The Sun. — London, England, 1812-05-16 00:00:00

amentel Friend. .Enconraged by this censidera t r. , he \N'oiltfl epture to state the motives by w f bieli i.e. was tetluenced. He bad tried to- lratne m'o- Ceu in ouch ,t way, as eta : repel any .oppotitiori that pleal&a I , would go merely stegaelest ne Right Ha3tr. Spencer Perceval hay 1-e' in :the telirsci'etitious dikharge of his duty drawn eleon himself the unrelenting animosity of an indi dual, by refusing to remunerate a private loss, by a_ public gta t, had b,ecn. assaesinAted _within the walls of the House of Commons. He asked for no opieien ea the politiCal merits of Mr. Pereeval. It -would be highly unbecoming in him had he done so. All he asked Was a commemoratien of his vir tues, f+ret a recored opinion of the atrocity of the a& by which be had fallen. He only "asked the Hon. Gentleman *opposite, to do that_ which, had a similar accident happened under similar circum stances, to any one of them, he would most_cor dially and sincerely have done. 01 Mr. Perceval, it might be truly. said, that he had injured no man, and that he did good- to all whom it was in bis poeer to assist. It perhaps might be permitted him to s'av, that as long as a single virtuous feeling glow ed within his breast,. he should think of the crime which had been perpetrated with the utmost ab horrence, and of the objetk of that cri.ne with the utmost respea and veneration. The Clerk having, in consequence of his Lord ship's request, read the resolutions of the House of Tuesday last, , a Lord CLIVE moved— " That an humble Address be presented to his Royal Highness the Prince Regent, praying that his Royal Highness would be graciouely pleased to order a monument to be erected in the Collegiate Church of St. Peter, Westminster, to the memory of the late Right Hon'. Spencer Perceval, First Commis sioner of his Majesty's Treasury, and Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was assassinated within - the wails of Parliament, as a Mark of the deep sense which the Hou , e entertains of his public and private . virtues, and of its abhorrence of the act by'which he fell." . Admirat , HARVEY seconded the motion. It ap peared to him to be.universally admitted, that some durable public testimony was requisite to record the abhorrence - of Parliathent of the late atrocious oc ' CUrreace. What Parliament had done already would not 'go beyond atheir own lives. He trusted, that the decisibd of the House on the Noble Lord's mo tion would be unanimous ; otherwise justice would • not be done to the public virtues of Mr. Perceval, acknowledged as they had been from all quarters, the sincerity of which acknowledgment he had no reason to doubt.' Mr. LAMBE, feeling as he did the mot sincere re gret for the late calamity, could easily conceive the pain experienCeaby those who were intimately con : neaed with the eminent Statesmap of whom the House and the country had been deprived. He had concurred in : the former votes, not only for the sake of ,Unanimity, but because Mr. Perceval had died unenriched by his important office, and he de fied the tongue of malice to impute those votes to any improper motive. It was with great pain, he observed, that he had now a different duty to dis charge. To vote a public monument to an indivi dtial, was so clear a reengnitian of his public ser vices, and of the public gratitude due to him, that having opposed most of Mr. Perceval's political mea sures, he could not, in the conscientious discharge of his duty, agree to the proposition. Had he ever been a supporter of Mr. Perceval's administration, be, should not aave inclined to bring forward such a proposition. He did not see any thing in the cir cumstances of Mr. Perceval's death, which entitled him to such an honour, in preference to many to whom it had not been granted ; among whom were Lord Godolphin, Sir Robert 'Waleole, Mr. .Pelham, and, in Our own - times, Mr. Burke,' Mr. Windham, and Mr. Fox. Mr. FULLER observed, that if the persons just • mentioned by the Hon. Gentleman bad been actu ally destroyed when - in the execution of their duty, and that at a moment when they were engaged in the public service, he could not believe that any , House of Commons that ever'existed, would have refused to ere& a monument to them.. Was a mo• nument ever refused to the Captain of a ship, or the leader of an army, who fell in the discharge of his citify to his country ) Mr. Perceval, whatever might be his political / principles, was at the moment • of his death, in the discharge of a great public duty, in which both sides of the House were concerned. — He spoke th;s, as it struck him as a man. He had supported Mr. Perceval's political measures,' when living, beFease he thoUght they were right,.and not because he . had any patticulacintimacy with that Gentleman. What was the objea to a great nation? ' All that was -asked, was a monument, - done by Nollekens, who was the • hest sculptor, and who ' Would produce a very•elegant thing for 4000 gui , nets. When good . -men were suddenly taken from n 'us in such a way, there ought to be some pub -- lic testimony of their -woYth.' If the Hon. Gentleman oppdaite or the Hon. Gentleman next; to him were suddenly taken , away, although he was of velar dif fereot principles; he would be the first man to pro - pose a monument on the occasion. His . was unlet tered oratory, which Blair said, sometimes came more forcibly than any fed oratory. He should feel gra % titie.d it the motion were acceded to, and he•was sure • the country would feel gratified too. Lord CASTLEREAG/1 declared, that if the.motion included any political opinion,- he should think it a . • most injudicems proposition, He should be very . • sorry it were to go to the vote, if it were supposed , that he and his political friends were to derive any triumph from its adoption. He shotald deprecate ' the motioa in that case as - turning the House and the country aside from the consideration of all the moral circumstances attendant on th'e transaaion.— It was, however, precisely the same proposition as centained in the original Address.; It merely testis ' fied the aohorrelice which the House felt for the crime, and the respect which they entertained (a relax( in wii;ch . his political adversaries had been . rric.t forward to loin) for the virtues of his lamented Friend. He should only vote as a memorial of the hot rid ad.', and of the public and private virtues of the individual who was the object of it, without t he ,I:ghtest reterence to any political consideration. Tie cireeimstences of the transaction deinanded a ieeenanere rect.) Those circumstances were, that a public sersant of the Crown perished in the ser - s ea , to ift Slate, and as in the . service . of ihe State, not less in the service of Parliament, at the very en ' t;etiee imu teet-esserittay. - He thotight they j would be t - neA ffeglii;eril of their duly if they fails:) to have as durable a record as thee art of man could produce,to impress itself upon the eyes of the com miserating generation by , which they were to be followed. ; Thar H-onuurable Gentleman opposite would net abandon a tittle of their political princi ples by acceding to the motion. If he thought they would, whatever might be his private feelings on the subject, his respect for them would induce hint not to support it. Mr. WHITBREAD shortly stated his reasons for not being able to concur in the motion. He ac quitted the Noble Mover, and the Noble Lard, of any intension to entrap into an approbation of Mr. Perceval's politics, those who had been Mr. Per ceval's political enemies. - Indeed he knew. that it had been the anxious wish of the Noble Mover,-so to reduce the awed Of praise which the motion in- Volved, as to concentrate all parties in the Rouse, but this Was impossible. . To concur in an unani mous vote' for this monument, would be to concur in an unanimous approval of Mr. Perceval's pub lic services (// cry of ko, No!) It 'could not be otherwise. Even the gallant Admiral had scarcely, commenced his speech before he -talked of. the public services of Mr. Perceval. The in terpretation which- he (Mr. 'Whitbread) had given to the vote, would be put upon it after the present fieeting debate was long over, If the monument was, erected in consequence of an unanimous vote of the House, it would be said by posterity that those who arraigned all Mr. Perceval's public mea sures had suddenly, abandoned. their politicel opi nions, and had concurred in granting tohis memory a marked distinction due only to the icero who fell in the cause of his country, or to the Statesman who concluded his country to prosperity. He would not trouble the House much longer, for, indeed, while the grave of Mr. Perceval remained, unclosed, he did not feel disposed to enter into any thirig like,politi-. cal dispute; The House had already recorded their abhorrence of Mr. Perceval's assassination ; they had agreed in the eminence of his public and private virtues, and, notwithstanding the durability of a mo nument, he trusted that the Journals of that House would be still more durable. The page of history would narrate the fact of their abhorrence. It would be a consolation to posterity, that the same page would convey the information that the person by whom it had been committed was, as tar as the subjea had- been investigated, unconnected with any other. He hoped this would be confirmed.— He should consider it. his. duty to take the sense of the House on the motion. He had never, 'from the first day, understood it to have been' the inten tion of Mr. Perceval's nearest friends to make such a one. He presumed, therefore, that it originated entirely with the Noble Lord ?• (Lord Clive bowed assent.) It did honour, he must say, to the Noble Lord's feelings; and he trusted that in what he had said he should not be supposed to. have meant any thing in the slightest degree disreapectful, either to the Noble Lord or to Mr. Perceval's memory. His opposition to the motion was founded on public grounds alone. Mr. CANNING, although he wished it had been possible to secure unanimity on t he present occasion, yet thought it but common candour to say, that the Hon. Gentleman had stated his objections to the motion in a way the least grating possible to those who were friendly to it. He had recently induced an Hon. Gentleman not to presa a motion for a public funeral to Mr. Perceval, because he thought that that motion might have been liable to the mis construction of comprehending Parliamentary ap probation of, 'Mr. Perceval's political principles.— But, in his opinion, the present proposition was free from that objection, for. care had been taken so to frame ie that it should not convey to posterity any sentiment a jot stronger than that Ixltch. the vote, to which the House had unanimously agreed, ex pressed. The Hon. Gentleman seemed apprehen sive that when posterity contenapiated this monu ment they would regard it as 'a proof of Parlia mentary approbation of MrePerceval's public ser vices, and not as a national concentration of sor row. He did not think it would ever be so regard ed. He did not think so disparaging a sentiment towards the Hon. Gentlemen opposite would ever be entertained, as to suppose them capable, when an obstacle to their ambition was removed, of heap ing tributes upon the dead which they refused to the living. He did not conceive that. the result of this .MOtion would be liable to any sucli , miscon sirnaion. He thought that the construction of all who.might hereafter look upon the monument (un less indeed it were possible, which it was not, that all historical records should perish, and that monu ments alone should survive), would be that political animosities had been, as in faa they had been, sus pended, and thatall other considerations had tor a time merged in the deeper feeling of sorrow for so lamented an individual, cut off in a manner the Most atrocious and almost unexampledr He con fessed that he should very much regret, if Parlia ment were' to pass lightly over an occurrence which, as it had shocked the present. age, ought to be re corded in such a manner, as to excite the hOr:ar of postelity. With that vieta v ealoee, and strialy limit ing his intention to that objea, he should most cer tainly give his support to the Noble Lord'a . motion. If the Gallant.Admnal had permitted his feelings to betray him into an expression stronger than die immediate circunrstanee allowed, that was no argn ment against the motion. - Even the honourable Gentleman himself, at 'the moment when he was most anxious to guard himself from any sup posed concurrence in the motioo, used the words " public virtues," as applicable. to Mr.. Perceval, and_yet those were ti o teidentical words included in the vote. Mr. WHITBREAD and Admiral HARVEY CX plained. • • Sir G. WARRENDER concurred heartily in the mo tion of the Noble Lord, without conceiving.that he was-guilty of Any dereliaion of those political prin ciples-to which he was attached.. Mr. LOKCIIART was sure, that in acceding to it, the House would only concur with all the wise and good in the country. , • Sir. C.' BURR:ILL supported the motion. . Mr. C.-WYNNE objealed, that there-was no in stance on the Journals in which a monument was voted to. the public and private virtues.of any indi vidual. That to 'bird Chatham was for acknow ledged public services, The present case was dif ferent from that of great naval or military charac ters who fell in the moment of victory, for by this monument it was intended to coinmettaorate not a trdnstiaioti of national glory and heroistii, btlt to mark thefeelings of Parliament on a disgraceful oc currence which every one must shrink from the re colle&ion of. tri cOncluded , with moving; as an Amendment, That the other Orders of the Day should be read,,, in order to avoid coming to a vote upon the subje t. Lord Alturoll objet:led to the motion; on the ground of the impossibility of separating the idea of a public monument from an approbation of public services. The 'provision which Parliament had al ready made, appeared to him to testify sufficintly the feelings they entertained on the occasion. After some tomplitnents.to the si . ncerity and integrity of Mr. Percvval, and citing the insto,;ce of the murder of the Duke of Buckingham, to whom no public monument was voted, he concluded with declaring it to be impossible for him to support the proposi tion of the Noble Lord. Lord DYSART spoke in favour of the motion, and contended, that it was not a question to be decided by the weight of precedents, but that it sub nitted itself to all. the honourable feelings of the human breast. 'The character of the individual, and the circumstances of the Aimes, called for such a mark of their sentiments. He proceeded to make some observations on the situation of Mr. Perceval's fa mily; the loss they had sustained, and the,virtues by which he was distinguished, and expressed himself strongly of opinion, that a monument should be erected *to his memory. Mr. WILBERFdRC \ E heartily assented to the pro position,, though he- was far from thinking that the glory of his-Right Hon. Friend should be looked for in a monument. The place in which it would best appear was the history of his country, in which he would go down to succeeding generations as one of its most upright Ministers and brigfitest ornaments. With respect to the eieetion of a monument to his name in Westminster Abbey, it were to be wished ,that many, whose memories obtained the same dis tint-tan had been equally deserving of it. Mr. ELLA oT declared, that if lie could bring him self to give .such a 'vote from private considera tions, he should not hesitate to give it to the undoubted - virtues of Mr; Perceval, but that no being the case, he was under the necessity of re. fusing it. The House then divided, For-the Amendment - kor the original Motion Majority The report of the resolutions on :the Prince Re gent's Message. being re-committed, Mr. Husxissorr proposed a resolution in the Committee, granting to the son of Mr. Perceval one thousand pounds a year, to commence from the day of his father's death, and continue during the lifetime of Mrs.. Perceval. The resolution was agreed to, and the report ordered to be brought up on Wed nesday next. The House then Went into a Committee on the Orders in Council, and proceeded to the examina nation of witnesses, after which the House ad - iourned. 26 -173 OLD BAILEY, FRIDAY, MAY 15. TRIAL OF 10HN BELLINGHAM FOR THE MUR. DER OF THE RIGHT HON. SPENCER PERCE. VAL. Abput ten o'clock Sir.JAMES MANSFIELD, Baron GRAHAM, .and Mr. Justice GROSE, entered the Court : they took their seats on each side of the LORDMAYoR,:and wereaCcompanied by the Duke of . CLARENCE, the Marquis WELLESLEY,• the RECOR DER, and almost all the Aldermen of the city of London. Besides the Duke of CLARENCE and the Marquis WELLESLEY, we observed many other dis- . finguished persons in Court. The crowd was so immense, that no distinetion of rank was attended to, and many Members of the House of Commons were, therefore, obliged_to mingle in the throng. Among the most prominent of the'Members were `Lord LEVESON GOWER, Sir FRANCIS BURDETT, . General GASCOYNE, Mr, WILLIAM SMITH, Mr. :VERNON, (son of the Archbishop of York) &c. There were also present a great number of Ladies, all led by the most intense curiosity to behold the assassin, and to hear what he might urge in defence or in palliation of his atrocious ad. . . - At length Bellingham appeared, and advanced_ tt the bar with a firm step, and quite undiSmayed. He bowed to the Court most.respedfully, and even -. gracefully. The impression that his appearance . made, accompanied as it was by this unexpected and unnatural fortitude, it is impossible for us to de-' scribe. A mute horror seemed to sit upon every countenance in the silence o: the first, few minutes ; but the miserable cause of it looked altogether un consciotls of the effeel he had produced: . He was dressed in a light brown surtout coat, and .striped yellow waistcoat : his hair plainly dressed, and with out powder.. Before the prisoner was called upon regularly to plead, • Mr. ALLEY rose, and said, he had 'to - Make an application for the'postponement of the trial. That application was founded upon statements, which went to shew that the prisoner could be proved to be insane, if sufficient tirne• were allowed for wit- . . nesses .to appear in his tavour. Mr. ALLEY was here interrupted by the Attor ney-General. He objected to the (node adopted by the Counsel for the prisoner in making" his objec tions. This was certainly not the, proper titne for making speeches. The first wage of proceeding:, was, according to all pradice, the pleading of the prisoner to . the indictment. Mr. GARROW agreed entirely with the Atiorney - General. He spoke after , the most mature consi deration ; and he was of opinion that there was, in, ' fad, but the one course which the Court could . suffer upon this occasion. Mr. ALLEY was about to reply, ~w!,;en he was told by the Court that they would not bear him. An application of this nature never was made be fore. How did the Court, e'en know, ;until the prisoner pleaded, whether he was in Court or not, or whether lie had Counsel ? This point being thus ruled, the indictment Was read, which contained three counts, and in the usual ,form charged the prisoner with the murder of the Right Hon. Spencer Perceval. - While the indictment was .reading, the prisoner listened with ,the greatest attention ; and when the I question guilty, or , not guilty was put to him, he t. spoke - shbitly tb the following effect :—“ . .My Lords t can pieaa to this inciiament, I east state, in justice Co myself, that by the hurrying ori. 4 of my trial, I ani 'piked in a most remarkable si tuation. It so happdnit, that my prosecutors are ac tually the witnesses agaiiist rne. All the document on which alone I could rest ttiy defenCe, have been taken from me, and are now to ptziession of the Crown. It is only. two days since I was told by Mr. Litchfield, :the Solicitor of the Treatury, tei prepare for my trier and . 'wheni Asked filth -- for my papers, lie told me that they would, not be vett up to, me. It ,is, therefore, my Lords, rendered utterly impossible for me to go into my justifica tion ; and under the circuMstance in which I firA Myself, a trial is absolutely useless. The part; are to be given to me after the trial, but how . cati that .avail me for my defence? I arm therefore; tot ready for my trial." The Court, however, insisted that he shoulj dead to the indictment : and then, in a silbdueti :one df voice; he said, " Not guilty I put thyself upon God and my countrY." Mr. ATTOR'NEY-GENERAL then rose and said that, in answer to what had fallen from tliti prisoner by way of complaint, he had to state, that when the papers were applied for, although tbei were refused, copies of them were . offered,- was told that they themselves should be given to 11414 at the trial. Mr. GARROW confirmed this stateinent. - - Mr. Ai.LEY.—My Lords, it is now my duty, ag'' cording to the instructions I have received, to make a regular application to you for the' postponement , this trial. Ho wever unpleasantly I may feel mysel'. • situated,—how ever to one's honourab , emotions it may yet will never shrink froal c my.duty ; and I now, therefore, have to corned: that, the Jury ought not to be sworn in this case, can produce affidavits that the prisoner at the bar e. not competent to rational actions, that he is not in state to meet this charge suijuris. The affidavits whic h I have, state, that whatever the appearance of th e prissoner may be,—howevet plausible' that appea r '' ance, he has been known by the: deponent to be , sane for years. The name of the person mak."„Fs the affidavit is :Anne &nett, who states, that oef was in Southampton, in Hants, when she heatd this dreadful , business, and that she illStantlY I ,?f r tened up to London : that she arrived only 'ye 4lec ; day, and has not had time to apprize many per°_,rl of the trial, wh6; to her knowledge, could treo• Aerial witnesses for- the prisoner : that; in parli 6 l lar e one Captain Batter could prove material fi d : tending to shew his insanity ; that she herself 114;ti' no doubt but that the prisoner was in a derang , o state of mind for a long time previously to- t f murder2e The other affidavit was from one Clark, of Newgate-street, stating, that ever s incet_ h e prisoner came, ,2 years age, from Russia, he was .Z 4 ofiotind mind. Upon these affidavits he grourtl e , a. his application for postponing the trial. It wes.irf, nesS for him to enforce this application by . any 1 30 gunients. He was quite confident that it mus t tile the \fish of every person, from the highest' tg.o lowest, conneCted with the administration of jug' tlf to allow this plea of insanity, if it could be j°. 9 0 0 Etna fairly proved. He:hoped, therefore, that nee might be granted, that it might be seen wh et „;o ' those material fags te which the affidavit of Bellett alluded, could be substantiated or not 4 1 denee. In justice to 'himself 'and his Le.4' l l - ,is Friend, Mr. Reynolds, who was with him fi ef defence, he had to say, that it was only yest er evening he received his iristrufflons, and that t/ f ee (her ofehem had any personal intercourse with prisoner. Mr. GARROW denied that even this Was the 13 per stage of the trial for. the speech in defenc e $ e the Learned Counsel. This same thing 0 ,35 t he tempted in the case of the King v. Arnold, b° l 1 ,0 Court refused the application. He was sorry tio the defendant's Counsel should have chos o particular time for making his speed]. st i/ Mr. ALLEY would not press his argument eye the affidavit was read by the Clerk, though b e st , lieved the-constant praelice of the Court way side.• The RECORDER said, ',hat the practice 0. / sf Court was not as it was stated by Mr. Alley. affidavit otieht first to be read alone. The affidavit was then read, and. . he Mr. ATTORNRY-GENERA I. argued against • db el , plication. If, in the case of the meanest indi‘ l os lt the Court could grant the application' upon ', s o an' affidavit A the present,: then he called 1-I?ci tt them to grant it now : but he was confident , 'lot s ,Was on the very face .of the affidavit, that the g el; thing was trumped up as te contrivance to del i Yob° administration of justice. These person s, , swore the affidavits, must have been seiecte%erfe. the view to impose a false belief upon the ' d i jee' anJ to baffle for a' time the dread purposes °(osset: tice ; and if the application were granted, a 5 ( 0 4 '.:' violation of justice could not in his creation b e red' tised : but who was this woman of South an ; 11 1° ' and this Mrs. Clark; or what did they says prisoner bad been resident for four months jo don before he perpetrated this act of mord er ; e o ta i was In the midst of a family. He was k° ° 6o o°', meltitudes, and known, as it , appeared, as a l' er e aad: no little sagacity, and of very masculine ing; N'Vhy. were riot some of the persons who i l ls , it': known him in London called upon for affid av ' e j sty stead of these women, about whom no onelliet'n thing? hat reasons w ere here,evBn in these ate , f eery alleged for a belief in the prisoner's insanity cos .of; were none : and again he should say, tha t tb lo tt l 'i' fidavits were a mere flimsy contrivance t o de teed ends of immediate justice. He begged th e er to -recoiled the manner in which the prisoo,:ch just addressed the Court ; and to recollect' 31 0 pfe; studious anxiety which his Counsel hatreyed /0 t l" vent him from addressing their Lordshipi- , tit address their Lordships would see, as be 53`,.`e'totte sistible grounds for refusing an application w er f ie; on insweity. If the Counsel for the .pri6°l, tend that he is insane, why did they •110 1 best judges in such a case—to the Sr eat t ee Pei men conversan On that malady--to The Court might rely upon the judgmen t e el 's° c i who'were in the constant intercourse Wit? e r ce 3 ° , 0 labouring under insanity, who had' expette",bot (1)1 knowledge upon that most delicate subject; eis clt e d Counsel for the prisoner did not call upond;ps men ; they thought, it seemed, the 81-I Ler O l d these two women quite enough tor he ir these Iwo women quite enough t 1 1011 Y o+. pose. The Court, however, wohld see the.!vdccor'" the contrivance of this attrisupt e and treat 'ascertain . of ottio