The Sun. — London, England, 1832-01-05 00:00:00

Monday morning saw Patrick Kearney there; he was coming from a corner house. At the suggestion of the Lord Chief Justice, the Learned Counsel went no further into the examina. tion of this witness. William Stone—Was one of the turnkeys of the Bridewell. Was there when it was attacked by the mob. Saw them coming down the lane before they entered the gates which closed the passage. After wards saw them. The mob forced the gate in against the witness. ad not see any of the pri soner 4 then, but afterwards saw Kearney walking about in the passage. 'When he saw Kearney, some part of the mob was quiet, others were rioting. Cross-examined—Witness never saw any one take an acti'.e part except those who pushed in the gate, and those he could not see, as he was on the ot her side of it. Could not say whether people came from curiosity who took no part in the riot. John Derrick saw the gaol attacked on the Sun day in question. Saw James Williams there. Knew him, as they were both natives of Keynsham. Can't say what the people were doing, but they were very busy breaking things, and they had bars in their hands. Went with the soldiers, but did not come away with them. There were great q uantities of p,ople there, as well as himself and Williams. P ironer had something in his hand about three feet long and an inch square, but whe ther wood or iron he could not say. S.tw the pri soner standinrr while one side of the door was broken in ; the other side was not broken, and he saw the prisoner hammering it, but whether he broke it of not he could nor say. Prisoner struck at the top part of the other panel. Saw prisoner first in the road, and he remained after witness left. There was a mob outside and inside too. There was not-e, and hallooing, and whooping, anti knocking of doors before he went in, but can't say there was any body making a noise when lie did go in, as the gaol was all in a flame of fire. Witness saw some of the prisoners corning out. Cross-examined—Was a blacksmith ; knew the use of iron, did not find any useful there. Knew George Bayley, a farm-labourer, and saw him there. Witness did not come up to Williams with an iron bar, and Williams did not advise him not to take it away. Believed that Bayley was with him while Williams spoke. Witness had been in custody for taking some books which he found on his way home. His master took the books, gyve them to Mr. Watson, and gave him a hid ing, although he told how he got them. Did not see Williams or Bayley that night. Did not know any beer house. Knew one near the prison. Could not swear that he was not in one on the Sunday night. The reason he could not swear was because he could not remember. The reason he did not re member was not because he was drunk. Witness lived at Keynsham, and many from that village came in to see the fires. James Pitman—Was a blacksmith at Keynsham, and was at the gaol on the Sunday of the riots. The mob had broken in when he arrived. He did not go into the gaol at once, but it rained very hard about six o'clock, and he went into the entrance to avoid the storm. Did not go farther than the en trance, hut saw the Governor's house on fire. Knew Williams, and saw him in the yard, with something in his hand, about three feet long and three quarters of an inch square. Remained only about a minute and a half. Saw Williams when he looked in, and left him standing there. Knew Wil liams seven years. Cross-examined—Saw Williams commit no act of violence. Had never heard any harm of Wil liams, and a good many young men came in to see the fire, not as rioters, but as he came himself. Nor did Williams, as far as he knew, come with any other intent. William Wason examined—Was an attorney of Bristol. Remembered the 30th of October; the Friday after that went to Keynsham. Knew Green, the constable, who took him to a house where they found blankets and shoes concealed,—the former avainst the gable end of the house. There was no footpath there, except that leading from the garden of the house. The shoes were found in a brook at the back of the house. We cannot pretend to give this witness's evidence, as he so mouthed his words, that though almost over him, we could not comprehend one word in ten.] The house belonged to the prisoner's mother. Cross-examined—There were only two houses to gether. Mr 9. Williams lived in the one, and a man n imed Widdington in another. Knew her to be the prisoner's mother, by asking her for her son, James 'Williams, Believed that a vast deal of pro perty was scattered, and that the plunder of Queen square had, in several instances, got into the hands of innocent people. W. Green examined—Was a constable at Keyn sham ; knew Williams, who lived with his mother; witness went with Mr. Wason to make a search at \Viliiams's house; found nothing the first time; saw Williams's mother and children ; went again, and found three blankets and three shoes ; the blankets were in an ash-heap. (Produced two of the blankets, and two of the shoes.) Stret on, again examined—Looked at the shoes, arid said they vt ere shoes he had made for the use cf the prisoners ; had them before the fire, bur missed 60 or 70 pair after the riot ; the corporation provided These shoes fur the prisoners. Sarah Bowles, the matron of the gaol, looked at the blankets, and believed them to belong to the eaol. Tliey ,sere there before the riots, and were los- at that time. - Si retton, in reply to the prisoner's Counsel, said that most of the prisoners s , ripped off their shoes and their prison dresses when they were let out. They pulled them off in the yard, put them under their feet, and threw them into the river. CJuld not say whether some prisoners might not have walked off in their prison shoes. Ci arle- Cres-ey saw he prisoner picking pockets, and linsling and heaping wood against the outer ples. (A this stage of the proceedings we found i t utterly irrpossiisle to hear the witness for a le, minor, s, partly owing to his position, and partly to the noise t at prevailed in Cour., the audience in whicli was principally composed of special con stables). . . . Dauirl Higr asked if the witness saw him set the gates on fire. Cressey—Not at all. John King, jun. examined—Was opposite the White Lion-inn, Broad-street, at half-past two o'clock on Sunday, the 30th of Oct. A mob came from the Bridewell, through St. John's archway, with staves, hammers, and bars of iron. Knows the prisoner Daniel Higgs. Saw him that day at the head of the mob just described. He had either a bar of iron or a staff in his hand. The prisoner (Higgs) was going with the rest of the mob to the gaol. Saw prisoner with the mob about five or six minutes. The mob, from first to last, conducted themselves in the same manner, and when witness lost sight of them, they went in the direction of the gaol. Edward Shirley Bannister—Was a coppersmith and brazier, and acted with the posse comiliilus dm , ing the late riots. Apprehended the prisoner Higgs on the 2d of November. When the prisoner was brought to the court off Norton -street, where he said he lived, they did not know him there. An o ld lady who was by said he lived in Holmes's-court. Thomas Watson examined—ln October last was the n ight-constable at All Saints' Ward. On the 30th of October was on duty again. Was at the prison before the gates were broken open. Saw Mackay (the prisoner) outside the prison door, aid ing and as,isting in breaking the prison door. There was a great number there engaged in rioting. Wit ness went up to the door and asked them what they wanted ; and they said they wanted to let all the prisoners out. He was obliged to go away, from the violence of the mob. When he begged them to desist, the reply was, " Hit the old —'s head off." A sledge-hammer hit him on the hat, and stones and other missiles were thrown at him. I.:loss-examined—Was not at College-green on Monday morning; nor did he see the collision be tween the soldiers and the mob. John Williams examined—Went on the 30th of October to the gaol. There is a smith's shop about 100 feet distant from the prison, between Prince's. street and the gaol. There was a mob at the smith's shop ; some of them having crow-bars. They forced the door of the smith's shop open. Saw Mackay bring out a sledge-hammer and chisel, about a quarter past two o'clock on Sunday. Witness then went with the rest of the mob up to the gaol, where he saw Mackay and several other persons hammering at the gates. After the gates were burst open, he saw him (Mackay) let the pri soners out. Saw the gaol burnt, and the van thrown into the water. Saw Mackay bring out a sack of peas, and throw it over the people's head. Sew Watson, a constable there. When Watson came up to the gates, a sledge-hammer was flung at him. Saw a picture of the Governor's likeness brought out of the gaol by Mackay, who kicked a hole through it, arid threw it into the water. Examined by the prisoner Mackay—Saw him (Mackay) on the 30th of October, and the reason why he did not take him into custody earlier was, because he had no opportunity of doing it till about the time he was taken. Mackay—Had you nothing to lay to my charge at the Council-house ? Mackay—l had. Mackay—You're a liar. . Examined by the COURT—Witness preferred his charges against the prisoner on the second day, and did not prefer them the first because he thought that the prisoner was to " be had" on a future day. The witness Selwyn recalled and examined by the COURT—Did not see the mob and the military in collision on Sunday the 30th of October. Moss recalled and examined by the COURT — Saw the mob and the military in collision on Monday. This closed the evidence for the prosecution. Mr. PALMER, as Counsel for the prisoner Clarke, , . submitted that he (Clarke) ought to be acquitted, because he was charged in the indictment with felony, whereas he was, if chargeable with any crime, guilty, according to the evidence, of high treason, — a crime in which felony merged. The Learned Counsel contended that the evidence went to prove that the prisoner meditated the destruction of all the gaols in the kingdom, and then cited the case of " Watson and Demaret," as a precedent, to prove that judicial decision warranted his opinion. He argued that Clarke had avowed his intention to open " all" prisons, and appealed to the authority of Fors ter, as decidedly in favour of the prisoner. The COURT overruled the objection. James Stokes examined for the defence—Knows the prisoner Clarke, and lived within two doors of him at Bedminster. ReCollects seeing Clarke on the 30th of October. He paid him (witness) some money, and purchased a bullock's heart. Saw him at a public-house in Bedminster on Saturday, and at Stokes's back-yard on Sunday morning. Knew Clarke for a long time ; he has lived as a sawyer, and his mother has kept a public-house. Has heard of an accident that happened to Clarke seven' years since—an injury to his head. Has observed a dif ference in his understanding since, when he takes a drink, and believes he would not, under such circum stances, be like other men. If Clarke took rather much liquor since his accident, he would be more violent than he ever was before. Witness conceived that there was no man of better character in the pa rish of Bedminster. Elizabeth Clarke, the mother of the prisoner, was called, and on her appearance in the witness-box, the prisoner (who in common with the other unfortunate per sons in the dock, was obliged, according to the barbarous custom of the law, to remain sanding during the trial, seemed so affected, that it was found necessary to remove him for a few minutes out of Court. On his retarn, ap pearing to be much overcome by his emotions, the Chief Justice ordered him to have a chair, which, however, the humanity of the officers had previously provided. Elizabeth Clarke examined.—Her son (the pr'soner at the bar) had lived with her for three years previous to the riots. He was at her house on the morning of the day of the fires, and prepared a bullock's heart for dinner. Wit ness left home at half-past ten o'clock, when he was begin ning to prepare the stuffing for the bullock's heart. Her son had received an accident in the head, that confined him to his bed some days, a few years ago. His mind and habits were affected by the accident; and he was, at times, ineens ble, and in a foolish state. He was out on a particular day, and came home, and no one in the kitchen but herself. _ . . The Under-Sheriff intimated to the Court that the pri soner Clarke had fainted. The prisoner was removed for a little, and on being brought back sank in the arms of the officers. On his recorering, The examination proceeded—Witness saw the prisoner in a peculiar way after mowing in last July.—(The evidence was lost for some minutes owing to the noise in Court.) Her son said he thought he must have killed a little boy; I asked why he should have killed a creature who never did him any harm ? When asked to go to bed, the prisoner said he was going to Mrs. Goold's for kidney beans. In the morning be appeared better in mind, hut was not better in health, but he knew that he had not been right the night before. He (prisoner) was attended for the illness in his head by Mr. Prowse, who is since dead. The effect of the illness has been shown since, whenever her son had liquor. Joseph H trding examined—ls a sawyer, and knows the prisoner Clarke, and has worked with him between three and four years. A piece of timber fell down on him, and jammed his head in, and injured him very materially. They put him on a piece of timber in the yard, and they afterwards carried him to a surgeon. Witness has seen Clarke frequently work since. Witness was obliged to leave the place on account of him. He was not fit to do his work—could not do it. He was subject to giddiness, and when he took beer he would want to fight with witness. Stephen Doughty examined—tle lives in the parish of Bedminster, and knows the prisoner Clarke. He recollects seeing him on Sunday morning, the day of the fires, stand ing at his mother's cottage-door about eleven o'clock in the morning. Witness came into Bristol with him. He asked witness, in the first instance, where he was going. He replied to Bristol, and then Clarke said, " Stop a mo ment, and I'll go with you." They went to Queen-square. They were ferried across the river by a boy. It was about twelve o'clock when they reached Queen-square. The soldiers were parading about there. They remained there about ten minutes, and Clarke did nothing but look about him (luring that time. They then went to College-street, where they remained a few minutes. They then returned to Queen-square. They remained there till about twenty minutes to one. A man came from the Mansion-house mob, and asked Clarke to assist in liberating a boy who was taken. Clarke said the boy was nothing to him, and he would have nothing to do with it. The mob then raised a cry " to Bridewell." Witness then separated from Clarke. That was about half-past one o'clock. Up to that time Clarke bpi done nothing riotously. Cross-examined—Clarke, when he parted front witness, weat towards Back-street, which was towards the Bride well, and which direction the mob had taken. Philip Melloir examined—Lives in Bedminster. Knows Clarke. Was with Limn in Queen-square on the Sunday of the riots. About twelve o'clock a man came up to him, and asked him to assist in getting a boy out that was put into the Mansion-house. He said, "No ; I'll have nothing to do with it ; the boy's nothing to me." Whilst witness was with him that day, he did not commit any violence. John Bickery examined—Witness remembers the day of the riots, the 30th of October. Witness that day, between one and two o'clock, met Clarke at the corner of All Saints'-street. Witness went went with him to the Bri tannia in that street, where they had halt a pint of gin. Clarke, witness, and those who were with him on that occasion, three or four in number, drank several gallons of beer there. They left at some time past three o'clock. Before witness left Clarke, he seemed to be the worse of the liquor he bad taken. They drank altogether three half gallons of beer, and Clarke drank more of it than witness. John Crates examined—ls a fellmonger ; knows Clarke ; was in company with him on the day of the riots at the Britannia public-house. They had amongst their party on that occasion a half-pint of gin ; then three half-gallons of beer, and then two gallons. There were about eight or ten drinking of that. Clarke drank more than his share of it. Witness parted with him between three and four o'clock. At that time he was intoxicated. He took off his coat, flung it on the rail, and behaved like a madman. Cross-examined—Clarke was quite tipsy on that occa sion. Witness saw a mob going to the Bridewell between one and two o'clock. It was about half-past three that witness parted with Clarke. Benjamin Flooke examined—Was at the Britannia tavern with Pickering and Clarke on Sunday, the 30th of October. They went in there about one o'clok. They had several vallons of beer. Clarke was the worse of his drink. He threw his coat on the settle, and was for fight ing. Witness thought it high time to go home. Cross-examined—Clarke was not so drunk that he could not fight. He was in high spirits and quarrelsome ; he staggered, but not a great deal. Daniel Peters examined—ls a woollen-draper, in High street. He neither knew Clarke nor his person. He did not identify him in the gaol. William White examined—Knows a witness of the name of Moss, who has been examined to-day. Witness saw him on Sunday, the 30th of October, at the gaol. He told witness that he had got some bottles, and in answer to a question from witness, he said he had got them from the prison. He took the bottles from his pocket, and asked witness to drink with him. Cross-examined—Witness saw Clarke at the prison. He had known him for three or four years. He had not a bar in his hand when witness saw him. Witness saw him there about four or five o'clock. Did not see him come there. He was, when witness saw him, standing looking on as a spectator. He appeared to be intoxicated. After a lapse of three quarters of an hour, witness went home. Witness knew the witness Moss before that day. He is a gardener. He offered witness some cider. Wit ness did not take it. Clarke was at the time inside the prison. Moss made the offer outside, and then went in. Witness went away with Moss. A man asked Moss for one of the bottles he had. He told him to go and get one, for he had work enough to get them. Isaac Cox examined—Keeps a public-house. He was at the gaol on the Sunday of the riots. He saw a flag on that occasion put on the top of the staff. He saw the staff taken down. He knows Clarke, and it was not he that put up the flag, neither was he the person who took it down. Witness was about SO or 100 yards from the pri son when the flag was taken down. He was certain it was not Clarke who took it down. Cross-examined—Witness was there from three to four o'clock. Witness was on the opposite side of the river. Sophia Reynolds examined—Was near the gaol about three o'clock on the Sunday that it was burnt. Knows the prisoner Clarke well. Witness saw the staff-flag taken down, and the flag hoisted. Witness was within about fifteen yards of the place. Clarke neither put it up nor , took it down. Cross-examined--The man who took the flag-staff down was dressed in a sleeve waistcoat. When witness saw Clarke on that day, he was dressed in a fustian jacket. Witness lives in the village of Bedminster. Witness saw the flag thrown down amongst the mob, and chucked into the river. The fire in the gaol was rising at the time witness was there, and the mob was so thick that the witness could not get in. Witness saw the van thrown into the river. There was a little shouting then. George Cann examined—ls a butcher, and lives in Bed minster. Knows Clarke well, nearly eighteen years. Knows his person perfectly, as well as his own mother. He was at the New Gaol on the day of the riots. Witness saw a flag on the flag-staff. It was not Clarke that put it up. Wm. Clissold examined—Remembers when the prison was burned. There was something flying like a flag in the prison. He knows Clarke well, The man who took the flag down was not Clarke. Witness could swear posi tively it was not Clarke. Cross-examined—Where witness was, was on the other side of the water, and perhaps about 300 or 400 yards from the gaol. James Hamilton examined—Keeps a public-house. Knows Clarke for four or five months. He has been often in witness's house; when in liquor he was very obstre perous indeed ; when sober he was very quiet. James Cheese examined—ls a gardener, and lives in Bedminster, about a mile from Clarke's place. He has known him from his childhood, and has never heard any thing against him. He has always received the greatest civility from him. William Trott examined—Lives in Bedminster, and is a grocer. Has known Clarke about six years. He has been generally a sober man. He is different from other men when he is drunk, and witness supposes that it must arise from something which is the matter in his head. _ _ Thomas Trott examined—Lives in Bedminster, and is a grocer. Has known Clarke for about eight years. His general character has been that of a hard-working honest man. When he takes a drop of drink, he is generally flighty, more so than men generally are. Thomas Pratton examined—Lives in Bedminster, and is a carpenter. Has known Clarke seven or eight years. His general character has been that of an upright and in• dustrious man. When he - drinks he is generally out rageous ; snore so than men generally are by drink. Henry Morgan examined—ls a hog-butcher, and lives in Bedminster. Has known Clarke from his youth up wards. His general character was that of a hard -working industrious man. When he drinks he is in what witness would call a frenzied state, ever since he met with a fall of timber on his head. Nancy Carroll examined—Has lived in the same lodging-house with Courtney. Recollects the day that the fires took place. Witness met Courtney on that day about half-past one o'clock, in the New Globe public house. He and the witness remained is that public-house till near five o'clock, when they parted. She saw him again about eight o'clock on that evening. Cross-examined—The landlord of the New Globe and his wife, and others, were present when witness and the prisoner Courtney were there. Dennis Lynch—Knows Courtney ; lodges in the same house with him. On the Sunday the fires happened he saw Courtney coming out of the Globe public- house in Christmas-street, about five o'clock. Witness took him into Mr. Smith's, the Full Moon. They stopped there till eight o'clock, and then went together straight home. Witness left him at his lodgings and came away. Witness lives in the next room to him. Cross-examined--What became of Courtney after eight o'clock that evening witness does not know. Wit ness has known him three years. He is a labourer, and so is witness. Henry Dwyer examined—Resides in the same house with Courtney and Lynch. Saw Courtney the day that the gaol was burned at eight o'clock in the evening. Wit ness remained with him about an hour. Witness went away about nine o'clock ; he left Courtney there. Elizabeth Grant examined—The house in which the prisoner Courtney lodges is her house. On the day of the fires he came in early in the evening, and did not Q'o out till next morning at seven o'clock, when he went to his work. He could not go out without her knowing it. Cross-examined—There are between twenty and thirty lodgers in her house. On this particular night she took particular observation of all who went out, and Courtney could not go out from eight o'clock its the evening until seven o'clock in the morning, when he did go out, without her knowing it. George Bailey examined—Lives in the parish of Keyns ham. The prisoner Williams lives in the same parish. Witness went in with him on the day of the fires into Bris tol. That was about three o'clock in the afternoon. They stopped on their way at a public-house, and had a pint of beer. Keynshatn is about five miles from Bristol. When they came to the turnpike near Bristol, it was twenty minutes after four o'clock. On getting to the bridge they heard the people say that the prison was on fire, and seeing a great many go there, they went also. When they got there it was all on fire. The prisoner and witness went into the prison. They saw the Governor's house on fire. Wil!iams was with witness all'the time. He did not commit any act of violence there. Witness saw Deyrick flinging blankets into the fire. He also saw bun come out of the gaol in company with a strange man who had an iron bar in his hand. He threw it down, and Deyrick took it up. Deyrick said he would make Ss. of it. The prisoner said, he should have nothing to elo with it, and Deyrick then flung it down. Witness and the prisoner then went down to a beer-shop. Deyrick came in there after them, and also took beer. When he came out he was tipsy. While Wil liams was in witness's company he did not commit any act of violence, and he could not have done so without his see ing it. The prisoner picked up a blanket, with something rolled up in it, on the Bedminster-bridge, in his way home with witness, and carries it home. Joshua Andrews--Knows the prisoner Williams. Went with his wife to Bristol on the day that the fires hap.. pened. The prisoner passed them on the road, about a mile out of Keynsham. That was about three o'clock. They stopped at the King's Arms on their way ; and they saw the prisoner there. They left him there whe❑ they departed. Nancy Dagg examined —Is the landlady of the King's Arms. She knows the prisoner James Williams. He came into her house about half-pist three o'clock on the Sunday of the fires. He remained from about twenty minutes to half an hour, and left about four o'clock. Christopher Wiggins examined—ls the son of an auc tioneer, in Keynsham. Knows Williams. Was on Bed minster-bridge, in Bristol, on the day of the fire. H e saw the prisoners let out about a quarter after four o'clock. Witness then returned to Keynsham ; and in his way about a mile from Bristol met Williams at Arnas_ v ,i, going to Bristol. That was about half-past four o'clock in the afternoon. Cross.examined—He knew the hour at Arnos-vale, be cause many people said it was half-past four. Some being asked the question, pointed at the church where the clock was, and witness, amongst others, thus knew what the hour was. He knew it from the people stating it, and afterwards from looking at the clock. James Evans examined—ls foreman to the surveyor of the roads at Keynsham. James Williams, the prisoner, has worked under him about six years. His character had been that of a very good workman, and a steady civil young man. He was at his work the week before the fires, up to the Saturday. Robert Reeves examined.—He was a debtor in the pri son at the time that it was burned. It was between two and three o'clock that the prisoners were released by the mob : amongst those that were active in releasing them he did not see the prisoner Kearney. He knew him before. Witness left the prison about five o'clock. Up to that time witness did not see him. He first saw him at the corner of the Grove in Bristol. Witness was then on his way home. The prisoner was standing then at the corner of the Grove. Witness spoke to him. This was between four and five o'clock. The prisoner had on that day the same light-coloured coat that he has on to-day. The pri soner was behaving peaceably when witness saw him that day. Cross-examined—Witness might have remained in the prison two hours after the gates were broken iu. Hugh Crawford examined—Knows the prisoner Kear ney. Saw him in Prince's -street, near the Grove, on the day of the fires, between four and five o'clock, with another person with him. That was about 200 perches from the prison. John Frankham examined—He know■ the witness Salter, who has been examined this day. He heard Salter speaking of the prisoner (Kearney) having sold him a piece of shirting. He said he owed him a grudge for that. It was about eight or nine months ago. Salter promised to pay for the cloth, partly in money and partly in bread. Had known the prisoner at the bar four years, and knew him to have been a very honest man in that time. Cross-examined—Witness is a publican, and the pri soner used his house occasionally. Henry M'Farlane examined—Lives in Charlotte-street. Has known the prisoner Kearney from his infancy. He never knew any dishonesty of him in his life. Cross-examined—Witness is a dealer in cloth, and mas ter of the business which Kearney carried on. On the part of Daniel lliggs the following witnesses were called : Mary Phillips examined—The prisoner Higgs wss at home at the time the gaol was set on fire. She lives next door to his residence. She saw him on the Sunday from twelve o'clock to two, and from four o'clock to eight o'clock on that day ; he was then in his room with his sister, and the witness saw him there. Cross-examined—She did not know where he was be tween two o'clock to four. She saw him the second time about a quarter after four. Anne Green examined—Witness has known the pri soner Higgs from his childhood, and she never knew any thing further of him than that he was a quiet, civil, in offensive young man. The neighbours gave him the same character. The evidence for the defence having closed, The CHIEF JUSTICE stated, that at that late hour of the night (half-past eleven o'clock) he did not think that it would be possible for him to go through all the evidence that had been adduced in a case which affected six pri- soners, and in which separate defences had been made, without detaining the Jury until an advanced period in the morning. Under such circumstances, it appeared to him that it would be more advisable to adjourn the fur ther consideration of this case until to-morrow, and as it was necessary that the Jury in the mean time should be kept together, he would assure them that every accom modation had been provided for them i❑ the rooms con nected with the Court-house. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that he wished to call one or two witnesses in reply to the evidence produced on the part of the prisoners, and he thought this was the beet time to do so. The following witnesses were accordingly examined : Gibbons examined—ls clerk to the Magistrates of Bristol. Was present when James Courtney was had up before Alderman Frapp, on the 11 th of November. A wiiness of the name of Backer was examined in his pre sence. His examination was read over to him, and signed by:him in the presence of Courtney. After the examina tion of Ricker, Courtney said something in reply, of which the present (the copy produced) is a correct copy. It is signed by the prisoner Courtney. James Backer examined—ls a tidewaiter at the Custom house. Remembers the Sunday of the fires. In the evening of that day,:about nine o'clock, he saw the prisoner Courtney coming from the gaol with six or seven others. He came as far as the toll-gate. He went from that to the Mansion-house in Queen-square. He saw him go into a❑ under-ground cellar at the back of the Mansion house. Iu about a dozen minutes witness saw him again in front of the Mansion-house, with a stick in his right hand and a piece of old iron in his left. He saw him beating in several windows in the square. When the prisoner was breaking the windows, he was cursing. Wit ness had a full opportunity of seeing the prisoner on that occasion. Cross-examined—lisa never seen him before that night It was his dress that attracted the attention of witness. He will swear positively that the prisoner Courtney was the roan that he then saw. The examination of the prisoner Courtney before the magistrates was then read. It was in the following words :—I have my landlord where I live, who will prove I was ❑ot out of the house on Sunday, and I am as inns- cent as a child. William Cross examined—ls a stationer. He was in Queen-square, near the Marsion•house, on the evening of the fire. He saw the prisoner Courtney there from half past eight to nine o'clock. He saw him exactly opposite the front door of the Mansion-house, near the rails. The Mansion-house was not then on fire. He heard him say to another man, " my eyes, have we not set fire to it after all ?" Has no doubt whatever as to his being the man. The CHIEF JUSTICE inquired whether Courtney had any questions to ask of this witness? Courtney said that he had not, that the witness lied, and that he (Courtney) was as innocent of the crime laid to his charge as the child unborn. The Court was then adjourned until ten o'clock to morrow (Wednesday) morning. RRISTOL, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FIVE O'CLOCK. This morning, at ten o'clock, the Learned Judges took their seats. The prisoners were immediately afterwards placed at the bar. After the names of the Jury had been coiled over, The Lord Chief Justice TINDAL commenced his sum ming up. The indictment against the prisoners stated, that several persons, as well as themselves, were riotously and tumultuously assembled together, and that the persons so riotously assembled together with force, pulled down and destroyed a certain house, being the New Gaol of this city. In the indictment the property was described in various ways ; first, as a certain house belonging to his Majesty ; then as the property of the Mayor, Burgesses, and Commonalty of the city of Bristol ; it was also de scribed as the house of William Humphries, the Governor of the gaol; either of these descriptions would be suffi cient. The words of the Act of Parliament (ti Geo. IV.) were, " That if any persons riotously and tumultuously assembled together, to the disturbance of the public peace, should unlawfully demolish, pull down, or destroy, or begin to demolish, pull down, or destroy any house, &e., every such offender should be guilty of felony, and, upon con viction, should suffer death ;" therefore it required their se rious attention to determine on the guilt or innocence of any of the prisoners, notwithstanding charged with having committed this offence. Under the Act of Parliament, there were two different states of facts to be considered ; first, whether the present six prisoners, or any of them, were persons riotously assembled together to the dis turbance of the public peace ; and then, whether that riotous body of persons. of which the prisoners formed a part, did or not demolish, or destroy, or begin to demolish or destroy, the building named in the indictment. The first part of the case, therefore, that you will consider is, whether these persons, or any of them, formed a part of a riotous and tumultuous assemblage of :people met to gether to the disturbance of the public peace. The mere circumstance of being on the spot was an equivocal act, because they might be necessarily or innocently on the spot, and a riotous assemblage of persons might overtake persons so situated. No one would say that the mere circum stance of being in the assembly would constitute their guilt ; but it would require some evidence of a co-opera tion. They must inquire whether or not there was any evidence to bring to their minds that the persons so pre sent had a guilty knowledge of the intention of that tu multuous assembly. They must have formed part of that body with a guilty intention ; that they were there for the purpose of disturbing the public peace. If they should determine that the prisoners, or any of them, formed, with a guilty knowledge, a component part of a riotous assem bly, then they would bring their minds to a consideration of the evidence as to the act of demolition or destruction, in which it was not necessary that it should be shown that all the persons joined together in this act, nor that by the hand of the prisoners the demolition was effected ; if t h ey forme e d qu a a p ll a y rt, g r il t t l y. the H m i i s sci L d o ef rd w sh a i s p do t n h e en by s o ai t d her li s e , they were thought the more convenient way would be to call the attention to each of the prisoners in order. There was no doubt that there was a very large and riotous assemblage of persons collected togeth• r, and that the gaol was de stroyed in some way by the persons so collected together; they had the fact that it was destroyed, and ceased to be of use for the purpose for which it was ,intended, His • Lordship then proceegti to go through the whole of the evidence, as it affected William Clarke, and then as it re lated to cacti of the other prisoners; and concluding by directing them, if the balance was even, to give the prisoners the benefit of any doubt they might entertain, thus doing justice between the prisoners and the public. The Jury then retired. At five o'clock the Jury returned into Court and de livered the following verdicts ; William Clarke—Guilty D. Higgs—Guilty P. Kearney—Guilty I Courtney—Guilty Williams—Not Guilty J. Mackay—Guilty . _ . _ _ The prisoner Clarke is a strong athletic-looking man, rather above the common size, with nothing in his coun tenance indicative of the determined outrages laid to his charge. He was attired in a blue frock coat, blue trow- Hers, and white waistcoat, and his appearance altogether very respectable, far beyond that of the other prisoners with whom he was associated. The prisoners Williams, Kearney, Higgs, and Mackay, were young men of about 20 years of age, and Courtney about the middle age; they all appeared to be of an inferior station in life, and pre sented nothing remarkable in their appearance. During the time the Jury were absent, Clarke appeared in great mental agony. Indeed the fatigue the prisoners have gone through must have been very great, as they had to stand during sixteen and a half hours yesterday. Thomas Evans Bendall, aged 19, and James Sims, aged IS, were then placed at the bar, charged with hav ing riotously assembled, together with other persons, to the disturbance of the public peace, and with having de molished and destroyed, or begun to demolish and destroy, a certain dwelling-house, the property of the Lord Bishop of Bristol. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in stating the case, said that though in the Act of Parliament the mere beginning to pull down and demolish any building was sufficient to constitute the offence with which the prisoners were charged, yet in this case he should be enabled to prove that the prisoners had been most active on this particular occasion. The trial was proceeding when the express left. AGGREGATE MEETING of the CITIZENS OF DUBLIN. (Abridged from the Dublin Freeman's Journal..) On Saturday last a very numerous and highly respect able and influential meeting of the citizens of Dublin took place at Home's• mart, Usher's-quay, for the purpose of considering the gloomy prospects for Ireland, both as re gard the proposed unjust and unequal measure of Reform, and the delusive projects suggested as for the amelioratio❑ of the tithe system ; as also to consider the propriety of calling, by a public expression of opinion, upon the Irish Members to as-emble in Dublin, or elsewhere, during the recess, to hold "National Council," in order to determine upon and adopt the course - most fitting to obtain such an increase in the number of the proposed Irish representa tion, and such change in the manner of election, as may be calculated to satisfy the just claims of the Irish people. At the time of taking the chair the meeting became densely crowded, and Mr. O'Connell entered amid laud cheers. Shortly after Mr. Henry Grattan arrived, and was enthu siastically welcomed. At a quarter-past one the chair was taken by HENRI . GRATTAN, Esq., M.P. JAMES DWYER, Esq. was appointed Secretary. Mr. GRATTAN, on taking the Chair, spoke to this effect :—As to our prospects being gloomy, I do not think they are ; they are difficult, but not gloomy—so long as the nstion is determined to right itself.—(Cheers.) For if a body of men are determined to proceed legally, consti tutionally, and firmly, to redress their grievances, and if the people are inclined to back them in this object, the prospects of such men cannot be said to be gloomy, al though they may be partially shaded by some few diffi culties.—(Cheering.) The manufacturing towns of Eng land have obtained an increase of Members, and yet Ire land, whose population is so very great, obtains no in crease in her representation.—(Hear, hear.) I disapprove of most of the Irish Bill. For instance, the power which is vested in barristers is not to be tolerated. The next subject to which I will allude is that of tithes. In re ferring back to an early period I find that the property of the Church was to be applied to the erecting of places of worship, the decent maintenance of the clergy, and to the support) of the poor.—(Hear and cheers.) On that ground I take it, and thus settle the question. I would diminish the Bishops and Parsons one-half. Mr. O'CONNELL—Say two-thirds. _ . . Mr. GRATTAN-Well, two-thirds, and after collecting the entire amount of the Church property and tithes, I would place it in a fund to be applied to its original pur poses, and thus get th• property of the Church back to the state in which it was at the commencement. The poor would be thus protected, and we would behold them, in stead of wandering beggars in the streets, comfortable and well-fed.—(Cheers.) We would have the ministers of the Church in that humility of demeanour that becomes their situation, and not with their six horses and stately car riages, more adapted to the dignity of kings than the hu mility of bishops. You will thus make it a profession, bearing the stamp of a divine obligation. As it is at pre rent, it beats all other professions, the bar, the navy, and the array, in aggrandizement and lucrative certainty.— (Hear.) I speak not thus in enmity to the establishment, but I do firmly assert that before thirty years it will fall of its own weight, for it is impossible it can go on as it is. —(Cheers.) It is too pampered and bloated to effect any good or continue in any lengthened careeer; like a spaniel, so long as it is thin, it will not refuse to hunt, but if fat it becomes lazy and lies under the manger.— (Laughter and cheers.) The Hun. Gentleman sat dow❑ amidst gr at cheering. Mr. JAMES DWYER read the following letter from Mr. Wyse, the Member for Tipperary : ___ ••• Waterford, Dec. 30, 1831. "‘ SlR,—Unavoidable business prevents me from attending the meeting on Saturday. I regret it. " The present measure, Ministers intend should be final. It cannot, nor ought to be, unless satisfactory. We had much fault to find with the last Irish Bill—but what are we to think of the present ? We are discontented with it, and have great and good reason to be discontented with it. Ministers ought to be told so, in a manner the most immediate, decisive, and universal. " We are told that we are part of an united empire, when taxes are to be imposed or soldiers levied. 'When benefits are to be conferred, or rights restored, why should we be carefully se parated from the rest of the nation ? " Ministers are opposed to a repeal of the Union. Why do they thus, not by words, but by deeds, preach its necessity ? What are all the speeches of every discontented orator in Ireland, compared to an Act of Parliament? " We ask not for superiority but equality perfect equality in all civil and religious rights. It is our due, and that due we must have. I know not the precise number of representatives which a fair estimate of our population, extent, and revenue may give us—but whatever that result may be, for that ought we to contend, and not rest satisfied with any other. It is the prin ciple of all Parliamentary Reform, recognised again and again in the House. Any departure from that principle is a departure from Reform itself. " Ministers dissolved Parliament already upon this ground.— General Gascoigne's motion went to preserve to England the present number of her representatives, consequently defrauding Ireland of her right to an increase. It was an injury and an insult, and Ministers did right. But what do they now ? Adopt this very measure—this very measure for which Parliament was dissolved. By their new Bill they sacrifice Ireland to Toryism— they would, in a word, propria manu, Gascoigne the Irish people. " But they mistake much if they think the Irish people—at least the Irish people of to-day—will timely submit to this. They mistake much if they think the Irish representatives will sepa rate themselves from the Irish people. Differences may have existed—jealousies - may have impeded—but let them not rely on either ; both will disappear in the urgency of a common cause. That cause is here—a cause not of faction or party, but of every man in Ireland. Whatever weare in the House of Commons, the t '4 is ' t e ic s e h , al c i on h s a o v l e id f a a t i e r government —if country onuotts,id,e,e. shall I f l a i o r n l fay y r e i p o r u e i s , e d n t i e n d j abuse, and bring about a state of things, to be got rid of only by open force or revolution. " This, then, is no ordinary case. It is the very question of the • canons , ccderis• between the two countries. It is to decide whether we are to be treated as a portion of this united empire, or a dependency. We await our answer. Whatever it may be, ,t that a r s , c th a ,a l l: el notaoren received,c fno e or,gv eatbioruelta to found knows u h n a , l i l our co n h s o t w i bowed,sp ea k a g, una.on of grievance and discontent, more perilous than any which have n t t lo u h‘ t ?o io cpit n ie.e . lintle N wn ‘ m-ia h lbln : by t r h :c e utas r hnee i7shall be a source of freedom and blessing, or r s osninllsi bow,t iste Ministers, a , s o t r h m ey o h re av tr e ul y nimous, calm, but firmly resolved people. •• I have the honour to be your obedient servant, thoseye occurred, tow h om THOMAS WYSE." . _ d lN e l P i e n li'sdt Mr. SWEETMAN, in moving the first resolution, s ai d thathi e he e e b r e e lo a v l e l, d Auinoannairmeho,us i w n illi e a x m pr i e v ssl g would recommend, th a t i f an equal mea sure of Reform be not extended to Ireland, t h at they peti tion, not the Ministers, but the King ; f or h e t h ought his Majesty would listen to their compl a i nts w i th the same t ( h c e r rs. w ) attachmentas, He thati t o t h t e h y e ir w facility as he did to those of his English subjects.—(Hear.) The resolution was seconded by Mr. Dwyer. Mr. E.. RUTH vxN, jun., next presented himself, and was received with loud cheering. He spoke to this effect—Sir, the resolution put into my hand convey. an expression of regret that the measure of Reform is both unjust in prin ciple, inconsistent with the act of Union, and bearing no fair proportion to the quota of representation for England and Scotland.—(Hear, hear.) On this question there can be no second opinion.—.(Mr. Rutliven concluded amidst loud cheers by proposing the resolution, which was se conded by Mr. Shea Lawlor.) Counsellor KEOGH, in moving the next resolution, said that when he saw Scotland with not half the population of Ireland.-- Ml'. O'CONNELL—No, nor the one-fourth._ (llear.) Mr. Kxocir—And Ireland possessing three acres for the one that was to be cultivated in Scotland, he had a right to complain of the number of representatives intended for Ireland.—(Flear, hear.) Mr. Keogh then moved his re solution, which was seconded by Mr. M'Cormick. Mr. CARROLL moved the next resolution, which was seconded by Mr. Kavenagh. Mr, BARRETT read the fifth resolution, and said—There is:not a human being who could distinguish the signs of the times, who could have anticipated the possibility of such a resolution being necessary at this period. There is not a mau, who observed the universal detestation in which the amount of church revenues, as well as the unjust character of tithes, could have anticipated a mem ber of this ministry daring to bring forward a measure professing to alleviate this burthen in the country where it was most burthensome, yet framing his measure, not really to limit their amount, not to purify their appropriation, but to perpetuate their full extent, and give added facilities to their collection.—(Loud cheers.) The measure of Mr. Stanley will not satisfy the people.—(Hear.) Let those who accuse Ireland of barbarous and turbulent propensities, which no amelioration can appease, compare between her and England the relative crime with the re lative grievances, and judge on which side is the superiority. Here the people suffer all the evils which convulse Eng land, with a multitude which England has not. Ireland suffers under a Sub-letting Act, a Vestry Bill, a Jury job bing system, and tithes extorted by a clergy, more hateful even for their arrogance than their rapacity—(Hear, hear) —yet Ireland has not a twentieth portion of English crime, although it suffers a triple portion of English grievance.— (Cheers.) In fact, when we look back to the history of this country, for forty years, we find most of the popular outrages and their origin in tithes, and yet this excruci ating grievance, in the plenitude of its enormity, Mr. Stanley meditates to perpetuate. Does be hope by the covert ingenuity of his scheme to deceive and to silence the voice of discontent, and to crush by force the spirit of resistance ? No, he -nay be assured that legislative injus tice casts a halo round popular crime—that where the horror of the punishment is greater than the horror of the offence, crime is consecrated—the victims become heroes. Bayonets may enable soldiers to rule where they tread— bullets may govern as far as they can strike—but in such a state of things the people, who are every where, will render, in spite of all, the situation of the oppressors irksome and insecure.—(l.lear, hear.) Had not Messrs. Blanchfield and Byrne been imprisoned for humanity, some humane person might have ventured to interpose between the people and the police at Knocktopher.—(Cheers.) Had punishment fallen upon the slaughterers in one place, the subsequent unfortunate catastrophe at the other might never have occurred.—(Hear, hear.) To show the con nection between the impunity which followed one event, and the calamitous nature of the other, I can state, on good authority, that the young man who first seized the process-server, when instantly stabb e d, * exclaimed, " I am gone, boys, but remember Newtownbarry." These words stung the people to madness. They felt that there was no safety even in running away--excited with a sudden fury. armed with rude weapons, snatched by despair —weapons which never miss fire—(Cheers and loud laughter)---they closed upon the police —set discipline at naught—and im molated the party. There is not a doubt but that the impunity of Newtownbarry caused the murders at Knock topher.—(Cheers.) The project of Mr. Stanley will not abate this spirit of resistance to Church exactions. God forbid, however, it should ever again manifest itself in so fatal a manner. But let our rulers be assured the people will still struggle against an impost, the very basis of which s unjust.—(Hear.) In a constitutional struggle, too, they will be joined by the intelligence and virtue of the country. (Cheers.) Resistance to oppression is associated with some of the noblest sentiments of the human heart.—(Cheers.) Mr. H. GRATTAN CURRAN said, it is time Sir, tha t the horrors incident to this system should end ; it is time that the ministers of the living God should cease to wring the means of luxury from an unrequited people at the risk or by the sacrifice of human life. It is time that those who bear a high commission to denounce the penalty upon blood guiltiness should cease, by their exactions, to incite men to incur it.—(Hear, hear.) The time is at length arrived for the ample, the unreserved discussion of this important subject. The carnage that has recently occurred and the demonstrations of public feeling, flowing in daily from every aide, admonish us that the time is come. But while I thus argue for justice, I am answered--.." Oh, Sir," cries one, " the thing is impossible." The clergy hold their possessions by a right as secure as that upon which any man bolds his estate. While another traces them to the paramount sanction of a Divine decree. Of the latter opinion seem to be many of the Reverends and Right Re verends themselves. And, indeed, how can we blame the self complacency of a pluralist, who, contemplating his redundant measure of the goods of the earth, and silently wishing himself " many happy returns" of each bounteous season, stretches himself in his easy chair and exclaims with the Mantuan— .. Deus nobis hsee otia fecit."—(Laughter.) We must content ourselves, however, with placing tithes j upon an humbler, but what so good an authority as Sir j Wm. Blackstone declares to be their best and surest founda tion—the common law, which gives the parson a claim to ' derive the necessaries, comforts, &c. of life from his pa rishioners. Upon what ground? His relinquishment of every profitable occupation from which he might derive these necessaries and comforts, for the purpose of devoting his time to their spiritual advantage, and upon this ground I charge many of the clergy of the establishment with having worked a forfeiture of their claim.—(Hear, hear.) Have we not, I would ask, some Right Rev. Gentlemen most flourishing dairymen ?—(Hear, hear.) And if we have such, how shall I describe the audacity of such a trader demanding any emolument from the public on the foot of a contract through which he has hroken.—(Cheers.) Will he tell me that he has smoothed my way to Heaven —that he has M'Adamized the high-way.—(Laughter.) I would fain ask him how he has been instrumental to such an end. But I had forgot, formerly those pious gentlemen thought it sufficient to fix our attention upon the durable riches of the other world as a requital for those of which they despoiled us here ; but now their zeal more abounds, and impatient of the remoteness of the prospect, they would accelerate our fruition, and enlitt the constable to precipitate us upon the scene of promised wealth.—(Cheers.) But, Sir, I have yet another answer to my plan which claims a passing notice. Some have ventured to say that we are a conquered nation, and must submit to the results of conquest. But I would caution men against instituting this new relation between us and Britain. Think they not that if they invest them selves with the traditional privilt gee of the conqueror, we shall value and assert the heritage of the strong, though once vanquished land.—(Cheers.) That if they meet our claims for justice with taunt and contumely, we will echo the words of Ireland's greatest man— " Liberty with England, but at all events liberty." Mr. O'CoNntee here rose, and was received with the most enthusiastic cheers. He said—l entirely concur with your Chairman in the first proposition laid down by him —that we have now come to a crisis of vital impor tance to Ireland.—(Hear.) In truth and in fact we have arrived at a great crisis, and the question now is, who will stand up for Ireland?—(Hear, and cheers.) All the rest of the world appears to have abandoned her.—(Hear.) Our situation may excite some sympathy in different parts of Europe, and we know that it does in America ; but England and the Government of England have abandoned us to our fate ; or if they have formed any determination, it seems to be one to continue our dissentions, in order that they may perpetuate our weakness.—(Hear.) This, then, is the time for Irishmen to speak out.—(Hear, and cheers.) If a marl does not choose that another era for freedom should pass away, without one particle of benefit of Ireland, this is the time for him to speak out.—(Cheers.) If a man does net choose, when the rest of the Empire is obtaining the blessing of liberty, that We should be handed over to an oligarchical domination, the time has come for him to speak out.—(Cheers.) If I go to England, which I shall do the week after next, and I am sorry for it, I shall find in the press there two circumstances attributed as the causes of the misery of Ireland. The first of them is " the ignorance" of the people. Never was there a more brutal and ignorant assertion contained in any press, than this charge of ignorance against the Irish people.—(Heer.) The next charge that is brought against Irishmen—and it is one in which lam proud to be a participator—is called " a gitation."—(Cheers.) They say Ireland would be well off but for agitation. I want to know from them is it agitation that has produced the tithe system ?—(Hear and cheers.) Is it agitation that has created Grand Jury laws, by which gravel walks are levelled to the doors of the ari stocracy, and the mountain is left pathless because the wretched peasant dwells there—which take care that there shall not be the slightest rustling in the private walli gr the gentleman, such as would shake even his gouty toe, or rouse him from his half sleep in his carriage ; but at the same time leaves the miserable cottier to travel, as he best can, over the rocky path, or the wild bog? Is it agitation, I ask, that has produced Grand Jury laws, by which taxes are based upon aristocratic nomination, in stead of being constitutionally imposed by representation —the only principle upon which taxation ought to be based ?—(Hear, hear.) Was it agitation chat passed the Subletting Act, which has hurried iut hundreds of fami lies from their little farms to famish by the road side, and find their graves in the ditches ? Is it agitation that de ssotruoythetlththe linen e‘vork ing manufacture o fcoarse w in oo t u he ns n ? ortl and lis, it tag i it n t agitation that has thinned the streets of our city, or which has de prived you, Sir, of the property which you ought now to have in the Liberty? I believe that upon that property there were, prior to the Union, t leven or twelve manufac tories, did nd that?—(Hear now ? Was morning puttingon it agi tationl was I came by them—l did not purchase them ; but the circum _th(enreea is r not and one.—(Hear.) cheers.)his and