The Sun.
London, England, 1840-01-07 00:00:00

PRE SUN, LONDON. TUESDAY. JANUARY 7. i-440

ear de,: I mil,- eka to say. that at the crine'u,ilort
of this case, treLss the I. vying of ear, and that for a trel-
ent,able object, be made out. Mr. Frost is in no danger
whatever on ,he !'ou-t counts of the. indictment.
Certainly, Gentlemen, I am indebted to my Learned
Friend for explicitly stating an the part of the Crown what
is your duty on this important and solemn occasion. Says
my Learned Friend at the outset, " You are to presume
Mr. Frost to be innocent ; you are to begin the inquiry
with every presumption in favour of his innocence until as-
sailed by proof ;'' and my Learned Friend said, " The evi-
dence to prove hint otherwise than innocent must not be
left in ambiguity—you must be in a situation from strong,
clear, and convincing evidence distinctly to see that you
are doing no possible wrong to any one by the verdict."
Every doubt, every difficulty is to be resolved according
to the original presumption with which, as my Learned
Friend said, you were to set out ; and if it be consistent
with the innocence of the prisoner, you are to adhere to
the presumption with which you began, and to believe Mr,
Frost innocent, until by the strong, clear, and convincing
evidence which my Learned Friend admitted 'to be indis-
pensable, you find yourselves bound and compelled, acting
under the conviction produced by that strong and clear evi-
dence, to pronounco a verdict of guilty. In my judgment,
Gentlemen, the great point in this important inquiry—im-
portant not merely to Mr. Frost himself, who stands at
that bar, awaiting the issue of your verdict, for life or
death, but important to the county in which we sit, impor-
tant to the kingdom at large, under whose Government we
live ; and the great question will be this—was the proceed-
ing of Sunday, November 3d, which terminated in the fatal
transactions of the Monday morning, fatal only to the per-
sons who were unfortunately engaged in the transactions,
was that—whatever you may call it-...by whatever name it
is to be designated, criminal I admit it to have been—was
it done with any treasonable purpose, and was that trea-
sonable purpose existing in the mind of Mr. Frost at the
time he concerted, if he did concert, that proceeding, or
joined, as I must admit he did join it, and marched with
those persons from the Welsh Oak, where, I think, we
first find him, down to the corner of the Westgate Inn,
where he appears to have been lost sight of. Gentlemen,
I take that to be the great question of the case. If I can
satisfy you, as I feel very confident I have the means of
doing—l do not feel so very confident as to the use I may
make of those means—but I must ask on your part all
the indulgence which will be necessary while, by and
by, I call your attention to all the important parts of
this melancholy transaction. If I satisfy you, as I think
I have the means of doing, that there is no evidence on
which the least reliance can be placed, even as the matter
now stands, by which you can come, as reasonable and
judicious men, to the conclusion that this treasonable pur-
pose existed ; still more, if there are certain parts of the
transaction which I can prove not to be as they have been
stated, then Mr. Frost will be entitled, whatever may have
been the criminality of the meeting—the marching —the
arming—the alarm—the terror, and the fatal consequen-
ces which ensued—how criminal soever these things may
have been—however ranch to be deplored and lamented ;
if I can satisfy you that the purpose was not a treasonable
one, then Mr. Frost will be entitled to your verdict of ac-
quittal. Nor, Gentlemen, do I feel any alarm as to any
prejudice on your minds to his injury. May years ago,
perhaps the advocate of a prisoner under these circum-
stances might have felt a degree of doubt, almost approach-
ing to despair, in case where undoubtedly armed person
were collected, where marching had taken place in diffe-
rent directions of the kingdom, and where the transaction
ended, as my Learned Friend has said, in bloodshed—a
doubt, I say, might many years ago have been felt by Coun-
sel how far a Jury would discriminate and do justice to diffe-
rent parts of the same transaction, and how far they might be
carried. by their indignation at the consequences, so as to
give a character to the transaction which legitimately does
not belong to it But, I speak not to latter y ou, Gentlemen,
sitting in that box, nor indeed to flatter the general body of
jurors to which you belong, but I do thank God that
we live in a time, when there is that general diffusion
of intelligence—still more that general glow of inde-
pendence by which you will, I am sure, be animated
unhesitatingly to fulfil your duty, and if I can satisfy
you that the object of the meeting was not for the pur-
pose of treason, you will not be misled by any strong com-
ments which may be made on the mischief that was done,
or on the suCairings of the wounded ; circumstances
which I feel had nothing to do with the transaction
—by any remarks on the lawless chat acter of the transac-
tion before it terminated in the deplorable events in front
of the Westgate. You will not be misled by circum-
stances foreign front the transaction, but your intelligence
will discern and your independence will give effect to your
judgment; and if I can persuade you that Mr. Frost had
no treasonable intention, you will give him the benefit of
that judgment, aye, even of a doubt whether you can
come to an opposite judgment from that which it will be
my duty to ask at your bands. Nor, Gentlemen, let it be
supposed that any. one under these realms, or in this
county, or in this Court, has an interest in a verdict of an
opposite character. If I can make out that Mr. Frost is
not guilty of treason, so far from that being a verdict
to be heard with regret, or that any one will have
to deplore, it is of all others, under such cir-
cumstances as these, the one that would give the greatest
satisfaction to this county, to the kingdom, and to the pub-
lic Et lady—of all others, it is that which would best re-
essdre those whom this transaction has alarmed, if I can
show that this wide spread of danGerous and destructive
treason has no foundation in fact—if I can satisfy you that
the thousands and thousands who were there assembled had
no treasonable object in view, I relieve this country from a
stain, a charge, an imputation of the blackest and deepest
dye—l give an assurance that the alarm which has spread
from county to county, all over England. is not well-
founded, that no person need be afraid of a repetition of
the lawless violence which prevailed on the 3d and 4th of
November, and that should even such an assembly again
meet, it will not be for purposes of treason, or for any of
those objects which create alarm and terror, at being in-
consistent with the public safety. Now, Gentlemen, before
I proceed to consider the evidence of my Learned Friend,
1 must make a few observations as to the time when we are
now assembled, and considering this important question. I
mean to make no reflections upon those who now guide the
councils of her Majesty. I have no instructions, and I
'ate no inclination to utter one ward of bitterness or aspe-
rity against individuals front whom personally I entirely
differ on many political subjects. Above all, l-should re-
gret if any thing which miejlet fall from me were calculated
to give personal pain to any absent party. But it is im-
possible to consider the character of these transactions
without adverting shortly, hastily, and lightly to the trans-
actions which have occurred within the last seven or eight
years. Some years ago, gentlemen, meetings, such as the
evidence tells us took' place at tie Welsh Oak, at Ponty -
pool, and at that other place where Zephaniah Williams
assembled those under him—some years ago meetings of
this description would have been deemed of themselves,
almost without anything more, indications of treasonable
designs. Gentlemen, the law cannot be altered by the
conduct of those who are called upon to obey it, and I
make that admission to my Lords on the bench, because,
in the few remarks I shall have to make on this part of
the case, Ido not mean to say that any change of the law
has occurred by the relaxed discipline of society within
some years, but I do mean to say distinctly, from what
has actually taken place, that when you have permitted.
perhaps, in some instances even sanctioned, a very dif-
ferent estimation to be held of public meetings, aye, and
even of armed meetings, from that which might have oc-
curred twenty or thirty years ago, the object and inten-
tions of a party may receive, at the close of the year 1839,
a construction far more favourable, and justly favourable
than, perhaps, might fairly have been awarded to it in
earlier periods of the history of this country, with which
you, Gentlemen, and I are familiar. Ido not go back to
any very remote period. Gentlemen, we have lived to see
thousands, I believe I should not be wrong if I said hun-
dreds of thousands of men collected for the purpose of ex-
hibiting their numbers, and of showing their strength. Aye
and we have lived to see those numbers displayed, and
that strength exhibited, for the purpose of interfering with
a change of the system of Government. According to the
strict letter of the law, as laid down by my Learned Friend
the other day, the one or two hundred thousand persons
who assembled at White Conduit House, I think it was, a
few years ago, and marched in tr.ilitary array, a certain
number in each rank, and the ranks following each other
like an armed force, who marched thus to the office of the
Home Secretary, and presented a petition complaining of
grievances, and praying for an alteration of the Constitu-
tion, according to the strict letter of the law, those men
were guilty of high treason; there can be no doubt that
arms are not necessary, according to the construction of
the Statute, to the levying of war. Yet, lam sure such
is the general information which pervades all ranks of
society now; such is the lively attention which every one
pays to public affairs, that I cannot be addressing twelve
gentlemen of your station in life, without, perhaps,
every one of you being aware that *hen that extraordinary
event took place, when the leaders of that assemblage
were admitted to a personal communication with an Under
Secretary of State, when a gigantic petition correspond-
ing with that vast army of men was unfolded in an inner

chamber of the seat of-Government, and when they were
discharged, I cannot say without a reprimand, for I be-
lieve they were told that their proceedings were unlawful,
and, if 1 mistake-tot, they were allowed to deposit the
burden of their petition in the chambers of Government,
but were told, that coming in that fashion, it was more like
treason, or public tumult, to which no attention ought to
be paid. But no notice was taken of the matter, and those
100.000 or 200,000 men returned that night to their peace-
ful homes, after having marched through the public streets
until all London was alarmed at the sight of so powerful
an army—for really such I may call it—l believe this was
after the passing of the Reform Bill, but at the period
of the Reform agitation, which commenced so early as
the introduction of the first Bill, in February or March,
1831. I think at that period, in various parts of the
kingdom, persons assembled in numbers, to show their
strength, and to exhibit by what preponderating and
overpowering numbers the expectation of Reform was
entertained, and its doctrines were to he enforced; and
in one of the most populous parts of the kingdom
(I mean Birmingham) persons assembled and talked
of marching to London and encamping—not as an army
—oh, no, gentlemen, but as a body of petitioners come
to represent their grievances ; they were to come from
Birmingham and encamp in the neighbourhood of London,
of course not to overawe the House of Lords—nothing of
the kind; but in order that those persons in London, and
especially in the Legislature, who were opposed to Re-
form, might be aware how large a body of men—formidable
and fearful if unarmed, irresistible if armed—were in
neighbourhood and ready to bear a part in the agitation of
the day. -With that body, possessing so much power and
strength, I believe some members of the Government were
in actual communication. That is matter of history ; and
there is no more doubt of what has been passing within
the last seven or eight years, than there is that we have
to-day the happiness of living under a gracious Sovereign,
and have the prospect of much happiness and prosperity in
living under her mild and beneficent rule. Under the
name of agitation, what has not been been done in every
town and corner of the kingdom ? if we pass—and I
shall do it lightly, because I do it reluctantly—if we pass
for a moment, and take a glance at the sister country,
how familiarly do we hear of petitions from 600,000
pople ? I shall say no more on that subject ; but I
call upon you, Gentlemen, to remember these trainee-

toils when you come to deliver your verdict upon this
charge of high treason, and let it be understood, that
without altering the law, it has been so far practically
relaxed by the permission, if not actual encourage.
ment, afforded to such proceedings, that it would be
most unjust to use the same measure which was formerly
in use. As to the motives of parties, it would not be just
to weigh in the same scales, in which it would formerly
have been weighed, the transaction into which you are
making inquiry. Gentlemen. I shall now proceed to call
your attention to the manner in which my Learned Friend
has made out his case. Before Ido that, I may, however,
be allowed to say that my course, in order to obtain the
obtain the object I have in view, will be merely on this part
of the case to comment upon the testimony which has been
actually given, and to add to those comments a remark or
two on the evidence which I shall be in a condition to offer.
Gentlemen, I have no eloquence to lay before you—l have
nothing to offer but remarks—of the value of which you
are to judge—upon the case as it has been and as it will
be proved. At the same time, do not understand me to
disclaim any appeal to your feelings or position. The
feelings and the sentiments and the habits of men have far
more ir,fluer,ce upon their general conduct than the calm
evidence of reason. Nay, even their passions frequently
come in and exercise an important, sometimes an uncontrol-
lable sway. For you to be addressed as sitting there calmly
to hear and coldly to decide upon mere reason and evidence,
does appear to me not in accordance with the duty I have
to discharge. When you come to decide upon human con-
duct, you must be prepared to judge and to feel as men ;
and the man who enters that box without being ready to
sympathize with his fellow-men, and to enter into all the
feelings and sentiments, and even passions, which
actuate him, is but half furnished for the important
duty Le has to discharge. Gentlemen, my Friend's
case has, I think, been very skilfully marshalled. He is
an experienced and an able general, and I think he has
made the most of the forces which he had to bring into
the field. His case is this—and the evidence, as Sou all
remember, from the manner in which it was arranged, I
have no doubt, on purpose by the officers of the Crown,
presents a clearer view of it than if the witnesses had been
called indiscriminately to give evidence upon different parts
of die case. My Learned Friend began by proving what
occurred on the fatal morning of the 4th November. He
then traced the prisoners through the various places
passed in, what he called, the night march. He then
traced Zephaniah Williams from Nantyglo, and then Wil-
liam Jones from Pontypool, and he showed them all to be
marching on the town of Newport. Each of those nar-
ratives of the collecting and marching of those persons
my Learned Friend interspersed with certain declarations,
to which I shall presently call your most especial atten-
tion, for, Gentlemen, without these expressions,
without these declarations, his case would be abso-
lutely nothing—l mean, Gentlemen, as a case of high
treason. Do not for a moment imagine that I consider
there is no crime in assembling a number of armed per-
sons, and marching them for any purpose ; but this case
could be nothing without the declarations of my friend.
Gentlemen, my friend then proceeded to prove, by the
landlord of the Coach and Horses, at Blackwood, I be-
lieve, that a number of persons.had assembled there on
Friday, the Ist of November; that there were about
thirty others with whom he was not acquainted, and that
Me. Frost, the I,risolier, William Jones, and Zephaniah
Williams, were three amongst them; and he con-
cluded his case with Mr. Thomas Jones Phillips's evidence
respecting the apprehension of Mr. Frost himself. Gentle-
men, it is qu to impossible to deny—nay, it is part of my
case, that persons did march down, and that they intended
to be in Newport at or about the same time; that some of
them were armed ; but, Gentlemen, I own that I very
much doubt that the arming was by any means so exten-
sive as it has been spoken of, for the number of weapons
which were picked up after the people retreated and were
dispersed, appears to be very inconsiderable, and I do not
know if all that were picked up have been produced here.
It would appear that they have been, if I am to judge of
the inclination to create effect by the display of those
which were brought here. But, from the number of weapons
produced in Court as those picked up, it is clear that the
arming was by no means so extensive as it has been de-
scribed. In point of fact, however, they marched into New-
port, and had a conflict with the special constables, but
whether there was a conflict with the military in the seme
which doubtless one of the gentlemen meant by the inquiries
made by him, although Captain Gray did not return a satis-
factory answer. I can gave it to him. It cannot be denied,
Gentlemen, that the constabulary force was attacked—that
one of the military was wounded (under circumstances which
3 ou will see presently), and, to use the expression of one of
the witnesses for the Crown, the moment the mob saw
one person fall, they all fled in every direction," and in a
few minutes the town of Newport was, almost as clear of
Chartists as it had been at an early hour in' the- morning,.
at six or seven o'clock, when not a single Chirtist
had entered it. Gentlemen, all this is not to be denied,'
but it goes to show what the object of those people was,
and that is the question—what was their object ? Now,
for the purpose of bringing one view before you as to what
their object probably was, I shall take the liberty of pre-
senting to you the evidence of a few of the witnesses for
the Crown, who stated what that object was, and who pro-
fessed to hare collected it from the general body, or from
their leaders. Gentlemen, I shall take the first person
who gave any information as to their object—a witness of
the name of Waters.
The Solicitor-General—He is the second substantial
witness, my Lords,
Sir F'. Pollock—No, not Waters; I shall take Thomas
Bevan Oliver, who is the seventh witness, commencing
with Sirr,monds as the first; for he was the first called un-
doubtedly who spoke to the charge, as Mr. Maulc
was merely examined as to the list of witnesses. Thomas
Bevan Oliver, who was a special constable at the West-
gate, says, " They turned round and came up to the door
of the inn, and called out, " Surrender yourselves our
prisoners." Now, undoubtedly, if that be taken to ,be
literally true, it has the aspect as if some of the matters
contained in the declarations of other witnesses were the
real, genuine objects of their going to Newport. But ifis
very odd that this should only be addressed to the special
constables; At that time the shutteri of the 'windows had
nut been opened, and I am satisfied that it was not known
to the people that the soldiers were there, notwith-
standing the evidence 'of the two "boys to the contrary,
or if it were known, the: shutters were shut and bar-
ricadoed, and' the soldiers were' placed altogether
beyond their sight, and I am surprised as to whom the
words, " Surrender yourselves our prisoners," could be
addressed. Gentlemen, I believe you are already informed
from the cross-examination of some of the witnesses
as to the fact that several prisoners—twelve, I believe
—had been taken. Some of these were in the soldiers'
room—the room, not at the corner, but at the extreme end
from the corner, and some in a room between that and the
passage. These prisoners had been taken between the
Sunday night and the Monday morning, and were confined
there. I think, therefore, Gentlemen, that you have a:-
ready anticipated what the demand to surrender really
meant—that it was to surrender those prisoners—the
Chartists who had been taken, and who had belonged
to the body which had marched down to Newport. It is
very singular, Gentlemen, that only one person—it is a
most important fact—has been called to prove the use of
these words in reference to the surrender of prisoners.
You have special constables in front of the Westgate,
lining the place : you have persons who turned King's
evidence, and who were near enough to the spot to be
wounded. I allude to the witness Matthew Williams,
who spoke to other declarations and expressions that had
been used ; whilst there is but one witness called who
speaks to the demand made of the persons in the inn,
whether civil or military, to surrender themselves pri-
soners; and, Gentlemen, that man admitted that much
confusion and noise existed at the time, and, that in
in his mind there was a great sense of danger prevailing.
I must say I think it singular, if the words were used,
and used in the sense in wh ch he would wish you to be-
lieve—l marvel that the case for the Crown is supported by
no other testimony to confirm the evidence as to this de-
mand. I think it remarkable: It is a most important and
striking feature, gentlemen, that even if this be true, it is
not decisive against Mr. Frost, because 'the demand might
have been made with other,objects of a private or personal
nature, and not at all partaking of high treason. It does not
follow, if that demand has not themeaning applied to it, that
Mr. Frost is guilty of treason ; but it follows that he is
not guilty if my friend is wrong and I am right, and I am
in a condition to prove it, that the demand was not " sur-
render yourselves our prisoners," but " surrender our pri.
Boners," the persons, (the Chartists) who had been appre-
hended during the night, and who were in the inn at that
moment. Gentlemen, I think it so important that I can-
not help impressing on your attention that the first act of
this negotiation or parley was a ;demand made, before any=
violence was used, before a islet wan fired, and before a
window was broken. If that demand were made, why has
it not been proved over and over again by a large body of
the witnesses for the Crown? For, if it be true that it
Was made, I submit that it could be so proved. Gentle-
men,exd between
liste complain, if
it
there have been summoned, according to the lists
that have been furnished us, two hundred witnesses, and
ndeiffter sehnocueld
out of these not more than thirty-nine or forty have been
called. Ido not complain. Do not understand, gentle-
men.
some of the witnesses for the Crown with respect to
their testimony as to some expressions used and declara-
tionsturneda I
out c mtph n; a
made—and if the Crown presented one witness and
kept back another ; and I will tell you why I should not
complain. Although in stating a case for the Jury yoii
are bound to state no fact which you do not believe to be
true, and to present no witness who is not to some extent
at least entitled to credit, still I doubt if you are bound to
risk a prosecution by sending all your witnesses into Court,
who may thus give an inconsistent account of what if is
your duty to prove. But I cannot help thinking that it
must have occurred to those who conduct the prosecution
—(tbis is not in the department of my Learned Friends r
here)--to ask others " Did any one come up and say ' sur-
render yourselves our prisoners ?' " Who is there to prove
it ? Why, there were hundreds present who must be
competent to prove it. The Chartists who have been
witnesses here could prove it. One of the constables' own
party is said to have called out in reply " Never I" This
was not Thomas Bevan Oliver. No. Who was the man ?
Where is he? Has he been called? No. Now, Gentle-
men, I believe that lam right—l believe that I might
appeal to my Lords, if I am not correct, when I say that
Thomas Bevan Oliver is the only man who has proved the
declarations made by and in the hearing of several. He
is not the person who called out " Never !" It was
another, and it cannot be said that he is amongst the slain.
Thank God, Gentlemen, that although severe suffering
and painful wounds were inflicted upon one and another
of those who were assembled for the protection of the town
and the preservation of peace, the fatal events of that morn-
ing lighted a10..e on those unfortunate individuals who were
engaged in these unfortunate transactions. The man who
called out " Never I" ought therefore to be forthcoming.
He whe answered the challenge—where is lie ? Has he been
sought for? If so, could he be sought in vain? Is there,
Gentlemen, a want of disposition to come forward and
claim a gallant and manly part in the events of that day ?
Apparently not. I wish not to disparage any person, and
least of all Sir Thomas Phillips, who has been most de-
servedly honoured by the dignity be has received from the
Crown, and which I hope I may be permitted to say, in
my opinion, receives lustre from the fact that it has been

vice.

so conferred on ste,h a Man. Alt Learned F.iend and my
self, who are associated in this title with iim, may vveh feet
honoured by the association of a man bearing if for trial
services as .he has rendered to his Queen and to hit
country, by the prompt, the gallant and persevering way
in which he conducted himself. But there has been no
backwardness iu claiming a share in these transactions.. I
do not speak disparagingly. To speak in terms of respect
of Sir Thomas Phillips is my sincere desire ; and, Gentle-
men, it must be in your recollection that the Mayor and the
gallant Captain, who commanded at the Westgate, have con-
tended here for the post of honour and danger. It is clear
that this post was the portion of the bow-window nearest to
the door where the insurgents were. There was the Mayor
'and the commander of the troops also. Sir Thomas Phillips
stated that he was the nearest to that side, and the cap-
tain the farthest from it, whilst the gallant Captain reverses
the positions, and claims for himself the post of danger,
and places the Mayor in that next removed from it. Thus,
Gentlemen, there has been no want of a disposition to claim
a part in those transactions ; but where is the bold indivi-
dual who, when the demand to surrender was made, called
out " Never l" It was not Oliver who thus answered
the challenge, and yet he is the only witness to prove it.
He proves both the demand and the answer; but where is
the man who made the answer ? Where are those by
whom he was surrounded when he made it? If there be
such a man in Newport, why has he not been asked as to
this? But he was not alone. If Thomas Bevan Oliver
heard him call out " Never," tnere are several others who
must have heard the demand also. Has that man been
asked by the active, zealous, and discreet Magistrates who
bare been engaged in getting up the prosecution—has he
been asked " are you the person who called out Never?'"
And" To what demand did you thus reply ?" Has he said
that " the demand was not surrender yourselves our pri-
soners,' but surrender your prisoners ;' " and has it been
said to him " you are not the men we want ; you would
contradict Oliver, but who was beside you? What woollen-
draper, what smith in the town? if any, send them to me,"
and has it been said to them, " you have heard your neigh-
bour call out never,' to what did he then answer'—" to
the demand that the prisoners shall be surrendered ?"
And has it been again said to them, " Then'you are not the
witnesses we want, you will contradict the witness Oliver?"
These arc serious considerations, and will no doubt present
themselves when you take up the case of the Crown. I
hive said, Gentlemen. therefore—to quit this part of the
case—that Thomas Bevan Oliver is the only one of the
special constables around the man who has stated the words
of the demand, and of the man whom he does not know,
who called out " never," and who has not died since these
transactions. Why, then, is he not here to avow that be
is the man? Why are not those who surrounded him here
to speak as to what they answered ? But before I dismiss
this part of the case, I have to state that I am instructed
there are one or two—several witnesses, who will be called
to prove that what passed on that occasion was a demand
for the surrender of the prisoners who were then confined
in the inn ; whilst you have to sustain the other side of the
question one solitary witness, who was doubtless mistaken
as to its import. The words are similar, and he might have
been mistaken without any criminal intention to press upon
the prisoner. But still there is but one witness to support
the case of the Crown ; and where there is but one where
there might be a host, and where there must at least be one
more, this, Gentlemen, I submit, leaves the case of the
Crown in a state cf doubt—in a state from which you can
derive nothing conclusive that the demand was " surren-
der yourselves our prisoners." But I shall be enabled to
put this part of the case in a condition beyond all doubt,
as I shall be enabled, I am informed, to show, by persons
acting, not as Chartists, but as special constables, by in-
different witnesses, that the demand in question related to
the surrender of the prisoners who were then in the West-
gate Inn, that the call for these prisoners was loud and
general, and that the mistaken statement, supported as
that statement is by the evidence of one witness only, is to
be merely accounted for by the alarm and confusion of
faculties in which that witness was at the time. Now, the
statement, so far as I can recollect, is the first part of the
evidence that is brought forward to indicate the object and
and intention of the prisoner in thus entering Newport,
and when the truth comes to be investigated what is the
result ? Why, so far from fixing the guilt of treason on
Frost, it tends to show that the immediate object of
going to the Westgate Inn was to obtain the liberation
of the prisoners whom they knew to be there,
and not for the purpose of fighting the soldiers,
whom I shall be enabled to give you the strongest
reasons for believing they not only old not know to be
there, but whom they believed to be elsewhere. I shall
again have occasion to advert to the expressions of the
witness. lam now coming to another part of the case,
but I must still call your attention to what he says in rela-
tion to the alleged object of the prisoner. The witness is
Samuel Simmons, who says, " I saw Frost ; he was on the
:paving, the anchor shop, close by. The people could
not keek on. ' There is a bow window on one side. Frost
said> txurn .:round,-; and. show your appearance to the
front.' " Now .I remember one of you, Gentlemen, asked
him if he was quite certain that was the expression. I
think it exceedingly probable that was not the exact •ex-
pression, and that it was put in other language. At the
same time, it is not for me to charge a witness with wilful
mis-statement, far less with perjury, on a point of this
sort. But I call your' attention to the expression,
even as the witness gave it, " Turn round, and show
your appearance to the front." Not a word of making
any attack—the order is totally divested of the idea of
attack. Not turn round and attack the inn—not turn
round and fire on the military—not turn round and do any-
thing—except " turn round and show your appearance to
the ft ont ;" and I really believe that this expression, which
has fallen from a witness of the Crown, affords the true
solution of the whole character of the unfortunate busi-
ness. I now pass to some of the more extraordinary, and
in some degree the less important objects—what the wit-
nesses have imputed to these parties on the 4th November.
For the present I say no more about the dernand of sur-
render; but I trust I have.made it intelligible to .you,
Gentlemen, that this expression was proved only by one
witness, instead of by dozens, as, if really uttered in the
language stated, it might easily have been---this demand,
not being replied to by the individual to whom it was ad-
dressed, merely related to the surrender of the prisoners,
whom, for the first time that day they heard were confined
in the Westgate ; and that it is absurd to imagine, as the
witness for the. Crown wishes you to .believe, that they
went up to the pWestgate in military array, and called
upon the constables there to surrender themselves pri-
soners of war. Now then, Gentlemen, let me call your
attention to Matthew Williams, the fourteenth witness,
and the first witness examined on the second day. I will
first call your attention to that part where he endeavours
to fix the prisoner, and those who were with him, with
treasonable intentions, on account of the objects they had
in view. He says, "We were told we were to go to
Newport to stop the coaches, the post, and all traffic; be-
sides, we were to stop and guard the town." Now, this
Gentleman, the witness, with respect to whom a very odd
matter occurred about a man said to be a messenger, and
called Reid or Reeves, you may remember, if e stated he
lived up in the hill country, that he met, at five or six
o'clock, with other persons there. Cefn was mentioned,
and they went to the Oak, and also that the witness wanted
very much to give his evidence in Welch, and that their
Lordships very properly prevented him, as he spoke much
better English than we did Welch. This witness, Gen-

semen, pro.essed to be a person pressed into the ser-
You will judge, Gentlemen, how far those per-
sons who were pressed into the service were the indivi-
duals most likely, as they pretend, to be made the con-
fidential and privy counsellor of this treason. You will
also judge how far it is likely, or reasonable, or pro-
bable that the parties accused intended to do all that is
ascribed to them by the declarations imputed to them
by such witnesses as these. You will ask yourselves
what is the probability, if such designs were centem-

plated, that the confidants of them would be persons who
had boon pressed into the service, and that to them should

be confided the extent of the mischief intended to be done,

and the ti eason about to be perpetrated. Well, this wit-
ness, after describing some of the country round
about, says they went to Tredegar Park, &c., and it ap-
pears the party did not know where they were going, nor
what they were going to do, except that they were going
to Newbridge after Mr. Frost. He then says that a per-
SJCI of the name of Reid came as a messenger from Frost,
and that his name was George Reid. This part of the
case is left in a good deal of doubt and confusion. The de-
positions of the witness, I believe, were read.
Chief Justice Tindal—They were.
Sir Frederick Pollock—Yes, and in the depositions he
spoke of this messenger as George Reeves, a collier,
whereas he afterwards, as he says, turned out to be
George Reid, a shoemaker. Certainly it is often ex-
tremely convenient to fix upon a wrong man, who cannot
be called to contradict you, and prove that he was else-
where, and then, at the last minute, turn round and sub-

stitute some one else, of whom no mention has ever been

made before. And it is, moreover, not very easy to explain
how Williams, who knew the man—who lived within one

hundred yards of him—who knew that he was married,
should speak of him as George Reeves, a collier, when be
turns out to be George Reid, a shoemaker. I observed that
one of you, Gentlemen, put a question to this! witness of
considerable importance as to how he would have addresSed
this man if he had spoken to him before this transaction,
and he answered, George Reeves. But, Gentlemen, that
was the only way in which he could have answered such a
question, and he had evinced sagacity enough to know that
if he had said, " Why, I should have called him George
Reid," he would have found himself in the predicament
of being a detected witness to an untruth. He had,
therefore, but one way to answer, and I am sure you
will agree with me, that I do not press this answer
too much if I say, that when you find a question put
experimcntum crucis one way, and which if answered ac-
cording to the views of the person who puts the questior,
destroys the credit of the witness, it does not follow that
an opposite answer should therefore set up that cre-
dit. But, Gentlemen, a blunder in a name I can under-
stand, but how the witness can have made such a
blunder in the business of a man whom he knew, who
lived within a hundred yards of him, I cannot understand,
and I could have wished that the question had been further
put to him by you whether, prior to this transaction, hdt
would have applied to this man to act as a collier or as a
shoemaker. But now, Gentlemen, with these facts before
us, to throw a strong doubt over the credibility of this evi-
dence, what is the alleged purpose which this witness re-
selves? He says, we were told that we were to go to
Newport to stop the coaches, the post, and all traffic."
This does not app ear to come directly from Frost, for
if I recollect rightly, he speaks of a messenger purporting
to come from Frost, and of the object of the meeting
as being talked of or communicated, fOr the witness says,
" When it was said we were to go to Newport, it was
said we were to stop the coaches, the post," &c. Now re-
member, Gentlemen, " stop the post," for this is more im..
portant than the surrender of prisoners, and I shall have to
call your attention pairticularly to it. Well, the witness was
asked what besides th ey were to do at Newport ; and he
said " they were to strop there and guard the town, and
that nothing more particular occurred." At that time
Mr. Frost had not arrived. The witness said, and he is
also confirmed by the respe( table evidence of Mr. Brough,
that Mr. Fros• did not appear at the We sh Oak till
break of day. Now with respect o the declaration '4*
Matthew Williams, as it, dot's not come home to Mr.
important. But you
Frost at all, Ido not think it vory

will judg- from the character of the man and of his corn.
train:cations, whether it is even true that it was ever s,id
et all. I may say it is of no irepottance, and I may say
that I don't believe ; but the question is what 7%1 be-
lieve. I certainly hold it to be irregmar to make any
ersonal declaration of my own belief in order to guide
yours; and my Learn id Friend interrupted nee when I
other day; but did so the ~ ut it is sometimes imposzible, In the
teertrith of argument, for an advocate to avoid mixing up
his strong personal convictions with his profeselresal repre-
sentations. The question; therefore, is, whether Mi.
Frost being absent, yen attach any Importance to it, and
if you do, whether you believe the fact on the evidence
of such a witness, more especially when you conic
to coo sider the fallacy, the improbability, nay (as I
shall presently demonittrate), the utter impossibility, of
some of the propositions thus stated. d here, Gen-
tlemen, let me call your Lttention ,to the manner in
which this case--seme part of it—has been got up. Ido
not mean this in an offensive sense. I blame not those
employed by the Crown and the Solicitor of the Treasury
in collecting evidence; but it is quite plain that the mo•
ment after the affair of the morning of the 4th November,
there was a general demand for some evidence personalty
against Mr. Frost. The declaration of 'the witnesses makes
it quite plain that the story of the two boys, about the
troops, the supposed communications to and from different
persons in the course of the march, were gathered in con-
s..luence of the eager search, at the expense of indemnify-
g al! those who would furnish such evidence. Indeed,
one of the witnesses expressly tells us, that when he had
said what he had to say against Mr. Frost, he found him-
self placed in a very different situation to that in which he
was before such a communication was made. I now pro-
ceed to the statement made by James Hodges, the fifteenth
witness—but I am properly reminded by my Learned
Friend, that there is also another objection to the tes-
timony of Matthew Williams, but of which his Lord-
ship would have reminded you, and which I am sure yon
have not forgotten, viz., that he has been in custody for
three months, not on a charge, but in consequence of a
conviction for stealing. But to refer to the evidence of
James Hodge, the second witness on the second morning
of evidence, who was examined immediately after Matthew
Williams ; he gives this account of the object they had in
view :—" I went to Frost, and asked him in the name of
God what was he going to do—was he going to attack any
place or people ?" He said, "he was going to attack
Newport, take it, and blow up or down the bridge (I can't
say which), and prevent the Welsh mail from proceeding
to Birmingham." He said there would be three dele-
gates there to wait for the coach one hour and a half after
time, and if it did not arrive, then the attack would com-
mence at Birmingham, and from thence spread to the
north of England and Scotland "and that was a signal
for the whole nation." My own note which I commenced
with, is more imperfect than that taken by some other
persons, and to which (the Learned Gentleman re-
ferred to the London newspaper reports which were
before him) I may now, without impropriety refer, for
the purpose of refreshing my recollection. This, there-
fore, is the description given by this witness of the object
of the great movement from Pontypool, Nantyglo, and
Blackwood. It is most strange, and it cannot have es-
caped you, Gentlemen, as a remarkable feature in this case,
that not one of those professed objects, according to the
witnesses against the prisoner, was ever attempted to be car-
ried into execution. It may be said by my Learned Friends
for the Crown, that they were totally routed or defeated
long before it was time to begin any one of them. But,
Gentlemen, where is the evidence even of such an intention ?
I should have thought that if they had really meant to blow
up the bridge, that the military possession of the post of the
estgate Inn was of very small importance, compared with
at once setting about that chief, that great important ob-
ject, which Hodge says they had in view, and which was
to give the signal to the whole nation, viz., the taking
Newport, blowing up the bridge, and stopping the mail
from proceeding to Birmingham. Now, then, Gentlemen,
let us direct our attention particularly to the point, and
here I might add, to the advantages of which the
Crown has not deprived the prisoners, that of your
personal and local knowledge of the surrounding districts,
of the temper of the inhabitants, and of the events which
have taken place within the last few months, and which
you may refer to as a matter of public notoriety. This
advantage it was certainly competent to the Crown to have
deprived us of by changing the venue. Now, lam told
that the mail frem Newport to Birmingham proceeds first
to Bristol, that it crosses the water at the short ferry, that
is at the Old Passage, which is the shorter one of the
highest up the river; and I dare say many of you are
aware that the mail itself, i.e. the mail-coach, does not cross
the passage at all. I cannot, Gentlemen, I have no right
to press any experience of my own into this service; but
I have a right to appeal to yours, whether, when you come
to the passage, it is not the letters only that cross, whilst
the coach itself does not go over. Indeed, it would be
exceedingly silly to take a coach across a passage fre-
quently rough and sometimes dangerous. I understand
that I shall be in a situation, if necessary, to prove the
fact ; but if there be any difficulty, I dare say you know
the truth. When the mail arrives at Bristol—we find that
Bristol acts as a sort of general post-office for all that
part of England—the letters are taken out and re-sorted,
and a new mail goes on from Newport to Bristol. The
same coach, then, that leaves Newport, does not cross the
passage to Bristol ; the coach that carries the letters from
the pas: age to Bristol does not go on from Bristol to Bir-
mingham ; it is not the same coach that performs either of
these three journeys. How monstrous, then, how absurd,
to imagine for one moment that the non-arrival of the mail

from Newport to Birmingham for an hour and a half after
time should be the signal for a general revolt? What effect
would the blowing up of the bridge have? I am reluctant,
even hypothetically, to suppose such an absurd intention
on the part of Mr. Frost. Let me, then, suppose that
the bridge is blown up, for that certainly would stop the
mail going out of Newport. But how would it stop the
mail leaving Bristol for Birmingham, in order that the
three delegates might know of what had occurred at New-
port? Was it to be supposed that the Bristol and Bir-
mingham mail depended upon the arrival or non-arrival
of the Newport bag, that all the north of England was
depending for its communications upon Newport; or be-
cause the Newport bag was detained, and then the three
delegates, seeing the coach, had not arrived for it to march
their troops ?—and yet this is the sagacious scheme
ascribed to Mr. Frost. This, according to the Crown,
was the plan laid by Mr. Frost for communicating with the
north of England,
Sand take military possession of the
north. I say tharsuch a plan could give no information—l
say that he might as well have agreed with the three dele-
gates of Birmingham to look at the same star in the
Heavens at the same hour, as to adopt this mode of com-
munication. I think that it became the Crown, when it
relied upon such a piece of evidence as this, to have gone
a little further—they should have shown us some of the
effects which might be supposed to have resulted from it.
They have done no such thing—they have attempted to do
no such thing. I do, therefore, charge this declaration of
Hodges, that it is absurd not only to the verge, but
actually into the impossibility of its being true. I say that
if Frost had used this experiment there could be no three
delegates to have taken advantage of it; there could have
been none to await the non-arrival of the mail. But then
you are to remark that Mr. Frost is a man of business ; he
has had constant communication with Bristol ; he
makes his bills payable there. I shall have occasion by
and bye to show you that he had a bill coming due on the
4th November—on that very Monday—and that he had
made provision for it at his banker's. I shall have occa-
sion to prove that he made provision for that very bill on
the Friday before. I shall make use of that fact, as you
all must easily perceive that it is very important to explain
this business. I use the fact of Mr. Frost's being a man
living in Newport, and being in the habit of transacting
mercantile affairs, must have known as well as the Post-
master at Bristol how the mails were conveyed, and there-
fore must have been conscious that such a scheme must have
been absurd and impossible. It is plainly the invention of
the witness who put the words into the mouth of Frost. If
he had uttered them he must have been raving. They could
not possibly originate in his mind, for he knew well what was
the mode of communication to Bristol. If the officers attach
great importance to this part of the charge—to this stop-
ping of the post—to this stopping of all communications
with the north, and it is plain that they did so, for the At-
torney-General condescended to dwell on it at length ;
it is plain that the Crown thought it so very important that
the Attorney-General stated it to you very fully; and it is
one of the few parts of the case in which he favoured us
with details. But if I show to you that the thing is ab-
surd and impossible, what becomes of the charge that
rests upon that foundation ? Some mention the fact of
Frost having provided fur the payment of the bill which
was due upon that very day from the Friday previously ;
mention it to show you that Frost communicated with
Bristol. I say it because the officers of the Crown, if
they meant to rely upon this part of the case, I do think
it became them to show the course which the mails take
for Newport and Bristol, and from Bristol to Birmingham,
and not to throw upon Mr. Frost that explanation which I
understand there will be no difficulty in giving. In those
matters we cannot tell how far the personal knowledge

of the witness will bear out the statements we are in-

EVENING EDITION.

the Crown an opportunity of giving evidence of this sort.
You are aware that the Government has unlimited means of
procuring information, and unfettered resources to bring
these !Titans to bear. It shows that Hodges' declaration
about the pat, whi.7.lt is the basis of the charge in this
case, is completely with6:lt found.stion. My Learned
Friend is not in a condition to sooty that there was any
preparation in Birmingham or elsewhere to take the signal
that was to be given by Mr. Frost at Newpoat, Iss this
true, or is it false ? If true, must there not be a mesrernOt
somewhere or another? But is it imaginary up to this
moment? There is nothing to show that it is otherwise.
Can you, then, by any possibility imagine that Mr. Frost
had thus planned to blow up the bridge and stop the mail
for an hour and a half to give information to three persons
at Birmingham? Can you imagine that he arranged.
without Government having some information of some
meeting of some portion of the people assembling—some-
thing or another on the part of the people of England—
to show that they F.are aware of this important communi-
cation.
t es you
waiting, o believe
and there no
r
The evidence on this point is a complete blank.
wthing.
eto
he
There is no such testimony. therefore have a r:saht to
ask Therewere
none—there nwoass:
ele-
effort to be made at co-operation; and there was none—
there was to be no signal, and there was none. Harford's
statement is one fabrication. It is possible that the Ma-
gistrates and active officers who endeavoured to trace
crime to the bottom, were anxious that persons should
give evidence against Mr. Frost. When this is presumes!.
any one might feel that he would be encouraged, if ho
came forward like Harford. But what is his story 7
He says that be was compelled to go along with
them; and yet, be has the hardihood to tell their
leader that he was leading them like a butcher to the
slaughter-house. That was a very true, and a very just
emark ; but here was a man who was forced—be was
under compulsion ; and yet it is to be supposed that he was
speaking to the leader, in the face of the men to whom
he had given this explanation. He was asked if any one
heard him, or in whose presence this bsd taken place.
He could not tell us, all he could say was, that he was
compelled to enter in this service, and that he expostulated
with Mr. Frost ; that he remonstrated with him. This
man said he had the hardihood to remonstrate wish
him, in the face of the multitude, in terms that were true
and just, yet the first opportunity that occurred he tnadas
his retreat. I :-oive not done with Hodges yet, for it is
only by taking this ease piecemeal, and examining it in de-
tail, that a person will be able to get at the trutb, or come
to a just conclusion. This is the way, the only way, of
getting to the value of such testimony. There is no act
done by Mr. Frost, there is Co act to give to the trans-
action of the prisoner the char actor of treason. There
is nothing else in the case, unless you rely on the evi-
dence of Hodges. His deposition was read to him when
he was cross-examined by my Learned Friend, He said
that a man came in with a glazed hat, that he came from
Newport, that the soldiers were all Chartists, and that
their arms were piled up. This Ras infinitely absurd,
it could not be believed, and yet it was brought in at an
instance of the truth. And yet how comes this man to
make any such statement ? Hodges told us that he did
not make it until the other day—that he did not tell it
before the Magistrates when ,he was making his depo-
sitions. My Learned Friend asked him if he did not
think it to be material and important. The answer was,
" Yes." And yet, when he was examined before the
Magistrates, he was asked how so vei v important a
piece of evidence came to be emitted' by him. It
is for you to judge of the nature of such testimony,
and upon that fact to stamp your judgment, one way
or another; but I would also add to this the at:surdity
of the story. Hodges admits that be was at ..licnne
and in bed at ten in the morning. He admits that,
and I believe that we have the means of showing that
he was at home and in bed at nine in the morning,
or very little after that time. He escaped at a dark hour
of a November morning, and be had some twelve or thir-
teen miles to go, and to be in his bed by ten in the morn-
ing. He had even to go over a cross road. Recollect
these things, and then you will find that the conversation
which my Learned Friend made him fix at Pie-corner,
could not possibly have taken place. Like the witness
George Reid, he was obliged to make the conversation to
occur at the break of the day. His story will be found,
looking at the time he reached home, os not consistent with
truth, much less with probability; We have the evidence
of the brewer, that Mr. Frost returned to the Welsh Oak,
and was there at the break of day. It is then quite certain
that, looking both at the distance and the time, it ia impos-
sible that this man could have had any such conversadon as
he says he had. I have then to call your attention to the
absurd, the ill-supported, and the monstrous charge thstt
is founded on the testimony of Hedges. First, observe, k
that Hodges suppressed an important part of his testi-
mony before the Magistrates. Ido not stop to go
through the whole of my Learned Friend's cross-examina-
tion; for I perceive that you attended to it, as you have
during the whole progress of the case. But I pass now to
the evidence of James James, who is the witness No. 17,
and who was called the second day, the next but one .
after James Harding. He said that some noon came to
Zephaniah Williams. to whom Williams said that he
hoped they would all come safe back, and that nobody
would be killed. I apprehend that this conversation re-
lated to the dangerous weapons which they carried, and
which, I own, were calculated to cause alarm, and to do a
great deal of mischief. But the question is, whether they
all went there as a matter of life or death more than once ?
Remark, that it is proved that Zephaniah Williams told
the people that they were to keep the peace. I dare
say that it is one feature of this transaction which has not
escaped your notice—that the people were desired to take
food with them ; that it was not to be expected that they
were to forage on their enemies, The real object—l
trust I shall satisfy you As to what it was—the real object
of the movers, it will be seen, was not disturbance
when they desired the people to take food with them,
the better that they might secure the preservation of the
peace. We have the words of Williams, " I hope that all
may get safe back ;" and " I hope that nobody may be
killed." The next !Arson who gives testimony as to these
who spoke is William Howell, and we have him saying
that he heard Zephaniah Williams express the command
that there should be no shedding of blood, or any man
hurt ; but that all might return to their own homes, in
peace. The next witness was James Woolford, the game-
keeper to Mr: Phelps, who is concerned in the prosecu-
tion in this case. Mr. Phelps is a gentleman of as much
zeal, and as much earnestness, and as much intelligence,
as any one byt
whom I have had the honour •of being in-
structed, an it cannot but be considered as natural, when
he is engaged in this prosecution, that those about him
should be disposed to give him every assistance. This man
said that the Chartists declared they were going to take
Newport. We do not know whether this is to be inter-
preted as the idle expression of some one that the witness
heard, and who 7deslared, either that they were goiis; to
Newport, or viiiaig to take Newport. That might have
been all fancy, or some one might have said that which wa.,
the expression of another witness, "going to take a turn to
Newport." The expression was one which the gamekeeper
might -have heard and mistaken, and not knowing its
"Peening, have interpreted as going to take Newport. The
next witness was Thomas Saunders ; he was the twenty-
fifth, and he deposed that he asked Williams where he was
going ? Williams said, " Why ?" " Because," said the
witness, " some of the men say you are going to Mon-
mouth to draw Vincent out of gaol." Williams said, "We
are not going to attempt any such thing, we are going to
take a turn as far as Newport." I have collected together,
and picked up, every particle of evidence that tended to
throw a light upon the object of these persons: I think it
much better that you should have them thus collected, the
better to enable you to determine upon the °bk. cts of
these parties. Look then at Saunders's testimony', rind
see what does it amount to? Why, said Williams, a:
you inquire what is the object of their march ?—Way
Because some of the men have said that you are going to
Monmouth to draw Vincent out of prison ; and Williams
said, we do not mean any such attempt, we are only going
to take a turn to Newport And now that I have arrived
at this point of the evidence, I mean to glance at what
was the true character of the whole proceeding. Vin-
cent had been tried for sedition. His sedition was that
which was avowed in language impossible to defend—lan-
guage which I admit was dangerous to the peace, and possi-
bly fatal to the good order of society; and for this offence
of sedition be was then a prisoner. He was considered by
the Chas-fists as a martyr to the cause which he supported,
and that it behoved them to evince their sympathy with hinss
and for that purpose meetings were held. I think you re-
member the statements that were read about Frost and
Edwards. They gave a character to that meeting—they
show that it was wished to take men out of the gaol of
Monmouth. And I believe I shall be able to give you
some direct and positive evidence that it had been con-
templated by large bodies of those ignorant men that they
would be enabled to free him from prison. Frost depre-
cated any such violence as that. He considered it would
be highly dangerous to peace and civil order. Frost did
not advise, but be permitted the mach to Newport. Lie
permitted them to do so lest in their desperation they
might take some resolution fatal to the public peace. With
that intention only he accompanied them, or permitted them
to go to Newport, for the purpose of making their appearance
toi•re, and showing their strength previously to making
another application to the Magistrates to release Vincent
from imprisonment, or at least to render the character of
his imprisonment less severe. And I say there is one
passage in the evidence of the Crown which proves this

rtaw •
a place where persons are in confinement, and where I •
hers are unfortunate persons under criminal thargest end
there it is permhted to transpire, that if any one is, aware
c
of flytitirt4. to coininetc Frost, there Is is e
--n.',;:ittragement
to him to tell it. I own that this leelei_y %eel met say
Ike an i"'litldic;",4l) ";!•1 what '" 'eat known, hut it lookh like
a plan or part qi, " leen eu invite say person to state any-
-1 thhoe that t 11?; hff...ar or criminate Mr. Frost, and an in-
-1 timatioo 17.nst any such statement will be received with
ohnaid' en.:ion and attention. Williams added, that he did
not es his liberty, but expected it; and added, that on his
W seine the statement he did, he actually did get his liberty.
tie was asked then if be knew a man of the name of Ed-
-1 wards or Mcrg n ? The natural answer, if his statement
I were true. was that Edwards or Morgan might, for aught
1
4 he knew, have been the name of the man who spoke to him
in the poor-holes/ ; whereas be replies that Edwards or
Merge:, IV3II not the /lame of the man who spoke to him.
It is not too much. to say that the whole of this commune.
cation—the blesvidg up the bridge, end the stopping the
1 mail—is a fabrication. Recollect that this reluctant indi-
vidual had been 12 days in prison, and it was not till a per-
son (
whs admitted into prison to try to collect evidence
and
that several persons were charged with high treason ' and
danger the nger he would himself be in if be did not' give
evidence was pointed out to him, that he makes the state-
ment. What degree of credence is to be attached to a state-
ment thus elicited, and made under such circumstances, is
for you to decide. lam reminded here that an accountant
was called to prove that there was powder in Newport.
Why an arcoureant, who was only so long back as ten years
ago partner with a powder manufacturer should be so
) galled, I cannot understand. Ido not umierstand why this
iwas done, fur there is no place u;ear to where mining is
carried on where powder may rust be found. tt appears to
Ime, then, it is as absurd, this declaration tat seizing the
powder, as Hodges' testimemy, and that there is no founda-
tion for the story, nor is ant- attempt made to prove it by
the Crown. I believe there is only one other witness, a
! elan named.Williant *Harris, who was examined next to
Harford. Harris ascribed to some person named Davis
that there were enough to eat Newport. Now, assuming
that the ohjsre, of shais meeting and of the march to New-
port was for thy' purpose of making a demonstration of the
strength and numbers of those who took an interest on the
Part ed, Vincent, I can well understand the expression of
b!"-:leig enough to eat up Newport as being perfectly harm-
, loss. It might mean that they could march them in such
numbers, and make such a demonstration of their strength,
as would show that, if they were really disposed to do mis-
chief, they had the power of doing a great deal in their
hands. But, I ask you, if the, statements of this witness
are true-oare they, I ask, soon as can gain the slightest cre-
dit from men making use of sbco. reason? This man swears
he heard Davis tell thetna to go on—that they were enough
to eat Newport, and then the depositions were put into
his hands, reshircting which an important question was
put by a .lure elan. The deposition is dated on the sth of
) November. !the Salieitor-General here whispered to Sir
1 F. Pol:ockt. I find from my Learned Friend that this is
a gPOteral headieg, and that it is used equally for deposi-
t' ens made on the bah, 6th, 7th, and 9th of the same month,
end as another of those points, which shows that there has
not been that accuracy in this case which ought to have
been preserved. The witness commences his examination
by saying, I cannot tell how many Sundays ago it is since
be was with the. Chartists, and then in the course of his
deposition- he says, "I am sober now." That, Gentlemen,
is an important statement., and it is one of much more im-
portance than, at first sight, it might appear. It seems
from this that he had been drunk the day before, and that
he was whets then, fur lie declares that "between the
drink anti the bother, I did not know what I said." He states
that ha had drank the day before, porter, and two pints of
hot .gin; that he had drank these in company with a
limn and a soldier—and who was the man ? The man
f with whom lie had been drinking the hot gin was a
1 constable I He, too, was examined after he had had the
gin and the beer t He says that he was almost the whole of
the day before with a young man—it was after this he was
examined I It was quite plain ; but the next day his two
statements were read to him—that which he was supposed
to have made when in the condition to which beer and gin
were likely to have reduced him, and the other when he
was not drunk. What, then, must they think of a wit-
ness who is taken to drink with a constable and a soldier
until his conscience is drowned in the liquor they have in-
duced him to swill, and then, when he is in this drunken
condition, is brought before a Magistrate, for the purpose of
giving information ? But the Magistrate before whom he
was brought becomingly reused to permit him to sign it,
and he teas dismissed for the night ; and when brought
before the Magistrate in the morning, he says, " I am
ar',oer now, and I did not think that what I said I should
have to state on oath." Why was this? Because sobriety I
had brought back to him his reason and his conscience. But
then, for some reason or another, he is induced now to re-
assert in the box that which hh first said while under the
influence of the soldier anti the constable, and which in his
sober moments he bad disclaimed. He was asked, it ap-
peared, by his deposition, if he was so drunk that he had
forgotten that he had been examined ; and that he did not
know what he had said. He now states that he did know
what was said ; and that what he bad stated was false 7
_ Thus it is that this testimony is got together—that the
life or death of Mr. Frost is at stake—that the honsur and
loyalty of 10,000 inhabitants of this county are implicated,
and the supposed peace and security of the whole kingdom
was imagined to be endangered. It is all made to rest
upon the evi lertee of the man who put his cross to this de-
positioe. 13es, all this it is for you to judge of. I have
00W, Gentlemen, Acne with my comments upon the sup-
lerased. march upon Newport ; and I now do trust, without
',eying to recapitulate esnerally that evidence which has
,
I been given by witn-sses—l trust that I may ask you with
confidence that has increased as I have been stating the
I evidence, is there that clear and convincing evidence which
my Learned Friend admitted must exist in a case of this
kind ? I now proceed to comment upon a part of the case
to which I mean especially to direct your attention—l mean
the deliberate tiring on the Queen's troops. A dispute
between the powers entrusted to preserve the peace, and
mobs may tik,l place, withcut involving, as we all know,
the partite in a charge of high t oases', but the imagining i
a lellir-ottioe -attack upoti the military force furnishes, I
adroLt, a stronger argument i, support of a treasonable at-
tempt. Before I call your attention an I that of my Lords
'to this particular part of the case, I wish to divide my
views upon it into two questicns—first, at what time did
• the military arrive from the poor-house at the Westgate?
and next, how did the mob conduct themselves when the
military were unmasked? I think I will satisfy you that
Mr. Frost did lot know, and could not have known, that
the military were there. There was not one who was with
him elm knew it, or who had the slightest notion that tha
inlitarv. were in the house. Tou find that the moment the
military appeared and fired, the mob ran awaya This is a
strong coefirmation of what was their intent. It shows that
their ohject 7,0 s Tact warfare. They all ran away; they threw
(low% th dr weapons, and, 88011 e of the witnesses stated, he
saw 10,009 retiring with the greatest precipitation to their
houses, ,vhich they had left either that morning or the day
before. I have taken the greatest possible pains in ascertain-
ing at what precise moment it was that the soldiers ar.
rived at the Westgate, and how it was that they
reached it lowa the barracks. lam exceedingly glad,
in order that re may understand the subject, that
eou have had pia,: s laid before you.—[ Sir F. Pollock
here explained i the plan the situation of the Westgate
and the barracks, and the road by which the mob came
towards the . We-smote: as well 39 the place where it
was alleged Mr. ?rest conversed with the two boys who
told him of the soldiers being at, the Westgate.] I, up
to the time when this case began, and until Mr. Waters
stated that he had gone for the soldiers, was of opinion
that the military had been et the Westgate all the pre-
vious night, and flier. fore, that it was a fact which in rill
probability- must be known to Mr. Frost and others;
but you nose perceive that it is impossible that the
boys could have told Mr. Frost that the soldiers were
at the Westgate, or that they could have known it. It
is sadisr sineular that loth these' are in the em-
ployment of Mr. Phelps, the Assistant Solicitor to the
Treasury.; and it does seen to me ea be rather cu-
rious that it does so happen that there is not one person
to he fund to - give evidence against Mr. Frost,
who is net in core nay or another connected with the prose-
cution Another ste•ement of one of those boys is equally un-
supported by the other testimony, and is equally destitute of
fontidatien, :tamely, that the parties went towards the
Westgate in any other way than by Stow-hill. One of
these boys said they saw the men planning. From this it
might be imeishe d that Mr. Frost was, like a skilful chief,
with a insp of the place before him ; and saying, let one
teke the time oa this side, and another flank it upon the
other. This was ' said by one boy. while another said
they we uld me let him go down by Charles-street, which
1 take to be th other street, which went on the opposite
side of the Westgate; and then, what was the "plan-
ning," that one said that his weapon was damned sharp.
It is to les remarked that my Learned Friends never
asked the boy how it was that he came to know that the
soldiers were at the ' Westgate. Perhaps you will ask
me why I did trot put the question? For this plain res
son—first, it apiwared to my Learned Friend and my-
self to b • a trumped up story, and it did not be-
come u to clear it up with that which would not be
evidence, namely, his saying such a one told me. I now
came to that part of the case which is made to bear
most strongly asain,t 'Mr. Frost—namely, the firing upon
the military after they were unmasked, and mean to state
nothing disrespectful of Captain Grey, or of Sir Thomas
Phillips; but yeu wiM find them completely at issue upon
the fact which of them it was that opened the a indow—that
• being the past of daager. Captain Grey you find, is of
opinion that the military were fired upon after the shutters
were opened. C.m.tain Grey was asked emphatically by
one of the Jury—." Are you satisfied, that after the
shutters were (messed, and the military displayed to the
mob, the mob fired upon the military ?" His answer
is I.oestwe lawyers call a reasoning answer; for it was
that "it must have been so -not that "it was.'' We al-
ways object to any answer of that kind, and with good
reason. Captain Grey having thus reasoned himself into
the fact, say s, that the mob fired upon the military after
the shutters score evened and the military were unmasked.
Now, I mean not i al di:respectful to Capt. Grey, Localise
I am co,A%laccd that he ineans to convey no other impres-
sion than tido which is upon his own mind. It often happens
~
thatrwe Have no oti.er means of answering as to by-gone
tranametialis than in going bask to our recollection, and
looking to the strong imeression which facts have made
upon us; if we find that there are in our minds two
impressions, inconsistent and contradictory to each other,
i
tint ,I hid) is the more fading gives way to that which s
the stronger; and thus it is that Captain Grey buttes
thdowhieh is clearly cast true—lie is led by a process of
owsonieg to wote cost w . _ .
but which sietsmeeti is
of the utmosct, certainly did not take place,
utmost importance, a., it al-
feios the guilt or innocence of the prisoner. Captain
Grey is asked this—" Are you satisfied that the mob fired
- the' -•• after el tor •vere unmasked?"--" They
upon leo:tory hoer ,a ~ ,
must," he says, "have seen me, arid fired afterwards, for
Sergeant Dan :and the M tow were_vtLounde,
d them heeh
It is then the fart of the Mayor and Dal y h wing beets
wounded together that makes him sat this. But then you
find, in meter to another question, thirty men in a small
room, into which a shot could not be fired without
wounding some one ; and yet his only reason for saying
a shot was fired, when the military were unmasked, is
that the Mayor and Daly were wounded. The Mayor
a . Sala "that be gate- orders- to the toldiers to - firs"
....