On this page
-
Text (1)
-
6 THE NORTHERN STAR. Sbptembeii 30, 1848...
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.
-
-
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.
The Powell Plot||G;.T.-; Trials At The O...
BB 3 Wfl 3 W # r to this portion of the statement of the learned swEBoiBelas there m to the part regarding myself . It 123139 m foundation . Mi Mr Kenealey said , that if he was misinformed , he nas as eorrv for having made the statement . M : Mr JustxeErie said , the learned counsel had JiucSuci betfcr confine himself to tbe evidence , and Maksakehis observations upon the case , rather nan aotemter into other matters which w < re totauy rrrekrelevsnt . " ... . „_„„ j M Mr Kenealey . -Tfae Attorney General had opened the ( he esse as an instance of the mild and merciful . tdrmdministratioa of the law , and he a ' eo said that , by thfahfa cer statate , no privileges were taken from the Hieoneop i e except those ot bang hanged and disemboweleed ed He shouldhowever , before he sat down , show
, Ihe he jurr thit this rew Crown and Felony Act isispifspriwi them of mo :-t important rights , and that it rras . ras . in . n oiotoffect , the most perai act that ever istisstiwi the Legislature . They lived is arrange iimames ; sad he considered Ihe-e prosecutions only one asoMorastep by the government to destroy those rights icd ud privileges which hai raised Esgland to her proud scaiicaiuoa anions the nations of the earth . He would esksk them , did liberty of speech exist in England ? i , ? t , !? tlaeni remember the miserable prosecutions for sjdi'diiioc . He admitted that a great many foolish , aasbash , and violent things were said by those patties ; mt at a mild and merciful government , desiring their i apiappiness , weald never have prosecuted them with tacbica severity ; but it was evidently the object of the ( ovovernment to put down liberty of speech . Their
iigbight to hold public meetings was gone , and the Atc orornev General had raked up an old Act of Parliament If tl the Hire of Charles IL—a period the most infa-: ionou 3 ia the history of the country—for that purpose tihais Act rendered it illegal for more than twenty » er jersiss to assemble for any purpose whatever . This : sdsd had the oaly effect that could be expected . The < ectopia were not allowed to meet in public , and they ireirere dr'ven to form secret associations . He imihnbred the jury to defend their rights , and he felt ississurcd shey would never think of convicting the ttrennggentfeoanatthebarof the crime of levying i ravar up ja such evidence as had been adduced . The ! pxoverament appeared to te determined to destroy the iibaberties of the people . At the commencement of ihsheyesr , under the pretence of a fear of invasion ,
hshey had made a large increase in their army and aaavy , sotely for the purpose of keeping down the woeople by force , and to carry out their own tyrannical ibjbjects , and that was also tbe object of these prosecu-Mona . If the offence was anything it was high trealoian , but the government knew that juries were too loionest to coavict of high treason under such circumstztances , and , therefore , they called it feiony , hoping hihere y to entrap a conviction . The evidence tgtgamst Hardy , Home Tooke , and Watson , was much ^ stron ger than iu this case , and yet the jury would not aamviet them . Why had the offence been reduced r jjm high treason to felony ? It was because in high wreason tome remains of ancient liberty were left to tfthe people . When a man was tried for high treason itas was entitled to have copies of the depositions and
. aeopyofthe indictment , and a list of the jurors , so fthst he might peremptorily challenge any improper person ; and he also had the right to have Uwo counsel assigned him . All these privileges wwere taken away by this new Act of Parliament , and j ^ et Sir J . Jsrvis , the Whig Attorney General , told tH ^ pn » H -was a merciful act . He , however , told them Boat it was a cruelty , aud that it was much better Shat the prisoner , and the thirty miserable creatures mdaJed with him in the charge , should have been ttried for treason , and have been hanged at once out oof tho way , if they had been convicted , than tone ttried under this statute , which deprived them of all nights , and subjected them te be sent for the rest of ( their fives to the most penal colony in her Majesty ' s ^ dominions . The Attorney General , either from
igniorance or some other cause , had departed from the usual course in this case , and had not said a word nroon the subject of the law relating to levying war sand the meaning of the expression ; but he should SEupply the omission , and had dd doubt that the acts imputed to the prisoner and his companions did not jamoant to that offence . He did not mean to deny Itaat their proceedings were criminal and wicked ; he llooked with equal detestation to any one present itmou tb . 3 proceedings of the Chartists , and their i threats of resorting to physical force ; butwhathe insisted upon was that their acts , in this instance , did n ? t amount to levying war , and , although he admitted they deserved and ought to ba punished , yet it should be under the Act of Parliament against riotous and tumultuous assemblages , and not for high
treason . The learned counsel then proceeded at great length to give his definition of what ought to betaken as a levying of war within the meaning of the statute . He referred to the statute passed in the 25 h of Edward III , which , he said , expressly referred to Ihe act of levying war , in the ordinary sense of the term , by marching in military array and organisatiai , and said nothing about conspiracy , or compassing , or imagining , the terms introduced into ihe present Act of Parliament . There was nothing about conspiring in . that Act , and no man under it could ba convicted of high treason , a * was now sought to be done , because some one had said something to somebody else ten ninths before . In the reign of Queen Elizabeth , the act of levying war was defined to be the ee z < ui by violence any of the
Queen ' s castles or fores , or usurping in any other manner tha royal authority , aad he should show them , By the highest legal authorities , what had heretofore been considered a levying of war . They all knew how Magna Charts wag obtained—by armed men instating upon their rights . That was levying war . The wars of the Stuarte—between thehonses of York and Lancaster—these were all acts of levying war . But did the circumstances of the case before them amcuct to that sort of offence ? Here were a set of foolish fellows , tinkers , tailors , and shoemakers , meeting together , providiag old pikes and swords , and such , rubbish , aud that was to be called levying war . Why it was perfectly ridiculous . Lord Coke , one of the greatest judges that ever sat on the bench , and who , by the way , was one of the moat corrupt men is the world while acting aa the public prosecutor , but
who certainly , when he had obtained the position he required , and bad all along bsea working for , made anexcillfnt judge—who was a very dishonest Attorney General , but who became a very honest man when he was elevated to the batch—he wished other Attorns . - Gaaerals might be the same —( a laugh )—had clearly and distinctly laid dowa the law upon the subject of levy ng war . He defined it in the terms of the ancient decisions , and said that there amtboa risine of the people , with the objeot of destroying all fas prisons , and releasing the prisoners , or of effect * ing aty reformation of their deeds without warrant , er of taking upon themselves the royal style or authority . Was thera anything of the sort in this case ? Only let the jury fancy Cuffay snd his respectable wife assuming tha royal style aud authority . ( A ! a « h . )
Mr Justice Erie observed that the learned counsel did not quite give the effect of the decision . The quesuoa would be , not whether all , but whether any EU 3 hacts were consistent with the proceedings of the lemons accused , and whether they were likely to result . The assumption of royal authority might be inconsistent with their proceedings , but was it inconsistent to say that Mr Cuffay might entertain ths intiietioa of breaking open the goals and releasing ihe criminals . Mr K ^ ueitey preceded . His lordship would eventually stele to them his view of the law , but in his opinion tha charge of levying war was not made out . Lord Coke said that there was a * ery great distinction between the offence of riot and tumultuous assembly and levying war . No ? , he admitted these people bad committed an offence , and that they ought to be punished , but what he said
was , they w < jre not guilty of the crime of levying war , and he hoped the jury would say so by their verdict . He then went on to argue that , ia order toconttitute a levying war , there must be a rising for a general object , either to destroy all prisons , all enclosures , meeting houses , « fcs ., to constitute levying war , and that , if the intention was only to do any one particalar act of destruction , it would not amount to the offence . He cited the case of the Duke of Northumberland ia the time of Henry IV ., w » w , when his son Hotspur was in arms against the Kn . , marched out with , a lar ^ e army , not cer tainly ' bU 3 3 the insurgents , but leaving very little doubt wha : his intentions were . Upon his son beiug defea--d he retired to his own castle ; and upon his case being referred to his peers , they found , by their verdict , that the act he had committed did not amiuiit to high treason , bat merely to a
misdemeanour . Mr Justice Erie here interpessd , and said it would be his duty to lay down the law to the jury . The law was the result of great learning and full and general inquiry , and the statement of small isolated passages was only calculated to mislead the jury . Mr Kenealey . —Am I to understand that the jury ara not to pay any attention to these facts ? M . - Justice Erie—I have stated what Imean . 51- Kenealey then referred to the trial of Hardy , and rM tbat in thatcase there was evidence to show a tniiitaTy organisation , and the evidence was alto * getter much stronger than in this instance , and yet the jury acquitted him . He would read a portion of tha evidence .
Mr Justice Erie stopped the learned counsel , and said be was clearly of opinion that he had no right to read any passage from a former trial , er the decision of aty former jury . It was coatrary to all legal precedent to take such a course , and it was only calculated fc , mislead a jury , because they had ao means of knowing what other acta were adduced , or what explanation was given of such passages . Mr . Kenealey then went on to arge that the offence did not amount te lev ying war , aad contended that their acts did not amount to high treason , and that it wasidle to suppose these thirty foolish persons really entertained the intention of destroying the whole metropolis . He charged the government with getting up the plot , and said it was their duty , when they received information of what was going on , to have curbed these miserable men in their proceedings and cot have encouraged them to proceed , and then sex * them aa traitors . An honest government
The Powell Plot||G;.T.-; Trials At The O...
would never condescend to cmpley spies and informers aa thegovernmeuthad done in this case ; but 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 which Powell represented were made at one of the meetings , that it was their intention to put down the power of the Queen and establish a Reonblie , was suggested by the police . The conduct of the police was pretty well known , and they had plenty of opportunities of observing their proceedings in a court of justice , and how little regard they paid to an oath when their object was to tbtain a coaviotion .
Mr Justice Erie told the learned counsel he had no 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 L ? rdsbip apply that observation to me ? Mr Justice Erie . —I apply it generally . Mr Kenealy then proceeded with bis address , urging that it was clear the plot had been got up 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 put down the Charter by such infamous practices as these—that they would by their verdict refuse to sanction the employment of such wretches as Powell to entrap poor men to the commission of crime . If they did net do so , and they returned a verdiot 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 of 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 letters were opened at tbe Post-office . Cross-examined b / the Attorney General . —lam a lithographic printer . I had lived in Eaat-streot , Manchester-square , for a week before I went to Ireland . I was in Ireland 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 , Dublin , and Kildare . I was not at Slievenamon . 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 tbat I was a suspected person . I only went to Ireland to see my friends . Will you just explain the meaning of those words on the paper . Pikes , rifles , fire , barricades , Mahoney , O'Brien , Slievenamon , poison , victories , kill English ? As 1 understood there was a risine in Ireland . I thought I would give my friend
information what was going on . But why should yoa wish to do so by means of secret symbols ? It was a short band . I did not want my letters to be opened . Then you swear that , going as you were into ths rery middle of the disturbed districts , yon made use of these symbols solely for shortness ? I do , and because I thought my letters would be opened . Why should yon 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 you explain the meaning of the shorthand writing at the bottom of the naper ? I don't understand it .
Mr Kanealey . —On your oath had yoa any disloyal object in going to Ireland ? I swear I had not . Mr J . Atkinson , law stationer , said—I have known the prisener twelve or thirteen months . I always believed bim to be a loyal subject and never heard him make use of any disloyal sentiments . Mr Gilbert said—I have known the prisoner nine or ten years . He was not a Chartist in politics . He did not agree with the Charter . I never heard him express any disloyal sentiments in private . Cress-examined by the Attorney General . —Did you in public f I cannot say . l 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 , but he never made use of any disloyal sentiments .
The witness was pressed to give an explanation of the first answer he had given , making the distinction between private and public , but he appeared nnable to do so . James Barry , a journeyman tailor , said—I have known the prisoner seventeen months . I was a member of a Repeal Clnb , the prisoner I knew as the secretary of the Davis Clnb . That club never appointed a delegate to the Chartists . The rules of the club were settled by two eminent counsel , Sir Colmau 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 Davis Club was subsequently dissolved , and merged into an association called the Irish League .
Cross-examined by the Attorney General . —I was a member ef the club for fifteen months . At one 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 he was a member of the Davis Clnb . A man named Crowe was a member . He was tried and convicted for sedition . I was at the same meeting , but I don't know whether the prisoner was there . At that meeting I read the paper in which 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 tailer . 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 Looney was sent as a delegate to the Chartists . I heard the speech for which Looney was convicted of sedition . I never bought any arms , bnt I once raffled a musket . Where did yon get tbat from ? My brother gave it tome . What for ? He said he did not want it , and I might have it and rsflh it if I pleased . Then yoa raffled it to get rid of it ? Yes . At how much % member ? One shilling ; there were twenty-eight members . And who won it ? It was an Irishman . I don't know his name . Was he a Confederate ? I don't know . Do you know where he lived ? I do not . Who were the members of the raffia . Were they Confederates ? I don't know . Give us the names of soma of them 1
Tke witness mentioned three or four , and , on being pressed , he admitted that they were Irish Confederates . Give us the names of some 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 Flashier , watchmaker , in Chancery-lane , said he had known the prisoner for some time , and he had never heard him 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 , said , with regard to the circumstances of the prosecution , he would only observe that he hoped it weuld be a lessen to persons who
conspired together for such 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 to an ordinary felony . If he had been the vindictive prosecutor that he was represented to be , he had plenty of opportunity afforded him by the circumstances of the case to have made a stronger statement to the jury . Now with regard to the law . The prisoner was charged with two acts ; first , conspiring to levy war with intent to pat constraint upon her Majesty , and compel her to change her touncils ; 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 the
Union between the two countries , and if the jury believed that any of the overt acts which had been proved -were in furtherance of that design , it would be their duty to find tha prisoner guilty upon tho pre-ent indictment . The oases that had been cited by the counsel for the defendant were totally inapplicable 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 committed certain acts . The argument for the defence that unless a general and universal object of destruction existed it was not a levying of war was abiurd , and he was not surprised that these misguided men should act as they did when their leaders gave them such an interpretation of the law .
Mr Kenealey said he was eo leader oftheChar > tints . The Attorney General did not say that he was . What he did say was , that he was not surprised if these people were told that they might burn Limerick , or Cork , or Waterford , and that it would be no act of high treason if Dublin or any other city remained . So that they might massacre the whole of the London police , but if they did not kill the rural police , it was no act of high treason . It was his duty , in contradiction to such idle statements , 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 point . The Attorney General then referred to the testimony of the approver , and said tbat the counsel for the defendant had said he was unworthy of be . lief , because he had not given information to the police sooner than he did when violence was proposed , but he would remind him that he himself was present at a meetiag where moral force was postponed to tha day of judgment by a resolution of the prisoner ,, and that he did not give any information to the government to pnt them on their guard , and therefore he thought this ought not 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 such reference
The Powell Plot||G;.T.-; Trials At The O...
to his private proceedings . He had not-rqejEjiped the Horsham affair , for instance . ^^ - Mr Justice Erie begged the learned counsel tr > reflect upon his conduct , ' and on the last observation that fell from him . Surely he could not think him J self justified in such a course . He must feel that the privilege of an advocate ought not to be thus abiised . Mr Kenealey said the Attorney General had made many personal observations upon him during the case , and had even gone so far as to say that he blushed for bis conduct in presiding at the meeting that had been alluded to , and the Court did net interfere . ' . - •' . •' ' . ¦ ¦¦ i-. m . ¦ :- ;¦; '
Mr Justice Erie said that the remarks made by the Attorney General were founded upon the evidence , and he was quite justified in making them ; # ' The Attorney General then proceeded with his reply- Ho conld assure the jury he had no wish to ba pergonal , and desired to confine himself entirely to the evidence . Observations bad been made upon the conduct of the approver , an d he was described as being unworthy of belief , and he was'bound to put the matter before the jury . He wished them to
understand that he did not wish to screen ihe accomplice ; he might be an infamous person or not , but the question was did his evidence and the corroboration he had received make out the guilt of the prisoner ? Tbe government did not desire to employ such persons , bnt they had no alternative . / What could they do when they received information that a dangerous conspiracy was in existence but get tbe best evidence they could to make out the case against the parties concerned ? What would the public have said if tbey had refused to interfere because the information came
from a contaminated source , and the result had been the destruction of the lives and properly of peaceful citiims ? Would tbey not have blamed the govern " ment and considered it unworthy of such a name ? 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 no doubt of its truth . He then commented upon the evidence for the defence , remarking particularly upon the portion of it referring to the secret signs to be made use of ; and he asked them whether it was possible to suppose that this could be intended for the honest purpose represented , and he concluded his reply by expressing an opinion tbat the case bad been duly established , and that the jury would feel it was their imperative duty to return a verdict of guilty . At the close of the address of the Attorney General , the further consideration of the case was adjournod to Monday morning . .
The jury were again taken to the London Coffeebouse where they remained in the charge of an officer . Mondat . —The learned jndges , Mr Justice Erie and Mr Justice "Williams , accompanied by Mr Baron Piatt , took their seats on the bench at ten o ' clock , and the prisoner Bowling was immediately afterwards placed at the bar . Mr Justice Erie then proceeded to sum up tho case to the jury . The learned judge said they had now arrived at that stage of this protracted inquiry when it became 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 which _ its importance deserved . As . some time elapsed since the evidence was given , and as many matters had been introduced which were totally irrelevant to the question , whether the prisoner at the bar was guilty or not , he proposed first to state the nature of the charge , and explain the law relating to it , and he would then read over the whole of the evidence that had been addneed in support of it , and he would at the same time remind them , although for gentlemen of their station it was possibly unnecessary that he should do eo , that they must be guided in the decision they came to entirely by the evidence , and the evidence alone . The indictment charged the prisoner , William Dowling , in the first instance , generally , with conspiring with
persons whose-names were given , and with other persons , to levy war against our Lady the Queen , within that part of the realm called England , in order by force and constraint , to compel her to change her measures and counsels . This was the first 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 ants , that was to say , acts done by the prisoner , or by the other persons associated with him , for the purpose of executing the intention ascribed to him . . The Jury must be satisfied of the existence of the intention , and that it was proved by the evert acts given in evidence . He would now explain te them the law with regard to the offence or charge of levying
war .. The expression 'levying war , ' had been used in the statutes for many years , and its legal meaning was perfectly understood by those engaged in the administration of the law ; but it 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 state what was his interpretation , of the term in a legal sense , If they should believe that the prisoner bad the intention to assemble with numbers of persons armed , and prepared to resist any opposers and to prevent the government from the exercise of any ot its lawful powers , those acts 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 of undisciplined persons possessing such arms as they might be enabled to procure , would be capable of effecting a most formidable resistance to the authorities and the government , and the law clearly considered such an aet tantamount to levying war within the meaning of the statutes . They would observe that tbe 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 or private purpose , from a dislike to one individual , and in a building , it would be a
riotous assembly ; but , if theaot intended was of a public and general character , then the same proceeding amounted to a levying of war upon the crown , and he would remark that it was clear there could be no more public object than to endeavour to oppose the government and [ put constraint upon it . This was the intention imputed to the prisoner , and in bis opinion it did not come within the scope of an indictment for riot ; but if it should be made out to the satisfaction of the jury , they would be justified in finding the prisoner guilty upon this count . If they believed the intention was , by force , to interfere with the free action of the government in any way , it was a levying of war , If the object was to compel the government to grant what was called the People ' s Charter ,
or to compel a repeal of the statute for the union of Great Britain and Ireland , or to interfere with and enbarrass the government in the disposition of the troops , or in any way to paralyse and embarrass the government is its actions—all these acts were clearly a levying of war . So also if they believed it was the intention of the 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 . This was the manner in which he explained the law with regard to the criminal intention , and he would describe this pait of the case as an armed insurrection against the government of the description to which he had alluded , and he should leave to them the question
whether this part of the charge had been established . Having alluded to this part of the charge he would now state the law with regard to the overt acts . The law required in indictments of this description that overt acts should be stated in . the indictment , and that those overt acts should be made out to the satisfaction of the jnry ; bat although several overt acts might be stated , it was sufficient tbat one of them should be proved , if the jury should be of opinion tkat the aot which was proved Itft no doubt of the criminal intention of the prisoner , and tbey would be justified in convicting him if such an act was made out . In the present instance , four overt acts were stated in the indictment , and with reprd to one of these acts , he apprehended that if the jury
should bs of opinion that it had been proved , they would entertain no doubt that the prisoner really entertained the criminal intention imputed to him . With regard to the law upon the subject of conspiracy , it wonld be necessary for him to state that when it was clearly proved that two or more persons were engaged in an unlawful combination with other persons , the moment the fact of the conspiracy was established , the ? ct of one of tho patties was the act of all , and they were all bound by the aots of eaoh other in furtherance of the original illegal object . If , therefore , the jury should consider it ta be proved that the prisoner did actually conspire with others to carry out 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 he had no doubt they would think properly bo , considered as tha act of the prisener . It might be that a person would act in such a manner as to stimulate others to tumultuous risings , insurrection , and violence ; he might provide money , and in point of fact be the prime mover of the outbreak and yet might not ba found at the moment it took place ; and in such a ease no one could doubt that he would be responsible for the acts of his co-conspirators , although he had himself kept in the background . The first overt aot charged in the indictment was , that the prisoners and the others
conspired . and confederated together to stir up insurrection and rebellion against the Queen , and to overthrow tho government and constitution of the country as by law established . This was the overt act to which 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 them to decide whether the evidence made out that charge . The next overt aot charged was , that the prisoners conspired , confederated , dj < j ., together , and provided large quantities of arms , daggers , pikes , pistols , swords , ( fee ., and a Iarge quantity of ammunition and ball-cartridges , intending to use them to fight with ud kill the troops of her Majesty and the po-
The Powell Plot||G;.T.-; Trials At The O...
lice who were acting , in , the execution of . their duty . The third'overt act alleged against the prisoners was , that they conspired together for the purpose of burnine the police-stations , railway ^ tations , and other buildings , and that tbey provided . combustibles for that purpose . The fourth and list overt at charged the ' prisonera ' nd other persona with , enrolling themselyes ' as members of Qiv . secret societies , holding secret correspondence with each other , with the object ef exciting rebellion , . insurrection , and war against the Queen . These' we re the - 'four overt acts with regard to the eriminaTihtention to levy war , and these were all the observations he had ' to make with regard to this , portion ; of the charge . The second count in the indictment charged the prisoner , with other persons , with conspiring to
depose our Sovereign Lady the . Uueen , and deprive her of the style , title , and Royal name of the Imperial Grown o ( Great Britain and Ireland . He should not allude to what had been considered in former timea as an interference with the Royal authority , because he considered it was unnecessary for him to do eo . Ho wonldonly observetbat if they considered the evidence established an intention on the part of the prisoner and his companions to subvert the monarchical inatitu . tion . in England , and establish some other form of government in its place , that would undoubtedly amount to the charge contained in the indictment 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 charge 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 should believe that the acts 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 indictment would also be established . In reference to the character of the conspiracy , he would observe , that If it should appear that a number of persons conspired together to resist the government generally , bnt that some were desirous to overthrow the government altogether , and establish a republic—some to obtain any particular measure , such as the Charter—others perfectly indifferent to what happened in England , bnt merely desirous ; that Ireland should be severed from the British empire—if tbey all agreed to co-operate and carrv oat their general . purposes , all parties
concerned would in the eye of the law be considered as adopting that general purpose ,: and would be amenable to the present charge ; . and the circumstances to which he had alluded would be very good evidence , from which the jury might infer the guilty intentions of tbo parties . The same overt acts were introduced in ; support of both the charges , 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 oh behalf cf the prosecution , and he ; prefaced the evidence 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 the violent designs and intentions ' of the . Chartist body , he honestly separated himself from them , and assisted in fraitrating thei t
evil intentions , he ought hardly to be looked upon as an accomplice , but rather deserved commendation for his , conduct . It was , however , clear that he had acted with deception towards the parties , and tbat , while apparently acting with them , he had been : in communication with the police , and , therefore , no doubt his evidence ought to be regarded with suspi oion . There was a very proper feeling in the breas t » of Englishmen upon the subject of spies and traitors , men who fomented plots and induced innocent per * sons to join in them , and no doubt snob , conduct was properly looked upon with disgust , but it was a ver y different ease where a man having joined with guilty persons repented and gave information to enable the government to frustrate their designs , and
although he might afterwards pretend te go on with the original design for the purpose of making out the case , and punishing the guilty , bnt having , in reality , no intention of furthering the evil de * sign , and he considered that such 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 the Attorney General—he did not wish to censure , but he certainly regretted that the learned counsel had adopted this course , as he considered that in a oonrt of justice , especially on such a solemn inquiry as the present , personal attacks of that character ought not to have
been introduced . He likewise considered that the learned counsel was hardly justified in commenting upon the proceedings of the legislature and in stigmatising as a bad law an aot of parliament that had received its solemn sanction . He did not see that there was any ground for the complaints that had been made regarding this act . It merely declared that an offence which formerly amounted to the crime of high treason should be treated as an ordinary felony , and abolished the capital punishment , substituting transportation in its place . It appeared to him that upder the circumstances , 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 for the
prisoner that the prisoner ought to have been indicted for riot , but it was his duty , to tell them that the evidence which had been adduced would not support a charge 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 such meetings were clearl y in furtherance of the ether design imputed to the prisoners . The learned judge concluded by stating to the jury that they ought to pay no attention to the observation of tbe defendant ' s counsel with regard to the result of this inquiry being looked forward to with interest by foreign nations . They had nothing to do
with any such opinion , nor with the evidence that had been given in other cases , or the decision of other juries . It was their duty to be guided solely by the evidence that had been adduced in the case before them ; and to decide whether that evidence supported the charge against the prisoner . If it was their opinion that it did , they would say so by their verdict—if they had any reasonable doubt of the fact , the prisoner ought to have the benefit of such doubt , and it should be their only objeot to give a decision which they believed to be founded on the truth , and by that course alone could they hope to reflect with satisfaction upon the result at which they wonld arrive in this case .
The jury retired at ten minutes to one o ' clock taking with them all the papers and documents that had been produced in evidence .
TRIAL OF WILLIAM CUFFAY , LACEY , AND FAY . . William Cuffay , Lacey , Fay , and Mullins were then arraigned at the bar . —Applications were 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 the one against Dowling , was then read , and the prisoners were called upon to plead . They all pleaded Not Guilty in a loud voice , and Cuffy added : 'I demand a fair trial by my peers , according to the principles of Magna Charta . 'The prisoner Mullins was then removed from the bar , and the trial of the others proceeded . Upon the name of the first juror being called , Mr Ballantine renewed the application made by Mr Kenealey on Friday , that the juror should be sworn , and that he should be permitted to examine him upon the vnirA dJvf .. Tho nrianna » had & riaht fft IrnAW nhAthar
a parson who was called as a juror to try him was actuated by any improper motives . —Mr Huddlostone and Mr Parry made a similar applioatien on behalf of their Clients . —Mr Baron Piatt , after some discussion , said he thought the first step to be taken was to place twelve gentlemen in the box , and this was accordingly done . Mr Huddlestone then applied formally to the court on behalf of Cuffay , that the wholo panel of jurors summoned to attend at the present session should be read over , in order that the prisoner might see who appeared . In support of his application he cited Townley's case , reported in Chitty ' s Criminal Law , ' pave 566 , where that course was adopted , and in reforesee to which Mr ( afterwards Justice ) Forster said this was done after a muoh longer debate than the matter deserved . ( A laugh . ) ....... The Attorney General said 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 he had read a considerable number of names , Mr Ballantine said he thought it right to state that it was the intention of the prisoners to sever in their challenges . — The Attorney General upon this said that as he did not think there was a sufficient number of jurors summoned to ensure a proper jury if the prisoners wore tried together , he should take the case of Cuffay first . —Mr Parry said there were a great many other jurors . —The summoning oflScersaid that two hundred jurors were in attendance in the avenues of the oourt for them within it
but there was not room . —Biron Piatt said they must come into court , aad get places as well as the y could . —Upon this announcement tho oourt was immediately crowded with jurors , and Mr Straight was engaged for a considerable tiae in reading through the whole list . Upon the name of the first juror being called , Mr Ballantine challenged him —The Attorney General said he had already intimated his intention to try ths prisoner Cuffey alone , and as Mr Ballantine did not defend that prisoner he ought not to interfere . — Baron Piatt told Mr . 'Ballantine that as he did not appear for the prisoner Cuffay he could not be heard .-. Mr Ballantine : Then I do appear for Cuffiy .-One
The Powell Plot||G;.T.-; Trials At The O...
or . two jurymen were . then challenged . peremptorily by the learned counsel . Whenthe name Of Jobn-Pick worth was called he was challenged by Mr Ballantine , on the ground that he was not indifferent between the crown aad the prisoner . —The Attorney General said he joined issue and'pleaded that tbe juror was . indifferent . —Two jarors were then sworn to try the question , and Mr Piokworth was examined upon the voire dire . —Ut Ballantine ( to the juror ) :- ! take the liberty ef asking you sir , whether , during the recent disturbances , you acted as a special constable ?—The Attorney General objected to the question as being entirely irrelevant . —Baron Piatt concurred that the question was irrelevant . -It was like asking whether tbe party was a loyal man : —Mr Ballantine then asked the juror whether "he had at any time expressed an opinion with regard-to the guilt or innocence of the prisoners or ' as to what ouehtto bo theresult of the trial ?—The juror said lie had not "done either ' . —The jury
then found that the juror was indifferent and he was sworn . —Upon the name of-John King and several other j urors being called , tbe same proceeding took place . —William Pembroke waschallenged for favour . —Mr Ballantine : Have yoa ever expressed any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the prisoner Cuffay , or as to what ought to be the result of this trial ?—The Juror : Yes , I have expressed an opinion that they ought all to be hanged . ( A laugh . )—Mr Ballantine ; You may retire . —The juror was then ordered to withdraw , and after considerable delay a jury was at length'formed . Mr Parry then said that although he had expressed his intention to challenge 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 of the court . He would now state that , on the part of that prisoner , he was content that the jury which had been called should try him . ' ' .
Mr Ballantine said that Lacey was also willing to be ried by the same jury . Cuffay here exclaimed , ' I wish it to be 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 tons . The Attorney 'General said he had no objection to proceed with the trial of the three prisoners , and Lacy and Fay were accordingly placed at the bar by the side of Cuffay . He addressed the jnry , and said he regretted very , muoh that the exigencies of
justice required the attendance of so large a number of gentlemen in their position , no donbt to their great inconvenience ; and he at the same time trusted that the proceedings which they had , just witnessed with regard to the choice of the jury would not have the effect of prejudicing the prisoners , because it was a coarse perfectly in accordance . with the law , arid which , the prisoners were entitled to adopt . He then proceeded to state the circumstances under which the charge' was preferred against the prisoners ; bat , as the facts were precisely the same as in the former case , it will be unnecessary to repeat them .
The evidence was then gone into , W . Cross , a police-constable , proved that he apprehended the prisoner Fay on the 18 th August , and that as they were going to the police-office , the prisoner told him that he had been secretary to one of the Chartist Associations . Sergeant Thompson deposed that he went to a garret occupied by Cuffay on the' 18 ; h August , and tookhiminto custody . He told him that he was charged with felony , in conspiring against the Queen , and he replied , r It ia quite sufficient , I understand
what I am charged with . ' He then went to a drawer in the roomjand fumbled about for some time , and then took , out a pistol which he endeavoured to pass to his wife , but witness laid hold of him , and , after 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 produced , and on which were inscribed , the words , ' Westminster District . ' Sergeant . West proved that on the following day he searched a cockloftinCoffay ' ahouse , and foundapike > staff , which he produced .
Charles Tilden deposed that he became a member of the Chartist Association on the 29 th of last May , and Cuffay was his class-leader . He belonged to the Dean-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 no gun , and the prisoner answered that , when the time came , they should get plenty of arms from the gunmakera ' shops . They ; likewise had a conversation about ginger-beer bottles filled with gunpowder and pieces of iron , and Cuffaysaid they would be very good things for the Chartists' wives to throw ont 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 Mitcbel
fashion . He also told him that there was a rebellion in Ireland , and the soldiers would all soon be sent away , and London would be in their hands ; and he said he hoped that witness would not flinch when the day came . —Grots-examined : He . was very anxious to be placed under such a' redoubtable leader as Caffay , and he expected if he obeyed his orders he should become a general , and perhaps eventually a president of the commonwealth . ( A laugh . ) He had been charged with being drunk , and about seven years ago , while . engaged in looking at the statue of King James , a policeman interfered with him and he was obstinate , aud stood by the statue from nine o ' clock in the morning till five , and then he was looked 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 man , and he purchased gunpowder at Cuffay ' s request , in order to see if he could not find ont something to stop their proceedings . He considered the ginger-beer bottle business physical force , and not moral force . 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 he always determined tr betray the physical force movement . He was in communication with the government before he said anythingrabout 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 raid for what he did , and he became a spy and
informer for the good of the public . He went to Cuffay ' s house a quarter of an hoar after he was apprehended . Knew there was a cook-loft to his garret , but had never noticed it . particularly , and of course he did not put the pike handle into that loft . He was io ' regular employment with a respectable tradesmen at the time of these . proceedings , and was earning 28 s . per week . Did not expect-to be paid for anything except his loss of time , but he should not be ashamed to take anything the government might give him . On one occasion he saw Cuffay casting ballets in his garret . He was using a tobacco pipe and a pair of pliers for the purpose . . Neither Mrs Cuffay , nor any of the little Cuffijs were in the room . ( A laugh . ) Re-examined : He was apprehended for loitering about Whitehall-gardens , and hot giving a satisfactory account of himself .
At the close of the examination ot this witness thejuryinthe former case came into oourt , and banded in a written paper to the benoh , in which they expressed a wish for the oourt . to read over thote portions of the evidence which confirmed the statement of the accomplice . ; M r Justice Williams said , that his learned brother Erie , who tried the case , and who had more particularly directed his attention to it , had left the court , but he would endeavour , aj well as he could , to do whatthe jury required . The Attorney Gsneral suggested , that as it was now past seven o ' clock , and as it would not be advisable to break into the evidence of the next witness , it would be better at once to adjourn the case of Cuffay and the ether prisoners .
Mr Baron Piatt said , that as there did not appear to beany probability of getting through the case that night , perhaps that would be the better course . The further proceadings in the trial of Cuffay were accordingly adjourned , the jury bairn ; taken , as in the former case to tha Loudon C'jffte-hoase , ia the chargo of an officsr . Mr Justioa Williams then proceeded to address the jury in the case of Dawliog , and read from his notes those portions of the evidence which were relied upon by tha crown'as confirming the testimony of the accomplice . Mr Kenealey , at the close of the learned judge ' s address , complained that he had not been allowed to adopt a similar course in challenging the jury that had been permitted to Mr Ballantine in the case before the court that day . He had made the same application , but it was refused .
Mr Justice Williams said , that the learned counsel had applied for a list of the jury , chat was the application which had been refused . Mr Kenealey asserted / that he had asked permissien to take precisely the same course that had been adopted by Mr Ballan ' . ine , and he now requested that the oourt would direct ths fact to be placed upon the record . v The court refused to accede to the request . The jury than again retired at half-past ei » ht o ' clock , and returned into court at half-past nins , when they gave a verdict of Guilty against thi prisoner upon the second count of the indictment . TuKsoAv .-Mr Baron Piatt and Mr Justice Wilhams tosk their seats on the bsnoh at ten o ' olook , and the evidenoo for the prosecution , in the case of theso prisoners , was resumed .
Thomas Powell , the approver , was examined by Mr B idkin , but as the ovidonoa given was precisely the same in every particular as that given on former ocoasisns , it will be unnecessary to repeat it . Ho spoke to joining the Chartist Convention , in Cripplesate district , and to hiaattaadin ? different meetings down to the month of August last , and taking notes ot the proceedings at each of these meetings . Ho swore , as on the former occasion , iu the most positive manner , that the prisoners took an active part iu the Proceedings connected with the intended outbreak , S „« li J h tLa 0 - . ?** amb " delegate into the mnufwtunng dwtnots , to ascertain whether the people were willing , to rise in rebellion , in conjunc tion with the Cbartietaof London , and also that upon
The Powell Plot||G;.T.-; Trials At The O...
his return he made , a report on the 1 . 5 th August . tha . £ the men of Birmingham and Manchester would neap that night , iu consequence of which repprt . the rising in London was fixed for the next . day , the prisoner Fay agreeing to lead . the Tower Chartist division , of the insurgents . " " . ' : ' : ' , '"' ' '"'¦ " '" " : " " ' Mr Bodkin ; who led the examination ; was proceeding j to question the ' witness respectingIbe meetings which took place prior to the period at whicithe saw either of the three prisoners present , and partid larly respecting the proceedings at the Black Jack on the 20 sh of July , when he was interrupted by ''¦ ' Mr Ballantine , who objected to any questions being pnt respecting these'proceedings ; unless it could be shown that the prisoners at the bar had had some " means of becoming acquainted with them and adopt *" mg them as their own . Mr Parry also objected to the reception of evidenoo ot that character . " .-. ¦ -. - -. » :-
-The Attorney General contended that where it was proved that a number of persons conspired toge » ther to do a certain aot , and a person joined them at the eleventh hour , that person so doing was held as having adopted the previous proceedings ol his coconspirators , and to be equally responsible with them for all that had been done . ¦ " ¦ ¦ ' ' Mr Welsby and Mr Bbdkin supperted the view ef the Attorney General . ¦ -. The Judges overruled the objection . —holding that it was competent to receive the evidence as nroof of
the general nature of the combination ; but that it wonld be a question for the jury to consider whether the proceedings at those previous meetings had been adopted by the prisoners subsequently . The examination was 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 been produced with the view to the erection of barricades , and where the chairman was alleged to have said tbat the object of the Chartists was * to destroy the Queen and establish a Re . public . ' ) .. ¦ r
Mr Ballantine having objected to the 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 , which occupied four hours , having been concluded , the Court and jury adjourned to take ssme refreshment . On their return the witness was subjected to a most severe cross-examination by Mr BaMantine . He said : I went by the name 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 . Baron Piatt . —What , don't yon know whether yon
ever went by any other name than your own ? Witness . —Yes ; now I reelect , I was called the Welsh Novice . ( A laugh . ) I joined the Chartists soon after April , but I did not . commence to take note s until about two days after the 20 th of July . No 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 onetime and forgotten another part and put that down afterwards ; aad I communicated what was going on to the government from time to time . I showed my notes to some of the authorities before these people were taken into custody , I swear I never altered the notes after they were shown to the authorities . Mr Ballantine . —To whom did yoa give the riband which was to be the symbol of leadership ? -
Witness . —I object to answer the question . I was earning 27 s . a week as a carpenter when 1 entered into this business . It was a matter of choice , not of necessity . I was determined to acquaint the authorities of what was going on . . I ; don't-know that I acted as a' spy , ' but I certainly , went in among these people to get information of their proceedings and to betray them . I have been paid £ 1 a-week since I have been obliged to be kept out of the way to protect my life . I have been a sort of sporting man in my time . I was a pedestrian . I ran at Wimbledon once , to bring a little custom to a public-house , and another time at Hounslow . I also ran at Croydon for a cay ' s amusement , for which I was -, well remunerated ; I was known as the Welsh Novice on those
occasions . I know what the' thimblerig' means . I never had a table for the thimblerig , but have looked on . Ionce , when an apprentice , played at a marqueetable at Ascot , and was paid so much a day for play * ing . It was on account of my master I went there . I was to pretend to bet , and was paid 30 s , for my day ' s work , but was too young at the time to consider whether this was cheating . I knew in reality that I was not betting , but did not consider myself a cheat . I was aware that what I did was to deceive the people in the booth , and induce them to bet . I never played at thimblerig . I never associated with such people . I know a person named Pennell , but I did not tell him I had walked a match against Townsend and sold it because I could get more money .
I was a witness once before in this court about eight years ago ; bat I never said that I was afraid of the counsel questioning me about a thimblerig affair , and wonld not go again . I work with my brother-in law , Mr Smith . He keeps a good many men . I never attempted to persuade any of thera 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 God , or in the Scriptures , or in our Saviour . I always have believed iu them , and do believe now . I did tell Paris
once that it was likely he would hear of something remarkable , but I don ' t think I said he would hear of a Chartist rising . - He did not tax me direetly with being a spy . He threw out hints that I was , but I took no notice of them . I got some lead from Mr Smith , my brother-in-law . in order to cast bullets . I did so , by the direction of Gurney , who was my warden . Gurney wanted to have as many bullets aa possible made against the day of rising . I oast the ballets in my own apartment , and gave them to Gurney , Besides 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 face , and I should resent such a thing if it was said in my presence . I know a man named Oiborn . I never told him there was to be a Chartist rising , and urged him to join it . I don't remember doing such a thing . I really will not swear I have not done so . I don't recollect it . Baron Piatt . —Will yoa swear yoa never have ?—I don ' t recollect . Baron Piatt . —Will you swear you never have ?—I don't think I ever did . Baron Piatt . —Then yoa may have done so and forgotten it ?—Yes .
Examination continued . — I cannot remember whether I pointed out to Osborn a man who would make him a pike . I think I do recollect that I once did do something of the sort . I believe I did do it , iu fact . 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 suppose it was for some parpose or other . We were talking about the Chartists at the time . I know another carpenter named Carr , but I swear I neror said to him that if I had a chance in a crowd I would rip the police ' s — gats out . I used to quarrel sometimes with my father when he was alive , but I swear I never struck him . I did once have a scuffle with him after he had struck me , and my brother-in-law separated ns . I
never said to Pennell that I heped my father ' s soul was in he'd . I never said to him that the government was a weak , tyrannical government , and that I would send Lord J . Russell and Sir G . Grey to the devil within a month . I swear I never said such a vhing jusi before tho 10 th of April . I may have asked Pennell it he was a Chartist , bat I never offered to propose him as a member , or told him that I could get £ 2 or £ 3 a-week for him , which would be better than carpentering . I never told him that the Charter would never ba obtained as they were goin \! on , or told him to look at the Queen with her hundreds of thousand ! a-yaar span * ia waste , while I had to work hard for a bit of bread , and that I would blow Her and tha - foreigner to hell . I swear ,
also , that I nevor told him I could show him materials enough to blow London to hell in half an hoar . I know Jamej Bsnnett , a shoemaker . I don't think I saw him about a woe ' s before the 10 th of April , but I may have done so . I don't remember asking hira what ! ae meant to do on the 10 th of April , but I cannot swear I did not do se . I won't swear I did not ank him if ha intended to go to the meeting armed . I swear ! did not say he was a — fool if he did not , and that I should do so . I believe I have said to htm that I had bean making some hand grenades that wjuld go half way through an inch board . 1 said
this when we were coming home together from a meeting in Holbom . I cannot recollect when this happened . It was not in August or July , but it may have been between May and June . I don't think it was before the 10 th of April , but I really cannot say . Iti was not trua that I had been making hand-grenades . I only said so for talking sake . I told this falsehood for talking sake , but I am not in the habit ot doing so . The others wore telling me different things which I did not believe , and I thought I would tell a he too . A man named Watson was with Pennell and me . I also told them how I made the arenadei . that was a he too . . . '
Mr Ballantine . —And are you not called ' Lying ; Totu ?'—Not to ray faco . . . Mr Billantino . —How wera these grenades made , did you say ? ' Witness—Why , I told them that gunpowder must be put into an ink-bottlo with auexphmve cap , audi dare say I did say that it would be a capital thine to turow among the police if it had somo nails in it . I don't think I told them tbat a blacking . bottle half full of gunpowder mixed with nails would do as well as anything to throw among the police , after it was ignited by a fusee , and that it would break the —— ' s legs . I never said te Bennett that I had got ten men , and , with four or five mora , Ieould easily take tha Artillery ground . I never produced any plan of London to Bennett ; I know a person
6 The Northern Star. Sbptembeii 30, 1848...
6 THE NORTHERN STAR . Sbptembeii 30 , 1848 .
-
-
Citation
-
Northern Star (1837-1852), Sept. 30, 1848, page 6, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/ns2_30091848/page/6/
-