Star.
London, England, 1817-07-28 00:00:00

TRIAL OF LUDDI It&

Benjamin Daniersby, of Hooky, in the West Riding
of Yoskshire, wearer ; Joreith B.9ke,r, of the sanw
place, clothier; Paac Jointess, of Holt:Atilt, in the
same Riding, labourer; Jorhata Thesulir, of the same
place, labourer ; Abraham Oldham and !An Oldham,
in Honley, in the sante Riding, labourers ; were in-
dicted for a robbery and burglary at the house of
Clement Dyson, in the said town of Hooky, on the
night of SuF.day the Bth of June last.
The tolkwing Gentlemen were sworn of the Jury :
John Hudd, Richard Baker, Thomas Sale, William
Pickard, Robert John Walker, Thomas Wilber foss,
James Het,den, Robert Liodsley, Thomas Clark,
John Matinee:man, Thomas Ellerby, and Anthony
Kitchen.

Mr. Trawls°, Mr. Soaatarr. Mr. RAINZ, and
another Learned Genii, man, mere Counsel for the
prosecrrion ; Mr. WILLIAMs, Mr. JONES, and Mr.
Manner. for four of the prisoners.
Mr. Torriao acLressed the Jury. He described
the riotous assembling of the prishners, with others,
to the number of S'a or 40, on the night specified in
the indictment, the alarm they excited by their me-
nacing and tumultuous conduct, and their general
demand for arms, though the object which they meant
to accomplish after they had obtained them could not
be very well guessed. As the prisoners stood charged
with burglary, in robbing the house of the prosecu-
ti ix of a gun, it was not necessary to look to the riot
as connected with any political views. The outrages
that were committed and threatened were no doubt
violent; but. except in so far as this single robbery
was-the consequence of them, they were not now be-
take the Jury.
Hannah Dyson deposed, that a number of persons
tame to her door between 11 and 12 o'clock on the
night in question; that bee husband was from home,
and she was alone in the house; that they called for
arms; that they knocked at the door, and not gain-
ing admission, burst it open ; that she it consequence
of their demand arid threats went and brought them
a gun which she had in the house; that she gave it to
one of the mob, she could not tell to whom, but that
she recognised Donkersby and two of the other pri-
soners, who were her neighbours; and saw one man
with his waistcoat turned inside out. who, according
to what she subsequently learned, must have been
Stites. This witness underwent a long cross-exami-
elation, for the purpose of 'hewing that she was not
to be credited in deposing to the identity of the pri-
soners, from the length of time she had allowed to
elapse heave she appeared against them (bring nearly
a month); from her having declared immediately
alter the outrage that she could not distinguish them
from any of the mob ; from her alleged declaration
that they were all strangers to her ; and from a re-
ported saying of her's, that the trade of a witness was
a very profitable thing, as she could get two guineas
a day by k. She totally denied the latter report and
insinuation. and accounted both for her long silence
in bringing charges against her riotous neighbour?,
acid her alleged contradictions, in saying at our time
she could-not identify those whom she now appeared
against, from motives of fear. She had seen Doti-
ketsby about nine o'clock of the night in questiou
making motions as it with a gun to another of the
rioters, and could not be mistaken as to him, when
he appeared among the crowd that demanded arms
shout twelve o'clock, as he was then only three of
tour yards from the door. She did not know the man
to, whom she gave the gun, nor did she ever mention
that lie was one Cbarlesworth, though she had said
that he was one of the party. Thanight immediately
alter the outrage she bad told one of her neighbours,
Susanna Hurst, that she had recognized Donkersby
in the crowd. Her husband arrived from London
about a fortnight after the robbery, and she was exa-
mined before the Justices at Huddersfield about a
fortnight alter his arrival. Her husband bad been
in London on law business, or to learn law. He was
not in the King's Bench or the Fleet, but. learning
law, after he bad tailed as a cloth-dresser. He had
bee" learning law for '24 weeks, but she not being
acquainted with' the subject, could not tell what
branch of it he practised. Being asked if he began
to practise first in advising her to go before the Jus-
tices to accuse her neighbours ? she answered, no, and
that he did not know her business. This witness ap-
-rated to hesitate a good deal in that part of her cross-
e aaminatiol which :elated to what she had said to one
Aluvon) abut her not kikeleins the pigOntri