Read Ebook: An Authentic History of the Cato-Street Conspiracy With the trials at large of the conspirators for high treason and murder a description of their weapons and combustible machines and every particular connected with the rise progress discovery and termina by Wilkinson George Theodore

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 917 lines and 77335 words, and 19 pages

be believed on his oath.

Cross-examined by the Attorney-General.--I saw him with plenty of money, and knowing that he had little or no work, I was surprised. I was in distress. He told me he would put me in the way to make plenty of money, if I would go with him. I agreed; and he proposed that we should charge gentlemen with an unnatural offence. That he was to go up first, and then I was to join him. I left him quite shocked. This was about three months ago. He said he had got ten pounds at a time from a gentleman in St. James's-street, by only catching him by the collar, and accusing him. I met him the next night at the Rodney's-head, 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 he knew better how to general it than his brother. I ought to have communicated it to a magistrate; but I was afraid of falling a "wictim" to the Irishmen who lived in the neighbourhood. I have spoken to him since. I was 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 cows. Some of the Irishmen have gone away from the neighbourhood now, and that induced me to summon up courage to mention it to my brother. I did go with Dwyer to the Park, but I was always struck with the horror of the thing. When I saw the names of the witnesses in this case in the paper, I made the communication to my brother.

Mr. Doane recalled: That is not my manuscript; I always write from a manifold.

Andrew Mitchell: I did not receive that from Mr. Doane, but from a person of the name of Lavenue, who furnishes things in the same way.

The Attorney-General: These papers ought to be here.

The Chief Justice Abbot: Strictly speaking, they ought to be here.

Mr. Adolphus: This is all the evidence I intend to offer on the part of the prisoner.

Cross-examined: I did not know Hucklestone by name. I saw him with other chaps at the corner of James-street, near where I live; but I never associated with him. I have seen him in Hyde-park. I never went into a public-house with him. I resorted to the Rodney's-Head, but never knew him to resort there. I have not repeatedly met him in a public-house. I don't know that I can swear I never saw him in a public-house. I will swear I have not been with him at the Rodney's-Head within this three months. I am a bricklayer by trade, and worked fourteen years for one master.

Mr. Adolphus now entreated permission to be allowed till the ensuing day to prepare himself to address the Jury on the part of the prisoner. The state of exhaustion to which he had been reduced, as well as the shortness of the time which had elapsed since he had received his instructions, and the great importance of the duty which he had to perform, where the life of a fellow-creature was at stake, the more imperiously impelled him to entreat this indulgence, if consistent with the views of the Court.

The Lord Chief Justice felt the propriety of the appeal, and after some conversation relative to the convenience of the Jury, the Court was adjourned till the following morning.

THIRD DAY, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 19, 1820.

The Court opened again at nine o'clock this morning, and a few minutes after Mr. ADOLPHUS rose to address the Jury on behalf of the prisoner, and commenced by observing, that "he could not request their attention to the feeble and humble efforts which he was going to make in defence of the prisoner at the bar, without returning them his sincere thanks for the kind and gracious manner in which they had conceded to him further time for the preparation of his defence. Under all the circumstances of the case, the situation in which he stood was sufficiently distressing; but it would have been still more so if he had been compelled to address them yesterday evening with a mass of evidence totally undigested, with a memory wandering over all, but steadily directed to none of the points which had come out during the trial; and without any of that simplification of the case which he had been able to effect, though imperfectly, in the few hours which, by their kindness, he had been able to steal from sleep.

"The inquiry in which they were then engaged was a most anxious and important inquiry: indeed, so anxious and so important was it that it was only natural to expect that the minds of counsel engaged in conducting it would sink under the heavy task imposed upon them. During the course of his professional career many trials similar to the present had taken place: but in none of them did the parties accused labour under such dreadful charges as were now brought against the prisoner at the bar; in none of them had they been so totally deprived of all assistance and support as the unfortunate individual had been on whose fate they now stood impanelled to decide.

"To say that he had all the weight of office arrayed against him--to say that the prosecution was conducted with all the talent and all the power of Government, was to say nothing more than that Thistlewood was indicted for high treason. He meant not to blame the Government for exerting all its energies in a case like the present; by no means--the Crown had, on all occasions, and particularly on an occasion like this, a right to demand of its best servants their best services: he only meant to contrast the difficulties against which Thistlewood had to contend with those which had surrounded other unfortunate men in his situation.

"Against the great legal talent which had been employed against them by the Crown, there had come forward advocates of high character, and not inferior ability--advocates who voluntarily embarked themselves in the cause of their clients--gave up their whole time and attention to their interests, methodized and simplified the evidence necessary to maintain them, and entered the Court prepared to meet the case brought forward by the Crown on every one of its points and bearings.

"Far different was the case of the unhappy man then standing at their bar.

"On the evening previous to his trial he was scarcely acquainted with the name of the counsel who was to defend him: and that counsel had scarcely more early information of the grounds on which his defence was to be rested. He could assure them that he was only chosen counsel for Thistlewood on Thursday last; that unavoidable business had kept him out of town during the whole of Friday; and that he had appeared before them on the Monday with such information as he could collect in the interim. He deplored this circumstance, but he could not complain of it. His want of ability and preparation was not, however, the only circumstance which rendered Thistlewood's case more desperate than that of the individuals who had formerly been placed in his situation. Many of them had been allied with, or supported by, men of power, and rank, and influence in the country. Thistlewood, on the contrary, was aided by no party, was supported by no subscription, but was deserted by men of every class and party in the community. He had received no assistance, no information, no instructions, from him; all that he knew of the case was derived from the materials which the solicitor, the gratuitous solicitor for the defence , had been able to collect within the last few days.

"Besides these circumstances was another still more extraordinary and unfortunate. At the state trials of 1794, whoever was discharged by a verdict of his countrymen was discharged at once from all further prosecution; and with the inquiry of that Court ended all inquiry into his conduct.

"This man, Thistlewood, however, was so beset, that, even though he obtained at their hands a verdict of acquittal upon this charge, he had to undergo a similar trial upon other indictments: indeed he did not hesitate to say that he was surrounded by every danger which could possibly environ the life of a single individual. It appeared as if this melancholy choice alone were left him, whether he would have the execution of his sentence end with the severing of his head from his body, or whether he would have his body given up after his execution to the dissecting knife of the surgeon. If his guilt were of such a nature as to demand that penalty to be added to the others inflicted by the law, he had only himself to blame for it: far was it from his intention to palliate his conduct upon that point: the only reason which he had for even alluding to it was to implore them to place out of their consideration every circumstance which was not connected with the subject of their present investigation, and which had not been brought regularly before them in the course of the trial.

"The Attorney-General had made the same request to them, and it had well become his character and legal knowledge to do so. It was not less his duty as a man and as a Christian, than as a high officer of the Crown, to give them that advice: for, bound as he was to protect the interests of the Crown, he was not less bound not to exercise his power in wantonly running down those subjects, who were living under its fostering care and protection. Made, then, as this request had been made to them by the Attorney-General, he could not help repeating it; for he was well aware how difficult it was to dismiss from the mind the impressions of ill-will and dislike which were naturally conceived against any one who was, or ever had been, the subject of general reprobation.

"On occasions like the present a man's usual convictions stole into his mind, in spite of himself: it therefore became them to be doubly on their guard, and to view the case then under their consideration as if they had never heard the name of Thistlewood before, and as if they had never received any other information than that which had come under their notice in the course of the trial, upon which, and upon which alone, they were sworn to give their verdict. He agreed with the Attorney-General that the present was a case of infinite importance; not, however, to the prisoner at the bar merely, whose life was at a stake, but also to the state and to all posterity.

"It was of importance to the state that verdicts should be given upon strict evidence alone, and not upon favourable or unfavourable impressions conceived by the Jury regarding the party on his trial. It was of importance also to posterity; because if, as against a bad man, a certain kind of evidence should now be allowed to procure conviction, it would, in time, be also allowed to procure conviction against a good one; and, in that case nobody could tell whose fame might not be impeached, whose property might not be injured, whose life might not be destroyed, by the same kind of evidence as had been produced on this trial; evidence which ought never to have the credence of any jury, or the sanction of any court.

"It was not, therefore, so much for the value of Thistlewood's life as for the value of a precedent in a case of treason, that he was then contending; for if a charge of high treason could be substantiated against any British subject on such evidence as had just been adduced there would be an end to all our well-founded boasts of the excellence of our law regarding high treason. Such an event, however, he, for one, did not anticipate, when he recollected with what care the law of treason had been guarded by the legislature, and with what caution executed by our juries, ever since the period of its first institution. Nor was such caution, vigilance, and correctness, as had been always exhibited by our juries, with some few exceptions, and those in bad times, unnecessary or uncalled-for.

"An accusation of high treason was a fearful accusation. In all other criminal cases, from a simple assault up to a murder, the King though not the real, was the ostensible prosecutor: in a case of high treason, however, the King was not merely the ostensible but also the real prosecutor; he was directly arrayed against the prisoner, and therefore it was the imperative duty of the Jury to see that the subject was not oppressed. The present case of high treason was as important as any of those which had ever preceded it; and the Jury ought, therefore, to be peculiarly careful not to allow one tittle of evidence to weigh with them which had not been admitted on former occasions, and, if they had any doubts with regard to its admissibility, ought to lean to the prisoner, and not to the Crown, however interested they might be in its preservation, and the preservation of its authority.

"He had before had occasion to state to them, that the defence of the prisoner at the bar had come to him, in the course of his professional business, as an enforced duty. He had not sought it; he had not refused it; indeed, as an advocate, he could do neither one nor the other. Standing, however, as he did, in that Court, as the advocate, the unfee'd, and therefore, in some respect, the voluntary advocate of the prisoner Thistlewood, he deemed it right to state that, during the whole of his life he had never given his assent to any proposition tending to change the constitution, as established at the Revolution, either in church or state. He had been born a subject of his late most gracious Majesty; to him, whilst alive, he had paid a subject's loyal obedience. He was now a subject of his present most gracious Majesty, and the allegiance which he had paid to the father he willingly transferred, as his due to the son.

"To the questions which had lately agitated the country, he had never lent himself for a single moment; on the contrary, he had always opposed, to the utmost of his power, every design of faction and innovation. Thus much he thought it necessary to state in the peculiar situation in which he stood; but making as he had that declaration of his political principles, he also felt, both as a man and as an Englishman, that he had a strong principle to advance and establish in this defence; and he therefore trusted that, if any persons were present who felt an interest in the fate of the prisoner, they would not think that he would relax, in his efforts on his behalf, on account of the difference of their political opinions. If any thought that he would relax, he was sorry that they should entertain such an opinion of him: he would, however, use every exertion to make a fair defence for the prisoner: if it were not conducted with ability, it would be not from want of intention, but from want of ability, which would be the prisoner's misfortune as well as his own.

"The learned Counsel then proceeded to observe, that the line of defence which he found it necessary to pursue was the most difficult which it had ever fallen to the lot of an advocate to make good; and he should here be deficient in respect to the good sense and talent of the jury, if he pretended to assert that the prisoner at the bar was perfectly guiltless. He was afraid that it was but too evident that he and those with whom he was connected had meditated assassination, a crime which was little less horrible than the commission of it. He did not intend to palliate Thistlewood's conduct in doing so--far from it: it was a crime not to be palliated: the very blood recoiled from it--the best feelings of human nature revolted against it, and the indignation and execration of society always followed it. Still he thought it possible that Thistlewood, though he might be guilty of murder and the other crimes imputed to him in the various indictments, might not be guilty of high treason. Unless, therefore, he was fully and clearly proved to be so, it was their duty to acquit him; and in so acquitting him, in spite of all the odium and prejudice which surrounded him, they would be doing honour to themselves, and benefit to their posterity.

"He was not weak enough to say this in any hope that, by flattering them, he should obtain their verdict; he should be sorry to obtain it on such terms; for if they gave a verdict for him against the evidence, they would be doing no honour to themselves, and a great injury to their posterity. He had once thought of stating to them, at some length, the nature of the law of treason, but he had afterwards found reason to change his opinion, it having been suggested to him that the law on that subject would come better to them from the Court. He should therefore proceed, before he entered into a minute examination of the evidence to state to them the nature of the indictment.

"They had heard the indictment read over to them, and would have perceived, unacquainted as they were with the technicalities of the law, that the same offence was charged against the prisoner, though somewhat varied in terms. There were four charges, or counts, to which he particularly wished to call their attention; there were to each of these ten or eleven overt acts, all of which, it had been said, must be considered as shewing the intention with which the prisoner had acted.

"The prisoner was charged, in the first count, with "compassing, imagining, inventing, devising, and intending to deprive and depose our Lord the King, from the style, honour, and kingly name of the imperial crown of this realm." The overt acts stated in the indictment were, conspiring to assassinate several of the Privy-Council; procuring large quantities of arms with intent to assassinate them; as also to subvert and destroy the constitution as by law established; issuing proclamations to the King's subjects containing solicitations to aid and assist them in making and levying insurrection; and various other acts specified therein. Before, however, they found the prisoner guilty upon this count; they ought to be convinced that the intention to depose the King existed previously, and not subsequently, to the commission of these overt acts. For though they should be perfectly convinced that the prisoner had gone to Lord Harrowby's house with the intention of killing the King's ministers, that fact alone did not render him guilty of high treason: it was necessary that a treasonable intention should be first proved to exist.

"These were the points which must be established before they could find the prisoner at the bar guilty of high treason; and what was the evidence produced to establish them? He did not hesitate to affirm, that never was evidence so weak tendered to prove charges so heinous. It was contradictory, it was inadmissible, it was incredible, coming from any quarter, but still more incredible, coming, as it did, from men destitute of all character, avowedly engaged in a conspiracy to effect a hideous murder, and therefore men of such a description as ought never to be allowed by their oaths to bring the life of man into danger at all. Before he proceeded any further, it would be requisite to call their attention to the degree of credit which ought to belong to an accomplice. The Attorney-General, in calling an accomplice as witness, had stated that he was to be believed, whenever he was supported by other collateral evidence. On this doctrine he would not comment just at present, but would content himself with observing, that it must be clear to all of them that the whole charge of high treason rested in this case solely on the evidence of an accomplice. For if the testimony of Adams were to be dismissed from their notice, there was not a single syllable said by all the other witnesses who had been produced, tending to convict Thistlewood of high treason.

"The question then came to this point, whether a charge of high treason ought to be considered as made out, which rested solely on the testimony of an accomplice, and an accomplice, too, like Adams. He maintained that it ought not, for if Adams were believed, no witness could hereafter be rejected as unworthy of credit, and consequently no man's life or honour could be considered secure." An accomplice, however, continued the Attorney-General, not indeed in those very words, but in words to that effect, "ought not to be expected to receive support on every point which he mentions in evidence, because if he were to receive such support, there would be no reason to call him at all."

"It was true that the evidence of an accomplice might be believed under certain circumstances, that is, when he was supported by other more respectable witnesses; but then he must not be supported by only a few witnesses, but by all the witnesses which could be called to confront him. He would even go so far as to say that those who availed themselves of the evidence of an accomplice were bound to produce every witness acquainted with the facts to which he swore, not merely those who could support, but even those who were likely to contradict them. These persons were the solemn gages of his truth, and like witnesses to the signature of deeds, ought to be called forward for the common good of all parties. This was not merely his opinion, but the opinion of many eminent lawyers who had gone before him. Indeed he had read an opinion of one of them in a book, which he could not with propriety mention there; an opinion which was so much in unison with his own, though much more forcibly expressed, that he could not omit the opportunity of reading it to them. The argument in it was clear and satisfactory, and the law was not more accurately laid down than it was forcibly expressed. The passage to which he alluded was as follows:

"'An accomplice may be a witness; even unconfirmed, he is a witness competent to be heard.'--A witness of the most infamous character, unless he has been actually convicted of certain specific crimes, and the record is brought into Court, may indeed be heard; but it is for you, gentlemen, to determine what degree of credit you will give to his evidence. Let him be heard; let him be examined; I thank them for calling this witness: I thank them for submitting him to the admirable cross-examination of my learned friend: I thank them for stopping certain subjects of inquiry; all this must satisfy you, that no reliance can be placed upon his testimony. I am sure, that if this were a case not of the immense importance which it is; but if it were a suit instituted to decide the smallest question of civil right, that you would not attend or give the slightest credence to such evidence. But in a case of this nature and of this magnitude, in a criminal case, in a case of treason, in a case of the highest description of crime, and, with respect to its inflictions and penalties, the severest that the law recognizes; in a case of high treason, I say, to build your decision upon evidence of this character, upon such a witness, and such a treacherous foundation, is it possible that my friends on the other side can expect it; is it possible that they can hope, or even wish for it? Can you believe that they could have known the previous conduct and character of this man, when they brought him into Court? It would be an insult to your understandings; it would be an outrage to common sense; a mockery of justice, to suppose that the smallest degree of reliance can be placed upon such evidence.

"But it is said that he is confirmed; and because he is confirmed in some facts, you are therefore to believe him in the rest. This is a position which lawyers are in the habit of stating in a very unqualified manner; but it is not a position which can be maintained to this extent, according to any principle of common sense. There is no man who tells a long and complicated story, like that which you have heard, who may, and must not of necessity, be confirmed in many parts of it. The witness was upwards of eight hours in giving his evidence, and of course stated many facts, which no man denies, which have been in all the newspapers for weeks and for months past; and because he is confirmed in certain particulars, you are therefore required to believe the whole of his story to be true. Is this a proposition to be insisted upon? Can it for a moment be maintained to this extent, and in this broad and unqualified way? But, gentlemen, every profession and science has its phrases; the necessary qualifications are by degrees lost sight of, and the worst errors are thus introduced.

"Let us then look at the mischief of this doctrine, and see the evils and injustice that have arisen out of it. The notorious Titus Oates, the witness for the Crown in the trials founded upon the Popish Plot, in the reign of Charles the Second, that most infamous and perjured wretch, who was afterwards convicted of perjury for his evidence upon those trials, and suffered the punishment of the law for his crime, was confirmed in his testimony in many most important particulars. Unfortunately, the juries, misled in those times of heat and party animosity, were prevailed upon to believe him, and many unhappy persons suffered in consequence of the extreme punishment of the law; and murders were committed, under the forms of justice, in consequence of the reliance placed upon the frail and fallacious testimony of a man of that description. You perceive, then, gentlemen, the danger of this doctrine; and that it is not because a man is confirmed in certain circumstances that you can safely believe him, as to other facts where that confirmation is wanting.

"What is the character of falsehood? Who has lived in the world, and has at all examined the operations of the human heart and mind, who does not know that this is the usual and proper character of falsehood--that it does not wholly invent, falsehood engrafts itself upon truth, and by that artifice misleads and deceives, truth is exaggerated, things that exist are discoloured or distorted--these are the usual operations of falsehood; this is a part of its nature, its address and dexterity. It arises, therefore, out of the very nature of perjury, that it must be confirmed to a certain extent; and it is because there is confirmation in certain particulars, to which particulars I shall, by-and-by, take the liberty of drawing your attention, that you are gravely required to believe the whole of the miserable fictions with which you have been insulted in the evidence of this abandoned wretch.

"But let us look with a little more accuracy to the shades and distinctions upon this material point. I beg you to follow me; for it is most important, according to my apprehension of the question. A man may be seduced into the commission of an offence, who had previously maintained a good character; he may repent of his crime, and give information, and then come into court as a witness. If the story which he tells is found to be probable; if he is not only uncontradicted in any facts, but is confirmed in essential particulars; if there are no circumstances of suspicion arising out of the situation in which he stands, a jury, may, possibly, upon such evidence, be justified in finding a verdict of guilty. I repeat it, that if the previous character of the man were good; that if the story he tells is probable; if it is not proved to be false in any part of it; if he is confirmed in essential particulars, and there are no circumstances of suspicion arising out of the persons with whom he is connected, and by whom he is surrounded, then the Jury may give credit to his evidence.

"He could not help observing, that, if he had desired the best friend whom he had in the world to enlarge his mind by the infusion of good sound legal opinions, or to compose for him a dissertation on this express subject, that friend could not have given him any sentences so adequate to the expression of the sentiments which he wished to convey to the Jury, as were the sentences which he had just read to them. He could have wished to have given them the book which contained these sentences to keep in the box with them, but the practice of the Court prevented him from doing so; he would, however, ask them to retain them, if they could, in their minds, as a shield of protection for the prisoner, against a man, who ought not to be believed on any one point, but who had interwoven with his falsehoods many truths, which he had acquired either from common report in common conversation, or which had been impressed on his recollection by the injunction of those under whom he acted.

"The next step which he had to take, would be to comment on the evidence, but before he entered into an examination of it, he should beg leave to describe the nature of the defence which he was going to make. He thought it, therefore, his duty, to say at once, that no doubt could be entertained of Thistlewood having been at a meeting in Cato-street, and that he, with the other members of that meeting, had determined to murder all the Cabinet Ministers. To entertain a doubt of the existence of the meeting, or the sanguinary designs which those who attended it entertained, would be full as absurd as to doubt the existence of light now that the sun was casting its full radiance upon the Court. Whilst that meeting was in deep deliberation, it was interrupted by the arrival of a party of police officers. In the affray which ensued, Smithers met his death, or, he ought rather to speak out plainly, was murdered.

"Making, however, these concessions, and admitting the facts to be as bad as bad could be against the prisoner at the bar, believing even, as he did believe, that Thistlewood was guilty of the murder of Smithers, still he maintained that his guilt did not amount to high treason. He would admit, that from motives of a personal nature, Thistlewood wished to kill one of his Majesty's ministers; and that, in order to effect that purpose, he had no objection to kill them all. The Jury ought, however, to recollect that, whilst influenced by this wish, he had always been accompanied by two spies: how far they had advised these plots was not clear, but one thing was clear, that, upon such evidence as theirs, they were called upon to convict Thistlewood of high treason. That he had been guilty of murder he was not now going to dispute; but it was too bad that the crimes of murder and treason should now be blended together, and that he should be represented as meditating a crime which he never had for one moment in his heart.

"He had already stated to them, that if Adams's evidence did not convict Thistlewood, none else did, for the evidence of the other witnesses was little or nothing. If, therefore, he shewed them, as he hoped and trusted he should shew them, that the witness Adams was totally unworthy of belief, then a verdict of acquittal must be given for the prisoner at the bar. In order to convince them how totally undeserving he was of credit, he should beg leave to direct their attention to three points. He should ask them how far Adams had been confirmed in that part of his evidence which related to the treason; then how far he had been contradicted by his own evidence, or that of others; and, lastly, how far he might have been confirmed by others, if the Counsel for the Crown had thought proper to call them.

"What then was the testimony which Mr. Robert Adams had given to them? He would tell them. The man had commenced his evidence by informing them, that he had been a soldier some years in the Blues. That any subject of the King should entertain such schemes as had been entertained by these alleged conspirators, was certainly deplorable; but that a man in the situation of Adams, a soldier, sworn to defend his Majesty to the best of his ability from all harm and danger, should have voluntarily entered into them, and should never have felt any of what he had termed compunctious visitings as to the guilt in which he was going to involve himself, until four days after the execution of that guilt had been rendered impossible, was a circumstance so atrocious as to deprive him of all claim to credibility and respect.

"This loyal soldier, however, proceeded to inform them, that he had become acquainted with Brunt about three years ago, when the British army was at Cambray, at which time Brunt was attending it in the capacity of a shoemaker. After the dispersion of the army he lost sight of him for some time, but afterwards met him again in the month of January last, when Brunt introduced him to Thistlewood. Then occurred one of the most extraordinary circumstances which he had ever heard of, though it appeared to be nothing else than the fashion throughout the whole of this case. At his very first meeting with this Mr. Adams, Thistlewood let him into the whole secret of his traitorous designs. But could any one believe that Thistlewood himself was so reckless of life, as to use language to a stranger equivalent to this?--'My fate is so hard, my circumstances are so desperate, that I care not a straw what becomes of me. I put myself, and all my designs, into your hands, without any regard to the consequences; and yet those designs are so horrible and so sanguinary, that if you have the slightest portion of loyal feeling about you, you must denounce me to Government, you must hand me over to justice, you must embrace the opportunity which I have given you of condemning me, without any scruple, out of my own mouth.' Was it possible that any man in his senses could be thus blind and foolish? Could the most credulous man alive be persuaded to attach credit to so incredible a story? He thought not; and he therefore trusted, that on such evidence, they would never find the prisoner guilty of high treason.

"At another meeting, this formidable band of traitors declared that they were so poor, that they could not wait longer than the ensuing Wednesday for the effecting of their intended revolution. He left it to the jury to say, whether such a declaration savoured more of plunder or of high treason. But, in his opinion, a scheme of plunder was the only thing which could be thus easily arranged; not a revolution in the state, which must depend upon many fortuitous events and circumstances. After this, their conversation became sportive; they gave certain facetious nick-names to certain distinguished noblemen; how justly it was not their business then to decide. This occurred on the 13th of January, just one month and ten days before the transaction in Cato-street. What occurred next, according to the testimony of the respectable Mr. Adams? Why, that three days afterwards he was himself arrested for a small debt, and carried to Whitecross-street prison, which residence he did not leave until the 30th of January. Was this man, who could not even preserve his liberty, more likely to be found engaged in a design to destroy the state, or in a design to commit pillage and plunder, to enrich himself? He had nothing to lose, he had every thing to gain; and if the worst came to the worst, he had only to save himself, and hang the rest of his companions, by turning King's evidence against them.

"That a wicked man, or that even a madman, might devise such a project, he could easily believe; but that any man should propose it as a feasible project to any body of men, was more than he could ever be induced to credit. For no story of oriental romance was so extravagant--no exploit of any hero of school divinity was so inconsistent with reason and probability, as was the design which Adams had shown to have been recommended by Thistlewood to his associates. And yet these men were to form a provisional government, and the forming of this provisional government was to constitute a chief point of their guilt! They form a provisional government for this mighty empire! In what way? by what means? out of what materials? Out of those illiterate and beggarly individuals, he supposed, who could not agree on the drawing up, on cartridge-paper, of three lines, to be exposed on the great day of the revolution on the blazing buildings of London, for the good of the people.

"This provisional government, formed from such materials as he had described, was not to begin the exercise of its authority, however, until the soldiers, who were to be tired to death by sitting up all night at Windsor, were fairly disposed of. From his talking thus coolly of tiring the poor soldiers to death by the labours of one night, it was quite clear that Adams, with all his military education, had either never heard of such a thing as a bivouac, or else that he had conceived all virtue and all valour, as well as all honesty, to have left the army when he quitted it. The provisional government being formed, it was only natural to expect that the business of the drama would crowd more thickly upon the Jury, and therefore they might be excused for asking what came next. Why, the provisional government was to send to the sea-ports to prevent any gentlemen from leaving England without passports: it was to send to Dover, to Brighton, to Margate, to Ramsgate, and other places, orders to that effect; to send to all of them, too, during the night of the King's funeral--and, above all, was to send these orders to Brighton in particular. Why so? because the mention of Brighton brought the prisoner at the bar into contact with the reigning Sovereign, and laid a foundation for a charge of high treason.

"The King, however, was not at that time at Brighton, but unfortunately confined to his palace in London by so severe an indisposition as to require the issuing of daily bulletins regarding the state of his health. From that indisposition he had now recovered, and he prayed to God that he might long be preserved from the recurrence of it. The prisoner at the bar, however, if they were to believe the testimony of Adams, was of opinion, that the present family had inherited the throne long enough, and that it was of no use for the present King to think of ever being crowned."

"Their arrangements for this are like all the other arrangements; barracks were to be taken, cannons carried away, ministers assassinated, government subverted, the Mansion House occupied, all by fifteen or twenty men. Twenty-five were the greatest number ever spoken to. Twenty-five would find themselves completely lost in the Mansion House; they might as well wander through the Tower of Babel. Palin, who was to be particularly important in his services, was to travel from place to place with satchels of burning materials on his back, and was alone to set fire to several places. Mr. Palin alone was to be seen wandering about, setting fire to houses for amusement, or for the perfection of their plan. Each individual was to have his distinct act of assassination; whoever failed was to be himself assassinated. But who the spare assassin was, to assassinate the rest if they failed, was not told. But this is one of the many fictions which you are called upon to swallow.

"The witness ventured, for the first time, to express here some difficulty, and asked whether, if failure proceeded from unavoidable causes, and not from cowardice, the same consequence must follow. Thistlewood relieved him from this apprehension. But how the court-martial was to be formed to try the case was not discovered. Such, gentlemen, is the delirium of delusion, or the suggestions of frenzy, which you are called upon to believe. Mr. Palin delivers a speech in parliamentary form. 'Agreeing as I do with the plan proposed, I wish to know where men are to be found.' Then he asks whether the plan is to be communicated to those he meant to call upon. Thistlewood authorizes him to use his own discretion. Gentlemen, if you find in this testimony some remote pointing to probability, believe it; but can you, for a moment, hesitate respecting this gross and flagrant fiction? Furnival's Inn was selected for setting fire to. No building is less liable to be burnt. It is a modern building, and there are strong party-walls. Other places, which I shall not name, and where some of us live, would be much fitter. Many places between Furnival's Inn and Fetter-lane, all timber, would take fire at once. But Furnival's Inn appeared fittest in fiction.

"Thus have I endeavoured, gentlemen, by hours stolen from my rest, to lay before you the real character of their intentions. My Lord will fairly state the law to you; I need not, therefore, anticipate any thing on that subject. At the meeting on the 21st, information is said to have been given that their proceedings were known at Bow-street, and at the Secretary of State's office. We might have had evidence whether this information could be well founded, but we have none. Next day, the 22d, the cabinet dinner is announced. Who announces it? Mr. Edwards. This corresponds with what is in evidence before you, that the intelligence was fabricated, and put into the paper for this purpose. "Poverty goads on these men; it is fit," said the prompters, "that we put them on to what will serve our own purposes."

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet