Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

minds of his majesty's subjects a belief that they were oppressed, and on this ground I consider it as a gross and seditious libel. This is the question put to you to decide.

It is admitted that the defendants are the proprietors of the paper in which this addres was published.

or on any other, before I arrive at a positive decision on that point, I would look about, and see what the times were when the publication took place. I would look at all the attendant circumstances, and, with that assistance, I would set about to expound the paper. The observations which this cause calls for, form a part of the notorious history of the country. How long this paper was penned before it appeared in this news-paper, I know not: the 25th of December is the day when it was published, and it is dated the 16th of July, 1792.

Gentlemen, you will recollect the appearance of public affairs, and the feelings of every mind in the country, at the time that parliament met, and for some time after, in December last. I do not know whether I colour the picture right, when I say very gloomy sensations had pervaded the whole country. It is for you to say whether at that time there were not emissaries from a neighbouring country making their way, as well as they could, in this country. It is for you to say, looking at the great anarchy and confusion of France, whether they did not wish to agitate the minds of all orders of men, in all countries, and to plant their tree of liberty in every kingdom in Europe. It is for you to say whether their intention was not to eradicate every kind of government that was not sympathetic with their own. I am bound, gentlemen, to declare my opinion on this paper, and to do so I must take within my consideration all the circumstances of the time when it appeared. I have no hesitation in saying then, that they were most gloomy; -the country was torn to its centre by emissaries from France. It was a notorious fact-every man knows it-I could neither open my eyes nor my ears without seeing and hearing them. Weighing thus all the circumstances, that, though dated in July, it was not published till December, when those emissaries were spreading their horrid doctrines; and believing there was a great gloominess in the country,-and I must shut my eyes and ears if I did not believe that there was;-believing also that there were emissaries from France, wishing to spread the maxims prevalent in that country, in this; --believing that the minds of the people of this country were much agitated by these political topics, of which the mass of the population never can form a true judgment ;and reading this paper, which appears to be calculated to put the people in a state of discontent with every thing done in this country:-I am bound on my oath to answer, that I think this paper was published with a wicked, malicious intent, to vilify the govern ment, and to make the people discontented with the constitution under which they live. That is the matter charged in the information; that it was done with a view to vilify the constitution, the laws, and the government of this country, and to infuse into the

There is one topic more. It is said they were not the authors of the address, and that it got inadvertently into their paper. It never was doubted, and I suppose it never will be doubted, that the publishers of a newspaper

are answerable for the coutents of it. Those who think most favourably for the defendants will go no farther than to say, that the parties publishing ought to give an account how they published it, and if there is any thing baneful in the contents, to show how it came to them, and whether it was inserted inadvertently or otherwise. If any thing of that sort had been offered, I certainly should have received it as evidence. But nothing of the kind has been offered, and the defendants stand as the proprietors and publishers of the paper, without the slightest evidence in alleviation being offered in their favour.

his not for human judgment to dive into the heart of man, to know whether his intentions are good or evil. We must draw our conclusions with regard to his intentions from overt acts; and if an evil tendency is apparent on the face of any particular paper, it can only be traced by human judgment primá facie to a bad intention, unless evidence is brought to prove its innocence. This cause is destitute of any proof of that kind.

It is said that this paper contains other advertisements and paragraphs; and therefore from the moral good tendency of the whole, for aught I know to the contrary, you are to extract an opinion that the meaning was not bad. I cannot say that the travelling into advertisements, which have nothing to do with this business, is exactly the errand you are to go upon. From this paper itself, and all the contents of it, you will extract the meaning; and if upon the whole you should think the tendency of it is good, in my opinion, the parties ought to be acquitted. But it is not sufficient that there should be in this paper detached good morals in part of it, unless they gave an explanation of the rest. The charge will be done away, if those parts which the attorney-general has stated are so explained as to leave nothing excepted.

I

There may be morality and virtue in this paper: and yet, apparently, latet anguis in herba. There may be much that is good in it, and yet there may be much to censure. have told you my opinion. Gentlemen, the constitution has intrusted it to you, and it is your duty to have only one point in view.Without fear, favour, or affection, without regard either to the prosecutor or the defendants, look at the question before you, and on that decide on the guilt or innocence of the defendants.

[ocr errors]

The jury then withdrew : it was two o'clock | Kenyon's house; the special verdict was, in the afternoon. The noble and learned GUILTY OF PUBLISHING, BUT WITH judge understanding that they were divided, MALICIOUS INTENT. and likely to be some time in making up their Lord Kenyon.–I cannot record this verdict; minds, retired from the bench, and directed it is no verdict at all. Mr. Lowten to take the verdict. At seven in The jury then withdrew-and, after sitting the evening they gave notice that they had in discussion till within a few minutes of five agreed on a special verdict, which Mr. Low in the morning, they found a general verdict ten could not receive; they went up in of-Nor GUILTY. coaches, each attended by an officer, ro lord

583. Proceedings on the Trial of an Indictment against WILLIAN

Hudson, for Seditious Words. Tried at Justice Hall in the Old Bailey, before Sir John William Rose, Serjeant at Law, Recorder of the City of London, on Monday Dec. the 9th: 34 Geo. 11. A. D. 1793.

not being ready; and it being necessary, in [OCTOBER the first, 1793. Yesterday Mr. this case, to give notice to the solicitor of the Pigott and Dr. Hudson dined at the London treasury of the persons intended to be offered cotiee-house, Ludgate-hill. Shortly after as bail. their dinner they were giving toasts to each 5th. Mr. Pigott and Dr. Hudson were other in so loud a manner as to be taken no- brought by a Habeas Corpus before the hotice of. Pigott gave aloud, “ The French re- nourable Mr. Justice Gould and Mr. Baron public,” which was immediately resented by Perryn, at Serjeant's-inn, at the request of a gentleman present, who gave “ The king Mr. Martin, their attorney. The warrant of Mr. Leech, the master of the coffee house, comınitment being deliberately read by Mr. had previously taken notice of their improper Harrison, at the request of the judge, Mr. conduct, and soon after sent for a constable Pigott hoped that Mr. Martin might state to from the Poultry compter, who took them into his lordship the grounds of their objection to custody. They were yesterday examined be the commitment. Mr. Martin was heard for fore Mr. Alderman Anderson, at Guild hall, the prisoners, in a speech which took up near who remanded them, in order to be brought half an hour. His principal aim was directed again before him. Mr. Leech, the master of to the illegality of the commitment; and he the coffee-house, Mr. Newman, of Newgate- trusted, that, as the precise words were not street, and a Mr. Vaughan, of Bristol, were specified in the warrant, the gentlemen would cxamined; and it was proved in evidence, be discharged. The solicitor-general made a that they had spoken in a very disaffected short reply; when judge Gould stated at some manner, and had given the following toasts, length the act of parliament which guided —“The system of equality,”—“May the hin in this business. He did not see that republic of France be triumphant over all there was any illegal step in the commitment, Europe!” The lord mayor was talked of in and quoted several authorities to confirm it. most opprobrious terins for his public con- Baron Perryn stated, that he knew nothing of duct. The king was spoken of in an im- the circumstance till that moment, but enproper and seditious manner; as was also the lirely agreed in opinion with his brother prince of Hesse-Cassel, whom they called a Gould. Mr. Pigott and Dr. Hudson both adswine-dealer. The ministry were denomi- dressed the judge, who gave them the greatest nated robbers and big waymen. The con- attention. Dr. Hudson also stated, that he stable, who accompanied them in the coach had no reason to complain of alderman into the Poultry compter, deposed, that on their derson's conduct; on the contrary, he beway thither they called from the coach-win- lieved he had done no more than his dutr. dows to the people, “ The French republic!" Mr. Martin, the attorney, begged to be heard and “ Liberty while you live!" This morning again. He said he dittered from his client in they were again brought before the same ma- his sentiments with regard to the alderman's gistrate, when Dr. Tludson made an able conduct; and was proceeding with some inspeech in defence of himself and his fellow vective, when he was stopped by the judge. prisoner. After the whole of the evidence Mr. Pigott: “ My lord, the Bill of Rights had been heard in support of the charge, the states, that excessive bail shall not be dealderman felt it his duty to commit both the manded." Judge Gould: “ You are prema prisoners for trial. They were accordingly ture. You do not know what bail I may decommitted to the New compter, their bail mand. I shall be satisfied with less. Where

ተ +

are your bail?" Mr. Martin: "My lord, from the objections I have made, I did not think of bringing any; my clients would much sooner suffer the greatest severity the law can inflict, than put in such heavy bail, so contrary to Magna Charta." Mr. White, of the treasury, said he should be contented with bail of 2501. for each of them. Judge Gould: "You must give twenty-four hours notice to the solicitor of the treasury, that he may inquire as to the respectability of the bail; but, as you have no bail to put in, I must do my duty, and remand you to prison." Annual Register.]

At the Old Bailey, on Nov. 2nd, 1793. The bill of indictment preferred against Mr. Pigott for uttering seditious words in the London coffee-house, was rejected by the grand jury.

The bail offered by Dr. Hudson, also charged with uttering seditious words, in the London coffee-house, in company with Mr. Pigott, was rejected by the Court; and therefore Dr. Hudson was committed to Newgate, there to remain until he shall produce sufficient sureties.

Monday, December 9, 1793. William Hudson was indicted for uttering seditious and inflammatory words:

Prisoner. The indictment has never been fully read to me, nor have I been indulged with a copy of it; I claim the indulgence of

What was the first thing that attracted your thoughts respecting the prisoner?-When they came into the room Mr. Hudson called for a newspaper, and sat down in a box in the open coffee-room.

Were there many people in the coffee-room, or was it empty? or how?-There were a good many in then, but there were more came in afterwards; the coffee-room was not so full then as it was afterwards. Mr. Hudson began reading the defeat of the Dutch troops in the paper; the first thing that attracted my notice was, that he wished the duke of York and his army were either sent home, or sent to the devil, he did not care which; there were a good deal of things spoken respecting several characters afterwards. I believe this conversation was 'between the prisoner and Mr. Pigott.

How far off were you from the prisoner?-I was in the next box, sitting in a chair at the end of the next box.

In the course of this conversation was the king mentioned at all?—He was.

By whom?-By Mr. Hudson.

Be so good as to tell us what part of any thing was mentioned by Mr. Hudson?-He said, "The king, what was he?-George Guelph, a German hog-butcher, a dealer in human flesh by the carcass, and sold his Hanoverian subjects to his British subjects for thirty pounds a piece."

Will you utter the words just as he uttered them?--I think it was, "The king, what is he?-George Guelph, a German hog-butcher, a dealer in human flesh by the carcass, he sells his Hanoverian subjects to his British subjects for thirty pounds a piece, and that [The Indictment read by the clerk of the he was not satisfied with that, that he was Court.]

the Court to have it read.

The indictment having been opened by Mr Raine, the case was stated by Mr. Fielding. [The witnesses examined apart.*]

John Buchanan, sworn.

I am a manufacturer at Glasgow in Scotland.

Were you in the London coffee-house on the evening of the 30th of September last? Yes.

Did you see Mr. Hudson and Mr. Pigott there?-I did.

About what time did you first observe them in the coffee-house?—I suppose, about seven o'clock.

With respect to the removing witnesses while others give their testimony, see the earl of Shaftesbury's case in this Collection, Vol. VIII, pp. 775, 778, 792; Harrison's case, Vol. XII, p. 871; Peter Cook's case, Vol. XIII, p. 348; Vaughan's case, Vol. XIII, p. 494; Matthews's case, Vol. XV, p. 1340; Reason and Tranter's case, Vol. XVI, p. 18; and Elizabeth Canning's case, Vol. XIX, pp. 323, 330.

partner with the prince of Hesse-Cassel."

them?" And not content with that, he Speak the words in the manner he related goes partner with the prince of Hesse-Cassel, and has fifteen pounds a head for each of his carcasses."

In what tone of voice was this said?-It was in a sharp tone of voice, and rather felt noisy by the gentlemen who were sitting along with him; it was louder than the common conversation.

Do you know, in point of fact, whether it was heard by those persons in the neighbouring boxes?It was heard very plain by the gentlemen who sat with him, and several others.

After he had made use of these expressions, what followed then?-There was some conversation took place between Mr. Pigott and him; Mr. Hudson took up the paper, and read of the king's going a hunting, and seemed to reflect much on his majesty's doing so, at the time that his country was in such a calamitous war.

Was there any toast given by any body?In the time of conversation they had drank two glasses of punch each; they called for a threepenny glass, and hurried it."

Were they tumblers or small glasses !--| That did not interrupt me. It was done to Large glasses, such as they charge sixpence a that effect. piece for: as soon as they had got then Mr. Was nothing else done?-I saw Mr. SewHudson drank aloud, “ The French republic! man interrupt you. or constitution !" I cannot say which exactly, Was this before or after I addressed the and Mr. Pigott said, “I will join you in that, company? - It was before. with all my heart;" on the doing that, the Now, Sir, pray what was the manner of gentlemen in the room got up on their fect, that interruption?-He told you, you were a except those two men, he and Pigott, and bad man, or you would not bave been guilty “ The king! The king !" was called from all of giving that toast. I do not know, whether quarters of the coffee-room, to my knowledge he did not call you a rascal. it was; when that was the case, Mr. Hudson Pray, Sir, did you not hear him call me a got up his glass and in a very loud voice called rascal? If you can recollect one part of the out, “ The French republic; and may it conversation, so much against me, you surely triumph over all the governments in Eu- can recollect the other, or else your's горе !?

must be a very accommodating memory. In what tone of voice did he call out that? Did not you hear him call me a rascal:-In a very loud tone of voice, much sharper It was thereabouts. than he had said any thing before.

Was it words to that effect?-I think Prisoner. You said it was about seven it was. o'clock in the evening when I came into the Were they opprobrious terms ?-There were coffee-room? I have said so.

words on both sides. • How long do you think I was in the coffee. I ask you positively whether he did or did room from first to last?- I cannot say. not call me a rascal ?--He did to that pur

How long do you think ?-He kept the pose. room for, I suppose, half an hour after the Would yon have supposed that any other business might have all been over.

man was called a rascal -I know the words That is not an answer.—How long do you he said to you was calling you a rascal. think I was in the coffee-room?-I suppose Did he do any thing else ?-When you you might be two hours; I took no particular called him a rascal he seemed to have an innotice of the clock.

clination of striking you on the head with his Did I address myself to you in any part of cane. that two hours or not?-As an individual you Did you hear Mr. Newman call me a never addressed me.

rascal? What did he call me?-I told you Did I address myself to the company at he called you something to that purpose. large ?-Yes.

Did you see Mr. Newman do any thing You swear that positively ?-I do. to me than call me opprobrious names ? To

Pray how was that manner of address cut the matter short, did not you see him put made t-You said, when the gentleman got his fist to my face?-He did put it very near up and drank “ the king,” you got up and to you. said,-“ what are we all?

if he had applied to you in that way would How? did I address myself to the whole you have supposed that he meant to strike room ?-You asked them, what were they you?-I had not given him a provocation to all? That was immediately after you had do it. drunk the toast.

Would not you have supposed he tras How long do you think I might have been going to strike you ?–Mr. Newman and you, in the cottee-room before I addressed the both, were in a passion, and you called out to company with that question ?-I do not know, the whole room that he was an aristocrat ard perhaps an hour, or an hour and a half. a rascal.

Do you think it was an hour?—I do not Did not you see him put his fist in my face think it was quite so much.

before I addressed the company?-He seemed What had passed before I asked that ques. inclined to strike you over the lead. tion ?- The drinking of the toast.

Was not all this previous to my having adPray in consequence of what was it that I dressed myself to him or the company? made that address ?-When they drank “ the It was in consequence of getting up and king !"

drinking, “ the French republic, and may it Pray, Mr. Buchanan, did you see any body triumph over all the governments of Europe !" attempt to interrupt ine previous to this ad- You say, you heard me call the king, a dress ? Mind, I ask you positively to speak German hog-butcher and other words; are to that question, because you must know.- you sure that these were all the words that I Yes, I think Mr. Newman did.

uttered? Are you sure that I never uttered Are you positive that Mr. Newman did ?- | any words by way of comparison, such as he I inink so.

was no better?-1 have told every thing is You seem to be extremely positive in some the best of my recollection. other things, why not in this ? Did you or Do not you know what passed previous to did you not see some person interrupt me ?- my making use of these words :- I remember Yes, they drank" the king !"

a great many scurrilous things said of diffe

[ocr errors]

this in your room?" By this time Mr. Hudson had spoken so very loud, as to cause Mr. Newman to call for a glass of punch, and give

rent characters; but they are put off here by the Court, and I am not to mention them. Pray at what period of the evening was it that I gave a toast" to the French republic?"" the king!" and every body in the room got At the time that Mr. Newman and you seemed to have a scuffle, when you got the third glass of punch, not before that as I can recollect; and you sat by me all the time; I was not far, I was a great deal too near you. You were not, I think, before the alderman, when I was first taken up?-I never was before any body till I came here.

Were not you applied to, to come before the alderman?-No.

up on their feet, and gave "the king! the king!" ten times or more; this roused Mr. Hudson, he got up on his legs and gave "the French republic!" he had a glass in his hand; Mr. Newman then went rather closer to him, and seemed to show great indignation at the toast which he had given; Mr. Hudson persisted in it, and gave it again, and said he would drink it, and held up his stick in a posture to provoke Mr. Newman to strike him. Mr. Newman seemed very warm, but was persuaded by the gentlemen present not to strike Was it not in consequence of a paragraph him; I believe no blows passed on either side. appearing in one of the papers, stating that Do you remember whether he held up his this country had to pay for so many Hano-stick in that menacing posture, before he was verians killed, at thirty pounds a head, that I threatened by Mr. Newman?-I should rather made these remarks?—I did not hear you think it was after Mr. Newman had reproved read that. him for giving such a toast, but certainly before Mr. Newman offered to strike him.

How came you to come here to-day?-Mr. White subpoenaed me here.

John Leech sworn.

What followed on that?-Several gentlemen called to me, and desired I would turn them out of the room; I told them I had observed their conduct for some time, and I did not think I was justified in turning them out of the room, but I certainly would deliver them into the hands of the police. I sent for an officer; there was twenty minutes elapsed or more before an officer came; during that time they behaved very riotously, particularly that gentleman offering his stick in the face of two or three gentlemen. Mr. Pigott made an attempt to go out, but I pulled him back again and had all the doors fastened, and when the officer came, I gave them into his custody.

I keep the New London coffee-house; this gentleman, Mr. Hudson, and Mr. Pigott, came into the London coffee-house between seven and eight o'clock, the 30th of September last; it was on a Monday evening, they had been in the house more than half an hour, and they had had three glasses of punch, and began to be noisy; they called for several papers, in fact I believe all the papers, and as they called them they read different paragraphs from them, and commented on the paragraphs as they went on; there was nothing which called my attention till they gave some toasts as were thought, by the company present, very improper ones, as "equality," "the French republic;" they both drunk it, I believe that gentleman gave it; he then drunk," an overthrow to the present system of government throughout Europe!" "I am not sure whether Mr. Pigott drank that, that-Till near nine. gentleman gave it.

Prisoner. Pray Mr. Leech what hour in the evening was it I entered your house?—I suppose it might be about seven o'clock.

How long might I remain in your house?

You think it did not exceed nine before I Do you recollect any other toasts that were went out?—I think it was about nine. given by the defendant?-There were several How came I to go out of your house?—I others, but I cannot take upon myself to re-ordered you out; I gave you in charge of the collect any others; these were both given by Mr. Hudson.

Had he a glass in his hand? Was he standing or sitting?-He was sitting at that time; he gave it in a friendly manner, but very loud; in short he called the attention of all in the room, and the gentlemen pressed me to turn him out; I told them I would thank them if they would make it a business of their own, as I did not wish to interfere in it ; several gentlemen reproved me for it, and told me I ought not to suffer such behaviour in the coffee-room.

Was that heard by Mr. Hudson?-It was not, these toasts I have mentioned must be heard by the gentlemen; by this time Mr. Newman came in, he walked up the room and he heard the toasts, and he said," Mr. Leech, why do you suffer such behaviour as VOL. XXII.

officer.

What authority had you for that?-If you had not said any thing I should not have ordered you out by an officer.

What period might I have been in your house, when I drank" the French republic ?" It was near eight.

How many glasses of punch did I drink in your house?-Three.

Was it the first, second, or third?-The third. Did I address myself ever to you?—Yes; you called me a fool.

Did any body attempt to interrupt me before I addressed myself to the company? Yes; you were clearly interrupted before you addressed the company, because every body was so hurt.

Did you not hear Mr. Newman call me a rascal?—I did not. 13 U

« VorigeDoorgaan »