stated by Adams were spoken to by them; but the treasonable purpose could not be well proved, except by accomplices. Information on that point could scarcely be expected from a pure source; Hyden was a witness of that description; but Dwyer, to a certain degree, was not. The prosecutors then called persons to prove what occurred at the stable in Cato-street; and Captain Fitzclarence, and several Bow-street officers, gave a detailed account of the transactions there. It did not appear to him necessary that he should go, in detail, through the testimony of these witnesses. It was not necessary to inquire by what particular hand a gun or a pistol was fired; but it was material to observe, that when the officers did come, many, at least, of the persons present, made a most desperate resistance. A knife, said to belong to Ings, was found on the premises; and two bags and a case knife were found on his person. The bags were important, because it was sworn that he stated the purpose for which he brought them. It was argued by the counsel for the defendant, that they were meant for the reception of plunder, and not for the horrible purpose that had been stated; but this did not invalidate the testimony of Adams, because Ings might not have wished to declare that he meant to put plate in the bags; and, if so, he might have said what he was sworn to have uttered, as a reason for carrying them. This closed the evidence for the Crown. On the part of the prisoners, Mary Barker was called, who, the Jury would recollect, was not cross-examined. This arose from a commendable delicacy, on account of the near relationship in which she stood to one of the prisoners. The Jury would say, whether her evidence went at all to shake the case. Indeed, it appeared from her statement, that she had seen at Tidd's lodgings in

struments similar to those produced in Court. A man named Hucklestone was then called, to prove that Dwyer was not to be believed on his oath; and he stated, that he thought he was not worthy of belief, because Dwyer had informed him that he procured money by accusing gentlemen of unnatural propensities. This, however, was entirely contradicted by Dwyer; and it was for the Jury to say which of the two witnesses were entitled to their credit. Joseph Doane, the Court reporter, stated, that he did not furnish the New Times with the paragraph relative to the Cabinet dinner; but it appeared from the evidence of Andrew Mitchell, that it was prepared by a person of the name of Lavenu. It was, however, a matter of no consequence how the paragraph found its way into the paper, since it was proved that a Cabinet dinner was intended to be given on the 23d of February. This was the whole of the evidence on each side. No witness was called to impeach the veracity of Adams, Hyden, and Monument. And if they gave credit to any one of those persons, (even to Hyden, who supported what the others told them, and whose account, though more concise than theirs, was the same in effect,) they must find a verdict against the prisoner. Besides the testimony of the witnesses, they had seen on the table a considerable quantity of arms, which were proved to have been found in Cato-street, and at the lodgings of one of the prisoners. It was almost conceded, that a conspiracy was entered into for the purpose of assassinating his Majesty's Ministers at Lord Harrowby's house. Indeed there could be little doubt of it. If, then, it were admitted that this most wicked scheme was entertained, it was for them to consider whether it could reasonably be supposed that that was all that was intended. They were to consider, what

was the probability that those persons, unconnected in any respect with each other, except so far as this plan brought them together and certainly quite unconnected with the persons who conducted the affairs of his Majesty's government-did not view that assassination as part of a scheme, having for its object a general and tumultuous rising of the people, to levy war against the King, or whether they conspired to effect that assassination alone; whether they adopted this plan to satisfy their thirst for blood, or to accomplish that ulterior scheme to which the witnesses had spoken. In deciding this question, it was fit that the Jury should attend to the great quantity, as well as the nature of the instruments produced. They certainly were far more in number than could have been wanted, or used in the abominable attempt that was to be made at Lord Harrowby's. Some of them could not have been used there at all. The hand-grenades might have been thrown, but the fire-balls could not have been used for the purpose which they meant to effect at that house. When those dangerous articles were found, some at one place and some at another, it was for the Jury to take the circumstance into their serious consideration. If, on a view of the whole case, they, as just and conscientious men, felt satisfied that a conspiracy to levy war was made out in proof before them,-if their minds were freed from all doubt on the subject, they would, he was convinced, discharge the painful duty that devolved on them with proper firmness. But if, after a due examination of all the circumstances, and after attending to the observations of the very eloquent counsel who had addressed them on the part of the prisoner, first and last, their minds were not satisfied that the case was proved, they would discharge the more pleasant duty of

acquitting the prisoner. The case was now in their hands, and he doubted not but their verdict would be consonant with the principles of justice.

The Jury then retired, but in a few minutes returned into Court, and requested his Lordship to read to them the Act of the 36th of Geo. III.

Lord Chief Justice ABBOT said, he meant to hand it to them; but he would in the first place state, that, by the terms of the statute, it was to continue in force during the life of his late Majesty, and till the end of the next session of parliament; therefore the Act had not expired when the alleged conspiracy was discovered. But if it ever had expired, it would have been of no consequence, since, by a late Act of Parliament, the statute of the 36th of Geo. III. was made perpetual. His lordship then read the Act, and particularly pointed out the clause which made it treason "to compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend to deprive or depose the King from the style, honour, and kingly name of the imperial crown of this realm; or to levy war against him within this realm, in order to compel him to change his councils." His Lordship observed, that it seemed to be admitted by the counsel on both sides, that if the project stated on the part of the prosecution were proved, it fell within the meaning of this Act; for, if a provisional government were formed, the royal style must of necessity cease. To levy war did not require soldiers drawn up in military array. It was sufficient if a number of people met to do some public act, in which they had no private interest, but which affected the country at large. Devising to force the King to change his measures, was always considered a levying of war, under the old statute of Edward III.

The Jury again retired, and, in about a quarter of an hour, returned

with a verdict of Guilty, on the third and fourth counts of the indictment.

In the following days took place the trials of James Ings, Thomas Brunt, Robert Tidd, and William Davidson. On each of these occasions all the above evidence was again gone over, with very little variation. In the trial of Ings, the following was stated by Adams in his cross-examination :I was born in England. I was a Christian. I once ceased to be a Christian. I was a Deist, and ceased to be a Christian. I was convinced I was wrong even before I was taken. I ceased to be a Deist since I was taken. I renounced Jesus Christ in August last. I have believed in religion since I was taken. I never was an Atheist. I never renounced the belief in God. I was induced to become a Deist by that cursed work of Paine's. I have never had any intention of joining in the commission of murder. Í never intended to inform against the party. I waited for an opportunity to creep out of it. I was afraid of the threats before this. I was not even disposed to rob the shops. There was no threat at one time; there were threats against me before I went to prison.

At the conclusion of this trial, Ings made the following address :

Gentlemen of the Jury-I am a man of no education, and I hope you will excuse my humble ability. I left Portsea on the 8th of May 1819. My reason was that I could get nothing to do, in order to support my family. (Here the prisoner was strongly affected.) I had no prospect for myself or my family. I thought I could get employment in London, but I was sadly disappointed. I tried every thing, but I could not make any thing. I had some money when I came, and I lost a considerable deal of money, neither by drinking, nor gambling, nor any thing of the sort, gentlemen. I took a house in Baker-street, and carried on business

as a butcher, from Midsummer to Michaelmas. The summer was very hot, and that was against me. I removed to Mount-acre, and kept a sort of coffee-house and eating-house. I persuaded my wife to return to Portsmouth, as she would be better there without money, amongst her friends, than in London. Men used to come to my house to take a cup of coffee and talk of politics, and of the Manchester massacre. I paid no attention. I one day met with this man. He said I did not stand drink. I said I had no money. I mentioned that I had a bedstead and various articles of furniture to sell. He proposed to get them bought, but did not. This was on the 20th of January. I met him again in Fleet-market. He talked of getting my sofa bought by a friend of his. He said, "There is something to be done, come and take some cheese and beer." He took me to the White Hart. He said his name was Williams, but Edwards is his real name, as I found since. I left the sword for him, to be sharpened. Is it supposed that I would have left any thing of this sort in my own name, if I did not do it for him? I got meat and drink whenever I went to the White Hart. I met him again in Bishopsgate-street; he said there was something to be done, and desired me to come to the alley opposite Mrs Carlile's. I understand, by the list of witnesees, that he lives at a side-door up that alley. I went. He gave me bags, and said there was some gin to be put in them, and it was for that reason I carried them under my coat so sly, for fear that they should be seen and suspected. We went up Oxford-street. He told me to wait there, and I waited an hour. He brought me then to a place, I forget the name of the street -John-street, the place where the arms were taken. I never saw the place before. I saw Davidson at the door. There was great confusion above. I declare, before you and God, I never

was on the loft at all. I was not two minutes there. Officers entered. You, I think, Mr Ruthven, entered first; the third collared me, and said, "You are my prisoner." I said, "Very well." He began by beating me with his staff till my head was swoln. I heard a pistol fired. I got out. I was struck by a man. I was stopped by a watchman, and taken into custody. This man was at all the meetings. I am sold like a bullock in Smithfield-market, The Attorney-General knows the man. He knew the plans and every thing two months before. I consider myself murdered, if he is not brought forward. I would not be very unwilling to die if he were to die on the same scaffold with me. He has He has been guilty of every thing. He has contrived the plot, if there has been a plot. I don't value my life, if I cannot support my wife and children. [Here he raised his voice to a vehement tone, and wept bitterly. He continued to speak in the same weeping tone to the end of his address.] I have a wife and four little children. I was driven to every distress. I hope, gentlemen, before you find a verdict, this man will be brought forward, because I consider myself a murdered man. Edwards came to me, I did not go to him. I was once at a public-house in Brooks-court; but I never was at any meeting at all. I was at no radical meeting. I was not at any Smithfield meeting. That man, Adams, who has got out of the halter himself by accusing others falsely, would hang his God. I would sooner die, if I had 500 lives, than be the means of hanging other men.

Brunt, in his address to the Jury, admitted his having been in Cato-street, but denied any definite plan of assassination. He said, when Thistlewood urged the necessity of acting, or that it would be a Despard's business, as has been mentioned, all were unwilling

to act, and it never was agreed to do any thing. As to my endeavouring to go with 14 men, I never would; I never was so deprived of reason as to go to certain destruction in that way. Two circumstances have been mentioned which contradict themselves. Adams has said that I said, "If but six men go with me, I'll blow the house about our ears." This is false. Monument has said that I said, "I would bury myself in the ruins." Is this consistent? Is this evidence to take away my life, -to deprive my son of his father, my wife of her husband? When I was in Cold-bath-fields, after I had been three days in such a state that I could scarcely wash myself, Monument came to me with Cooper and Strange, and said, "What did you say when you were before the Privy Council ?" I replied, "I said I knew nothing of the matter." I was induced by this to ask Mo. nument, "What did you say?" He answered, "I could say nothing; you told me nothing; why did you not tell me?" This shews that he had an intention to betray me, like that villain Edwards. Sooner than betray any individual, my lord, although I have been enticed into this base plot, sooner than betray a fellow-creature, I would be killed on this spot; yes, I would sooner be racked upon the wheel.

On the 28th April, the prisoners convicted on these several trials were brought up to receive their sentence.

Thistlewood made a speech of considerable length. He began by say ing-that he was asked, what he had to say why sentence of death should not be passed upon him? This was but a mockery, for, if he had the eloquence of a Cicero, he was conscious that it would avail him nothing against the vengeance of Lords Sidmouth and Castlereagh. He would, however, of fer a few observations; not that he expected any thing from the justice or pity of the Court-their pity he did

not want-justice was all he required; but he wished to protest, and he now did protest against the whole of their proceedings on these trials, as unjust and partial. Their conduct had been guided by ambition, and he could not expect fairness from them. He had found the judges, who used to be rather the counsel for the prisoners, not only now against them, but their most implacable enemies; and, in one case, the Jury had got a reprimand for appearing disposed towards the prisoners. He had undergone the etiquette of a trial, but he had been denied justice. He would much rather be murdered at once than have this form. He had been denied a request which he made to have witnesses called into court, respecting some of the witnesses against him; but this was inhumanly refused. He looked, therefore, upon himself as a murdered man. After some other observations, which were not sufficiently audible, he proceeded: He had, perhaps, but a few hours to live-a short time, and he would be no more-but the night winds which should blow over his cold remains, when he should be free from further harm, would waft to the pillows of those who tried and prosecuted him feelings of anguish and remorse. He cared not for his life; but his memory would live, and he wished to preserve it from that obloquy which he knew his enemies would be anxious to heap on it. He would therefore give a short sketch of his life recently-and say something of the present case. He again repeated, that his trial was but a mockery; and he challenged any of his judges to say that he was not falsely murdered. The evidence which he had offered, after his counsel had concluded, was rejected. He could have shewn, by that evidence, that one of the principal witnesses against him was infamous, and unworthy of credit on his oath; but this was not allowed, and

he had been sacrificed to forms. With respect to his intentions towards Lord Sidmouth and others, he had no personal hatred to him, notwithstanding the manner in which he (Lord Sidmouth) had plundered him. But he looked upon him and others as having caused the murder of thousands. He alluded to the massacre at Manchester, where fellow-creatures were butchered without mercy--where even the innocent babe at the breast did not save the wretched mother from destruction. It was the recollection of these circumstances which had fired his mind. He had the prosperity of his countrymen at heart, and he wished to rescue his country from such oppressors, and he intended that their blood should be a sort of requiem to the souls of those who were innocently murdered. He was in this mood when he first met with Edwards. When he first knew him, he (Edwards) lived in Picketstreet, without a bed to lie on, or a blanket to cover him. After this, he told him (Thistlewood) that he was a relative to a German baron, whose property he claimed, and that Lord Castlereagh had assisted him in supporting his claim. When he succeeded, he used to dress out in all the folly of the newest fashion. This man, finding his (Thistlewood's) mind strong on the sufferings of his country, advised him to various plans of destroying the Ministers and others. He first proposed to him to blow up the House of Commons, but he (Thistlewood) refused, being unwilling to punish the innocent with the guilty. He afterwards suggested that the fete given by the Spanish Ambassador would be a good opportunity of destroying the Ministers; but he could not consent to this, as he knew there were ladies to be there. The same feeling was not evinced at Manchester, where women and children were massacred by troops, set on by the agents of government. This