Star.
London, England, 1820-05-16 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF K1N478 BENCH.
THE XING V. 111/411Y HUNT • AND OTHERS.
(In continuation from the STe of yesterday.)

After the affidavits had been disposed of,
Mr..HUNT proceeded.—The Court had heard from
his affidavit the manner in which he had been invited
to attend the Public Meeting at Manchester: that
Meeting was called for the purpose of obtaining that
Reform for which a million of persons had befOre
petitioned : and he had complied with the invitation,
in the full confidence that the conduct of the assem-
bly would be as peaceable and as orderly as that of
the other Meetings at which be had attended. Wbat
had been the course adopted by the Crown? Why,
the affidavits. upon which the dispersion and the de-
struction of that Meeting had been grounded were
drawn up, not only before there had been the slightest
act on the part of the people which could be con-
strued into sedit?On, or even -into disrespect of the
Constituted Authorities, but actually before the per-
sons who composed thnt,Meeting had arrived at Man-
chester. At the time of the trial, he had read to the
Jury an extract from a speech made by an individual
in high authority—a • speech which clearly and dis-
tinctly shewed, that, at the time when the Meeting
of the 16th of August took place, the first lawyers in ,
the realm did not think that such a Meeting wakil-
legal. Surely the Attorney-General, surely the So-
licitor-Genera., who received such ample salaries from
the pockets of the people, (and salaries not ill-de-
served, it they did their duty conscientiously), surely
those Gentlemen were bound to know the law of the
land ? If those Gentlemen had declared that such a
Meeting was not illegal, and bad been mistaken, was
it reasonable to punish the defendants for not know-
ing that which had not been known by the first law.'
yers in the country? That such Meetings had been
deemed inconvenient, he was aware; but the speech'
of Lord Sidmouth upon the Seditious Meetings Bill,
was sufficient to skew that they were not then illegal.
That Noble Lord had directly called for the adoption
of some measure to put down such Meetings, upon
the ground that there was no existing law by which
they could be prevented. Let the Court address its
attention to the conduct of the Manchester Magis-
trates. Of all the popular Meetings which had ever
been called—of all those.assemblies which Mr. Burke
had emphatically termed "the safety valves" of the
State—of all those .Meetings which had met undis-
turbed, and from which no evil consequence had re-
sulted—no:le had been called -with so much ..aution,
with so much attention to regularity and to legal
notice, as this Meeting of the 16th of August. The
Magistrates had every reason to believe that the con-
civet of that Meeting would be peaceable ; they knew
Clat there was no existing law by which that Meeting
cuuld be prevented ; they knew that Acts of Parlia-
ment were preparing for that purpose; but they were
too bold to wait for the assistance of those powers,
aqii resolved at once to seal those " safety-valves"
with the blood of the Reformers. What had the Re-
formers done to deserve this treatment ? They
had said, " We are working like slaves, and we are
starving when we have done. We labour 13 hours'
a day; and, though we live on oatmeal and water, we
cannot get enough of that to support our wives and chil-
dren. We have been told to wait patiently ; but we are
five years in peace, and our burdens are unabated. We
are tired of these miseries, and we will meet toge-1
ther ; we think that there is one great cause of all
ottr grievances ; we think that a free Representation in
the House of Commons would alleviate our burdens ;
we will lay our case before our Prince, and before
Parliament ; we will call upon them to take off some
of those enormous sums which are paid to the Officers
of Government, sometimes for doing nothing, some.
tames for doing worse than nothing. We will do all,
this, but %se will do it peaceably."—This was the lan-
f rage of the Reformers: how had it been answered?
They were told, " Youi Meeting ii for an illegal pur-
pose." They called another, of a different nature.
The Requisition for that Meeting was signed by 700
persons : their names and places ef abode fully given.
NVere time persons strangers ? They had lived and
worked, some of them twenty and twenty-five years
in the same town, and seven years in the same dwel-
ling. This was some evidence as to the character of
such men, for they- were poor men ; and if they coin-
mitted any offence, they were speedily detected and
punished, and sent packing. They were not Gentle-'
men ; not like Mr. Hulton, of Hulton ; not men of
property, who might be " steeped to the lips." in infamy
and crime, and yet live unmolested and undisturbed
in their mansions, who were above the reach of being
driven from their homes or from society.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE.—No man in England,
Mi. Hunt, is above the reach of law.

Mr. Hunt.—Such were the persons who had called
upon him (Mr. Hunt) to attend their Meeting. With
what view had he attended Meetings of that de-
scription ? In order to inculcate upon the poor and
wretched the doctrines of Reform, to save them from
the commission of those riots and outrages which
were daily committed before those doctnaes were
generally promulgated. He (Mr. Hunt) had been
accused of exciting riot. Their Lordships would re-
member the Luddites; they would recollect the time
when the misery of the people broke- out into yen-
etance against their masters and against their neigh-
bours; when the butcher, the baker, the maltster, the
manufacturer, were the objects of attack ; when the
people madly attempted to do that by force which,
during the last Eve years, they had been seeking to
do by reason. Where were these riots now ? But
the Reformers met on the 16th of August. No doubt
there was a feeling in the public mind : su:h a feeling
might well be troublesome to Government—it might
o near to threaten some of those precious scenes of
bribery and corruption, and drunkenness, which dis-
tinguished our Elections. What said the Government?
64 ThiS will not do. We must make a law to put this
down." "No, said the Magistroes of Manchester (no
doubt in correspondence with some of the worthy Gen-
tlemen near Mr. Hunt)—no ; law is not necessary.
You could not act decidedly at Smithfield ; but we
will put down the thing, aad make an end at once."
Punishment ! 'was punishment talked of for the de-
fendants in this case? He (Mr. Hunt) knew the sore
of men he had to contend with; and it was his misfor-
tune, that bylaw, those persons were allowed to speak
after him ; but he would tell those Learned Counsel,
that when they came to press, and press they_woul
far.kittgracr.t against him, they should confine them.