The Sun.
London, England, 1803-02-10 00:00:00

a
Y.
'it

!r—
-id
rt

iL
le

Y

u.

II

i

.oentleman at. the Bar. You will easily eon.
teive it one of the most painful duties that can pos.
sibly be cast on a man standing in my situation :
for; however unfavourable the case laid. before you
may appear, yet when it is rectilletied that it is my
proiince to bring fortvArd its mote, prominent fea-
tures, argue them iii-the most favourable . point of
vie*, and draw thOseinfetencecfrom them which
shall induee you' to acquit him. a a charge that
reaches his' life, charaeler, and honour, every thing
most dear to him, ,ettery thing that- can tilted him in
this world and in the world to come you must be
sensible r have need of all that interest and -attert-
tion,' on your parts, which n subject of so serious
and iMportant a nature demands: If I did not feel
that I was addressing you in a Court of Justice,
where I haVe all rhoie advantages which the ArroA-
!UV-GENERAL has enumerated, if I was not sensible
I am assisted by:thelearned and noble judge, who.
is, by the Constitution of the Country, equally with
myself the Counsel for the Prisoner ; if I was not ap.
Pealing ttea Jury who knew that the law of which
they are the guardians, is to be administered in Incr.-,
cy, I should be incapable of performinglhe artiu.'
eel task imposed on me. The Learned AiTORNEY,
GingtßAL has with' great propriety stated, it is a
Illheiple: in the administration of justice, that the
greater the crime is, the 'greater should be the
caution of the Jury in weighing the evidence be.
fore they deliver the person accused to that yen.
leance of the law which awaits him in case they
Vinmunee him guilty. It is no new principle.
It is applicable to every case of' enormity, and
has been tecognized by the ablest Judges and
Vritees• If it is true with regard to cases which
Only ;Zeta the Public in a mural point of view,
l'ow much more so must it be in those in which
as teptesentatives of the Public are Prosecu.
? it is the peculiar misfortune of a person whO
is tried fur .High Treason, that you cannot be in.
tlifrerent to the charge against him. The offence is
otle which directly attacks Society itself, and those
laws to which you look up for protedion. If it is
Necessary, therefore, you should guard yourselves
against that indignation which induces you to at.
tacit guilt to persons accused of lesser offences, how
touch more ought you to ad with circurnspedion
its a case of High Treason, in which you cannot
avoid feeling an interest in delivering over the per..
sea to whom it is imputed, to that punishment a
crime of such deep malignity merits ? The Learned
Artol.NeS.- N It A 1, stated sonic of the advantages
a prihnner has when put on his trial for High Trea-
t"ni aid he mention... 3 this as'. one .of the cases : I
11'glIlY approved his observation. lie said, those
who planned the scheme of 'Liberty the people of
this country have enjoyed since the glorious Revo-
juli°o, 'Wm sensible :that where the State was the
Prosecutor, and sent into a Court of Justice the
whole weight of legal talent against the accused,
that it was necessary 'the Prisoners should have a
greater clegree of allowance and indulgence than if
charged with a crime of -lesser niiignitude. This
indulgence' is certainly one of -the most beautiful
Patti 'cif the Constitution.' • There is nothing skews
the existbnce of .that troe Liberty, we enjoy .
Country, so, much as the fair. mode of administering
Justice with regard to the trial of piesunied Trai.
tori ; it presents 'the'tnoit amiable iiiffitre Of impar.:
tial jurisprudence. One which, if duly Alontem..
Plated, will teach those, if • any :there Are, whO
are hostile to. our Gov,upplent and Constitution,
tblc hat if there is any.country on the face of the habita.
world, Libe,tty fluuri4hes,, it is in
this. 4 is. thelitly,„guunt9 in which those auto are
charged with An attempt, to overturn the Govern.
itnd- ,whittevir is dear and ealtiable, have time
least chance of a fair triai. • For. no Oilier crime,
even though it should embrace every species: of
4tr°citY, does the Law Allow a 'similar indulgence
to a Prisoner. If the Gentleman at the Bar was
accused of the foulest Murder, I should pot,- as his
Counsel, have the liberty of addiessing you-. I make
these observationsjor the pnipoie-of skewing you
that titbit whb faititied • the LaWs 'with regard to
trials fot'High Treason., were convinced how neces.
larfthef Were to Sieure:theSubjeit from that pre.
judiec, whiquuch au accusation is likelyto excite.
}Lyin mitele
g .these observations, I ant persuaded
it Will be tinntcegory fi>r me to-desire 'you to` do
all you can to., divest yourselves of that prejudice
You may be disposed' to feel, 'anti to 'do that which
the laws of your country :demand of you, and with-
°t.it which there .Ca 'be tip liberty in the country.
ratan to presuauellte..Prisoner innocent until hi,
is clearly 'made out—still 'it is made out, not
that species' of e'videne.e you have heard to.clay,
bat by legal and Line proof. Permit me, to call
c",leattention to some few rules of evidence which
ave been wisely adapted to CASes(lf this sort; some •
bfliell) areapplicable to cases in general, that come
: that they Will'fhave the.
*anction a the Learned Judges whatem rOc, I ant..
Persuaded. I would not-state them if I did not
think so. I omitted to observe that atilt is almost a
question of fakte, .ands God:forhid I should say, if
the AEU alledged arc clearly made out, they..do not
Amount to. High Treason. The only question for-
the consideration of' the Court 'and Jury will 'be,
'whether •_ the different faks are made out by clear
th4:4stisfaCtory evidence ; and whether the Treason
h'a' been manifested by the hist evidence' that could' I.
.rtivuiiiveiecohl4f.eilet4n;;;°O..gb‘lvt/21';iiintceorfd.has everlbent hliparrtoe:voaeridlt;
do'frte
'i‘vinlieddreetil'licasctt?bin:'e;
that Treason cannot be made:our by words; it must
14,e. by "lts, -deeds, or .•t% ritings. is the principle
41earitient law, and. by the statute of 36 Geo. 111..
On which this indictment is framed, the Treason
most beity Writinircir'rinting. Thus you see that
`. hat is alledged ,to be rteason, is not to be made
out by thvniere• declarations of the . party accused.
_
do not mean,
.sey,„tbat the parol testimony of
Witnetiscs is., not.; to:.. be received, rbut only that
a ,mart i 5 nut to be convicted of High Treason
concurrent 'Proof by' writing ..or deeds.
But it may be said, why does. .Ihe -.law allow
to be 'received; if it cannot be: the' founda-
lion of a conviction ? I will jell;iou why. s;-It
alluws' it to be rtweivesi.to explain ttansadions,Wlitch
3,n iheinstiv6, would he otherwise inexplicable.—
g t- am about to. advert to a book whichl am aware
lrelott-tctiocauthority .EnglislvCourt
'.',Pls.ticse. 4 not, admit, an authority on .
"'trickJr.i/g:i4.l.vimil to ail, 14ut. it is an authority. 1

Whieit inhutt Lave weight, Wherever reran end
justice ptesido. - The learned than who is the att.
thor of it, bas.expressed my opinion infinitely bet.
to than Lean express it by any, words ire
my power
to use. Monresrlueiu, in his Spirit of Laws,
speaking of Treason; thus expresses himself, No.
thing renders the crime of High Treason more ar-
bitrary, than declaring people guilty of it for indis_
Creet,spreches. Speech is so subjed to interpreta-
rion;' there is so great
_a difference between in.
disCretion and 'make, and frequently so little is
there of the latter in the expressions used, that.
the Law can hardly sullied people to a capital
punishment for words, unless it expressly declares,
what words
.they are which render a man guilty.--7,
Words do not constitute an Qvert.ad, they remain
only in idea;, they ,generally, when considered
by themselves, have no determinate signification;
for this depends owthe tone in which they are ut.
tered, koften happens, that in repeating the same
words, they Kaye not the same meaning. ' This
meaning depends on, their connection with other
things, and sometimes more is expressed by silence
than ,by any discourse whatsoever. As there can
be nothing so equivocal 'and ambiguous as all this,
how is it possible to culvert it into a crime of High
Treason ? Wherever this Law is established, there
is an end, not only of liberty, but even of its very
shadow." It is impossible that the ideas of any Eng.
lish Lawyer could be more clearly or better express.
ed. If a man was to be accused of going to a public
market, to excite. the people, to revolt, five hundred
people might be brought to prove that he did such
and such particular ads, or fie might bring the same
number to prove he did not do them ; hut what would
he du if he was brought to trial for those ads, which
he could have no opportunity of contradiding, for
what passed in a • private room in the midst of
persons of a description so, infamous as those
who have been produced .upon the present Occa-
sion ? Do not tell me that the Law, as defined,
admits of constructive Treason, when the Law
says you can only.convid- on Overt.ads„ I am aware
that going to a traitorous meeting is an Overt-aft,
but with great submission to the ATTORNEY GENE...
RAI., he is begging the question; for before he can
say that attending, a -meting is Nigh Treason,
he must shew the that it is atreasonable meeting.
Something else than the bare meeting must be added
to shew me that it is an Overt-act of f-ligh Treason.
-You have no legitimate proof that any meeting• Co.
lone! Despard ever attended was a meeting for trai.
torbus purpoies.. There is writing in this case Tad.
wit. I could explain that writing if I was called
upon to do so, but I am not driven to the necessity
of takingpotice of it. I do nut care whether that
writing is treasonable or not, for it is no-ways
,connefted with the Prisoner, except by the evidence
of William Francis. There is not an atom of evi_
deuce besides Isis, to affett the Gentleman who stands .
at the
l'il-heoentlis;lg evidence
; against him is, that
e attended
o,e i ne
namely, that meeting at
which he was apprehended ' • for as to his attendance
at any other, it is proved by witnesses, whose testi-
,mony I will undertake to convince you, if it can'be
for a moment believed, there is not a man whose
fame, fortune, or life, can be safe. L'et us contrast
this case with those which have occurred
before, and
see whether it is not materially different from them.
16-the case of Christopher Layer, what was the evi-
dence ? Did the Counsel for the Crown 'edntent
themselves with calling 'evidence to prove that the
Prisoper attended meetings ? No : they proVed that
arms were found, and they proved a plan, in his own
hand-writing, to overturn the Government of die
Country. In all theother cases, I ventene to appeal:
with eanfidence to any one who hears use, whether,
in any
,that have occurred sibce the ke.volution, for
I AU never admit that a' precedent' is to be drawn
friim what passed before, at a- period when Judges
were objefts of suspicion, and not as-they are now,
objeds of admiration, and as eminent for their in-
dependence as their learning." From the period of
the RevolutiOn, then, I ask, whether a single solitary •
instance can be found in which a man has been con:
viCted of High Treason by merely strewing hini to,
have attended a meeting, without, at the same time,
proving :lets indicating that crime. I do not Mean
to'say that any thing is necessary to 'redone towards
the immediate accomplishment ' of the TN:atoll,'
but a Jury ought to require it to be shewn that
the accused at !cast had the Means of carrying the
design into execution. 1 can conceive a ease in
which Treason would be complete, though it was
only its preparation. That case is where a Treason
was meditated, which it required time to; ripen, and
where the moment of adion was at a distance. Ac.
Costcling'fo the evidence, this was 'not that inchorate
species of Treason ; but, from the account given by
the witnesses, it appears' the Treason was 'not. only
conceived, but at the moment of being carried into •
execution, and though witness after witness has
been called, no one has pointed-out where there were
any arms, ammunition, or the, means of its being at-
tended with any probability of. success. Though
the object was the taking the Tower of LondOn, the
first fortress' in point of strength in the kingdom,.
and from which you.ate told the Prisoner' said he
could batter the town to atoms, yet you do not find
that he had a single instrument ready to died this
design, save a few tobacco.pipes, or that the whole
exchequer of the Conspirators amounted to more
than Iv. d. If such a Conspiracy had ever been
proved by people of a description different from
those whose evidence you have heard, woald'you not
say, the story was too improbable to be en-
titled 'to belief'?' You have noise of the writings
brought hOrne to Colonel Despard ;. but it may he
said, 'he was so cautious a man, that he would take
care their contents should not attach to him. Can the
ATTORNEY GENERAL he permitted to say this ? Can
he represent the Prisoner as a eaUtiOUS anti ineptl.den man at the same time I It is impossible that
man should be 'described as cautious, who'is reoeat-
edly found, according to the testimony of the‘Wit-
nesses, talking to every stranger he meets, upon a
subject which he could not but he aware, if deve-
loped, -must affect his life, I come now to a topic
which is the most important of, anyone I have co
.address you upon, and it is, that it is a rule of cvi.
donee, not merely applicable4o High Treason, b 8&
every' other crime, that the case should be made out
by credible witnesses. It may be put to me—ii Do
you' mean to say, that witnesses who are /W.
conerlkes ought nut to be 'received'?" Certainly

they aught. But I think I can state, the tine
which constitutes the utmost extent to Which their
evidenceis.entitled to credit.. The evldenee of an
Accomplice is entitled to credit, where it captains.
a transattiOn which has been proved by other Wit-
nesses. '' Why then," you wit! ask, "isitto be
received at all, ifir can only confirm what,hai been
before proved ?" It is, I say, to be :tedei veil' for
the purpose of satisfying a Jury, wh6.woutrnot,
without it, be satisfieit in` returning verdiet": of
guilty ; but the evidence of an Aez..ortiptiCe is' not to
be received as 'nob( of a•case, which; Without it, is
an innocent one:

The humane laoguage of the Law of this Country
is, that it is better oinety.trine.guilty'persoos should
escape justice, than that one innocent man should
suffer injustice.' The testimony of Accornplices,
then, ought not to be received till after the crime
has been made out by others. Let me ask you if
one tittle of proof has been adduced in this . case,
except by the evidence of Accomplices, or any one
circumstance alledged against the Prisoner at the Bar;
except- his being present at the Meeting at . the
Oakley Arths 3 .If so, it is not the case of Colonel
Despard I am pkading,' but of every individual.
The principles upon which the Law and English
Liberty are -founded, are those whickaffutd pro.
tedinn against foul charges in courts of justice.
It must be admitted, that only four of the Witnesses
fro' the Crown, in the least degree, go to offal the
Pr isoner •;- those four are, Windsor, Blades, Francis
and Emblin, and I think I am entitled to say,
that nut one of these persons have a right to the
least degree of credit. I may be cold, that though
each of theSe separately, could 'not bring home a
case of guilt, yet, that altogether they prove one.
I feel the full, force of what the SoLic trok GR-
RAL will say on this sulijett, in his reply. I
admit, that if Witnesses Came from different parts,
and all agree in the same story, they are to'a certain
extent, entitled to belief; hut this observation,
which has been constantly made,' does not apply
to a case of Conspiracy ; fur where men attempt
to fasten a ctitne on another for Conspiracy, they
will, of course, do it by a story which shall be
supported by a concurrence of testimony. Men '
otluated by such :in intention, will take care, that
in. their narrative they shall exactly resemble each
other. if the charge is foendedie a COnspiracy, it
makes no difference, whether 'it is supported by an
hundred witnesses td by a few. If 1 shety that the
transaction is altogether infamous, and' that the
. witnesses have conspired to charge Colonel 'Despard
with that which belongs to themselves, it is your
duty to acquit hint. come now to a ground which
is decisive of the case; you have heard a tale which
'freezes one's blood with horror; it is alitiott
impossible for any man to listen to such a story,
without 'being deprived of thosel'aculties necessary
to enable hint to extricate the Unfortunate Gentle.
man at the bar from the labyrinth in which he has,
by the wickedness of others, been entangled.-e-
If this is an imptoble case, "it is your duty to're_
quire more cogent evidenee to substantiate it. That
it is an improbabli Otte, to one who has heard the
evidence can for a moment doubt. It appears that
not more than fourteen persons were assembled at
an alehouse, with no other weapons but tobacco.
pipes, and that their objea was to overthrow a.
Government supported by as many thilliotis. Had
they any foreign connections ? No attempt has
been made by the evidence to infer such a theory.
At the moment this mighty.blow was' to struck,
it appears, they were destitute of means, and
,expected no assistance. Resources were talked
kif, to give. an air of credibility to. the design ;
but if there .was any foundation for ' it in point
'of fad, how happens- it that we• have bad' no
;proof of a corresponding conspiracy in other
parts of the eciuntry ? How was the platy to be, put
in execution, with the enormous' sum, as I have
already mentioned, of fifteen -shillings and eight.
pence in the conspirators' treasury.? With what
arms ? not a pike, Or a gun, or a sword, or' any in.
strument of ()Knee. The Tower wasp be taken ;
the Mail Coaches stopped ; the King was to be at.
ticked while surrnonded by his guards,' ten times
more numerous •than all the eonipira tors.; the Batik.
was to be invested ; the two Houses of,Parliament
were to be tiiken possession of, "anci. all this by• four-
teen Men in buckram ! It has been supposed 'that CO.
howl l)espard should haee said, " that if no one else
would do the deed, his Single arm shOuld attempt
this probable ? T tidal have dernonstrited
so you,. that no scheme ever Was. mote improbable.:
Are we rb be told, that a Government, testing on a
foundation calculated to make it endure for ever,
is likely ''to be destroYed by a conspiracy formed
at a low alehouse ? The Whole etinipiraCy has been
'developed, and yet it has not been shewn that any
'man of the least poWer or consequence supported it.
:If thii be so, are you to be contented with' the eVi..
dence of four men who are entirely unworthy of cre.•
dit I You may ask me, do I menu to conten'! that
no traitorous Conspiracy existed ?I admit that'; but
the question is, whether the Prisoner at the Bar i's a
Traitor t. I believe there werepeople who thought.
it would' be a good thing' if they could sedUee the
Army to their interest, but they had not got- the
length of determining what they' should do with
that Army after they had seduced it. The Attorney
General has supposed, that it was contrition which
made the witness, Windsor, disclose the Conspi-
racy to Mr. Bownas. I-rather think it was because
he found his Treason impraCticable, and be was
therefore the more infamous in endeavouring to
'seduce others. What credit can you give to a
man who would seduce another into a situation
of danger, in order to betray him ? It may be
asked, , " if Treason existed, to whom does it be.
long ?" I say, the nature of the Treason betrays its
low origin. It has manifestly been hatched by those
who were not capable of looking to distant objetts.
You will ask, how a gentleman like Colonel Despard
should be found in such low company 1 I am not
afraid to encounter the question. It has so hap.
pened, that, Colonel Despard, from the connection
he formed about the year 1788, was suspected of
being eacerned in a traitorous 'Conspiracy. 'He
was confined duriog three years. 'When he was
berated, be was. deprived of the rank he had held in
the ArMy. It appeated, that there was no ground
of aeonsastion 'against him, which could be }step be:
fore a Jury. I do not find fault with the' AEI of
Liderimity, which ?rotated the Jaw frOno

that might have been bionght against theta
by 'WhO had been.bojtlitly
they did -was according to the best
ment for the benefit of the Country, and ltWaS pto:'
per individual interest should give Way., Thiii hay.
ever, prevented Colonel Despatd front seeking that
justice he had a tight to expeft. • The Learned
Cothisel -proceeded to' idler the improbability of Col.
13espatti,' who was innocent of an imputed traitototts
ozonipiracy at a time when he might have looked foi
foreign assistance, being engaged in one when the
country was traticidil, :add without enemies abroad.
He then observed. upon the infamous charaeters of did
Witnesses Blades', Windsor, Fratteis and Etitbliti,
and particularly dwelt upon the atrocity of Francis,
who came forward as a wi mess, not only against
the Prisoner, but Iris own Brother. • It wag
sible that midi a man as Colonel Despard should
ha‘ie been guilty of an ad that contraditied rho
whole tenor of his former life.

The first Witness called for the Prisoner WM
Lord Nelson,: he was examined by Mr. GURNRY;
His Lordship said, he knew Colonel Despard ; *at
it was 23 years ago since he saw him. He became
acquainted with hitn in Jamaica, when he was Lien.i
tent of the True Blues, when the French were ex.
petted. '!'here, from his abilities as an Engineeti
he was employed on very important service:
The LORD CHI v Justtc e said, he was sorry
to be obliged to interrupt his Lordship, but rho
Court could not with propriety hear the story of
this Gentleman's military tife ; but his Lordship,
from his observation of what he saw, might give
his opinion upon his charaeter.
Lord Nelson said, that he and the Prisoner Were
on the same spot together inJamaica in an Expedition,
:and had shared together the fortune of war; had made
up their bed together, and slept in their clotheS on
the ground together, and had examined the Eneirty'S
walls on all these occasions the Prisoner had con.
dutted himself with a steady and -determined COOL
rage, and no man could shew more zeal and attach.
meat to his Sovereign and his Country. He cull
eluded with stating, that from every thing be had
seen of him, and from what he thought of him, he
would say, that if he had not heard of him for the
last twenty years, and was asked what he thought of
him, he would say, " If he is alive, he is certainly
one of the brightest ornaments of the British Army."
Upon his cross.examination by the ATTORNiY..
GENERAL, his Lordship said, that he had not
known any thing of the Prisoner since the •ear
1780 ; that he had heard of the. charges against
,him, but knew nothing of them, and that, inde.
pendent of those charges, he had no reason to stts..
pett

General Sir A. Clarke was then called ; he said,
he-knew the Prisoner extremely well, that he was
in the service when he (the Witness) was Governor
of Jamaica, and that he was a' very serviceable
Officer. lie stated some parts of the Prisoner's
conduit when he proceeded to the Bay of Honduras,
where he behavedwith singular propriety. In short,
he always considered him 43 an intelligent, :good,
loyal Subject, and a very brave, active Officer.
On his cross-examination by the Soctc !Tom
GfiNP.RAL, he. said, -he had known nothing of the
Prisoner for the last .13 years.
Sir E. Nepean said,. he had known the Prisciner
ever since the year 174, and had always enter.
tained a great resped for him until he was appre-
hended, in consequence of some suspicions that fell
upon him. When the Prisoner Came from Jamaica,
he was recommended to turn with such strong testi_
monials of merit in the service, that he became
intimately acquainted with him, and frequehtly
vited him to his table, and entertained the
greatest opinion of him, believing him 'to he a. man
of the most petted and honourable -charader,
Juspiciortfellupon him, the grounds of which
picion he was never acquainted with ; but for the
• last .four or• five years, in consequence of these sus:
picions, that intimacy had been discontinued.'
On his cross-examination, by Mr. Serjeant Sett r.
iiEED, he said, he had not known, or had any in.'
tettourse with, theYeisoner, since he became -an
object of suspicion ;: but the subjed of that suspicion
he wis,totally unacquainted with.
,Serieant SHErliEliD asked the Witness whether
he oho,. believed the. Priioner to be a man of
gond charaiter 1. fie. replied, that the -only reason
he' had-for entertaining any doubt upon the subjeCt'
was, that the .Prisoner.had• fallen under the -sup'.
ciun of Government, and if he had not ben sus;
petted, he should have thought him a man of good.'
charider,
Mr: Geo. Long svo then called, but did hit ar::
pea:: •

. The Evidence for the Prisoner being closed,
Mt. Gua NE Y rose to sum it up to the jury. He
said, it would be unnecessary to enlarge upon the
subie6l, as his Learned Friend who had preceded
him, had so ably and so .eloquently discharged the
arduous task. which, had been assigned to hini. He
contended that the Overt.ads which had been laid,
in-the indictment ought to be proved by two, credi..
ble witnesses,- but in this case, there was no evi.
dence:of any Overt.ad manifesting an evil intention,
independent of the evidence of the accomplices. It
was true that accomplices had been examined in
cases of Treason at ad times, and had been held to
be nnt•only competent, but credible witnesses, front
the nature 6f things, because Conspiracies could not
be developed without such an examination ; but it
had always been held That it was necessary that their
evidence should be confirmed by other witnesses in
some respects. At the Trials of the Persons whb
were concerned 'in the Rebellion in 174 p and in.
the atternpts made to resale the House of STUART,
it was true that the accomplices were examined,
but they were very different kind of men from
those who were examined as accomplices in the pre.
sent Case. They were men of good anti noble intert.,
tions, atting under a misguided judgment, their's waal
a pure attachment to the person of him whotis they
considered to be their lawful Prince, and therefore,
though they were -Rebels in the eye of the Law, yet
they were men of moral good‘condatt, and entitled
to credit. But the accomplices who had been ex.
amined in the present case were men of a very dif.
ferent complexion. The . Learned Counsel then
commented upon the manifest improbability that a:
man in such a situation in life us the Ptisonerohoulti
engage in so desperate and so Ah_kurd a Proceeding
as that which was imputed to bitn ; bat the ions