The Sun.
London, England, 1839-08-17 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION.__

society arise. Deprive the poor man of the opportunity I Mr. Stephens then applied to the Court for Permission
of employment and earning his bread by attaching to it to have the use of writing materials.
such pains and penalties as render it morally impossible The ATTORNEY. GENERAL had no objection on the. part,
for him to do so, and you reduce him to a state of of the Crown, as it was not his wish to make Mr. StepltAe be ns
reckless desperation, despair, and revenge. You drive imprisonment more unpleasant or oppressive than cou
him as an outcast beyond the pale of society, and I avoided.
compel him to be a wanderer on the face of the earth— Mr. Stephens then withdrew in the custody of the
you arm him against that property which otherwise it officers.
would be his pleasure and pride, as it would be his religious The trial did not terminate till nearly nine o'clock.
obligation and duty, to prohibit. Multiply that illustra- Mr. Blundell, who was tried for forgery on Sir Thomas
tion until you have the general mass of the population Stanley and acquitted, was this day found guilty of. em
existing under such circumstances. Place before your bezzlement and sentenced to fi.teen years' transportatton•
mind's eye a population such as we unfortunately have at this
day in England, according to all Parliamentary documents,
official returns, and authentic records, unable to obtain a
sufficiency ~of food for the reasonable comforts of their
families, and recollect that it is simply against this state of
things that I have lifted my voice. That it is against the
law which takes all power arid control out of the hands of
Yourselves and your brother parishioners, and hands it over
to three Commissioners, who, as Bacon has well observed
have not power at all to declare the mind of the Queen.
Blackstone says it is the law makes the King, and not the
King the law; and I contend that the Lords and Commons
of this empire have no right to transfer the power given
them in trust for the people to three Commissioners to
make rules and regulations to bind the subjects of
this realm. Against that Act, which dissolves the
marriage ,tie—which breaks up the homestead of
the cottager—which compels him, when obliged to apply
for a little temporary relief, to sell the whole of his pro-
perty and become the inmate tof a :workhouse, against
this un-English and anti- Christian law—against this as an
Englishman I am bound to protest, and as a Christian
Minister lam bound to preach. The Attorney- General
has told you that I sustain the office of a Christian Minister
—I received this book (a Bible) some thirteen years ago
at my ordination according to the formula of the Church of
England, and it has been from that day my study to under.
stand it aright—to represent its contents fairly arid
impartially, and to see its doctrines promulgated and
established. I defy any man to show one solitary instance
in which I have said one word, or conducted one argu-
ment, that has not been fairly and faithfully drawn from
the precepts and practices of this book. lam hound as a
Christian minister to preach these doctrines, and therefore
I am to be held guilty of having denounced oppression,
injustice, and wrong. You are not to throw the shield of
your verdict over that oppression and wrong. For doing
this, and nothing more, I am charged in the in-
dictment with exciting discontent and disaffection
in the minds of her Majesty's subjects. You have
heard what my opinions are on these subjects,
and especially on the right of the people to a maintenance
out of the land. These are also the opinions of Black-
stone, of Paley, of Locke, Lord Coke, Puffendorf, Gro-
tius, and of the greatest and wisest men England has pro-
duced. Mr. Stephens here made several well known quo-
tations from the above and other authorities, on the nature
of the social compact—the rights of the poor—the right
of resistance to laws violating the law of nature and the
fundamental principles of the law of God and
nature, and contended that the new Poor Law,
n those provisions for separating men from
iheir wives and families, and compelling a breach
of the marriage laws, under the only other alternative,
that of starving, was to compel him by superior might to
a breach of a superior law, and was within the category
described by Locke as justifying resistance. The only
questions of a political nature on which I have taken part
are the Factory and the Poor.law questions, and on these
I have spoken according to my conscience, to the word of
God, and to the laws of the realm. As a Christian Mi-
nister I am bound to inculcate obedience to the law, and
in spite of all that you have heard, I have inculcated it.
Mr. Stephens then at considerable length, and with much
eloquence, proceeded to contend that on the authority
of Locke and others the Poor-law was not a law
to command obedience, and that notwithstanding the fa-
vourable doctrine of the Whig party that Parliament was
omnipotent, it was only omnipotent within the limits of the
trust confided to it, and could make laws only, but not le-
gislators ; that the Poor-law Amendment Act made le-
gislators of the Commissioners, and that, therefore, ac-
cording to the opinions of the late Lord Eldon, of Lord
Wynford, &c., it was an illegal and unconstitutional Act,
which had not the authority of law. He also referred to
the book published under the name of " Marcus," recom-
mending the destruction of all children of the poor above
two in number, as soon as born, in order to prevent the
increase of poverty, as a supplement to and carrying out of
the Poor-law Amendment Act, and complained that the
Atforney- General, as the vindicator of the law, had not pro-
secuted the author and publisher of this book, though both
were well-known, and the attention of the Secretary of
State had been especially called to it. If the Attorney-
General had prosecuted the author of that book, then in-
deed he would appear as the vindicator of the laws, human
and divine—then indeed would he have upheld its autho-
rity. But no. It suited better the purposes of the party to
crush a man, whose persevering exertions have raised up
something like a spirit of indignation at, and resistance to,
this inhuman, unjust, and illegal Act. But he dared nut
prosecute me for what is the real ground of complainst
against me. He dared not place the question of the lega-
lity of that Act at issue; but by this species of trumped
up charge, and by imputing to him opinions and motives
which he never held, and by which he had never been in-
fluenced, sought to obtain that verdict which was to pre-
vent him from prosecuting that duty which the law of
God, the old books of our law, the customs of our land,
from the days of the Druids down to the present time ;
and the greatest constitutional, moral, and legal
authorities of this country alike asserted and inculcated.
The Attorney-General has not prosecuted me in any of
my recorded speeches or writings, but has taken the evi-
dence of witnesses no two of whom agree upon any one
point. If I have recommended the use of arms in self-de-
fence, and that that had been made a charge against me, I
could, show our law books, and even Lord J. Russell
himself has done the same, and even stepped out of his
way to make large promises of supplying the people with
arms. If the meeting was of the alarming character which
was ascribed to it, why had not some of the inhabitants of
Ashton beyond these two families been called into
the box ?—has there been any evidence that a single stone
was thrown, or a stick brandished, or a blow struck ?—No !
And with regard to my observations, I contend that they
were loyal and constitutional. If the Attorney-General
had brought competent persons to state what I uttered, he
never would have dared to prosecute me. The great char-
ter of our liberty is that justice shall not be sold or delayed.
It has been delayed in my case, and I contend it has been
sold. The power of the public purse, and of the public
press, and of public opinion, is directed by the Go-
verment now in office against the humble individual
now before you. You, gentlemen, have had a sample .of the
reports of the alarm with which the public mind has been
filled. It has been stated that armed masses were on their
march to Chester to rescue the prisoner. You see the
ground of alarm—you see who the quiet and peaceable
subjects of her Majesty are, and you may learn from this the
feeble foundation on which this prosecution has been raised.
Gentlemen, judge of me as you would wish yourselves to
be judged. If lam not to obtain justice here, where am
Ito seek it ? I know that my character is in the hands
of my prosecutor, Lord John Russell, and that he is in
possession of information with respect to the burn-
ing of Jowctt's mill. which would convict the
really guilty party. Why, then, has he not come
here and rescued my character from the misrepresentations
and calumny which has been heaped upon it through the
agency of the Poor.law Commissioners ? I stand before
you in my conscience and before God guiltless of every
crime but that of hating what his book teaches me to. hate
—speaking against nothing but what this book teaches me
to denounce—guilty of no other crime than endeavouring
to reconcile the differences between masters and men ;
and, never since I became their minister have the dis-
tricts of Hyde, and Dunkinfield, and Ashton, and Sta-
ley-bridge, since their first stone was laid, have the
disputes betweon masters and men been less frequent.
Can you, Gentlemen, pronounce a verdict of guilty upon
an innocent man, who has endeavoured at no inconsider-
able cost, to promote peace and good will, and which has
cost me pretty nearly everything but my life. lam now a
poor, broken, emaciated man, as compared with what Iwas
five years ago, when, unconnected as I still am with any
political party, I had forced upon me the condition of the
factory labourers, and then, not intentionally, the condition
of the poor as it was affected by the new Poor-law. It
is only in connexion with these two questions that I
have ever had any4thing to do; I am guiltless of any thing
else, so help me God. Whatever your verdict may be, I
have not attempted, by any eloquence or talent (for I do
not possess them) to excite your passions, or raise your
sympathies on my behalf If I had any favour to ask, it
was a postponement of my trial. If I had not been guilt-
less I should have no occasion to big here. I might have
walked away until the next Assizes, when there would be
something like a calm and tranquillity in the country, as
there was at the time of my arrest, and as there was at
the last assizes when I ought to have been tried. Put all
these circumstances together, look at them:singly, and then
look at them in their concentrated impression, as they
may strike your unsophisticated and unbiassed judgment,
your loyal principles, your Christian emotions, as Eng-
lishmen and Christians, as men who fear God and honour
the Queen, and all in authority below her and above us ;
take a general view of their character and bearing, and
then on your consciences, and before this Court, say whether
I am guilty or not guilty of this charge.
There was a burst of applause as the Rev. Gentleman
concluded his address, which was instantly checked by
the officers of the Court.

THE MARKETS,(YESTERDA

KET, AUGUST 16.

. d.
Walls !end Hetton ........ .. 0/ ~
Walls End Lainbton .......... 23 '
Walls End Vrn ebert.,n ...... 90
Walla End Stewart's ......... 0 ?,
Wails .• nd Whitwell ......... `22 "
Walls End Kelloe ............. 2'3 3
Walls End Adel. ide .......... St
Walls End Bai rett . ........... 22 v
Writs End Coundon .......... 22 0
21 9
W Ils End Gordon ......... ...
Nabs End South Durham.. 'll 9
Walls End Tees ............... .. S' 2
Walls End Victoria Tees .... , "
ißlythe .. ........ . ................... 111 g
Bapton ........................... IS 0
rn
El,icar .............................. IS 0.
0
Hartley ............................ 20
ast market-diy, 40.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in reply, after adverting to
the liberty which had been allowed to Mr. Stephens in his
defence, which would not have been granted to a gentle-
man of the bar, reprobated the language used toward him-
self, but more particularly towards a dignitary of the
Church, the Bishop of London, whom the defendant had
described as a robber of the poor—as an episcopal de-
vourer of widow's houses—as a wolf in sheep's clothing_.
and as a blasphemer of the God whose representative he
impiously pretended to be. He then answered the ob-
jections to the mode of indictment, and to the statements
made about the Poor.law, which, he said, had as
much reference to the present question as to any subject on
political economy, and contended that notwithstanding all
the evasions and denials of the defendant, all the state-
ments which he had made in his opening speech had been
fully proved by the witnesses, The Jury, therefore, had
to found their verdict on the evidence that had been laid
before them, and the oaths of the witnesses. If they were
satisfied with tl'o evidence, they would not, he trusted,
hesitate to pronounce a verdict of guilty. If, indeed, Mr.
Stephens was guilty—if he had so debased himself and the
high character he filled--if he had so far forgotten his
duty to his God and his Sovereign, he (the "
General) thou ght there would be littl7 o hil""neY"
t
tattle "c
punishment Wo uida
d with him, and that his enter-
tary warning and example, operate as
a WOO. salt'
and have a most
powerful
theeOt in restoring tranquillity, and respect for the
lu o country.
The LEARNS!? ham then proceeded to sum up, and
the Jury, after deliberating for a few minutes, returned a
verdict of Guilty.
The LIMINEU JUDEIE then, after complimenting the de-
fendant on the talent and ability with which he had con-
ducted his defence, and regretting the duty which the law
imposed upon him, sentenced the Rev. Gentleman to
eighteen months' imprisonment in the gaol of Knutsferd.