The Sun.
London, England, 1839-08-03 00:00:00

EVEN INt4 EDITION.

jesty's Attorney-General, instructed by the Solicitor to her
Majesty's Treasury—to see the leader of the Circuit, the
Recorder of the town, assisting the Learned Gentleman,
and all simply to decide aye or no, whether these young
men were guilty of a riot. He trusted he should be able
to satisfy them that if it was important to punish the of-
fenders, on the other hand it was most important that they
did not convict these young men, unless they were satisfied
that they had been guilty of an unjustifiable breach of the
law, and that it was altogether unconnected with politics.
He was aware that he was speaking now under
the responsibility of having every observation he made
turned against the young man at the bar, but he
would do his duty fearlessly and honestly ; he
had a duty to discharge to the prisoner, which he
should do without any regard to polities, but still he could
not help feeling that, as regarded the charge against the
young man at the bar, there were political considerations
involved which were calculated deeply to prejudice their
case. It was matter of notoriety that there were other
cases for trial that would raise the question of the legality
or the illegality of these meetings, and of the sentiments
expressed at them. Why had not the Attorney-General
grappled with those cases in the first instance, and ascer-
tained whether these persons had a right, founded upon
the principles of the Constitution, to meet and discuss the
questions to which these assemblages referred ? Why was
a distinction to be drawn between these and other great
meeting., upon which they had probably framed their pre-
cedents, and which had been pronounced by compe-
tent authority to be perfectly legal and constitutional?
He, however, trusted that, nevertheless, like many other
clever tactics of his learned brethren, in this case they had
overreached themselves, because they had not called any
one to prove for what purpose the meeting had been
convened; or yet that the slightest unconstitutional ex-
pression had been used at the meeting. Although
they had taken one of the banners, they had not
shown the banner to show that even the motto was un-
constitutional. lie would allude to more recent circum-
stances that had taken place in Birmingham. He should
not, perhaps, have done this had it not been that he be-
lieved those events would be uppermost in their minds,
and that the Attorney- General knew this, and had endea-
voured to press it on their attention. He, however, had
no fear. Before he sat down he trusted that he would be
enabled to show that those riots had been caused by trans-
actions that took place subsequent to this meeting. It was
a matter of notoriety, that as far back as 1832, instead of
200 or 300 meetings, there had been 200 or 300 thousand
assembled at meetings for political purposes. And it was
admitted by Dr. Booth that no attempt was made to put
them down. He did not recollect who was Attorney-
General ; but, at all events, it was the same party to which
the Learned Attorney. General was attached that was
now in power. But then the charter of Birmingham had
not been granted. There were political objects to be
attained ; and neither the Tory Magistrates of the town,
nor the Liberal Government of that day, used any means
to put down these meetings. These might have taken
place in circumstances, but whatever might be the case in
that respect, that could not change the legality or illega-
lity of the meetings. His Learned Friend, however,
might say that the meetings might be legal, and yet be
so conducted as to call for the interference of Magis-
trates. It was not because that a meeting was large, or
that some nervous and timid persons were alarmed, that
could render a meeting illegal if the object was constitu-
tional. What would be the use of the privilege of petition-
ing Parliament, if the people were not permitted to meet
in such numbers as to give their petition weight? The
Learned Gentleman then alluded to the meeting that had
assembled and sent up a petition for Parliamentary Reform.
When the Reform Bill was thrown out of the House of
Lords great excitement took place in the country; and
would it be said that those who did not put them down
were to be responsible for the burning of Bristol and
the Duke of Newcastle's castle ? It would be hard
to blame either Magistrates or her Majesty's Govern-
ment ; and if those who were in power did not put
them down, and where not to be held responsible,—let
him impress upon the minds of the Jury, not to hold
those wretched lads responsible, but only those who were
actually culpable. The real cause of the riot was, in fact,
the extraordinary conduct of the Magistrates of Birming-
ham, in introducing, without any notice whatever, the
London police into the middle of the mob; and it was
matter of notoriety that the excitement which had taken
place in Birmingham was owing to the conduct of
those whom he would call the prosecutors. The Learned
Gentleman then recapitulated all that had been elicited
in the evidence, in which he censured the Magistrates,
and contended, that as only sixy constables had been
thought sufficient to quell the riot, that two hundred
constables of their own would have done as well. It had
been said that the inhabitants were compelled to close their
shops, but they should recollect that in many lines of busi-
ness the shops were closed at that hour, and what then was
it that constituted the illegality of the meeting ? They should
recollect also, that Thursday was the market-day, and that
the market-place was within the precincts of the Bull-ring,
and many of those assembled were most probably pursuing
their legitimate avocations. The people were peaceably
and legally assembled, and when a body of Englishmen
were peacefully and constitutionally assembled fur any le-
gitimate purpose, and not conducting themselves in auy in-
decent or riotous manner, the rioters were those who set
upon that body, and not those who were thus illegally and
unjustifiably set upon.--(Loud cheers from the galleries,
which was instantly suppresssed by the officers of the
Court.) He trusted that his client's case would not be
prejudiced by any improper or ill-judged expression of
feeling among the auditors. He denied that there was
the slightest tittle of evidence to show that there was any
riot until the police arrived, or anything calculated to
alarm the inhabitants. It was most unjustifiable, because
the Magistrates might feel a repugnance to the objects
discussed at the meeting, or the views of the body who
composed it, that they were justified in dispersing these
men. Dr. Booth had very properly and candidly
told them, that the appearance of the police was
taken by the police as a declaration of war against
them ; and he was glad the statement had come
from him instead of from one of the police. The meeting
was ordered to disperse, and then the police, with their
staves (for they were unarmed) charged them. It appeared,
however, as if the legitimate use of the staves in the hande
of the police was to break mens' heads, and to give evi-
dence of the treatment which the people received from these
infuriated policemen, who had been described as combining
the temperance of old men with the vigour of young men,
they heard the evidence of one policeman with respect to
the prisoner, who was flying from them, and who concealed
himself behiind the tombstones. He was asked to make
some confession, and on refusing to do so, the policeman
struck him with his staff across the back.
The ATTORNEY.G&NERAL interfered. That was not the
evidence before the Jury.
Mr. MILLAR contended that the man had been assaulted
without the slightest provocation, and in the most brutal
way by the police. They should recollect that an English-
man's person as well as his house was sacred, and he would
ask what right had the Magistrates, when no breach of the
peace had been committed, to order the police to disperse
and take these men into custody ? None; and when
the policeman did so, the people had a right
to resist. It was rather a singular coincidence
that the leader of the police sent down by the
leader of the House of Commons had been protected
by a leader, and it was not the first time that petticoat
protection had been thrown around that leader.—( A
laugh.) There was no proof beyond his being found
in the enclosure that Storey had participated in any way
in the riot. No stone had been found en him ;no eepres-
sions were ascribed to him ; and there was not a single fact
beyond his being found in the enclosure. The same might
be said of the young man who had been found concealed
behind the tombstone. That was the whole of the ease
against them, and from that sample they might form some
estimate of the• credit to be attached to the whole orthe
charge, and the evidence by which it had been sup-
ported. Storey had taken no part whatever in the riot,
except, perhaps, from motives of curiosity having gone into
the Churchyard to witness the proceedings. That he was
there was certain, but that he was there for any guilty
purpose he utterly denied. There were strong reasons,
perhaps, why those who represented the Government
should be anxious to obtain a conviction. Appoint-
ments had been made which had been censured, but that
was no ground why these unfortunate men should be
made the victims of that state of things. They would
recollect that the fate of the prisoners was in their hands,
for the best safety of the people of all countries depended
upon a jury ; and if ever there was a case when the im-
portance of trial. by jury was real, conspicuous, and valu-
able, it was in cases of political prosecutions, when the
whole power and influence of Government might be brought
to bear against them. He knew the great odds he had to
contend with. He warned them against the casuistry and
the sophistry of his Learned Friend the Attorney-General.
He hoped they would not be led away by it. He left his
case in the hands of the Jury, conscious that they would
not gratify any political motives which there might be I
in view by the conviction of these innocent men. Wheat
they found his Learned Friend availing himself of tb
might depend upon it there -was
s,
pinlyt.htehecyase than appeared upon ti.e face
the pure administration of justice, epe. not lend
preserve Lt
ospofrmivtheilteehgiinendgoicfmtanosrerenet. He hoped, however, the
would
U'iy
themselves to a political prosecution like tale present, evi-
dently set on foot for party purposes.
John Neale addressed the Jury. lie
any one at the
the meeting by accident. hen he save
out, he asked what was the meaning of it,
for he saw
come
W
no riot; he threw no stones; and he asked the policeman
to allow him to go home quietly. He
wo
uld, with their
'
permission, call a witness who would h
He believed that if there
had been i
to hear his case, he believed hep
examined
h •a
at
ta
oc
ft
_ffioe
cur
e.r
o'clock when there Was no one there.
Sheares then said a few words.
nw
denying
o not he a
charge
he a
rb:e e n
where he was at present ; bute was
;
as didhaar
lell
sTrowbridge theowbrid
other prisoners.
a pawnbroker
Charles
in Birmingham, gave
Storey an excellent character, known him for ten
years. Prisoner was with him
in his garden about eight
Br ng.
jdol-hrni
o'clock that night. The garden is about a mile from the
known Nicholson, a day labourer for John Neale—Had
n him from an infant. Prisoner left home, about four
miles from Warwick, on the Tuesday. He had not had
much employ. He
gave the prisoner an excellent charac-
ter, as being peaceable and orderly.
Wm. Lowe, for Sheares.—He stated he was a bra es
founder in Birmingham. Had known the prisoner for
16 years. Never knew a more peaceable boy aboast the
Factory, where he hal worked with him for eient wears.
Charles Swinburn, a gun-maker at Birmingham, ap-
peared to speak for Eades. Had known 'nim for 15 or 16
years. He gave him an excellent character.
Samuel Haycock, a mathematical-instrument-maker,
for Mahon. Had known the prisoner for a good many
years, and never knew him to be otherwise than peaceable
and orderly.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL rose to reply. He was no
master of subtlety or casuistry, as was stated by his
Hon. Friend, and if he were this was no time to use them.
It was his duty merely to state to them the law of the f
case. There had, however, been no evidence to alter the I
facts of the case adduced in evidence. There had been
some witnesses come forward to character, but that
did not affect the evidence. They had heard an