The Sun.
London, England, 1842-10-08 00:00:00

SPECIAL COMMISSIONS.

STAFFORD, WEDNESDAY.—The close of our last
information on this trial left Mr. ALLEN addressing
the Court on behalf of the prisoners Edge, Harris,
Millington, Cartledge, Williams, and the two Musts.
The Learned Counsel, in concluding his address, re-
marked upon the evidence in the case of the other
prisoners, pointing out the features of doubt and dis
crepancy that presented themselves in each. He
would remind the Jury that the charge did not carry
with it the punishment of death; but 'that should not
prevent them from weighing every point of the case
with the greatest caution and accuracy. They stood
there as fathers, husbands, and sons, liable at the ver-
dict to be pronounced by the Jury to be torn from
their families and friends—they stood there with all
the wealth and influenceof the Crown arrayed against
them, with nothing but their poverty and the weak-
ness of the evidence to defend them. Under these
circumstances he left the case in their hands, with the
fullest confidence that they would give it, in all its
bearings, their calm and deliberate consideration, and
that they would, should any doubt arise in their
minds, give the unfortunate persons at the bar the full
benefit of that doubt.

Mr. HUDDLESTON then addressed the Jury on be-
half of R. Wright. The Learned Gentleman com-
mented at some length upon the evidence against his
client, and concluded by submitting that there were such
circumstances of doubt and suspicion connected with
the evidence of the two persons who had spoken as to
Wright, that the Jury could not possibly find a ver-
dict upon it.

The- CHIEF JUSTICE inquired whether the other
prisoners had anything to say in their defence ?
Saunders declared his innocence, and said he had no
means of obtaining legal assistance.
Wagstaff, on being called upon, said there was a
gentleman in Court who, he had no doubt, would
give him a character.
Sampson Whitehouse had some witnesses as to his
character.

Thomas Cotton declared that he was stopped by the I
mob, and when he got to Dr. Vale's the windows
were all broken. He had got amongst these fellows,
and they rushed him into where the liquors were, and
forced him to drink. He was a hard-working man,
and had been forced off from his work by the mob.
Samuel Eaton said he was forced from his work at
Lane-end. That he ran and concealed himself in an
ash tree. He was afterwards sent by a clerk of Mr.
Shepper's to go and assist in putting out the fire.
William Bradbury, Josiah Gilbert, Thomas Banks,
John Owen, and John Powell declined saying any-
thing.
On behalf of Whiston, Mr. Price called
Mr. Owen, who knew the prisoner for 15 or 16
years, but had not heard much of him for the last
three or four years, as he had gone to reside in an •
other part of the district. He had never heard any-
thing against him before.
Charles Hackney—Knew him several years. He
was always a sober steady man, and a member of the
Methodist connection.

Mr. Pool gave similar testimony.
Mr. Nathan, of Point, innkeeper ; Samuel Swann,
police constable ; and some others, gave Toft a good
character.
Thomas Hartshorn, Esq., Magistrate of the county,
Phillips and Smith also received, good characters.
gave Shaw a good character.
Jackson, Dimmock, Edge, Joseph Saunders, Cart-
ledge, Millington, Williams, Powell, James Hurst,
Richard Wright, Whitehouse, and Bradbury, also
called witnesses to character.
The examination of these witnesses on the part of
the several prisoners lasted from three in the after-
noon till half-past six o'clock.
The CHIEF JUSTICE inquired of the Solicitor-General
whether he would then proceed with his reply,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said he was in the hands
of the Court.
The CHIEF JUSTICE said it was not his intention
to sum 'up the evidence that evening. He did not
think it right, in a case which involved the interests
of so many prisoners, to go over such a lengthened
examination at a time when the attention of the Jury
must be completely exhausted.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL would leave it to the
Jury to decide whether he should address them then
or in the morning.
The Jury were unanimous in favour of an adjourn-
ment.
The CHIEF JUSTICE did not think the interests of
the Learned Solicitor-General would suffer by a
postponement to the following morning.
The Court then adjourned till half-past eight the
following morning, and the Jury were again com-
mitted to the charge of the constables for the night.
In the course of the day the Grand Jury came into
Court with a large number of bills which had been
found by them ; among others, true bills against
William Ellis (whose case was referred to by the
Learned Chief Justice, in his address, as having been
committed upon a charge of high treason), for sedi-
tion, and against Arthur O'Neil, another Chartist
orator, for sedition. A bill has been also found, for
the same offence, against Cooper, of Leicester.
It is understood that the three Judges will preside
in different courts to-morrow, and that one of the first
oases taken will be the horning and demolition at
Lord Glanville's, in which .a large number of persons
are implicated, and which :is said to present features
of a much more serious character than that of Dr.
Vale's case. _

• ----
THURSDAY.—The Judges took their seats this morn-
ing at half-past eight o'clock.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL p roceeded to address the
Jury in reply, at great length, and went through the
whole of the cases of the prismers consecutively, re-
marking upon the evidence as it affected each. He
concluded by remarking that h e had no doubt, what-
ever the verdict might be that should be given, it
would be a verdict of justice.
The CHIEF JUSTICE then summed up to the
Jury. The prisoneri were indicted for riotously as-
sembling and beginning to destroy, and for de-
molishing and destroying, the dwelling-house of Dr.
Vale. It was not necessary, in order to establish the
guilt of the prisoners, that the wit should have been
fulfilled; but if they were proceeding in the work of
destruction, and were interrupted in their wicked de-
sign, that would be sufficient to establish the guilt of
the prisoners. The evidence wits clear that as early
as twelve o'clock they were in the town, near Dr.
Vale's, and, after committing soi ne acts of violence
there, proceeded to his house. The first question
they would have to decide was, -who were the parties
who combined and acted in concec •t for the purpose of
committing these acts of destruction. They (tl-}e
Jury) could have no doubt that but for the inter-
ference that had taken place, the house would have
been utterly destroyed and demolished, and he did not
think the Act made any distinction. as to the mode in
which that destruction was effectei—whether by fire
of the prisoners were en
or by pulling dem n was equally within the meaning
of the Act. They would say whether all or any
in that demolition
and destruction. Had the
mob contented themselves
with destroying the furniture and burning it in front
offence had been made out; but if with that original
of the house, it would be difficult to say that the
yo c
oe
fe dt eh de
ot
fiouse, then
laid in th e indictment.
had, when on the spot, changed their
mianllitneNdnvhstOatn\h‘'releYre present aiding and coun,%enancing that
endeeestroy the ho
act were gull:
It was for them to say how far the parties who were
engaged in feeding the flames outside the house were
to be taken as participators in the gui It of those
who were destroying the house and setting fire to the
furniture within it. He would make one observation
with regard to the evidence that had been called as
to the charater of the prisoners. Their guilt or inno •
cence was tobe, in all cases, established by facts ; but
in some cases there was so much of doubt And un-
certainty in the evidence that the scale could not be
said to incline either way. In such a case, where a
man had borne a 'good character for integrity and
honesty through life, that would be of some w sight
with the Jury; but where the evidence of guilt was
clear and incontestible, the evidence of previous wood
character could be of little avail in their eyes or that
of the law. He would now proceed to consider the
cases of the several prisoners separately, and would
ask the opinion of the Jury upon each case separately,
which would very much lighten their labour. The ,
Learned Judge then proceeded to read over the evi- 1
dence of the several witnesses, commencing with that
of Mrs. Vale. After referring to the evidence of
Mrs. Vale, the gardener, and servant, he observed
that was the evidence generally as to the conduct of
the mob, and the object they had in view, and they
would form a judgment whether . the mob were
riotously assembled, and whether the object was to
demolish and destroy,Dr. Vale's house. The first pri-
soner to whose case he would direct their attention
was John Harris. The Learned Judge then read over
the evidence of the several witnesses who had spoken
to the part taken in the proceedings of that day by
Harris, and after referring to the evidence given as to
his previous character, asked the Jury to turn round
in the box, and consult among themselves whether,
supposing Harris was the only prisoner to be
tried, they would be able to say if he was guilty of

the charge or not. [The Jury having consulted for
a few minute 3, turned round again, having privately
pronounced their decision upon the case of Harris.]
The next case he should take was Richard Wright.
The evidence having been gone through which af-
fected Wright, the Learned Judge said it would be
for them to weigh what the value of character was!
taking into consideration the evidence that had been
given as to the part he had taken in the proceedings.
One of the witnesses had indeed pointed him out as
having been the very origin' of the fire. [The Jury
deliberated for a few minutes, and again resumed
their seats.] The next case T.was George Colelough.
[After the evidence with regard to the prisoner had
been gone through, the *Jutt.), in a similar manner
consulted for a few ininutei] The Learned Judge
then took the cases of JohnlVilliams, Jervase Phil-
lips, James Saunders, ..Toeph Whiston, Hamlet
Jackson, and James Millington, in the same manner,
and was proceeding with thgTother prisoners when the
train left.

CLOSE OF THURSDAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

The Jury having come to:a decision upon all the
cases,
The Clerk of the Arraigns called over the names of
the prisoners, and the Jury returned a verdict of
Guilty against all the prisoners, except Hamlet Jack-
son and the two. boys whO had been acquitted the
previouS morning.
The prisoners were then re-moved in custody.
The CHIEF JUSTICE, in consideration of the length
of time the Jury had been occupied with the trial dis-
charged them till Monday evening.
The Court then adjourned, for ten minutes, and at
the expiration of that period`.
(Before Sir N: TINDAL.)
James Bibs, John Lavatt, George Shaw, and John
.Roden, were indicted for an assault upon Thomas Hill,
of Stoke-upon-Trent, and stealing from him three
gowns, value 10s., and a variety of other articles
enumerated.

The-SOLICITOR-GENERAL stated the case. It ap-
peared that on the day after the burning of Dr. Vale's
house, a large mob collectedin the town of Hanley,
and, among other acts of violence, attacked the house
of the prosecutor, a pawnbroker, for the purpose of
obtaining property which had been pledged with him.
The prisoners in the present case formed part of the
mob who surrounded the prosecutor's house, and by
their numbers, violence, and threats, compelled him to
deliver up a large quantity of property.
Mr. Thomas Hill made his depositions, and the
property being produced and identified, after some
witnesses had been examined to character, _

The Learned CHIEF JUSTICE summed up, and the
Jury returned a verdict of Guilty against all the pri-
soners, recommending the three first to mercy, as
they had used no threats.—The Court then adjourned,
(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE.)
_ _

Philip Dean, James Rathbone, George Owen, Wm.
Spilsburgh, George Simpson, and Edward Moss, were
indicted for a burglary in the house of James Plat,
grocer, of Shelton.
James Plat, in whose house the burglary was
committed, together with several witnesses, identified
the prisoners as having been seen by them with pro-
perty of Mr. Plat's in their possession, on the morning
and at the place in question.
The Jury returned a verdict of Guilty against all
the prisoners.

(Before Mr. Baron PARSE.)

Samuel Gibson was indicted for having, on the

night of the 15th of August, hurglariously entered
the house of Mr. George Paddock, in the parish of
Stoke-upon-Trent, and stolen therefrom 10 half-
crowns, the property of the said Mr. G. Paddock.
Mr. Sergeant LUDLOW opened the proceedings.
Mr. George Paddock sworn, and examined by Mr.
GODSON—His father lived at Grove House, Hanley,
in the parish of Stoke-upon-Trent. On the night of
the 15th of August a number of men came up to him,
near his father's house. Amongst them was the pri-
soner, who asked him for some money, which he gave
him, and they went away. That was about eight
o'clock. The mob returned at ten o'clock. As they
reached his father's house, he heard a crash. He then
went to the house, and found the mob and the prisoner
there. He had previously knoNs n the prisoner, who
endeavoured to conceal his features by contorting them.
John Baddely, a labourer, saw the prisoner, pass
his house on the 15th August towards Mr. Paddock's.
His face was not then blackened.

Mr. Baron PARKE charged the Jury, who imme-
diately returned a verdict of Guilty.
Sentence was deferred, and the prisoner removed;
After which the Court adjourned.
The Grand Jury have already found 90 bills of in-
dictment, and have adjourned till Monday next.
The Judges, Grand Jury, the Solicitor-General,
and the leading members of the bar, will dine this
evening at Ingestrie House, the seat of Earl Talbot.

STAFFORD FRIDAY.

(Before Sir N. TINDAL.)
BURNING OF THE REV. MR. AITKEN'S

HOUSE.

Elijah Simpson, Tii;;:as-6wen, George Kelsall,
T. Murray, Phillip Deane, William Spode, Henry
Howard, William Ellis, Adam Wood, Elijah Clay,
John Cunliff, Joseph Green, Richard Croxton, John
Rathbone, William Turner, Thomas Roberts, William
Fearn, and George Colclough, were indicted for riot-
ously and tumultuously assembling, with divers others
to the Jury unknown, on the 16th August, and with
pulling down, demolishing and destroying the dwell-
ing-house of Robert Ellis Aitken, clerk; and in a
second count they were charged with beginning to
demolish and destroy the house.
The prisoners pleaded not guilty.
William Ellis, the person who was originally com-
mitted on a charge of high treason, and who is in
appearance much above the class of the other priso-
ners, on being arraigned, exclaimed in a loud voice,
" I am not guilty."
Mr. ALLEN applied that the prisoner Ellis might he
allowed to sever on his trial, in order that he might
procure the attendance of witnesses to meet the charge.
The CHIEF JUSTICE said it was impossible he could
obtain a copy of the depositions, as none existed, and
he could not now separate a prisoner who had already
pleaded to a joint indictment to sever on his trial.
The Solicitor-General and Mr. Waddington con-
ducted the prosecution ; and Mr. Lee, Mr. Meteyard,
Mr. Allen, Mr. Yardley, Mr. Male, and Mr Huddle-
ston appeared for several of the prisoners ; many of
them were undefended.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL stated the case. Mr.
Aitken was for several years incumbent of the parish
of Shelton, and it would appear that the mob originally
assembled at Crown-hank on the Monday. They
then proceeded to the house of the Rev. Mr. Aitken,
in the town of Hanley, who, having been apprised of
the coming of the mob, left his home. His son and
servants remained in the house, but on the approach
of the mob they retired, and ie work of destruction
was proceeded with and speedily consummated.
It must be shown to constitute the offence that the
parties had destroyed or had commenced to destroy
the building; and that, he thought, the evidence
would sufficiently establish. He would show that
some of the mob were armed, and two or three of
them with swords. He would show them the part
that had been taken by the prisoner William Ellis,
becauss the prisoners were divided into two classes,
those who were actively engaged in the work of
destruction, and those who were present countenancing
and encouraging the others. Among the latter
was William Ellis, who would be proved to have
accompanied the mob, and would be shown to have
been standing within the court in front of the
house between one and two o'clock in the morn-
ing, while the mob was there, and at that time his
face was blackened. He would not be able to show
that he took any active part in the destruction "of the
property by fire ; but to judge from his expressions
and conduct on previous occasions during the day,
they would be able to judge whether he was there
with an innocent or laudable purpose, or from idle cu-
riosity, or as a leader and encourager of the mob, aid-
ing them in their attack upon the house. They would
find that, after the previous outrages, Ellis had spoken
of them, not in terms of condemnation, but of praise
and approval. That he spoke of the people resisting
the soldiers, and at the end there was a shout, " Now
for Burslem." He would show that Ellis was at Burs-
lem with the mob, and that he was one of the persons
who was dispersed by the soldiers—that he formed
a constituent part of the mob. He would show that
in the morning, before they went off to Burslem, Ellis
was heard to say that some said that their motto was,
" a fair day's wages for a fair day's work ;" but he
would say their motto was, " the obtaining of the
Charter, and equal political rights." In allusion to
the fires, he said that the Reform Bill had not been
carried without fires—that there had been fires at
Nottingham and at Bristol—and these remarks would
indicate to them whether he, was standing there to aid
and encourage the mob, and if so, he must be taken to
be equally guilty with those unhappymen whose hands
set fire to the building.
Evidence to this effect was given at considerable
length, and the trial was proceeding when the train left.
(Before Mr. Baron PARKE.)
Thomas Kelsol, Thomas Tooth, John W. Farring-
ton, Susannah Yates, Charles Simpson, John Parkes,
Thomas Banks, and Joseph Barrett, were indicted for
is felony committed in the parish of Stoke-upon-
Trent, by breaking into the shop of Mr. George Fen-
ton, in the said parish, and stealing therefrom, on the
1 6 th of August, a variety of wearing apparel.
Witnesses were then called who identified the par-
ties on the occasion.
The prisoner Tooth was acquitted, as the evidence
did not implicate him.
Mr. SPOONER addressed the Jury on the part of
Kelsol and Susannah Yates.
Mr. NEIL addressed the Court on behalf of Barrett.
The trial had not concluded when our express left.
(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE.)
'Joseph' Broster was indicted for demanding, with
menaces, on the 17th of August, from Thomas Hughes,
at Woolstanton, 4s. 6d., with intent to steal the same.
Mr. Sergeant TALFoURD and. the Hon. Mr. TALBOT

conducted the prosecution. It appeared that the pri-
soner was one of those workmen who infested the
neighbourhood to the terror of the inhabitants.
The prisoner was found Guilty.