The Sun.
London, England, 1840-01-13 00:00:00

the Horse Guards and the soldiers attacked them, as they
bad done the unarmed population at Manchester, or that,
apprehensive of the repetition of such an outrage, they had
come with antis, would that be called high treason ? It
might be-an offence to take the arms; but then would it
be, as it was made here, high treason ? Now such meet-
ings and processions were, he knew of his own knowledge,
encouraged by Ministers themselves, and they met at the
dead hour of the night those who at the time of the Re-
form Bill led on the processions. And yet were Ministers
who did this now to pick out men, and to act harshly
towards them ? If the Attorney-General succeeded now
In putting down public opinion, he would do no good by
it—that which was suppressed locally would spread uni-
venally, Why should the prisoner be punished for
doing that in which others had set men the example?
He would on this point call their attention to the
great Reform meeting, held at Birmingham, at the time
that Marshal Soult was in this country. Over that
meeting presided his kind and excellent friend, Mr.
Attwood, and a part was taken in it by several mem-
bers of Parliament. Amongst other such things said
by Mr. Attwood was this, that they who met there
"wanted a change of Government." The prisoner at the
bar was not proved to have said anything like that—on the
contrary, he was proved to have said to all that they should
conduct themselves peaceably. And yet, because violence
arose out of the conduct of that part of the meeting with
which he was not connected, he was now to be punished
as a traitor. Mobs were not treated as traitors, but pu-
nished by martial law ; or if death ensued, they were pu-
nished as being guilty of a felony. He trusted that the
English people would arrest the spirit of treason, prose-
cution, and so far just we think the law, that men might
only be punished for the crimes which they actually did
commit. Mr. Attwood called for " a total and absolute
change." Williams did no such thing, and he was under
prosecution as a traitor. Mr. Attwood spoke of a pres-
sure from without,' and gentle compulsions' upon the
rulers of the State.' According to the present doctrine
established at tbose trials, every one who took part in the
meeting at which this was stated, would be liable to be
tried for high treason. They had heard the Solicitor General
in this case. The Solicitor-General was the giant of the law,
but it was tyrannous in him to use his powers like a giant.
It was lamentable to think that where there was the power to
show on the part of the Crown a further intention on the part
of the prisoner, and that where evidence might be produced
that could clear the prisoner, that it should be withheld.
This he believed could be done here, and yet it was not
done. Mr. A. called on the meeting in Birmingham, by
the next Christmas-day, to assemble, not by thousands,
but in two millions. Here the very utmost sworn to be
collected together was MOM Why did not the Attor-
ney-General prosecute Mr. Attwood? Why allow great
meetings to go on, because they were useful to the Go-
vernment, and yet punish others as traitorous, because the
Ministry did not like them? Mr. Attwood said—and so
did Zephiniah Williams—that there was to be no blood-
shed.; while Mr. Attwood added, that if their enemies
wished for bloodshed, the consequences would be on their
own heads, and Zephaniah Williams gave expression to no
such sentiment. The Learned Gentleman proceeded to
read from Mr. Attwood's speech a recommendation to
the people to demand and insist upon further reforms
of the Hause Of o'Comm ons, and in particular Universal
Suffrage ; and if t hey did not succeed in their application
by petition, to resort to other means. That they should
have a sacred week, during which not a ploughshare should
be thrown over the surface of the earth, and not a stroke of
work done. He did not approve of these opinions or re-
commendations ; but when such principles were avowed by
Members of the House of Commons, it was bard that a
poor little publican in the hills should be indicted for high
treason, for entertaining opinions and principles which had
been supported by Earl Grey, Lord Erskine, and some of
the greatest men of the day. Such were the principles of
the Chartists. No bloodshed ; but if a set of bad fellows
struck out from the mob, and committed an unpardonable
riot, for which they might be punished, perhaps, with death,
he asked the Jury net to strain the Act, which says there
must be a levying of war against the Queen within her
realm. It was a bad law, made in bad times, by bad Minis-
ters, for party purposes, which alone created the construc-
tion that had been put upon the 25th of Edward-111.
He had not been aware until the day before yes-
terday that the prisoner was to be tried for high
treason, and having received his instructions so late,
he was exceedingly afraid—very much afraid—that he
should not be able to do justice to the case as regarded the
evidence. But here he had a safeguard, and a strong one ;
for his Lordship, who had taken down every word of the
evidence with a mind capable and willing and disposed and
determined not to let anything that was just or righteous
'loiter& the prisoner escape the information of the Jury,
would assist their minds in coming to a just conclusion.
He did not ask for a charitable or a favourable view. He
thought if he had a scientific man coolly and calmly sitting
down with him, he could prove to demonstration the jus-
tice of his client's case, as easily as he could solve a pro-
blem. But he trusted there was enough in his case not to
require so much as that. The Learned Counsel then
proceeded to comment upon the evidence of Bowen, which
he contended showed that the prisoner had no other than
peaceable intentions.

A Juror here begged to ask a question : Had not the
witness said something about .a statement as to the num-
bers of the soldiers in Wales, and the eff.tct which the ap-
pearance of the Chartists would have upon them?
Mr. Justice Williams referred to his notes, and read
the statement of the witness—that Zephaniah Williams
had stated the number of soldiers in Wales, and said that
if they came out they would be as nothing, if the Chart-
ists would unite all in one body.
Mr. Thomas thanked the Juror for the interruption,
and admitted that the whole of the witness's evidence
should be taken together, in which view it presented
nothing but peaceable intentions and recommendations on
his part. The Jury must recollect the text of Scripture
which said, " The fool had said in his heart there is
no God." If this passage were divided, and only the
latter part taken, " there is no God," i s sense
would be entirely distorted and perverted. In re-
marking upon- the evidence of a witness with respect
to lodges and meetings, Mr. Thomas said that he did
not mean to deny that there had been lodges and
meetings of men—ay, and of women too, and if the
Jury convicted these men, they would have a band of
those Welsh Amazons coming before another Jury, at a
future special commission, to receive verdicts gird judg-
ment for treason; for the women were as much Chartists
as the men. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to
remark upon the absurdity of supposing that the stop-
page of the mail was to be a tignal for an: insurrec-
tion at Birmingham and in the north, when the mail
from Newport merely went to Bristol, and the mail
coach going to Birmingham wont from Bristol only, and
would have reached Birmingham in due course, whe-
ther the Newport mail had arrived or not. Had there
been any such conspiracy or intention, could it not easily
have been proved ? Could any man entertain a doubt that
the Crown had made the strictest inquiry, and bad dis-
covered no trace of it? What difficulty would there have
been in discovering it? Was not Birmingham watched?
Would not some indications of a conspiracy so horrible
have been traced ? And was a man to be crushed—was
the life of the prisoner at the bar to be sacrificed, upon
such an impossible and unsupported statement as this ?
How was the charge supported—where was the evidence
of an organised conspiracy? What evidence had they but a
bit here, and a scrap there—but where was the proof of
that charge in the indictment, of a conspiracy for a general
rising in the country, of men poor, unarmed, with not
money to procure ammunition or provisions ? It
was to be found no where—it was impossible that it
could have been contemplated. Was there, for that
was the real question for the Jury to decide,
any proof of any intention and design on the
part of the. prisoner (accompanied by any overt acts
to carry it into effect) to dethrone the Sovereign or
overturn the Constitution. Was not their design to show
their numbers, with a view of exhibiting their moral force,
and thus endeavouring to carry out their views of improv-
ing the Constitution? If the ten thousand men who came
into Newport had come with any intention of taking
Newport, would they have been diverted from their at-
tempt by thirty soldiers. The fact of their retiring im-
mediately the soldiers showed themselves and. opened the
fire, proves that such was not their object. But it was said,
their intention was to arrive at Newport in the night, and
surprise the town. Why, if that were so, that also proved
that they never contemplated fighting the soldiers; and
that the unfortunate event of that day was solely attri-
butable to the heat of the moment, and the re-
fusal to surrender the Chartist prisoners in the Westgate.
For that riot they might be punished, though most, if not
all, of those immediately connected with the affray had al-
ready paid the forfeit of their lives. He hid the deepest
respect for the trial by Jury, and the highest veneration
for the judicial bench as it was now constituted. He left,
therefore. the case in their hands with perfect confidence
as to their impartiality. He should call but two or three
witnesses ; and he entreated them to consider the effect of
a verdict of guilty in such a case as the present, and not
lightly to give up those sacred liberties which were ob-
tained by our ancestors with so much difficulty; but to
hind them down unimpaired to a posterity which would
honour them for their justice.
Mr. Thomas spoke for seven hours.
EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENCE.

The evidence for the prisoner was then commenced,

Thomas Lewis, a miner, deposed to the repeated ad-
monitions by Lphaniah Williams to keep the peace, and
to his general peaceable character.
Daniel Lewis, shopkeeper, of Abersychar., deposed to
acts of embezzlement on the part of the witness for the
Crown (Thomas Saunders), formerly in his employ, whom
he swore he would not believe on his oath.

Richard F, Marsden, linen-draper, of Brynmaner, also
formerly an employer of Saunders, could not say whether
or not he would believe him on his oath. Saunders did not
dine with him on Sunday, November 3.
Mr. Thomas—The witness, launders, swore he did, in
his deposition.

UNUSUAL CASE OP POISONING.--On Friday
afternoon an inquest, adjourned from the 2d inst., was
held before Mr. Wakley, M.P., at the King William
the Fourth, Wilmington-square, on the bodies of Han-
nah Wilson, aged four, and Caroline, her sister aged
six. On both occasions it was proved that. the children
drank, in the absence of their parents, on the 29th ult.,
out of a bottle, a portion of goulard water, or solution
of acetate of lead, and that they died on the 31st.
The medical gentlemen who were examined, though
they thought the solution caused the death of the
children, would not speak positively, as there was no re-
corded instance of children I, -wing been poisoned by a
solution of the above sort. To enable them to give an
opinion, and aiso to further medical science, a post mor-
ten: examination was ordered, which was performed by
Dr. Golding Bird, who stated that it was his opinion,
from the appearances observed both before and after
death, that the children died from having drunk a certain
portion of solution of sugar of lead. Verdict—Acci-
dentally poisoned.

The Marquis of Bute returned to Campden Hill,
on Wednesday last, from Cardiff Castle, Glamorganshirei