The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-01-04 00:00:00

RE-EXAMINATION OF MR. J. R. STEPHENS,

THE AGITATOR.

Yesterday being the day appointed for the re-examination
of Mr. J. It. Stephens, or Dukinfield, the neighbourhood of
the New Bailey Court-house, Manchester, was crowded by
the adherents of the ci-devant reverend agitator. The hour
fixed for the hearing was eleven o'clock, but long before that
hour, the neighbourhood and approaches to the Court-house
were crowded with people. Precisely as the prison clock
struck eleven, Mr. Stephens arrived at the New Bailey
gates, his entrance being greeted with loud cheering from
the mob. He'shortly afterwards entered the court, accom-
panied be Messrs. Willis and Williamson, his sureties, Mr.
James Taylor, of Spotland, Messrs. O'Connor and Matthew
Fletcher of Bury, having arrived sonic time previously. Mr.
Oastler was also greeted with loud cheers on his arrival.
About half-past eleven o'clock the following magistrates
took their seats on the bench, viz.;—John Kenworthv, Esq.
in the chair ; J. F. Foster, Esq., Chairman of the Salford
Hundred quarter sessions; Daniel Maude, Esq., the stipen-
diary magistrate ; Edward J. Lloyd, Esq., Shakspeare
Phillips, Esq., Captain Clarke, Dr Garrett, Esq., Paul
Moon James, Esq. We also noticed on the bench Colonel
Wemyss, the commanding officer of the district, the con-
stables of Manchester, &c. Mr. Brandt and Mr. Duck ap-
peared for the prosecution. Mr. Stephens defended himself,
but was assisted with the advice of Mr. Law and Mr. Richard
Cobbett. It is a long time since we saw such a muster of the
" press-gang;" the representatives of the press having come
from London, Leeds, Birmingham, &c.
Mr. BRANDT, in opening the case for the prisoner, stated
that as there were some magistrates present who were not in
court at the time of the former examination, he should state
the course which lie intended to pursue was that he should call
forward the witnesses examined on the former occasion, in
order to afford the prisoner an opportunity of cross-examin-
ing them if be thought proper. The magistrates' clerk would
read over the evidence of the witnesses as taken on the for-
mer occasion, and if the prisoner desired it, the cross-exa-
mination would he taken down. The learned gentleman
then called James Johnstone, who deposed to the truth of his
deposition.
Mr. Stephens was then asked if he chose to cross-examine
the witness; but he declined doing so.
The evidence of Wan. Coward as taken on the last occasion
was then read, and upon his being asked to state whether the
evidence was correct, he said that he did not state of his own
knowledge that the Druidical Society had voted money for
the purchase of fire-arms; but he bad stated that which he
had been told by other parties. It was proposed to strike
out the portion of evidence relative to the Druid Society;
but this was objected to by Mr. Stephens. After some dis-
cussion it was then decided that it should be stated in the
minutes that the witness did not state the fact of his own
knowledge.
Upon Mr. Brandt calling James Dean (an additional
witness) to give his evidence, Mr. Stephens objected to this
as being part of a fresh case.
Mr. BRANDT then said, that the evidence he proposed to
give was with reference to the Leigh meeting on the 13th of
November. But he would state, that although he should
apply for the committal of Mr. Stephens on the charge of
sedition, yet he should prefer an indictment which would
include the names of other parties, charging them with a
conspiracy to defeat the law of the land. (The learned gen-
tleman no doubt alluded to the new poor law.)
It was then stated by the Court, that Mr. Dean's evidence
would be received.
James Dean, who stated that he was present at the Leigh
meeting, said,—l heard what was said. I heard Mr. Ste-
phens say something with respect to the poor law guardians.
He said the poor law was no law at all, and ought rot to be
obeyed, because it contradicted the law of God; and he that
killed a poor law guardian in the execution of his duty did
God religious service. He mentioned the names of Mt.
Topping, Mr. Jackson, and others. I don't know of Mr.
Topping as a guardian. He also mentioned Mr. Pownall,
who 1 have heard is a guardian. Towards the close of his
address, he exhorted the people to purchase arms, and to
hang them over their mantel-pieces, and nut to use them till
they saw him with his implements in his belt. I attended
the meeting in the evening, and stayed there the whole time.
It was a torch-light meeting. On that occasion he spoke of
the poor law guardians. lie said the people must go to the
poor law guardians, and fork them out, and strip them, and
get a soft painters' bfush, but not to hurt them, and then
they must daub them over with tar, and feather them. He
alluded to the meeting at Kersall Moor. He told the people
that he had said at the Kersall Moor meeting, that the ballot
question was a knife-and-fork question, and bread-and-cheese
question. Some man in the meeting then shouted, "Would
not a spoon do?" Mr. S. said, "Aye, foryour porridge; but
a knife and fork for your buttock of beef." Somebody shouted
" We have no beef: we have no use for knives and forks."
Mr. S. said, " take them, and put them to yoUr tyrants'
throats, and see how they wilt fit there." The meeting broke
up some time afterwards.
Mr. Stephens then addressed the Court for upwards of an
hour, alluding, in the course of his speech, to the fact that
Mr. Sanderson, one of the magistrates who had signed the
warrant, was one of the parties who had given evidence in
favour of Henry Hunt, at the York Assizes. He also com-
plained of the course that had been adopted with regard to
the present case, and protested against the proceedings as
illegal.
Eventually he was ordered to find bail, himself in £lOOO,
and two sureties in £500; each to answer the charge at the
next assizes, and to give 24 hours notice of bail.
The bail of Mr. Williamson, of Ashton, was taken ; but
Mr. Willis, who was bail on the former occasion, declined
being surety for £5OO. Mr. S. consequently stood commit-
ted; but it was understood that if he completed the bail in
;he course of the day, lie would be liberated.