Mr. Gurney.—My Lord, they are only those witnesses who were permitted to remain by common consent; they are the officers.
The Lord Chief Baron.—They are only those whom your Counsel have consented to remain.
Mr. Baron Garrow repeated the same observation to the prisoner, who bowed respectfully to the Court, and resumed his seat.
The Chief Baron began his charge to the Jury by telling them, that this was not constructive treason. A nefarious assassination was admitted by the Counsel for the prisoner, and by the prisoner himself, to have been intended; an assassination of some of the most honourable and the most amiable of the King’s subjects.
His Lordship then read the evidence.
In recapitulating the evidence of Adams, his Lordship observed, upon that part where he (Adams) mentioned “that he had been induced to give up Christianity by reading that infernal work, Paine’s Age of Reason, and the writings of Carlile,” that the circumstance was important for the consideration of the Jury. They would weigh every part of his testimony with jealousy, considering the situation in which he was placed, and look upon his statement as requiring corroborative proof. Unless it was supported by such evidence, they would, of course, receive it with considerable hesitation; but if they found it corroborated by the evidence of unsuspected witnesses, they would consider of it accordingly. His Lordship then went through the evidence of the other witnesses, remarking upon those parts where they coincided with the account given by Adams. He then adverted to the arguments of the prisoner’s Counsel, and to the observations of the prisoner himself; which latter (though, perhaps, it might not have produced the impression which they could have wished, for the sake of the prisoner) they would give every attention to.
As soon as his Lordship concluded, and before the Jury retired, one of them addressed the Court: “My Lord, I hope your Lordship will allow me to ask a question as to a point of law.”
The Lord Chief Baron.—Certainly, Sir; any thing you please.
Juror.—My Lord, we are bound to take the law from your Lordship, and no doubt you will give it to us most correctly. I wish to know whether, if the evidence bore out that an arming had taken place, and that there was a resistance to the civil power, would that, in the law, be a levying of war?
The Lord Chief Baron.—Undoubtedly. After a short pause, his Lordship said, “Gentlemen, do I understand the question rightly? Please to repeat it again.”
The Juror repeated the question; and his Lordship replied, that a resistance to the civil authority would not constitute a levying of war.
The Juror.—My Lord, if there was an arming for the purpose of inducing his Majesty to change his measures, would that be a levying of war?
The Lord Chief Baron.—That, gentlemen, would constitute a levying of war; and, if you believe that it was proved in evidence, it would support the indictment under the Act of his late Majesty. I put only the first and third counts to you, gentlemen, not to embarrass the case.
The same Juror.—I would wish to consider the whole of the indictment. I hope your Lordship will excuse my asking these questions.
The Lord Chief Baron.—Certainly, gentlemen, it is your province to consider the whole of the case before you. You have also an undoubted right to ask any questions you may think necessary.
The Jury then retired at twenty minutes before four; and in about ten minutes returned with a verdict of GUILTY on the THIRD and FOURTH COUNTS.
The prisoner’s appearance was in no degree altered by the annunciation of the verdict. He bowed slightly to the Court, and was removed in the care of two of the gaoler’s assistants.
TRIAL OF R. TIDD AND W. DAVIDSON.
SESSIONS-HOUSE, OLD BAILEY.
First Day, Wednesday, April 26, 1820.
At ten minutes after nine o’clock, Mr. Baron Garrow, Mr. Justice Best, and the Common-Serjeant, took their seats on the bench; the Attorney-General, Mr. Gurney, and Mr. Bolland, and the prisoner’s counsel, Messrs. Adolphus and Curwood, appeared in Court at the same time.
After a short consultation between Mr. Curwood and the Attorney-General, Mr. Harmer quitted the Court, and proceeded to commune with the prisoners in the gaol.
During the absence of Mr. Harmer, Mr. Baron Garrow addressed the gentlemen who were waiting to be called on as Jurors. “They might,” he said, “feel some surprise at the delay” and the Bench, therefore, felt it right to declare that the present interruption was caused entirely by an application made by the prisoners’ counsel. He hoped that the Jury would not consider the delay as intended to convey any want of respect towards them.
One of the Jurors said, he hoped the Court would allow them to sit down, as many of them had come a considerable distance to attend the Court.
Mr. Baron Garrow said, that the Court felt every disposition to accommodate, in every possible manner, the gentlemen of the Jury, and requested them to occupy the seats vacant in the Court.
Soon afterwards Mr. Harmer returned to Court, and communicated to Mr. Curwood the result of his conference.
Mr. Curwood then, addressing Mr. Baron Garrow, stated, that a proposition, which he had thought for the benefit of his clients, had been acceded to by them, and that two of them (Tidd and Davidson) were willing to take their trials at the same time.
Mr. Baron Garrow then addressed the Jurymen, and said, “Gentlemen, I may now communicate to you that which it would have been improper to have made known to you before. The learned gentleman who appears here for the prisoners, and whose exertions you have witnessed upon more occasions than one, has thought fit to consult his clients as to whether it is necessary to pursue the course which has already been adopted in severing their challenges, or whether two of them might not take their trial by the same Jury. By this pause we have in effect saved time, for the two next prisoners have agreed not to sever their challenges, but to be tried at the same time.”
The prisoners, Tidd and Davidson, were then put to the bar; Mr. Shelton called over the list of the Jurors, and after a number of challenges on both sides, the following Jury was ultimately impanelled—
* W. Percy, Cleveland-street, Mary-le-bone, plasterer.
J. G. Holmden, St. James’s-walk, Clerkenwell, fusee-cutter.
J. King, Islington-road, Gent.
C. E. Prescott, Colney-hatch, Esq.
* Benjamin Rogers, Lampton, farmer.
Charles Goldings, Jamaica-place, Limehouse, surveyor.
Charles Page, Crouch-end, Esq. and merchant.
* J. Young, Frederick-place, St. Pancras, Gent.
William Butler, Hounslow, baker.
Joseph Sheffield.
William Churchill.
* Samuel Grainger.
The Jurors thus marked * had served on some of the previous trials.
Davidson asked whether the Court would allow him and his fellow-prisoner to sit down. The Court complied with his request, and chairs were brought to them.
Mr. Gurney having stated the case with great clearness and ingenuity, he proceeded to call the witnesses for the Crown—beginning with,
Robert Adams. His evidence was the same as before, with some additions. He said, that when the proposition was made for assassinating the Ministers, it was added, that they had found out where they kept their specie, and that they were to return and plunder it. Bradburn was to make a box for the purpose of sending Castlereagh’s head to Ireland.
In cross-examination by Mr. Curwood, he said he came back to the belief in Christianity about the 24th of February—the day after he was in marvellous great danger of being hanged. The halter might have had some effect. It was never lawful in his sight to sweep off fifteen men in cold blood. He thought it was a cruel act when it was proposed. Nevertheless, from the 12th of January to the 23d of February, he still continued to frequent the society in which that matter was debated. He was once a chairman. The largest body he ever saw collected was in Cato-street. There was a talk of a great many more, but he did not know them by name. His single sword was all he agreed to contribute. He never heard where Mr. Cook’s party were to come from. Nobody objected to the proclamation written by Thistlewood—“Your tyrants are destroyed,” &c.
He did not know a man of the name of Chambers, nor did he ever call upon such a man, and say he would have “wine and blood for supper,” and solicit him to join in this plot. His object in joining their parties was, to search further into the principles of Brunt; he joined them because he had a foolish and curious idea to know what Brunt’s principles were; and for this reason he joined in this plot. He did not know a man of the name of Watman. Tidd did not say he had been deceived in the loft in Cato-street; but he said, “it never can be done.”
Tidd and Davidson now both expressed a wish to ask the witness some questions:
Mr. Baron Garrow humanely interposed, and suggested whether, for their own advantage, it would not be more consistent with prudence to put their questions through their Counsel, as they might do something prejudicial to themselves.
The prisoners both thanked his Lordship, and communicated to Mr. Harmer’s clerk, the inquiries which they wished to be made.
The witness then, in answer to questions put by Mr. Curwood, said, that he could not say that Davidson was armed in Cato-street; he did not notice any arms.
In re-examination by the Solicitor-General, he said that Davidson brought 500 bullets to Fox-court, on the 22d of February. He had changed his religion in consequence of reading Paine’s Age of Reason, which was put into his hand by the prisoner Tidd; he did not see Palin, or Cook, or Potter, in Cato-street; he did not know of what numbers their parties consisted.
Eleanor Walker, Mary Rogers, Joseph Hale, (apprentice to Brunt), were then called; they repeated their former testimony as to the presence of Davidson and Tidd at the meetings in Fox-court.
Hale, in cross-examination by Mr. Curwood, said, that Edwards was oftener at the meetings in Fox-court than Adams.
Thomas Smart and Charles Bissex, watchmen in Grosvenor-square, were next called. They were followed by Hector Morrison, servant to Mr. Underwood, the cutler; Henry Gillan, of Mount-street, Grosvenor-square; Edward Simpson, James Aldous (pawnbroker), John Monument, and Thomas Hyden, who communicated the plot to Lord Harrowby. The last witness, in cross-examination, said, that he had known Wilson for a long time. He agreed to join in the plot to save himself. One evening at his friend Clark’s he was accused of not supporting the committee, and Davidson said, “those that did not come forward would be the men that they would first murder.” This made him agree to what Wilson said.
He knew a man named Bennet, but he never did ask him to attend ‘a private radical meeting.’ He believed, he said, he might speak or not speak when he was there, as he chose. He did not say “Radical meeting,” nor did he say that he must take up arms, if he were called upon so to do; he did not recollect saying so; he had no recollection that he ever did say so.
In re-examination, witness said he had been twice at a shoemakers’-club, where he saw Davidson, Wilson, and Harrison. This club was held at a public-house, called the Scotch Arms, in a court in the Strand. He asked Bennet to go there with him, and Clark; that was four or five or six months ago.
Thomas Monument, Lord Harrowby, and John Baker, his Lordship’s butler, were next examined, in confirmation of the former witnesses; and these were followed by the officers and other persons who were present at the occurrences in Cato-street, and the subsequent arrest of Brunt and Thistlewood.
Tidd, in reference to Ruthven’s evidence, said, that Ruthven, on searching him, had said, “Curse me, here’s nothing here but a tobacco-box.”
Ruthven, on being asked by Mr. Baron Garrow, denied that he had made use of any such expression.
The Attorney-General now addressed their Lordships, and stated, “that the case for the Crown had now been concluded, with the exception of producing the arms and ammunition found in Cato-street and elsewhere. As it was now late, (five o’clock) the Court would perhaps defer the production of these things till the next morning.”
Mr. Baron Garrow:—“Gentlemen of the Jury, the case for the prosecution is now closed, all but the production of the arms. If by sitting late there were any probability of bringing the trial to a close this night, I should consult you as to the propriety of doing so; but as we cannot finish it by sitting late, and thereby exhausting ourselves, this is the best time for adjourning.”
Davidson stood up and addressed the Court:—“My Lord, as I have been taken by surprise, I am quite unprepared with my witnesses. I hope you will allow my wife to see me this night, that notice may be given them to attend.”
Mr. Baron Garrow:—“The Court has no power to make any order on the subject you have mentioned; but I can say that care will be taken that any proper person may be admitted to you for any proper purpose.”
The Court then adjourned till nine the next morning.
Davidson took notes during the day, and frequently sent communications to his counsel. He conducted himself altogether with great composure and propriety. He paid close attention, and made his remarks, both verbally and in writing, without effort or confusion.
Tidd seemed to have perfect self-possession, but a flush that occasionally animated his face indicated some hurry and eagerness of mind.
Second Day.—Thursday, April 27, 1820.
This morning the Court assembled in pursuance of adjournment, at nine o’clock. The prisoners, Tidd and Davidson were immediately put to the bar. They were provided with chairs as on the preceding day. Davidson had a bible in his hand, which appeared to have been much read, and in the leaves of which were several marks. He had also a large book composed of sheets of paper sewn together, in which there appeared to be a good deal of writing, and in which he occasionally wrote while in court.
The arms, ammunition, and other materials of war, found in Cato-street, and in other places, connected with the machinations of the prisoners, were brought into court previous to the arrival of the judges.
The Court having been opened in the customary form, Ruthven, the Bow-street officer, was called, and described the arms and other articles taken in Cato-street, and on the persons of the prisoners. These were again separately exhibited to the Jury.
Samuel Taunton selected the ball cartridges, hand grenades, pike, handles, and arms found in the lodgings of Tidd, at Hole-in-the-wall-passage, Brook’s-market. We have already given their enumeration. The long sword and carbine, taken from Davidson when he was apprehended by Ellis and Chapman in Cato-street, as well as the pistol taken from Tidd, after he had attempted to discharge it at Lieutenant Fitzclarence, were next produced, and underwent a minute inspection.
Sergeant Hanson was next called; he repeated his description of the fire-balls, and the probable effects which would result from their being thrown upon buildings. He also explained the nature of the powder in flannel bags, which, as before, he stated were cartridges for six pounders. He then opened one of the hand-grenades, and exhibited its component parts to the Jury. This one was only armed with four large spike nails, but some of the others which were opened had no less than twenty-five separate pieces of old iron enfolded within the outer wrappings of rope-yarn. The large grenade, weighing nearly fourteen pounds, and constructed in the same way, but upon a larger scale, was not inspected.
Mr. Gurney announced that he had closed the evidence on the part of the Crown.
THE DEFENCE.
Mr. Curwood rose to address the Jury on the part of the prisoners. He said, “that he had now rose for the fourth time, to urge those topics on behalf of the unfortunate men at the bar, which he had previously submitted to other Juries in the course of these trials. The force of those topics remained in his mind undiminished; he was still conscientiously satisfied, that the charge of high treason in these cases was alone supported by the testimony of Adams,—a man, the infamy of whose character ought in his estimation, to deprive him of all claims to credit.”
The learned gentleman then went over the different points of the evidence, and contended with great ingenuity, “that whatever might have been the diabolical intentions of the prisoners—however ready they might have been to inflict vengeance on those whom they might suppose to be the authors of those melancholy transactions, but too frequently designated as ‘the Manchester Massacre,’—yet, that in all these things there was nothing in reason or common sense, that could lead to a fair and rational conclusion that they had it in contemplation either to compass and imagine the death of the king, or to levy war against the king.
“If the Jury, under all the circumstances, entertained with him this opinion, he had no doubt they would not hesitate to acquit the prisoners.”
During the time Mr. Curwood was addressing the Jury, Davidson took from his pocket a Bible, into several parts of which he inserted small pieces of paper, for the purpose of enabling him to turn more readily to certain passages which he intended to quote in his defence.
Mr. Adolphus now called the witnesses for the defence.
Mary Barker, the daughter of Tidd, deposed, that she knew Edwards and Adams. Edwards left at her father’s house, about a fortnight before the affair in Cato-street, a number of grenades and some powder. Adams also left a very large grenade. They were to be called for again. Edwards took them once away, and brought them back afterwards. They were taken away again on the 23d of February by Edwards; and some were brought back on the morning of the 24th, about a quarter of an hour before the officers came. She did not know the person by whom they were brought back. A box remained which had never been opened.
As the witness left the Court she squeezed her father’s hand. They both seemed much affected. Tears came into the eyes of Tidd, which he endeavoured to suppress. The daughter was in an agony of grief.
Thomas Chambers deposed, that he lived in Heathcote-court, Strand; Edwards and Adams repeatedly called upon him. They came together to his house about a week before the Cato-street business, when Edwards said, “Won’t you go along with us?” Witness said, “Go where?” when Edwards answered, “Oh, you must know that there is something on foot.” He replied, he did not; when Adams said, “We are going to kill his Majesty’s Ministers, and we shall have blood and wine for supper.” Edwards said, “By ——, Adams, you’re right.” On the Monday before the Cato-street business they came again. Edwards brought with him a bag, which he wished to leave with witness. He asked what it contained; when Edwards said, “Only some pistols, and things of that sort.” Witness would not receive it, and they went away. He saw no more of them.
In cross-examination, witness said, “I believe I have been sworn on the prayer-book. I never was sworn before above twice; I believe in Christianity. I was brought up in the Christian faith, and continue in it. I am no member of any faction. I never saw Paine’s works. I know the two prisoners. Davidson I know since the time of Mr. Hunt’s procession. Tidd I have known only in the trade. I cannot say how long; I might have known him at the Smithfield Meeting, and elsewhere. I attended all the meetings held in the open air. I scorn all secret meetings. I know Thistlewood, Ings, Harrison, Strange, and Bradburn. I carried banners in some of the processions. I carried no weapons. Thistlewood has been repeatedly at my house. I took all the flags to my house. I saw him also at the Black Dog, in Gray’s Inn-lane. I used to frequent the White Lion, in Wych-street; I went to attend the meetings there. They called themselves Reformers. I was always in the waggons with Hunt. When I refused to go with Adams and Edwards to kill his Majesty’s Ministers, I did not think they would ever get any persons to be so foolish as to join them. I may be a great fool, but not foolish enough to enter into such a scheme. I did not communicate the project to any magistrate. I never heard any thing said against his Majesty’s Ministers, more than what I saw in the newspapers. I do not read Paine’s works; I only read Cobbett, and have a drawer full of them. I also read the Prayer-book and Bible.”
John Bennett deposed, that he knew Hyden; he called on him to ask him to accompany him to a private radical meeting. He endeavoured to persuade him to go more than ten times. He told him, that he might hear and see what was doing; but he need not speak unless he liked.
Several witnesses were now called to the general character of the prisoners.
Mr. Cook, of Charlotte-street, Blackfriars’-road, knew Davidson six years ago; he then worked for him, and was an industrious hard-working man. He had not known much of him since.
Mr. M’William, an architect, knew Davidson at Aberdeen, in the years 1800 and 1801; he was then studying mathematics; he had only seen him three or four times since in the streets, and was surprised to have been called on to give him a character. Davidson was, at the time he was at Aberdeen, an apprentice to a cabinet-maker. He had been at college, and had, in Mr. M’William’s estimation, “a gigantic mind.”
Stephen Hale, William French, and Samuel Lands, spoke to the general correctness of the conduct of Tidd in private life. He was an honest, industrious, hard-working man, and apparently much attached to his family. Other witnesses were expected, but did not attend.
Mr. Adolphus addressed the Jury on behalf of the prisoners. His speech was marked by an acute examination of the whole of the evidence, a just and forcible reprobation of the atrocity of a betraying accomplice, and an energetic and powerful appeal to the Jury, not to condemn men on the evidence of an avowed conspirator, who had broken the bonds of society, forfeited his allegiance to his Sovereign, and his duty to God. The learned gentleman, in the course of a very eloquent speech of an hour and a half, remarked that it would be the last time he should appear on these trials.
Baron Garrow then addressed the prisoner as follows:—“William Davidson, the law of England, in its excessive tenderness to persons indicted for high treason, has allowed them privileges of defence not extended to other cases. If, therefore, in addition to the able defence of your Counsel, you wish to say any thing, now is the time. Do it deliberately, and the Court will hear you attentively.”
Davidson then rose, greatly agitated, and spoke nearly as follows:—“I am much obliged to your Lordship, and will call your attention to a few particulars in this instance. My Lord, from my life up, I have always maintained the character of an industrious and inoffensive man. I have no friends in England, but have always depended upon my own exertions for support. I have an extensive family, and for their sake alone is my life a value to me.
“The charge which has been brought against me, I can lay my hand upon my heart, and, in the presence of that God whom I revere, say I am not guilty of. Concerning how I came in possession of the blunderbuss I will state. I had a friend, whose name is Williamson, who told me he had bought an old blunderbuss, which was all over rust. He was going to the Cape of Good Hope, and gave it to me to clean.
“I have been doing business for myself for the last five years, and that is the reason I cannot bring any more of my employers than Mr. Cook to speak in my behalf. To Mr. Edwards I owe being brought into this situation. I never knew any thing of him till I attended Mr. Hunt’s procession; that was the first time I ever went into public in my life. Mr. Edwards told me that he would take me to a place to have this blunderbuss raffled for. When I went to the place, I there saw Mr. Thistlewood for the second time; I had previously seen him at Mr. Hunt’s dinner. I saw Mr. Adams there also, but I knew none of the others. Mr. Edwards proposed to commence raffling for the blunderbuss; but, as they did not put down any money, I would not agree. I then heard a great deal of improper language, and would not stop.
“I went to Mr. Williamson, who was waiting to know the result, and told him what had passed. He then said that he wanted to get some money, and I proposed pledging the blunderbuss with a pawnbroker. He agreed, and requested me to take it for him. I did so, and got seven shillings upon it from Mr. Aldous, who knew me. The money I gave to Mr. Williamson. I afterwards went to see Mr. Williamson on board the Belle Alliance, which was about to sail for the Cape. He made me a present of the ticket.
“On the 22d of February, Edwards called upon me, and told me that he had been to see Mr. Williamson, and that he had given him an order to get the ticket for the blunderbuss. I said very well, and consented to go and get it out of pledge for him, as, he said, he was to get ten shillings by it, part of which I was to have, and he gave seven shillings and two-pence for that purpose. He told me to meet him at the corner of Oxford-street, which I did; when he said he would take me to Fox-court, where there was a countryman of mine; a man of colour he meant. I objected to going.
“My Lord, I never associated with men of colour, although one myself, because I always found them very ignorant.
“I now pass over to the sword concern; I shall state the truth. On a Monday after the Manchester massacre, I met a person of the name of George Goldworthy, to whom I had been apprentice in Liverpool; he expressed his surprise at seeing me in London; I told him I was out of employment, and that there was nothing worse than being a small master, as all the rest of the trade, from jealousy, set their face against me; he said he had a little business of his own in the country, and that he would employ me if I would go. I agreed to go at 30s. a week. He then appointed me to meet him at a house he called the Horse and Groom, in John-street, Edgware-road, on the Wednesday following. All this time I did not know that Goldworthy was an acquaintance of Edwards’s, but he was.
“On Wednesday evening accordingly I went to the Horse and Groom. I looked into the house, but did not see Goldworthy. I stopped at the corner to wait for him, my lord, which your lordship and gentlemen must well know I being a conspicuous character would not have done, if I was about any thing improper. I saw Adams there; but I went on to walk a little further. On my return I saw several persons going in and out of the house, but still Goldworthy did not come. A little after eight o’clock, while I was in the Edgeware-road, up came Goldworthy. He asked me if I was not surprised he had not come. I said I was. He then said he was going to call upon a friend, and gave me a sword, which he said he carried for self-protection against thieves about the country.
“At this time I had not the least intention of any thing directly or indirectly concerning the business in Cato-street. I went down the street accidentally, and hearing two or three pistols fired, I went to see what was the matter. I never was afraid of any man. I then heard a cry of “Stop thief!” and I was seized and taken to gaol. I never drew the cutlass nor offered to strike; but gave myself up quietly.
“I have ventured my life fifteen times for my country and my King, and ask you, gentlemen, if you think it possible that I should be so vain as to attempt to join a few weak men to trample down that well-founded constitution, in which this country has so much reason to glory? I would scorn such an act—and I solemnly protest there was nothing found on me but the sword which I received from Goldworthy, and a little block.
“It was said, that I said ‘I would die for liberty’s cause,’ and that I was searched in a public house; this is not true; and if the landlord was here he would prove the contrary. I know nothing at all of the plot in Cato-street, directly or indirectly. I know nothing of a plot to plunder—to burn houses—or to massacre the Ministers. I did not know that any such plot was in existence.
“I will now, my Lords and Gentlemen, give you an instance where one man of colour may be mistaken for another—as must have been my case. Whenever I had any leisure time I employed it as a teacher in a Sunday-school: there a similar mistake was made. A person, a man of colour, insulted one of the female teachers at Walworth. The young lady said it was me, and I found I was slighted, although nothing was said. I sent in my resignation, when the gentlemen waited upon me in a body, and stated what had been alleged to my charge. I was so confounded, that I could not say any thing, and let them go away without making any defence. I afterwards, however, set myself to work, and actually found the man who had committed the offence, made him acknowledge it, and beg the young lady’s pardon. The young lady could not look me in the face, knowing how she had injured me, but held out her hand as a token of her regret.
“Now, my lord and gentlemen, this shows how one man may be mistaken for another. I would as lieve be put to death as suppose that you, my lord, or the gentlemen of the crown, should think me capable, for one moment, of harbouring a thought to massacre any person whatever.” (Here the prisoner applied for a glass of water, which was handed to him.) “Although I am a man of colour, that is no reason that I should be guilty of such a crime. My colour may be against me, but I have as good and as fair a heart as if I were a white.
“I have a very few words more to say. I have a very numerous family, and a wife that never earned me a penny in her life. All my distress arose from the consideration of the helpless situation of my family. Were it not for that, I would not care what became of me. Like Isaiah it may be said of me, ‘He was persecuted, yet he opened not his mouth.’ As a father, I wish to discharge my duty,—for them I wish to live—and for their sakes I wish, if possible, to clear up the black charge which has been brought against me.
“First of all, Mr. Adams positively swore that he had not seen me in the loft, and that I was down stairs; and then comes Mr. Monument, who said that I addressed the congregation, and told those that were afraid of their lives to walk out. They must see that this was an exaggeration, and in fact altogether an invention, or would not both of these men who were present at the same time have agreed in the same story? I admit that I was in Cato-street; but even admitting this, what does it amount to?
“I now very well know that Mr. Goldworthy was an accomplice of Edwards, and it is clear that by these persons, for purposes best known to themselves, I was entrapped into this snare. As for myself, my Lord, I have served my country, and done all that I could do for it. I have supported my family by honest industry, and I never directly or indirectly associated with any persons at public places. I never attended any meeting but as a common spectator.
“I know nothing of these men (Tidd and the other prisoners). I have no knowledge of their plots; I do not blame the gentlemen of the crown for the manner in which they have conducted this case; because they have done no more than their duty, according to the evidence which has been brought before them; but I say, the witnesses, as far as regards me, are altogether false sworn. I have selected a few passages from the Bible, which I wish to read on this subject, and these I offer, not for the purpose of insulting the court. The indictment charges that I did certain things ‘not having the fear of God before my eyes, but having been instigated by the devil.’ Now, I always had the fear of God before me, and always cherished the feelings of virtue and humanity. I always subscribed to the beautiful lines of Mr. Pope:—
“The verses from this sacred Book, which I think applicable to my case on the present occasion, are these:—
‘One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.
‘If a false witness rise up against any man, to testify against him that which is wrong;
‘Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the Lord, before the priests and the judges which shall be in those days.
‘And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;
‘Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother; so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.
‘And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.
‘And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.’
“These words, gentlemen of the Jury, I wish to impress on your minds.
“I am a stranger to England by birth; but I was educated and brought up in England; my father was an Englishman, my grandfather was a Scotchman; I may too claim the prerogative of an Englishman, from having been in the country from my infancy,—still I have not a friend in England,—I have not a relative who will stretch out his hand to my helpless family. Then will you not think it hard to have my life taken away for a scene of intended iniquity, of which I know nothing. To have me torn from the bosom of her whom I lived but to cherish,—to have me exposed to the ruthless knife of the executioner, while my innocent starving babes seek in vain for consolation.
“Gentlemen, when I think of this, it unmans me. I am no plotter—no assassin—no traitor! Look well to the evidence, and to your own hearts, before you pronounce the fatal verdict of ‘Guilty.’
“Gentlemen, the Earl of Harrowby I have known for years; I worked on his Lordship’s estate in Staffordshire. Gentlemen, I knew him but to respect him;—and yet it is suggested that I could raise the dagger of the murderer to his breast.—Forbid it providence! Had I known that this plot existed, I would have been the first to warn his Lordship of his danger; but I declare solemnly that I knew not of such an intention. I knew nothing of all these dark and bloody projects.
“Gentlemen, I have now done. I repeat, I will readily submit to death if you think me capable of harbouring an intention to commit the crime of high treason. If that is your persuasion, pronounce your verdict accordingly. I hope my death may prove useful to my country,—for still England I call thee so,—and I trust that those by whom I shall be condemned, may lay down their lives with as clear a conscience.”
Baron Garrow, then addressed Tidd as follows:—“Richard Tidd, do you wish to add any thing to what your counsel has stated for you? If you do, this is the proper time.”
Tidd rose, and said, in a meek and humble voice, “The first thing I have got to say is, that I had the misfortune to get acquainted with Brunt about a month before Christmas, by his frequently going to see Adams, who was living next door to me; our windows joined; by that means I became acquainted with him.
“During the Christmas holidays, we kept them together; after the holidays, I was introduced to Edwards, who does not now appear against me; he was constantly coming to me afterwards; I always was a hard-working man, working sixteen and eighteen hours a day. I never had any time to spare, except on a Sunday. Messrs. Edwards and Brunt together told me that there were certain meetings going on.
“I never attended any meeting after the acts to prevent illegal meetings, till Edwards told me that he had authority to state from persons high in rank, that meetings might take place to procure reform in Parliament. I was then introduced to a room, where I was taken to, in Brunt’s house. I did not see there any thing particular, till the Sunday when I was proposed to take the chair.
“Certain propositions were then made, which made me declare I would never more attend such meetings, and I fully determined that I would not keep company with them afterwards. Prior to this Edwards came up to my house, and said, that he had got certain materials, and Mr. Thistlewood would be obliged to me if I would let them remain in my house. I said, I would allow no such thing. He then went away, but in the evening he came and brought the things, which the officers afterwards seized.
“On Tuesday, Edwards and Brunt came to me, and asked me if I kept to my determination—they added, that all the proceedings that were going on were entirely flustered; they then said there was to be a meeting of the Mary-le-bone Union, and asked me to go.
“Edwards said, every body going there for self-preservation took a weapon of defence. I told him I had none; he said, if I had not, the club would supply me with one; he then pulled out a pistol, and said, you ought to arm yourself now.
“He also had a sword-stick, which he offered me. He afterwards gave me a direction where the meeting was to be held. I have it now in my pocket.”—[Here the prisoner produced a small piece of paper, on which was written these words:—‘Horse and Groom, John-street, Edgeware-road.’]
Tidd then went on. “During Wednesday, while I was at work, Edwards and Brunt came to me, and said there was some people I must bring to the club. I afterwards took Monument, but I do declare before you I never knew any thing about a cabinet-dinner. It was never mentioned to me. I was introduced into the stable, and in ten minutes after the officers came in and apprehended me.
“This is all I have to say, and you may depend I have told the truth.”
The Attorney-General rose to reply, and proceeded to point out the various instances in which the evidence of Adams had been confirmed: it was confirmed by Monument, who had not been deeply concerned in the plot; but it was much more strongly confirmed by Hyden, who was no accomplice, and who was in every way worthy of belief. There was, he contended, a compleat chain of evidence, to prove that there was a conspiracy to overturn the government: and if they believed that the two prisoners at the bar took a prominent part in it, they could have no hesitation as to the verdict they should give.
Mr. Baron Garrow, proceeded to deliver his charge to the Jury. He went over the whole of the evidence, and commented on all the material parts of it in a most perspicuous manner. While his lordship was reading over the evidence of Monument, the prisoner Davidson caused a written paper to be conveyed to him, and said he hoped it might be read as a part of his defence, which he had before forgot to notice. The learned Judge observed, that although it was not strictly regular to comply with the prisoner’s request in the present stage of the business, yet he was ready to allow him to make any statement which might be of use to him. The statement was, that his (Davidson’s) house had been searched, and nearly pulled down, and not the slightest evidence was there found which went to show that he had been guilty of any conspiracy.
After his Lordship had read over the evidence of Hyden, he said it was the most important of any that had been given to the Court, because the conspiracy had been communicated to him by one of the parties, who invited him to assist in it; and because he went immediately and communicated to Lord Harrowby the danger which ministers were in. He pretended to show a readiness to join the conspirators, but he never did join them; and one reason for not refusing to take a part in the plot was, a threat held out that any man who did not join would be put to death.
“The learned counsel for the prisoners had endeavoured to throw some discredit on this witness, on the ground of his being an accomplice; but there was not the slightest ground for such a supposition; nor did it appear to him that the slightest inroad had been made on his testimony. On the contrary, he ought to be considered as an instrument in the hands of Providence in saving fifteen of the first men in the country, and perhaps many others, from destruction; and all persons then present in Court, ought to consider themselves indebted to him.
“Here it was clearly in evidence, that the intention of the conspirators was to murder the most respectable and virtuous characters in the kingdom; and that not content with that, they were to destroy the house of the Bishop of London, one of the most amiable men in the kingdom, who of all other men in the world was the least likely to give offence to any body.
“What then could be their motive for all these unprovoked atrocities, but the ulterior object of revolution? If plunder was their object, where were the implements in which they were to carry away their plunder? What necessity was there to add murder to their offence? What occasion had they for a box full of ball cartridges? What was their object in all this, but the ulterior object of effecting a revolution? The usual argument of inadequacy of means had been used on this occasion; and it was said, nothing certainly could be more preposterous than to suppose a revolution could be effected by such contemptible means; but it was proved, that a plan had been formed—that a band of ruffians, reeking with the blood of the most illustrious men in the kingdom, had intended to overturn the government, by stirring up the people to insurrection.
“Such men as these might imagine that the object could be effectual, without ever considering the adequacy of the means. Before the commencement of the French Revolution, the first beginnings were as contemptible as this; and every body knew the vast extent and the wide-spreading desolation, by which these small beginnings were followed.”
After a variety of other observations, all tending to show that the evidence of the accomplices was confirmed in various instances by credible witnesses, particularly by Joseph Hale, the apprentice of Brunt; and by Hyden, the cow-keeper, who was no party in the plot, and who acted honestly and conscientiously, his Lordship concluded his charge.
The Jury then retired, and after an absence of forty minutes, returned with a verdict of “GUILTY UPON THE THIRD COUNT,” with the exception of the eighth and tenth overt-acts. The count in question alleged a conspiracy to levy war.
At the conclusion of the trial of Tidd and Davidson,
Mr. Curwood addressed the Court, intimating a desire, on the part of James Wilson, to withdraw his plea of misnomer to the indictment against him for high treason, and to plead “Guilty,” and the Attorney-General stating that he had no objection to this course,
James Wilson was put to the bar, and, on being questioned by Mr. Shelton, pleaded Guilty.
Mr. Walford then said, he was instructed to make a similar tender on the part of the five remaining prisoners, and
Mr. Baron Garrow directed the prisoners to be brought to the bar.
John Harrison, Richard Bradburn, John Shaw Strange, James Gilchrist, and Charles Cooper, were then brought into the Court, and
Mr. Walford again addressed his lordship, and said that he had watched, with great diligence, the whole of these proceedings, and from what had passed under his observation, he thought he should best consult the interests of the five unhappy men at the bar, for whom, with his learned friend (Mr. Broderick), he was counsel, by recommending them to acknowledge the deepness of their offending, and to throw themselves on the leniency of their Sovereign, who, he was persuaded, would follow the steps of his revered father, by tempering justice with mercy.
Mr. Broderick said, he too had watched with the most anxious solicitude the progress of the trials which had taken place upon this indictment, and he felt satisfied that he could not better consult the interests of the prisoners, than by adopting the course suggested by his learned friend. These unfortunate men were desirous of making the only reparation in their power to the offended laws of their country, by acknowledging their guilt. They did not ask for mercy, but they entertained a hope that their contrition would have the desired effect, and would induce an extension towards them of that brightest attribute in the person of the Sovereign.
Mr. Baron Garrow then explained to the prisoners the situation in which they stood, and that their plea must be received without any pledge on his part, and with a full understanding that they were to receive judgment to die.
They all expressed their concurrence in what had been said by their counsel, and, having withdrawn their previous plea of Not Guilty, they pleaded Guilty, and were removed from the bar; and the gentlemen of the Jury were dismissed with the thanks of their country.
SENTENCE OF DEATH.
The following morning, Friday April 28th, at a quarter after nine, Lord Chief-Justice Abbot, Chief Justice Dallas, the Chief Baron, Mr. Justice Richards, Mr. Justice Best, and the Common Sergeant, took their seats.
Mr. Brown, the gaoler, was immediately requested to bring the prisoners to the bar. In a few minutes the clank of chains was heard, and the eleven prisoners entered the court. They were all double ironed, with the exception of Ings, who had been much indisposed since his conviction. Thistlewood came first, and advanced to the bar. There was a melancholy resignation in his countenance, and his appearance was considerably altered since the last time of his being in Court.
All being in readiness,
Mr. Shelton (the clerk of the arraigns), addressing himself to Thistlewood, said,
“Arthur Thistlewood, you stand convicted of High Treason;—what have you say why you should not receive judgment to die, according to law?”
Thistlewood immediately drew forth a manuscript address, which he proceeded to read in a mournful tone, as follows:—
“My Lords,—I am asked, my Lord, what I have to say that judgment of death should not be passed upon me according to law. This to me is mockery—for were the reasons I could offer incontrovertible, and were they enforced even by the eloquence of a Cicero, still would the vengeance of my Lords Castlereagh and Sidmouth be satiated only in the purple stream which circulates through a heart more enthusiastically vibrating to every impulse of patriotism and honour, than that of any of those privileged traitors to their country, who lord it over the lives and property of the sovereign people with barefaced impunity.
“The reasons which I have, however, I will now state—not that I entertain the slightest hope from your sense of justice or from your pity. The former is swallowed up in your ambition, or rather by the servility you descend to, to obtain the object of that ambition—the latter I despise. Justice I demand. If I am denied it, your pity is no equivalent. In the first place,
“I protest against the proceedings upon my trial, which I conceive to be grossly partial, and contrary to the very spirit of justice,—but, alas! the judges, who have heretofore been considered the counsel of the accused, are now, without exception, in all cases between the Crown and the People, the most implacable enemies of the latter. In every instance, the Judges charge the Jury to find the subject guilty; nay, in one instance, the Jury received a reprimand, and that not in the gentlest terms, for not strictly obeying the imperious mandate from the bench.
“The Court decided upon my trial to commit murder rather than depart, in the slightest degree, from its usual forms. Nay, it is with me a question, if the form is usual which precluded me from examining witnesses to prove the infamy of Adams, of Hyden, and of Dwyer. ’Ere the Solicitor-General replied to the address of my Counsel, I applied to the Court to hear my witnesses. The Court inhumanly refused, and I am in consequence to be consigned to the scaffold.
“Numerous have been the instances in which this rule of Court has been infringed; but to have infringed it in my case, would have been to incur the displeasure of the Court, and to forfeit every aspiring hope of promotion.
“A few hours hence and I shall be no more; but the nightly breeze which will whistle over the silent grave that shall protect me from its keenness, will bear to your restless pillow the memory of one who lived but for his country,—and died when liberty and justice had been driven from its confines by a set of villains, whose thirst for blood is only to be equalled by their activity in plunder.
“For life, as it respects myself, I care not; but, while yet I may, I would rescue my memory from the calumny which, I doubt not, will be industriously heaped upon it, when it will be no longer in my power to protect it.
“I would explain the motives which induced me to conspire against the Ministers of his Majesty; and I would contrast them with those which these very ministers have acted upon in leading me to my ruin. To do this, it will be necessary to take a short review of my life, for a few months prior to my arrest for the offence for which I am to be executed without a trial, or, at least, without an impartial one by a jury of my peers.
“’Tis true, the form, the etiquette of a trial has been gone through; but I challenge any of the Judges on the bench to tell me—to tell my country—that justice was not denied me in the very place where justice only should have been administered. I challenge them to say that I was fairly tried. I challenge them to say if I am not murdered according to the etiquette of a Court (falsely denominated) of Justice.
“I had witnesses in Court to prove that Dwyer was a villain, beyond all example of atrocity.—I had witnesses in Court to prove that Adams was a notorious swindler, and that Hyden was no better.—These were the three witnesses—indeed, almost the only ones—against me.—But the form and rules of Court must not be infringed upon, to save an unfortunate individual from the scaffold.
“I called those witnesses at the close of Mr. Adolphus’s address to the Jury, and before the Solicitor-General commenced his reply; but the Court decided that they could not be heard.
“Some good men have thought—and I have thought so too—that before the Jury retired, all evidence was in time, for either the prosecutor or the accused; and more particularly for the latter; nay, even before the verdict was given, that evidence could not be considered too late. Alas! such people drew their conclusion from principles of justice only; they never canvassed the rules of Court, which have finally settled my unhappy doom!
“Many people who are acquainted with the barefaced manner in which I was plundered by my Lord Sidmouth, will, perhaps, imagine that personal motives instigated me to the deed; but I disclaim them. My every principle was for the prosperity of my country. My every feeling—the height of my ambition—was the welfare of my starving countrymen. I keenly felt for their miseries; but, when their miseries were laughed at, and when, because they dared to express those miseries, they were cut down by hundreds, barbarously massacred, and trampled to death; when infants were sabred in their mother’s arms, and the breast, from which they drew the tide of life, was severed from the parent’s body, my feelings became too intense, too excessive for endurance, and I resolved on vengeance—I resolved that the lives of the instigators should be a requiem to the souls of the murdered innocents.
“In this mood I met with George Edwards. And if any doubt should remain upon the minds of the public, whether the deed I meditated was virtuous, or contrary, the tale I will now relate will convince them that, in attempting to exercise a power which the law had ceased to have, I was only wreaking national vengeance on a set of wretches unworthy the name or character of men.
“This Edwards, poor and pennyless, lived near Picket-street, in the Strand, some time ago, without a bed to lie upon, or a chair to sit in. Straw was his bed—his only covering a blanket; but, owing to his bad character, and his swindling conduct, he was driven even from thence by his landlord.
“It is not my intention trace him through his immorality. Suffice it to say that he was, in every sense of the word, a villain of the deepest atrocity. His landlord refused to give him a character.
“Some short time after this he called upon his landlord again—but mark the change in his appearance. Dressed like a lord, in all the folly of the reigning fashion, he now described himself as the right heir to a German Baron, who had been some time dead, and stated that Lords Castlereagh and Sidmouth had acknowledged his claims to the title and property, had interfered in his behalf with the German government, and supplied him with money to support his rank in society. From this period I date his career as a Government Spy.
“He procured an introduction to the Spenceans—by what means I am not aware of—and thus he became acquainted with the Reformers in general.
“When I met with Edwards after the massacre at Manchester, he described himself as very poor; and, after several interviews, he proposed a plan for blowing up the House of Commons. This was not my view: I wished to punish the guilty only, and therefore I declined it. He next proposed that we should attack the Ministers at the fête given by the Spanish Ambassador. This I resolutely opposed, because the innocent would perish with the guilty;—besides, there were ladies invited to the entertainment—and I, who am shortly to ascend to the scaffold, shuddered with horror at the idea of that, a sample of which had previously been given by the Agents of Government at Manchester, and which the Ministers of his Majesty applauded.
“Edwards was ever at invention; and at length he proposed attacking them at a cabinet-dinner. I asked, where were the means to carry his project into effect? He replied, if I would accede, we should not want for means. He was as good as his word: from him came, notwithstanding his apparent penury, the money provided for purchasing the stores which your Lordships have seen produced in Court upon my trial.
“He who was never possessed of money to pay for a pint of beer, had always plenty to purchase arms or ammunition. Amongst the conspirators, he was ever the most active;—ever inducing people to join him, up to the last hour ere the undertaking was discovered.
“I had witnesses in Court who could prove they went to Cato-street by appointment with Edwards, with no other knowledge or motive than that of passing an evening amongst his friends.
“I could also have proved that subsequent to the fatal transaction, when we met in Holborn, he endeavoured to induce two or three of my companions to set fire to houses and buildings in various parts of the metropolis.
“I could prove that subsequent to that again, he endeavoured to induce men to throw hand-grenades into the carriages of ministers as they passed through the streets; and yet this man, the contriver, the instigator, the entrapper, is screened from justice and from exposure, by those very men who seek vengeance against the victims of his and their villany.
“To the Attorney and Solicitor-General I cannot impute the clearest motives. Their object seems to me to have been rather to obtain a verdict against me, than to obtain a full and fair exposition of the whole affair since its commencement. If their object was justice alone, why not bring forward Edwards as a witness, if not as an accomplice; but no, they knew that by keeping Edwards in the background, my proofs—aye, my incontrovertible proofs of his being a hired spy, the suggestor and promoter—must, according to the rules of court, also be excluded.
“Edwards and his accomplices arranged matters in such a manner as that his services might be dispensed with on the trial, and thus were the Jury cut off from every chance of ascertaining the real truth. Adams, Hyden, and Dwyer, were the agents of Edwards, and truly he made a most admirable choice, for their invention seems to be inexhaustible.
“With respect to the immorality of our project, I will just observe, that the assassination of a tyrant has always been deemed a meritorious action. Brutus and Cassius were lauded to the very skies for slaying Cæsar; indeed, when any man, or any set of men, place themselves above the laws of their country, there is no other means of bringing them to justice than through the arm of a private individual. If the laws are not strong enough to prevent them from murdering the community, it becomes the duty of every member of that community to rid his country of its oppressors.
“High treason was committed against the people at Manchester, but justice was closed against the mutilated, the maimed, and the friends of those who were upon that occasion indiscriminately massacred. The Sovereign, by the advice of his Ministers, thanked the murderers, while yet reeking in the blood of their hapless victims! If one spark of honour—if one spark of patriotism—had still glimmered in the breasts of Englishmen, they would have risen to a man—for Insurrection then became a public duty—and the Blood of the Slain should have been the watchword to vengeance on their murderers. The banner of independence should have floated in the gale that brought the tidings of their wrongs and their sufferings to the metropolis!—Such, however, was not the case, and Albion is still in the chains of slavery—I quit it without regret—I shall soon be consigned to the grave—my body will be immured beneath the soil whereon I first drew breath. My only sorrow is, that the soil should be a theatre for slaves, for cowards, for despots.
“My motives, I doubt not, will hereafter be justly appreciated. I will therefore now conclude by stating, that I shall consider myself as murdered, if I am to be executed on the verdict obtained against me, by the refusal of the court to hear my evidence.