The National Register.
London, England, 1820-03-27 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REGISTER.

greed the public peace, and tended •• 10 raise fears and
jealousies among Ins:ll..p:sty's stiiijects," it was all tittlaw-
itil assembly, although tic poople did not appear armed.
Tlieret .Oftt sue Of tae 10011005 the jury would have to
ilreitle was, whether the ineetitiA now tinder consider-
at•tot entisisiesi Of Well now hers of people. and was cal-
led together under such elrellittStallCe, as could toot Inn
endanger the public peace? It might be, that in a very
large assembly,tilere were many persons entirely 1111101 el it
of any improper et. Tire). might meet for what was
strictly a ',mini purpose ; ate )et there might, in that
meeting, he many other persons illegally asseinnled, who
tnitcht s tan to make the innocent parties the instruments
in weir 11110,:a ;in effecting their unlawful purposes.—
Now, he had 110 1111fiC1Illy in stating, that in all cases of
unlawful assembly, they were to look to the purpose for
which tie people met, tile manner in which they came,
and the means which 'hey were using to effect their
proposed object. All these were circumstances which
the jury were hound to take into consideration. He
had no hesitatinn in stating to tnetn, that it was not
IWCAU,t 11 meeting W. 1% composed of 60,000 persons, or
becaute it was a body (111/1111111g children,

:isat Inereiort m,ab All unlawful a.5:.11.141%. Th t alum-

her of persons might feet tanner such circumstances as
were not calcuinted to raise terrors, fears tar jealousies, in
the mistily of the people to the neighbourhood. But in
an assemble so constituted, and met for a perfectly legal
purpose, if. any introduced themselves illegally in order
to give to that meeting au undue direction, which would
produce in the minds of his Majesty's subjects, although
59.00(1 persons out of a meeting in 60,000 were com-
pletely intiocent, yet there might be IS: or 'tl illegally
nun there, and those twelee or •.!O would be liable to be
tried tau the ground of hating illegally assembled. It
followed, that although a meeting might be perfectly
legal as to the great bulk of the people attending it, yet
if any persons, lay a plat, among themselves, introduced
objects new to that meeting, by placards or any other
means, which objects were likely to give to that meeting
a direction toot lieliare contemplated, so as to produce
alarm, or to endanger the public peace, and strike terror
into his Majesty's subjects, those permits were liable to
tie indicted for assembling together. The Zia!,
as it was stated by Mr. Sergeant Hawkins, seemed to
contemplate the event of immediate danger resulting
from the meeting. He, however. Was not prepared in
his own mind to say, that the appearance of immediate
danger was necessary to constitute this offence. If in
the results the jury were satisfied that, boot such an
assemblage, accompanied by the circumstances he would
loy•and-bye point out to them, terror must have been
inflicted on the minds of his Majesty's subjects, leading
to an apprehension of immediate danger, they would
Rite a veruset against those who occasioned that appre-
hension. On the other hand, it, loon the peaceable
demeanour of the people at the tittle, and the association
of women and children on the ground, the meeting was
not sufficient to produce a feeling of immediate danger,
.hough it might of future d.ingel, he would recommend
it to the Jury to tied a speciat verdict. If they found a
special verdict lie would call upoti them to state: whether
they thought the circumstances attending the meeting
were such as were calculated to prouuce immediate
danger. If they thought tint, they would then find,
" that the persons had met under such circumstances as
were not likely to inspire the fear and terror of immediate
in:wilier, butt which were calculated to create a fear and
terror of distant danger." With respect to the subject
inf conspiracy, it was necessary to observe that the defen-
dants were not liable to be found guilty, although they
wereserking the Sallie tilt!, if the Jute were not ulopinion
that they were acting in pursuance of one design, with
the privity ofell. It might be, in a case of this kmd,
twelve or ;seem!, persons might go to a meeting, each of
them introit:llA to sow sedition; yet, if each person
itittoded to sow that !tedium', from the mere motive and
impulse of his owl' initial, and not ill Cam tttttttt With the
other parties, they could not be Mond guilty of Conspi-
racy. prove conspiracy, there was no necessity to
skew the absolute meeting together of the panics ac-
cused. II the circinti•latocts were such as to induce the
jury to believe that they could out have occurred without
tile previous concert and rionlonation of the parties
accused, it was sufficient. It tile CirCUlllataDCeS were of
such a nature as to imply that there t have Ineni a
, regions plan, that wouid Wallailt conviction for conspi-
racy. If, in this case, the jury should be of opinion that
these persons could not have cootie togentes tit the way
described—generally speaking, his a regular step, and
approachnig a paint-titer place, at tile exact time they did
—it they loeliesed they could not Cottle iu that way, ht
me common order of eircumstatoces, without a previous
useetiog between the parties, that Wall
eel-
deuce of a precinicetted plan. Ban it the Jury were of
opitition loot Owl might have met together by accident,
*litmus previous arrangement, then the charge of con..
spiracv most be dismissed from their minds. A party
expresstog au iiiteinitio to go to this or any totter Ineetthg
might lettuce oilier persons who heard of it through
to attend hoiit any previous design. They
could only implicate, in toe ohetice of conspiracy, those
persons who Me ee hooter mooted either actually were,
tar iron' eactonstaeces most have been parties to tit for-
mation of time ociensal plan. 'Phone who joined in a
a plait, thought at a late pentad of the ifallaatillas, could
tiOt tie dutiututisheti lrom those weft eit hum it originated.
isecanse thi y in feet agreed to all that had ureviolosly beets
dune, and thus become conspirators. consitiering
the warier of emopiracy, they must look to the case tot
each iheteittlant, anti see WIIII wiliell 01 the tither aleltia-
(Uinta lie Coletitifttl. It 11101 he that, as to the conspi-
racy charged to this case. tiwy wo,it tar Of 01)111101a Mal
alit and tote a.otte, 01 the present defendants, N. 19. COW
ileetrd se:lii tile plan, 5% 1% as Ille NU:jeCt tir the COM'
ni•ifitey• If they were smihal that one 01 Muse mien-
.lJitts. Ittgritter with ducts tither poisons not flawed, tad
formed lilt plea, It would silt j. et 111.11 a:dein:mat awl
alottr, to be 1.001141 et..i.y tat the Charge. 'rite tact 01
test 111.01;114 dial 110Lioiallti salon the saute ground ; breathe
if in such a thectitts a, that Mt:its: lictoUtilt

_

fur unlawful purposes,(that was to give animproper direc-
tion to the proceedings of those who were legally and
properly met,) those 12 might be Hanoi godly of illegally
assembling, though there was no previous conspi-
racy. iii deciding this case, they would take all the
attending circumstances into consOleration. One of
these eirCllitiStaliCei was, the appearance of the parties
as if they had been drilled. %Vito respect to banners,
hearing inscriptions, their illegality did not extend to
every man present at the meeting, but on): to those
particular persons who adopted those banners, and the
s.oitiittents inscribed on them; or who, with a full
knowledge of their existeuce, gave perfect confidence
and co-operation to the meeting. So also in the case 11l
drilling. It could only affect those who knew that
drilling was practised for illegal purposes. If he knew
that persons were drilled, for the purpose of overawing
his Majesty's subjects, and bearing arms, and lie attend-
ed a meeting of that kind, and gave it his confidence,
then he was guilty of attending illegally.. But, if on
the other hand, he was present at a drill-meeting, not
being aware it was met for illegal purposes, the law
considered him innocent, because he was not laity to
the fact winch alone constituted the thing illegal. As
to the point, whether a specific assembly was likely to
produce terror, future or immediate, the tact might he
pour(' in two ways—by showii.g, on the one hand,
that terror was actually produced, or on the other, by
proving the abseuce of all terror. To show whether ter-
ror was or was not produced, lie would state the testi-
mony on both sides in this case. They would find in
the evidence on the part of the prosecution, a great
deal whiten imported that no Jig°. ehension of i 111 l nedi-
ate dancer existed; and the cheunistance of wot,en
and children being present would be worthy of their
cousidelation in that respect. An attempt to keep
ileac,: at the meeting was admitted. But this might
hate been done in orar to forward future objects. It
might have been hoped, that, by this means, the pre-
pared seed would be sown, while those who pursued
this course would wait till the time of harvest to reap
the benefit of it. Having made these olotervations,
which lie deemed it necessary to do, in order to enable
thein to tuner at a correct coticlusioo, and at a pottier
understauding of the evidence, he would now point uut
to them what the nature of that evidence was.
Tire Learned Judge then proceeded to recapitulate
the voliti ll i 111 l us evidence adduced in the course of this
inteiesting trial, briefly comnientitig on it as he went on.
Ile observed, that a meeting of 60,000 persons, if they
all came to a certain point, with the common know-
ledge of what was to be done, might create terror.—
With respect to the banners, he again observed, that
those only who showed that they were lavourafle to
any motto inscribed on them, by carrying, tit inime-
distely marching under them, could be considered as
liable to any penalty which the illegal nature of any of
their inscriptions ought warrant. It was given, he,
observed, in evidence, that .11(mi:house was a religious
Mail, and constantly read the Bible to his family—a fact
stated to induce use inference that he would not be
guilty of dui itlegal ur immoral act. It was also stated,
that Mrs. Moornouse, though in the 'amity way, went
through the crowd ; 311.1 it was not likely, if danger had
been apprehended, that her husband would have per-
mitted I,er to atiend. With respect to persons walking
lit the military. step, to which several witnesses had
swoon it could not affect the persons charged, i nless
'ties weie proved to hate been cog,raizant of die fact.-
11 tili repeat to the iiiscriptioit " Equal fel:resew:atom
tit dvatti," if it meant that those who adhered to sticri
a staritiard would lose their hies unless they procuied
serial they dr:ruled '. equal representation," it ausouoteil
to sedition ; but if. as ith. Hunt explained it, the
iitscription merely meant, that if the people rho nut
procure " equal represent:llloli" tiny would he started.
to death, it would out come 'Nonni tilt character of
sedition. Agani, the inscription of "No Corn Laws"
left the Jury in consider wilt:diet tile meaning of it
was, that the Coln law; were sir opliitio.l%e, that eve!):
means, legal or illegal. were to be taken, iii truer to get
rid of them; or whether it was a their altiOrbsitill of
disapprobration. In the 'rimier case it o'lit,hl certainly.
tie sedition, in the latter it u turid nut. As to the cap of
litre' ty, it was nue of the insignia of the M,411; and
whew the Kilig went to Parliament, au officer of state
always bore it be hint. 1 I (lita not, IhefelOte, of ne-
cessity, meats ally thing seditious. Vs respect to any
stoppage of business occasioned by the meeting, it was
prvitively sworn by a Veal IliaSS aet lueliee tor the de-
tentlantr, 11141 it was loil at all interrupted; and, ct r-
tastily, if any in let ruin ion 01 Illibllltsil bath taken plio:e, ill
a great 'owl' like Nlatichester, it would base SATO easy
to have calrid es iilrtice to that tact.
When his !Amish's) had come to the testimony of
('hadwick, redoing, lite es Ilielile at letiatil, Mr. Seal ita
suggested that, if all parties would agree, the le:hi:nig of
ihe esitleine might be very notch abridged.
Ad the parties awrettl.
His Lordship then said pie would read the evidence,
aild it 1w chatted any tiling material he begged it nitwit
be stigktested, and h,. would lead it.
... Itaniford—l lease it rut irely to your Lordship's judg-
Ilirlit. You have had a itit'at deal of nun mitt.
Sir. Justice Bayley.—l grotto: to trooliie ; )00 hair
a tiitii to my sett icrs. His I.m.lim,r this cummwd in
sum tip. !le said, the phrase sworn in by our of the
A Mat asCS, as has ing been used by a person Suing to tl.e
Meeting, 1141111.1," 'lli'lll they ..milu make a AJostvw
of i‘latrenesitr,' seemed to he rucoo,ito or with toe
Iletiti al Ilbfrtittell (XiiitsstAl by the !storm:to on that
slat,
'1 lie Itarticil Judge continued his observations on the
evictoce nil eight o'clock, *slit ii he atiptirtred the
Court omit ,Nriooday iimmiris., 'we egg first, in v pit-
atter with tile ierlitt si of N(1.1111111, cikilictl in' Jiltr) tO
:SIMI:till 'iron reaming the tiesssjapvis, li I ClAili CI 3.41.014 Ull
the subjec, tuf tile trial.
-------

- - _
LONDON : l'oiotr4 and by the Po optiLtor
JULIN T%4106, MI LOlll'U, :0, Fitt