Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

prehensions of danger were afloat: but from the evidence brought forward on these trials, it was pro ved that the great mass of the population in the metropolis was sound and untainted; and that mischievous designs were exclusive ly confined to those who were not in the smallest degree formidable from their talents, their numbers, or their influence.

The trials next in importance to those of Watson and his associates were the state trials at Derby, of several people who had assembled in a most violent and tumultuous manner, and who, it was alleged, designed to force the government into their measures, if not actually to overturn the government, by the measures they pursued. The principal among those who were tried at Derby for those crimes was a man of the name of Brandreth. From every account and description of this man, he seems undoubt edly to have been calculated and qualified to be the leader of a band of desperate conspirators against the tranquillity of the country. By the energy of his mind, the undaunted valour which he displayed, and the constant, cool, and full command of his penetration and judgement, which were always ready to assist and counsel him when they were most needed, as well as by his dark and desperate character, he had gained and exercised unbounded influence over his associates. It was proved an the trial, that an intention to overthrow the government was not only formed, but avowed; not avowed in indistinct terms, but openly ;-that it formed, as it were, the badge and rallying word of the conspirators; and that they conceived themselves perfectly justified in having recourse to arms, to endeavour to

free themselves from the alleged thraldom, and actual misery, in which they were involved.

It is unnecesary here to repeat the substance of the evidence which was brought forward on these trials; it certainly proved, that treason had been committed, by Brandreth and some others, with a perfect knowledge that they were com mitting treason, with an undaunted view of the probable consequences, and with what they conceived to be a full justification of their plans and measures. With respect to most of the other prisoners, it was proved that they had acted through ignorance, and under the influence of Brandreth. The public prosecutor, the judge, and the jury, made the proper and equitable distinction: only the most desperately guilty, thre most dangerous criminals were executed; the rest were either not tried, or, after having been found guilty, were pardoned, or had the capital part of their sentence commuted for more lenient punishment.

Those who contended that government were perfectly justified in suspending the habeas corpus act, referred to the result of these trials at Derby as a proof of the justice of the opinion. There can be no doubt that it was fully proved on these trials, that a considerable number of people had armed themselves for the avowed purpose of attempting to carry into execution, by means of arms, plans, which, if they could have been carried into execution to the full extent, which they imagined and expected, must have been fatal to the existence of the government;-or, more shortly, by these trials at Derby it was proved, that acts of high treason had been committed. Still the question recurs-Ought the habeas corpus

act

act to be suspended, whenever a few desperate men enter on plans which cannot fail to terminate in their own discomfiture and punishment, so long as the great mass of the people are sound and untainted; and so long as those desperate men are not countenanced or joined by any persons of influence or character. In short, ought the habeas corpus act to be suspended while the great mass of the people are sound and untainted?-Ought all to be deprived of one of the greatest bulwarks of our liberties, merely because a very few, and those not formidable on any one account, are mad enough to plot the ruin of the government?

On the other hand, the trials at Derby were alleged to have proved beyond a doubt, that all the mischief was occasioned by the spies of government. There was, indeed, no evidence brought forward on the trials to show that the prisoners had been instigated or encouraged by government spies to the actions for which they were tried and condemned. In explanation of this circumstance it is stated, that the counsel for the prisoners had no opportunity of bringing forward such evidence; that it could have done no good to the prisoners. This, however, we must confess, is not a satisfactory explanation; for though the proof that the prisoners had been encouraged and instigated to the plans and acts for which they were tried, would have been no legal defence of their conduct, yet it would undoubtedly have weighed with the jury in their behalf. If their counsel had examined Oliver, who was alleged to have been the most active of the government spies, and to have been chiefly instrumental in fomenting the disturbances in Derbyshire and the 1817.

adjacent counties, they might certainly have brought out from his examination proofs (if any there actually were), that, if he had not encouraged the prisoners, the latter would not have proceeded to those extreme acts by which they rendered themselves liable to the punishment of high treason. Some of the prisoners were actually not brought to trial, or, after being found guilty,

were sentenced to a more lenient punishment, solely on account of some things in their character, or in the circumstances brought out during their trials, which were fa vourable to them. And could any circumstance have pleaded more strongly in their favour than the proof (if it could have been obtained) that government spies had entirely, or in a great degree, led these unhappy men to the deeds for which they were tried on a charge of high treason? All things considered, without permitting party clamour to weigh with us, we cannot help believing that, in the case of Brandreth and his associates, no circumstance could have been adduced on their trials, with respect to their having been instigated by government spies, which would have been favourable to the culprits.

On the declaration of one of them, just on the eve of his execution, that Oliver was the author of his death, we must confess we are not disposed to lay much stress. If, on the one hand, some persons of warm religious feelings, at the approach of death are disposed to regard a violation of truth as a more dreadful crime than at any other time, there can be no doubt that others will not be very scrupulous on the subject, from the reflection, that if the falsehood of what they assert is afterwards found out, it cannot possibly injure them

U

Derby

Derby was the only place at which legal proof was given that high treason had been committed. The result of the trials at Westminster-hall, as we have seen, was, that there was no legal proof of high treason having been committed by the Spa-fields rioters. In Scotland, also, government endeavoured to show that their measures had been called for by the state of that part of the kingdom. The Scotch, in their attempts to reform what they conceive to be the abuses of the constitution, generally proceed in a different manner from the English; and indeed the Scotch reformers have at all times been a different description of men from the English reformers.

This proceeds chiefly from the great and striking difference be tween the national character of the English and the national character of the Scotch. The great mass of the people in Scotland are much better informed than the great mass of the people in England; they are, moreover, distinguished by greater strength and compass of intellect. Generally speaking, the English peasantry and labouring classes are little entitled to that grand characteristic of rational beings,-they look little before and after. Like children, and all persons of minds little cultivated, the present moment almost fills their minds. The Scotch peasantry and labouring classes, on the other hand, are accustomed from their earliest youth to look far and attentively both before and after: hence they are distinguished for their good sense, as well as correct conduct; and for being more under the guidance of their judgement, and less under the influence of their feelings and passions, than the English peasantry and labouring classes.

The Scotch, therefore, seldom give themselves up rashly and precipitately to any measures in which their interests may be involved. They look far forward, and they look long and attentively before they act: but after they have determined to act, there is always more consistency and perseverance in their actions, than there could be if they were stimulated by mere feeling. There is one circumstance, however, in the Scotch national character, or rather in their conduct, which seems not exactly in unison with their accustomed soundness, sobriety, and caution of behaviour. In religion and politics they usually go from one extreme to another. During the agitated state of the country soon after the beginning of the French revolution, when the Scotch convention existed, the most decided advocates for pure repub. licanism were in Scotland; and whoever is acquainted with that country, even generally and superficially, must know that, with respect to religion, the Scotch are mostly in extremes.

The west of Scotland has long been distinguished as that part of the kingdom in which the greatest enthusiasm with regard both to religion and politics displayed itself. It was in this part of Scotland that the Cameronians and Covenanters chiefly underwent, with such he roic fortitude, the persecutions to which they were exposed in the time of Charles II.; and there still are to be met with there, men as inquisitive and dauntless searchers after truth as their ancestors were at that period.

During the agitation of political questions in the years 1790-1796, Glasgow and its vicinity were distinguished for the number and intelligence of the reformers which

they

they contained, as well as for the zeal with which they endeavoured to spread their opinions. It was chiefly among the operative weavers that they were to be met with; and then, as well as lately, not merely extensive information but very considerable eloquence was displayed among these classes.

Major Cartwright visited Scotland during his missionary tour in behalf of reform already alluded to; and his zeal and example acting upon the already excited minds of the Scotch, produced such effects as might be anticipated. There were several meetings, particularly near Glasgow, Paisley, and the other manufacturing towns in the west of Scotland, for the purpose of petitioning parliament, or adopt ing other measures, in behalf of reform in the representation, and retrenchment of expenditure. Besides these public meetings, it was known that there were associations similar to those in England. Government took the alarm; and the lord advocate of Scotland thought himself justified in ordering some persons to be taken up for administering unlawful oaths. The powers of the lord advocate in Scotland are very great: indeed their limits are hardly defined by the law, or known exactly to the person who exercises them. He is the public officer who prosecutes crimes before the court of justiciary. At the circuit courts he acts by deputy. He possesses powers more extensive than all the grand juries of England; for he not only decides whether the parties suspected shall be prosecuted, but în capital crimes can, by a motion before trial, restrict the sentence to what is called an arbitrary punishment; that is, a punishment at the discretion of the judge, not extending to death.

From this short and imperfect sketch of the powers of the lord advocate of Scotland, it will be suf ficiently apparent, that unless the judges and jury before whom the accused are tried give them the full benefit of the laws, and of the evidence that may be adduced in their favour, their chance of escape is very small. The lord advocate brought two persons to their trial before the court of justiciary in Scotland, for the alleged crime of administering unlawful oaths. It is highly to the honour of the Scotch bar, that the most celebrated advocates (or counsel) at it offered their services in behalf of the prisoners ; and by their talents, the mismanagement of the lord advocate, and the strict impartiality of the judges, they succeeded in proving that the prisoners were not guilty of the crime laid to their charge. It fortu nately happens, that very frequently great power is rendered harmless by not being allied to great talent. This was the case in the present instance. The chief witness against the prisoners was a man to whom an offer had been made, on the part of the law-officers of the crown in Scotland, of a reward if he would give evidence: and this offer was made, though it is the uniform practice of the Scotch courts to ask every witness, as soon as he is placed in the witnesses' box, whether he has received any offer of reward to induce him to give his testimony? As soon as the witness on this trial had answered the question in the affirmative, the cause was abandoned by the lord advocate. Indeed, it is most surprising that it did not occur to him, that in either case his witness was inadmissible:-if he spoke the truth, he was inadmissible, because he then must have declared that he had re..

[blocks in formation]

ceived an offer of reward, and therefore could not be admitted as a witness; and if he did not speak the truth, his perjury would equally have rendered him inadmissible.

Besides these trials for high treason, or for capital crimes, there were other trials which excited a large and general share of interest in the public mind during the year 1817: we allude to the trials of Wooler and Hone. Both these men, a short time before Cobbett left this country for America, had begun to publish weekly political pamphlets, very bold and severe in their strictures, as well as violent and extreme in the plans they recommended, and in the measures they proposed to carry these plans into execution. At last ex officio informations were filed against them by the attorney general. It may be proper to inform our readers, or at least to recall to their recollection, that in all cases where the attorney-general files such information, there is no intervention of a grand jury to determine whether there is ground for trial, and that the attorney-general may, after he has filed the information, either proceed upon it and bring the accused to trial, or suffer the apprehension of trial to hang over his head. These powers, so much at variance not only with the spirit of our constitution but with its prac tice in other cases, have always rendered trials by cr officio informa. tions extremely unpopular.

There were two circumstances attending the trials of Wooler for libels, that deserve notice :-in the first place he pleaded his own cause. This he did with great intrepidity as well as considerable presence and powers of mind. There can be no doubt, that in almost every case, it is the height of folly for a man to

plead his own cause; but if ever it is likely not to prejudice, but rather to benefit him, it is where the accusation is that which involves politics. Judges are but men: and though they may be anxious to do strict justice between the crown and individuals, yet partialities, prepossessions and party feelings will intervene; and these will probably be roused very much, if the defence of the prisoner involves a bold defence in that line of politics which is most obnoxious to government, and especially if it involves a defence of those doctrines that are generally regarded and represented by the advocates for the measures of ministry, as striking at the root of public tranquillity. Counsel, therefore, who, however great their talents and skill may be, must depend for their successful defence of their clients, and consequently their practice, in a considerable degree on the judge's hearing them with attention, or setting his face against them (to make use of a homely but expressive phrase), will not be very ready to offer in defence of a person brought to trial for a political crime, all that might be said. Wooler, therefore, resolved to defend himself, and he succeeded in persuading the jury, in one of the cases, that he was not guilty. On his other trial occurred the circumstance to which we alluded above. Whenever the jury deem it fit or necessary to retire from the court to consider of the verdict, the law requires that they should all come again into the court, before the foreman pronounces the verdict: on one of Wooler's trials, the foreman pronounced the verdict before all the jury had again come into court:-and upon this circumstances occurring, great doubts arose, whether a new trial should take place, and if a tew trial, whe

ther

« PredošláPokračovať »