foS ooouuiu , it will . be . unneousary to repeat itSJ JfirV-T ft ^ irthk Oration , in Cripple ! dowa to the month of August last , and takia ! S £ of the proceedings as eaoh of theBo rniSa Ha manner , that the prisoners took au aotive part in the ¦ ESSf ?? ? * With the iflfended OHtb ? e k and also that Laoey was sent as & delegate into the manufaoturmg dutriets , to ascertain whether the ttoa with tho Churuateof Loadon , and also th » t uooa

    Untitled Article

    his return he made a report on the 15 th August , tha * Iw . ,- Bi"nfagham and Manohsster' would be ap tnat night , in oonsequefloa of whioh report the rising in London was fixed for the next day , the prisoner Fa ? agieeing to lead the Tower Chartistidiviaion of the insurgents . : r i ; . .- > : - ,-, w Mr Bodkin , who led the examination , was proceed ' - ing to : question the witness respecting the meetiaes which took place prior to the period at which he Baw either of the three prisoners present , and particularly respecting - the proceedings rt : the Black Jack onX 20 : h of July , when he was interrupted by

    mr ijauantine , who objected to any questionable put respecting those proceedings , unless itboaUba abown that the . prisoners at the ba- hadhadlorn ! offfiS ^ eCted t ° reCepliOn of ^^ The Attorney General contended that where it u J « ? Aertain 1 ? ' 1 Pwsonjoined them at the eleventh hour , that persosso doing was held as ^^ J " . pwi 0 BB Pwedings of ffi oS b

    the itKe / Sn ? ali . B 0 dkin 8 UPP 8 rted "" «™ ° The Judges overruled the objection .-holding that it was oompetent to receive the evidence as proof of the general nature of the combination ; but that it would be a question for the juty to conaider whether the proceedings at those previous meetings had been adopted by the prisoners subsequently . The examination waB then proceeded with . ( It will be remembered that it was at the meeting on the 20 th of July where plans of various parts of London were said to have bean producsd with the view to the erection 1 of barricades , and where , the ohairman waa alleged to have aaid that the object of the Chartists was to destroy the Queen and establish a Re . public . ) Mr Ballantine having objected to tha reception of the above words as evidence against the prisoners , Mr Justice Williams remarked that he thought it would be hard to make them responsible for a wanton remark of that kind made by a person in their

    absence . The examination in chief of this witness , whioh oc onpied four heurs , haying been coacluded , the Court and jury adjourned to take ssme refreshment . On their return the witness was subjected to a most sever * cross-examination by Mr Ba'lantine . He said : I went bv the namo of Johnson , and a person also called me Robinson one evening , and I told them to call me what they liked . I never went by any other name . I cannot say whether I ever went by any other name . Baroa Platt . —What , don't you know whether you ever went by any other name than vour own ?

    nuf" , iT- 1 recjlept , I was called the Wehh Novice . ( A laugh . ) I joined the Chartists Boon after April , but I did not commence to take notes until about two days after the 20 th of July . JSo one told me to take notes , I did so of my own accord . I did not show the notes to . anyone . I may have put down a portion at one time and forgot ' ten another part and put that down afterwards } and I communioated what was going on to the government from time to time . 1 showed iny notes to some of the authorities before these people wore taken into cuatody , I swear I never altered the notes after they wera shown to the authorities . -. .

    Mr Ballantine , —Towhom did you give the riband which was to be the symbol of leadership ? Wjtness . —I objeot to answer the question . I waa earning 27 * . a week as a carpenter whon 1 entered into this business . It was a matter of choice , not of necBBBity . I was determined to acquaint the authorities of what was going on . I don't know that I acted aa a spy , ' but I certainly went in among these people ta get information of their proceedings and to betray them . I have been paid £ l a-week since I have bsen obliged : to be kept out of the way to proteot my life . I have bsen a sort of sporting man in my time . I was a psdeatrian . I ran at Wimbledon once , to bring a little oustomio . a : public-house , and another time at Hounslow . I also ran at Ci'oydon for

    a oay ' s amusement , for which I was well remunerated . I was known as the Welsh Novice on those occasions . I know what tha ' thimblerig' meats . I never had a table for the thimblerig but have looked on . Ionoe , when an apprentice , playedata marqueetable at Ascot , and was paid so much a day for playing . It was on account of my master I went there . I was to pretend to bat , and was paid 303 . ht my day ' s work , but was too young at tan time to consider whether this was oheating . I knew in reality that I was not betting , but did not consider myself a oheat . [ was aware that what I did wiss to deceive the people in the booth , and induce them to bet . I never played at thirablerig , I never associated with suoh people . I know a parson named Pennell . but

    I did not tell him I had walked a match against TownBand and sold it because Iuould get more money . I was a witness onoa before in this court about eight years a » 6 '; but I never said that I was afraid of the counsel questioning me about a thimblerig affair , and would not go again . I work with my brother-in law , Mr Smith . He keep 3 a good many man . I never attempted to persuade any of them to join the Chartist clubs . They were quite capable of doing that without my persuasion . I know James Paris , the foreman . I never said to him that I had been employed by the thimblerigging men , or that I had been employed by the police against thieves . I have talked with him on religious matters , but never expressed to him an entire unbelief in Godor in tho

    , Scriptures , or in our Saviour . I always have believed in them , and ds balieve now . I did tell Paris once that it was likely ha would hear of something remarkable , bat I doa ' t thiak I said he would hear of a Chartist rising . He did not tax me directly with being a spy . He threw out hints that I was , but I took no notice of thea . I got some lead from Mr Smith , my brother-brlaw , in order to cast bullets . I did so , by the direction of Gurney , who waa my warden . Gurney wanted to have ' as msny bullets as possible made , against the day of rising . I oast the b ' ullets in ray own apartment , ' and gave them to Gurney . Beaide 3 this , money was given me by our locality for the purpose of purchasing gunpowder and

    making cartridges . I don't remember whether my shopmates nicknamed me ' Lying Tom . ' I never heard of it to my f- > oe , and I should resent such a thing if it was Baid in my presence . I know a man named Oaborn . I never told him there was to be a Chartist rising , aad urged him to join it . I don't remember doing suoh a thing . I really will not swear I have not doae so . I doa't recollect it . Baron Platt . —Will you swear you never have ?—I don ' t reoolleot . Baron Platt . —Will you swear you never have ? - > I don't think I ever did . Baron Platt . —Then you may have done bo and forgotten it ?—Yes .

    Examination contiaued . — I cansot remember whether I pointed out to Oaborn a man who would make him a pike . I think I do reoolleot that I once did do something of tha sort . I believe I did do it , in faot . I pointed out a blacksmith as a person who would make him a pike . I don't know what the pike was to be used for , but I supposa it was for Borne purpose or other . We were talking about the Chartists at the time . I know another carpantor named Carr , but I swear I ne ? er said to him that if I had a chanoe in a crowd I would rip the police ' s — guta out . I used to quarrel sometimes with my father when he wa 3 alive , but I swear I never struck him . I did onoe havo a scuffb with him after he had struck me , and ray bvothar-in-liw separated us . I

    never said to Pennell that I hoped my father ' s soul was in hell . I never said to him that the government waa a weak , tyrannioal government , and that I would send Lord J . Russell and Sir G . Grey to the devil within a aontli . I swear I never said suoh a thing just bafora the 10 th of April . I may have asked Pannall it he was a Chartist , but I neves offered to propose him a 3 a member , or told him tkailcott ! dget £ 2 or £ 3 a-week for him , which waulu be hotter than carpentering , I never told him that tha Charter would novor ba obtained as they were going on , or told him to look ai the Queen with har hundreds of thousands a-year spent in waste , while I had to work hard for a bit of bread , and that I would blow ller and the — foreigner to hell . 1 gwear .

    also , that 1 never told him I could show him materials enough to blow Londoa to hell in half an hour . I know James Bannett , a shoemaker . I doa ' t think I saw him about a week before tha 10 ih of April but I may have done do . I dm't remembar askino him what fee meant to do on tho 10 th of A pril , but I cannotswoar Ididnotdoso . I won't swear I did not t \» Ss \ A i cnded , 80 to the meetin s «»«*¦ lT « luflW tf , wa 3 r feo 1 '' " * e did ' S m 5 t 1 Oald d 1 0 - ' l believe I ^ saW to nun that 1 had boaa makin ? some hand grenades that would go half way through , au inch boarJ . lsaid this when

    we were coming home togatkor from a meeting in Holborn . I oanno !; reoolleot irteu thia . uppeaed . It was not in August oy July , but it may have been between May and June . I doa ' t think it was balore tha lOih of April , but I really cannot say . It was not traa that I had baen making hand-penadea . I only said so for talking sake . I told this falsehood for talking sake , but I am not in the habit oUomsBo . The others wore telling me diffarout taings which I did not balieve , aud I thought I would tell a lie too . A man named Watson was with Pennell and me . I also told them how I made tho grenades , that was a ho toj .

    Mr BaUantine . -And are you not called ' Lying Tom ?'—Nottomyfaoe . Mr Billantine . —How wero thosa granades made , dul you say ? Witness—Why , I told them that gunpowder must ba put into an ink-bottle with an explosiva cap , aud I dare say I did aay that it would ba a capital thing to throw among tha polios if it had some nails in it . I don't think I told them that a blacking . bottle half full of gunpowder mixed with nails would do ai well as anything to throw among the police , after it waa ignited byafusae , and that it would break the ¦ - »' a legs . I never said to Bennett that I had

    got ten men , and , with four or five more , I could easily take the Avtillery ground . I never Broduoed any plan of London to Bennett ; I know aptnon

    Untitled Article

    _ f THE NORTHERy ; STAR ; Sbptembeb 30 , 1848 .

• Citation
  • Northern Star (1837-1852), Sept. 30, 1848, page 6, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1490/page/6/