The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-29 00:00:00

THE REGIME OF 1794.
Petition of Paul Thomas Lemaitre, presented to the
House of Commons by Mr. Warburton on the 14th of
August:—
The humble petition of Paul Thomas Lemaitre—
Showeth,—That your petitioner, now in the 70th
year of his age, is one of those persons who, during the
suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, towards the close
of the last and the beginning of the present century,
were arrested, and were confined in prison for long
periods of time, on charges of traitorously conspiring
against the King's person and Government; of which
persons your petitioner is now nearly the sole survivor.
That in the year 1794, your petitioner, then in his
eighteenth year, became a member, and at a more ad-
vanced period of the same year, a delegate of the Lon-
don Corresponding Society; his function, as delegate,
being to attend committees of the society, to take mi-
nutes of their proceedings, and to report such minutes to
the division of the society to which he belonged.
That, in the month of May, 1794, the papers of the
said Society were seized, by order of the Privy Council,
and were referred, with other papers, to Secret Com-
mittees of the two Houses of Parliament; that a statute
was passed in the same month for suspending the Habeas
Corpus Act ; that Thomas Hardy, John Horne Tooke,
and other active members of the said Society, or of other
societies of a like nature, were arrested and committed
to prison on a charge of high treason ; and that these
persons, in the months of November and December
following, were tried and acquitted of the crime laid to
their charge.
That, on the 27th of September, 1794, your petitioner
was arrested, by warrant of the Privy Council, for
alleged "treasonable practices ;" and that his books and
papers were seized, and that he was treated with brutal
insolence by the officers who arrested bim; and that, on
the following and two subseqnent days, he was examined
before the Privy Council, respecting the proceedings of
the London Corresponding Society, and also respecting
his cognizance of an alleged plot, for shooting through
an air-gun a poisoned arrow at the king's person ; and
that after such examination, without his knowing what
had been deposed against him, or by whom any matter
criminatory of him had been deposed, and without his
being permitted to communicate with his friends, and
receive professional assistance, he was committed to the
prison of Coldbath-fields (of which he was the first
inmate); and was there confined, and subjected to rigo-
rous treatment,* until the 9th of May, 1795, when he
was released, on his giving bail in the amount of 501. to
appear personally to answer any indictment which might
be preferred against him in respect of the charges for
-which he had been confined.
That, some months after his liberation, your petitioner
was summoned to appear before the Privy Council, and
that he did attend at the time and place appointed in the
summons, and made known his attendance to the
Treasury solicitor, whom he then and there saw; and,
after waiting until eight in the evening, was informed
by the office-keeper that the council had broken up some
hours before. _

That, on the 14th of January, 1796, the grand jury
for the City of London, after examining the witnesses
produced for the Gown, and particularly one Upton,
hereafter to be mentioned, returned a true bill for high
treason against one Crossfield, together with your peti-
tioner and two other persons named Smith and Higgins.
That, on the day following the finding of the several
bills, your petitioner, and also Smith and Higgins (who,
like your petitioner, had been admitted to bail), sur-
rendered themselves in court, and were committed to
Ne wgate.
That, at the London sessions held on the 26th of
January, 1796, Crossfield, your petitioner (who now for
the first time met this his alleged co-conspirator), and
the two other aforenamed parties, were arraigned on the
indictment., and severally pleaded "Not Guilty ;" but, in
consequence of the jurymen not having been summoned
by the Crown solicitor in due time, the trial was post-
poned to the next ensuing session, held on the 11th of
May, and your petitioner, and the three other persons
arraigned, were sent back to prison.
That, the charges in the indictment were substantially
as follows: that is to say, that Crossfield, your petitioner,
and the two other above-named parties, did conspire,
with divers others unknown, to procure to be made a
certain instrument intended to be used for discharging
an arrow to be loaded with poison against the person of
the King, and therewith to kill the King; and that the
said parties did meet, consult, and deliberkte among
themselves, and together with divers others unknown,
how and when such putting to death of the King might
be most readily and effectually accomplished; and that
the said parties did employ and engage one Thomas
Upton to assist in making the said instrument, and did
deliver to him certain designs and certain wooden models,
as instructions for making the said instrument, or parts
thereof, and also a certain metal tube to be used in
making the said instrument.
That the said Crossfield was first triedt on the said
indictment, and apart from your petitioner and the two
other above-mentioned parties, and was acquitted of the
crime laid to his charge ; and that a week after the
giving of the said verdict your petitioner, Smith and
lliggins, were pro forniii, put on their trial, in order to
receive their acquittal, and were acquitted accordingly.
That it appeared from the statement of Sir John Scott,
Attorney-General, made in the course of th.‘ said trial
of Crossfield, that, in August 1797, the sail Thomas
Upton gave information to the Privy Council, wherein he
charged himself, Crossfield, your petitioner, and the two
other above-named parties, with having engaged in the
traitorous conspiracy hereinbefore set forth.
That, from the evidence given on the part of the
Crown on the trial of Crossfield, it did appear that the
said Crossfield and one Palmer, a witness for the Crown,
had lent themselves to certain projects, in which the said
Thomas Upton was the real and principal actor ; and
that the said Thomas Upton, in company with the said
Crossfield and Palmer, did apply to sundry workers in
wood and metal to have certain models and parts of an
air-gun made, which models, &c. were, about the mid
die of September, 1794, in the possession of the said
Thomas Upton ; and whatever was the nature of the
projects in which the three said parties were together
engaged and concerned, such projects were invented,
framed, and organised by the said Thomas Upton, and
were moulded by him into a conspiracy which he nefa-
riously imputed to others.
That during the trial of Crossfield no trace of evidence,
or hint, or allusion, fell from any witness, to connect or
implicate your petitioner, Smith, or Higgins, directly or
indirectly, in any the remotest degree whatever, with the
peculiar transaction, whatever may have been its nature,
in which Upton, Crossfield, and Palmer were together
connected.
That the said Upton, on whose information your pe-
titioner, Smith and Higgins were arrested and had been
imprisoned, was not produced as a witness on the said
trial of Crossfield ; and that the Attorney-General Sir
John Scott, to account for his non-production on that
occasion, alleged that the said Upton was dead, and was
permitted to produce Upton's wife, in widow's attire, as
evidence in support of that allegation ; that the counsel
of your petitioner tendered two witnesses, to prove, as
was the fact, that the said Upton was alive, and at his
residence in London, on the morning of the trial ; but
the court would not allow such evidence to be given, as
being irrelevant to the issue, unless it could be shown
that the said Upton was, by force or fraud, kept away ;
and that one week after the trial of the said Crossfield,
on the day whereupon your petitioner, and Smith, and
Higgins, were put to the bar in order to be acquitted,
the said Attorney-General repeated in court, that he was
as satisfied as he could be of any such fact, that the
said Upton was not in existence, but should it afterwards
appear that the person who had come forward to induce
a belief of his death hal practised an imposture on the
court and the country, he (the Attorney-General) would
bring that person to condign punishment.
That, some months after the said trial, your petitioner
meeting Upton in London, in Middle-row, llolhorn, en-
deavoured to arrest him, with the view of delivering him
up to justice; but a riot ensuing, the said Upton made
his escape, and that your petitioner immediately wrote
and forwarded letters to Mr. Pitt, and to the Attorney-
General, apprising them of the occurrence, and claiming
of them, as an act of justice, that they should without
delay cause the said Upton to be apprehended and pu-
nished according to his deserts.
That it was given in evidence on the trial of Cross-
field that in August and September, 1794, and antece •
dently to Upton's giving information to the Govern-
ment, your petitioner, Smith, and Higgins, without any
concert with each other, endeavoured to effect the expul-
sion from the London Corresponding Society of the said
Thomas Upton on the around of his disreputable charac-
ter, he having been indicted for firing his own premises,
and also having been in custody on a charge of horse-
stealing • that in return for these endeavours so to ex-
pel him the said Upton transmitted to your petitioner an
hostile challenge, and that the said Upton stated to
several persons that he would be revenged on those who
had traduced his character before the society.
That the sole purpose for which your petitioner now
recalls from oblivion these miserable contentions, is to
remark how wholly inconceivable it is that your peti-
tioner, had he been disposed to engage in a dangerous
conspiracy, should have chosen for an accomplice, at
whose disposal he would have placed his life, a man be-
tween whom and himself there existed at the time the
most bitter animosity; and these facts, and the vindic-
tive motives which had induced Upton falsely to ace
cuse your petitioner, Smith, and Higgins, were proved
on oath by the testimony of many witnesses, not only on
Irossfield's trial in May, 1796, but also in September,
1794, before the Privy Council.
That your petitioner, after his acquittal and libera-
tion, returned to his aforesaid cousin's establishment, to
complete the period of his articles, by which articles
your petitioner was bound to give his personal attend-
ance sixty hours per week for three years, at a salary,
with liberty to enlarge or abridge the hours of business
at his pleasure, on condition that the difference should
be accounted for at the rate of 9s. per day, plus or
minus, weekly, and that the balance due from your pe-
titioner in pursuance of this agreement, was claimed of
him and enforced for the whole period of his imprison-
ment, and for all time lost in consequence of his said
prosecution.
That, in the year 1798, the year of the arrest of
Arthur O'Connor, and of the breaking out of the Irish
rebellion, there was held, on the 19th of .Agri., a meeting
of the cosetnittee of the London Correspouding Society,
for the purpose, as your petitioner had previously been
informed, of considering the propriety of making to the
Government an offer of the services of the society as a
volunteer corps, to resist the then apprehended French
invasion; and being of opinion that the effect of the
course proposed (which he knew to have originated
with spies) would be to render the society ridiculous in
public estimation, your petitioner, at the earnest solicita-
tion of a deputation of the society, attended the meeting,
although not a member thereof, with the sole view of
dissuading the committee from making the offer in
question.

* This treitineut was solitary confinement, 1,0 person
being permitted to see him, unless by order of the Privy
i
Council, and even then n Its cell, a jailor being present.
.
t See State Trials, vel. p. 1.