The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1886-04-10 00:00:00

IT TRIAL.

The trial of Henry Hyde Champion, John Burns,
henry Nfeyev4_, llyndman, and John Edward Williams,
for sedition, arng out of the West-end riots on the
Bth of Fehmery, t,•;—(a commenced on Tuesda,y morn-
ing gt. the Central (;iminal Court, before Mr. Justice
Cave.

The Atforney-Cleneral. Mr. Poland, Mr. Wright,
and Mr. C. Mathews appeared for the Crown; Mr.
Thompson defended Burns and Williams, and the
other two defendants conducted their own defence.

The indictment charged the defendants with utter-
ing certain violent and inflammatory language calcu-
lated to provoke a breach of the peace, and excite
discontent among her Majesty's liege Eubjecte, the
charges being varied in different counts.
They all pleaded not guilty.
The Attorney-General, in opening the case, said
that the simple question for the jury was whether the
defendants had uttered the words imputed to them,
and whether these words were calculated to produce
the effect charged in the indictment, and the im-
portant question of the right of holding publio meet-
ings was in no way involved in the inquiry, because
there was not the slightest intention to interfere with
that important right. The defendants Burns and
Williams were working men, and iTyndman and
Champion appeared to be men of superior educa-
tion, and were all members of an association called
the Social Democratic League. He then briefly
referred to the circumstances attending the meet-
ing in Trafalgar-square, on the Bth of February,
by the unemployed workmen of the metropolis,
when the defendants appeared to have considered
that this was an advantageous opportunity for
them to address the large mass of people who assem-
bled on that occasion, and endeavour by that means
to forward the views of their own association. Ho
next referred to the speeches alleged to have been
made by the defendants, and said that he felt it right
to say that the conduct of those who were really un-
employed, and who were, no doubt, severely pinched
by want, appeared to have been most exemplary. He
went on to say that Burns was carrying a rod flag,
and after describing himself as a member of the
Democratic Revolutionary Society, he said that
capitalists, landlords, railway directors, and others to
whom he alluded, ought to be banged. He told them
they ought not to shrink from revolution, he sug-
gested that an attack should be made upon the bakers'
shops, and he called upon the mob to follow him,
and said that unless the working men got bread,
the other classes to which he had referred must
have lead. The Attorney-General then referred to
the speech reported to have been made by Champion,
and said that after he had concluded Burns said
that they would now go the West-end, and he
called upon the crowd to follow him. He was still
carrying the red flag, and the crowd went along Pall
Mall, where stone-throwing commenced, and the
windows of the Carlton Club were broken ; but he
said he thought it was right to relate that the defen-
dants were not charged with actually inciting the mob
to commit these acts of violence, but what was alleged
was that their language was calculated to cause this
result. The Attorney-General then referred at con-
siderable length to what subsequently occurred in
Hyde-park, and the robberies that were committed
in South Audley-street and Oxford-street. In his
concluding observations the Attorney-General ad-
mitted that the defendants had done all in their
power to prevent these acts of violence from being
committed, but he said that they were still amenable
to the law upon the form of charge that was now pre-
ferred against them.
Mr. John While, reporter to the Times, was then
examined and cross-examined. After repeating in
substance the evidence he gave at the police-court
hearing, the witness said that be at first declined to
give his private address, as he had been warned of
the consequences that might ensue if he had done so,
end he did not wish his house to be attacked by a
gang of roughs. The witness denied that when he
wrote the report he merely picked out the sensational
portions of the speech made by the defendant. He
had no idea that acts of violence would follow the
speeches that were made in Trafalgar-square. When
he WAS summoned to the Treasury he declined at first
to give evidence, and he then said that he heard
Burns say that if the working classes could not get
bread the others must have lead, but he did not
mention this expression in his report in the interest of
the public, and with a view to prevent foreigners
from forming the idea that there was a revolution in
London.

Mr. liendle, a reporter attached to the Dail! Tele-
graph,, was examined, and he corroborated generally
the evidence given by Mr. White. He stated, in cross-
examination, that several meetings were going on at
the same moment in Trafalgar-square, and the mob
seemed to devote their attention more to horse-play
and bonneting one another than to what was said by
the speakers. He said that Burns first made the
suggestion that the mob should march to the West
end.

Two or three other witnesses, who were merely
spectators in the crowd, were then examined in sup.
port of the evidence as to the speeches made by the
defendants in Trafalgar-square.
Evidence was then adduced to show that the
defendants, after marching away with the crowd from
Trafalgar-square, proceeded to the Achilles Statue in
Hyde-park, where further inflammatory speeches
were made. Evidence was also given as to the mischief
that was subsequently done by the mob in South
Audley-street and other places. In the course of the
examination of the witnesses it was stated that there
was no police on duty in Trafalgar-square, and that
there were no policemen present when the
windows of the Carlton Club were broken. It was
also stated that there were several persons standing
at the windows of the Carlton Club, and they ap-
peared to be smiling at the ragged army that was
approaching from Trafalgar-square.
In cross-examination, it was admi4,ted that the
speakers at the meeting in Hyde-park expressed
strong disapproval of the conduct of some of the
mob and their insulting ladies, and said that any one
who acted in this manner was unworthy of the name
of a man.

Mr. W. E. Darling, another reporter of the Daily
Telegraph, was then examined, and he gave evidence
as to what occurred in Trafalgar-square in the after-
noon of the meeting. Ile followed the crowd in
Hyde-park, and saw the windows of the Carlton Club
broken. He then noticed a great many windows
broken at other clubs, and saw carriages stopped, the
windows broken, and things taken away from the
persons inside. He made his way to the Achilles
Statue, and saw all the defendants standing near the
statue, and Burns said something about having shown
what they could do with stones that day. He then
heard Burns say that the Government should
be told that unless their wishes were complied with
there would be revolution in the streets of London.
Champion addressed the meeting, and told the
crowd that they could not stand against the
police,or the military, but what they could do was
that those who had relations in the army should ap-
peal to them not to act on the side of those who were
riding in carriages in the park but on the side of those
who were sufferers by the present system. There
was then a cry of "Shoot the aristocracy." The
defendants subsequently addressed the crowd, and
said that those who had broken windows and insulted
ladies were injuring their cause. The crowd were
then told to separate and be ready to meet again when
called upon.
This closed the case for the prosecution and Mr.
Thompson postponed his cross-examination until next
day. The defendants were all admitted to bail.