The Sun.
London, England, 1820-03-23 00:00:00

TRIAL OF AIR. lIUNT AND OTHERS.

FIFTH DAY.
YORK, TUESDAY NIGHT.

caused the dispersion of the meeting. But why,
he asked, bad they not proved the reading of the
Riot Act ? He had witnesses from the same house
in which the Magistrates had been, to prove that
it never was read. If it were read, why was it
not proved ? Why did not Mr. Ethelston, who
sent word to the Oldham Inquest (not daring to
go himself), that it had been read, why did he
not prove the reading on the present occasion ?
He (111.. H.) bad not put the question to him.
That would not do for him, for he knew that Mr.
Ethelvo', would have said " yes," bang ; but in-
directly he had got him to swear that it was not,
for he had made him admit that the crowd bat
received no warning of that which the Magic►.
trates intended to do. This was swearing that
it had not been read ; for what was the Riot Act
bet a 'warning ? Where were Mr. Trafford, Mr.
Norris, the Rev. Mr. Hay, and the other Magis-
trates, who might have pro'Ved the reading it it
had taken place ? Mr. Hay was a bold man.
Why had he not been put in the witness box
He (Mr. Hunt) had too much experience to put
a Magistrate in the box for examination in chief,
who had received a living of 2,5001. per annum
for what he did on that occasion ; hut could he
have had him there to cross-examine him, be
would have given a Jew's eye for him. It was
his intention to put witnesses of high respectabi-
lity in the box to meet the evidence of Mr. Elul-
ton. The question which the Jury had now to
try was, not whether or not be (Mr. Hunt) was
guilty, but whether or not the last spark of liberty
shoohl be extinguished in England—and whether
the Jury, their wives and children, in common
with all others, should be left exposed to be as-
sailed by a drunken infuriated soldiery, at the
will of any young hoe-headed Magistrate, who
might think it proper to order the military to act.
vance to disperse a popular assembly. He com-
mented on various parts of the evidence in which
he t'+ covered contradictory allegations. He re-
minded them of the evidence of the Mushroom►
Seijeant, who bad represented Bamford as ad-
dressing the party at Middleton, and telling them
that there would be no disturbance till they came
hack. It would be proved that no such words
were used, and that the sole object of Baruford's
address was to preserve peace and good order. The
Boroughreeves had called a meeting inl 812,tocon-
tither how far they should congratulate ti►e Prince
Regent on the prosperous state of the country,
when 9-tenths of the population of those parts were
in extreme distress. 't'h'en it was legal to call a
meeting, to which those who inhabited the neigh-
bouring townships were invited. No objection
was then started to the legality of such a meet-
ing. He took occasion to advert to what bad
been said of him. He bad been described as an
illiterate, vulgar, ragamuffin, without means.—
What was the fact ? He was a Lord of the
Manor in Glastonbury, in Somersetshire, where
his property lay. He had been, perhaps, one
of the greatest farmers in England ; pro-
perty had descended to him by inheritance ; on
that account be was less proud of it than if he had
acquired it by his own exertions ; but such was
the fact. He had ever lived as a Gentleman, and
in every village Where he had resided he had been
delighted to associate with the Clergyman. He
never read any part of the works of Thomas
Paine till be attended in the Court of King's
Bench on the occasion of Carlile's trial. In con-
sequence of this he had been described as the as-
sociate of Cathie. Of that person's opinions,
as he was now suffering the punishment of the
law, he would not say what he might ot'berwise
be disposed to express. He must, however, be al-
lowed to assert, that he had never participated in
them. The Learned Counsel knew that his in-
dictment of Dr. Stoddart stood for trial the next
to the case of Carlile. Had he been absent but
for a few minutes the Learned Counsel knew that
if Carl ile's trial had gone off, in his (Hunt's) ab.
settee, a verdict of acquittal might have been en-
tered for the defendant in the other case to which
he had .alluded. This was the cause of his (Hunt's)
being in the Court on the occasion of Carlile's
trial. On such grounds it was too much to im-
pute blasphemy to him (Hunt) as well as sedition.
Adverting to the allusion of Mr. Scarlett to Ho-
garth's representation of a mob, demanding that
eleven days, added to the Calendar when the
change of style took place, should be given back,
he remarked, it would have been more to the pur-
pose had he spoken of the poor people confined at
Manchester on a groundless charge ; he might
with reason have supposed them to cry out—
" Give us back our eleven days of sweet liberty !"
He remarked on the absence of the Attorney-Ge-
neral on this occasion. It was thought that his
presence was unnecessary, and that without him
they could dispose of a poor country 'squire.—
Had the Attorney-General been here, he would
have put the book into his band, and proved
from his own mouth that the meetings at Smith-
field and Manchester (tor be was consulted on
them) were legal.
. The JUDGE said, that bad the Attorney-Gene-
ral been present he might have said what he

thought proper on that subject, but he (Nlr.
Hunt) must have taken the law front hint (the
Judge.)
Mr. HUNT replied, he should have made the ex-
periment, though his Lordship might have
stopped him. He then noticed what bad occurred
at White Moss, and contended, that though the
Learned Counsel had expected to prove him (Mr.
Hunt) deeply and criminally connected witl►
those transactions, this had not been done. It

would be proved by witnesses for the defence,
that Bamford (whose wife, child, and cousin bad
gone to Manchester in the terrible military array),
was at home when the proceedings took place at
White Moss, on which so much stress had been

what was imputed to him. The Jury would re-
member, that when the question was closely put
to that witness, he had said he would not posi-
tively swear, that he never declared he would
rather " be rowed to his own house in the blood
of the Reformers than walk to it on !he pave.,
meat. " He at first lenied this, but did not choose
to swear that be had not used the words in clues-
lion, because be recollected that those were in at-
tendance who could contradict hint. 'l'l►at witness'
then described him to have proceeded to the Star,
where the Magistrates were assembled. He com-
plained of the description given of his conduct on
that occasion, and of the inference drawn front it
by the Learned Counsel, and declared that when
conducted to the Star, he could no more tell that
it was the Star than he could the names of all the
stars in the firmament. Enlarging on this point,
he, in the most solemn mariner, conjured the
Gentlemen of the Jury to dismiss from their minds
the prejudices that might grow on the misrepre-
sentations which that man (qr. Scarlett) had
endeavoured to instil into them.
The JUDGE iotertered, and objected to such
language.

Mr. HUNT apologised, and hoped allowance
would be made for his feelings. He proceeded to
contend that misrepresentations had bet ti address-
ed to them, and noticed the evidence of three of
the witnesses : one had been a lunatic, the second
had been a deserter, and the third a , confessed
thief; as the last bad admitted that he hod robbed
his master 14 years ago, and had only paid the
money he had token since the commencement of
this prosecution. Cowper, it had been stated,
went to the hustings as a reporter, and Mr. Or-
ton, another reporter, gave evidence that he had
said, " if any one creates a disturbance, put hint
down and keep him down," and both contradicted
what had been sworn to by Mr. Entwistle. Platt,
who was so well acquainted with the flimsies,
came next, and swore that Bamford and Mo.ar-
house were on the hustings. This would be dis-
proved in both cases by evidence ; Moorhouse in
particular, had no more to do with the Manches-
ter meeting than the Gentlemen of the Jury had
to do with it. He remitukd the Jury of Piatt's
connexion with the flimsies, and he further com-
mented on the alacrity which Platt had manifest-
ed on the succeeding day of the trial to swear to
the conduct of a person who Wns committed for
interrupting the Court. He had first sworn that
he saw the man jumping up and down—then that
he saw him moving his hands up and down—and
at last (on the words being unintentionally put
into his month by Mr. Scarlet t), that he saw him
clapping them ; and he added, another person in
the gallery could swear to the same thing. Who
was this person in the gallery ? It was the wit-
ness, Murray ! He felt that it would be improper
to detain the Jury longer by continents on such
testimony. After noticing tile evidence given by
the witnesses, Orton, ,Green, and Ellis, be coin-
plained that the Learned Counsel, who had with
propriety treated lightly the case of Jones, ought
to have taken with that of Moorhouse a course
somewhat different from that which be bad
pursued.
The JUDGE reminded Mr. Hunt that it was
to his own defence that he should confine himself.
Mr. HUNT submitted, that if the defence made
for Moorhouse bad a tendency to acquit Moor-
house by convincing bin: (Hunt), that then be
had a right to touch on this subject.
The JUDGE acquiesced.
Mr. Hu NT now applied himself to show, that
having arrived at Manchester on the 9th, on ac-
count of his private affairs, be thought of return-
ing immediately,- and had no intention of remain-
ing till the 16th. His servant would prove that
he had not made tip his mind to stay till the Wed-
nesday after the 9th. Several Gentlemen would
also prove the efforts which they bad made to pre.
vail on him to stay. Notwithstanding all his
sufferings, (which he minutely described,) he re-
joiced ; he was delighted that •he had been pre-
vailed upon to stay ; that lie had been numbered
among the Defendants, and had now to make that
defence which he was then addressing to the
Court. Fortunately for hint, while he remained
near Manchester, be had never gone more than
two miles from Johnson's house. Though in-
vited to the houses of several Gentlemen, he had
not attended to them. It so fell out, and he was
glad that in had happened so, that he had not gone
where he was invited ; had he done so, then, what
a tale would have been got up on the subject of
his conspirings ? From his conduct in calling at
the Police Office at Manchester, on the Saturday
previous to the 16th, as well as from the placard
which he had issued, calling on the people to re.
pair to Peter's-field armed only with a blameless
conscience, anti inviting the Magistrates to come
among them, he maintained that it were to be in-
ferred that be was prepared to yield ready sub-
mission to the Constituted Authorities of the
town. He then noticed the testimony of several
witnesses, and, in particular, that of Andres s, on
the subject of the sticks said to be carried by those
who attended die meeting. This he showed was
not confirmed by other witnesses, and he pro.
mised to repel it by the testimony of persons whom
he proposed to put in the witnesses' box. After
noticing what had been stated by one of the wit-
nesses, who, as a reporter to a London Paper,
had attended many meetings without seeing
him (Mr. Hunt) urge the people to violence ; he
animated on the levity and malice evinced by
another witness,, and the manner in which re-
ports were in some instances got up for News-
papers. He went on to explain the " locking of
arms," respecting which so much bad beet) said,
to be merely a measure of precaution adopted to
guard against the recurrence of an accident,
which had on a former occasion forced down the
hustings, on which occasion those who were on
them only escaped with their lives by a miracle.
He would prove that a constable might have got
to the hustings without being molested. He
could have received any communication that they
might have been inclined to send to them, and
proving this, he could also prove that he, in such
case, would at once have advised the people to
yield obedience, and thus dispersed the meeting
without the loss of a single life. He should
prove,
,that what had been stated by Mr. Hutton,
on the subject of the danger to which the sok
diers were exposed, was unfounded ; that not a
bludgeon had been raised, that not a stone or a