7W &
, ; , , ,
J.-
* *
{{: lif.--
PROCEEDINGS
AT
pork special tommission,
JANUARY
1813;
THIRD EDITION.
PRICE ONE SHILLING AND SixPENCE)
iºns ',
* - - -
r **es +
A ** / tº , t * $
• * - * .*. 2 - #
* ...] { *: *s 3' : * .
---
R EpoRT of
l
* *
, * * * ,
- > * > *
; \ } -
* § - .
PR oc EED IN Gs
* * . '; •
UNDER COMMISSIONS OR
^.
* Oyer & Terminer and Gaol Delivery,
Fo R THE CO UNTY OF
Y O R K,
II E1. D A T T H E C A S T L E O F Y O R K,
Before
SIR ALEXAND E R T H O M SON, KNIGHT,
on E of THE BARONS OF THE ExchequER;
AND
SIR SIMO N LE BI, A N C, KNIGHT, --
*NE QF THE JUSTICEs of THE court of KING's BENCH;
From the 2° to the 12th of January
| 8 || 3.
-T—
FROM THE SHORT HAND NOTES of MR. GURNEY.
To which are subjoined J
TWO PROCLAMATIONS,
Issued in consequence of the Result of those Proceedings.
ilonton:
PRINTED BY LU R E H A N S A R D AND so Ns.
N E A R I, IN Co I, N’s-IN N F 1 E L D s.

2. HE object of this Publication is, to afford authentic infor-
mation on a subject which has been greatly, and it is to be
feared purposely, misrepresented; namely, the real state of the
manufacturing districts of the North of England, in regard to the
disturbances which have lately prevailed there. With the view
of correcting the misconceptions which have existed on this
subject, it appeared that nothing could be so unexceptionable,
and so satisfactory, as an authentic Repont of what was proved
upon oath before the learned Judges, who, under the authority
of a Special Commission, lately sat at York, for the trial of the
crimes committed in the West Riding of that county; and, in a
great measure, by witnesses who were more or less implicated
in the outrages which were perpetrated.
At the same time it seemed desirable to record the valuable
legal doctrines pronounced by the learned Judges who presided
at the Trials, and which therefore have been preserved entire;
although some of them convey more instruction to the lawyer
than to the general reader.
It may not be amiss here to observe, that as both the Judges
rehearsed the whole of the Evidence in summing up the cases to
the Jury, it appeared to be unnecessary to swell the volume by
giving it also in the form of question and answer.
Although it is conceived that the very clear Statements, by
which the several Cases were developed to the Jury, will suf-
ficiently explain to the reader the state of the immediate neigh-
bourhood in which the unhappy scenes were acted, yet it may
neither be useless nor uninteresting to give a concise account
b Of
( vi )
of the circumstances and causes which led to a crisis, such as
has seldom been exhibited, and never can be long suffered to
subsist, in a civilized country; a crisis little short of open
rebellion.
In the spring of the year 1811, disputes arose between the
masters and journeymen employed in the trade of weaving
stockings and lace, which is carried on in the south-western
part of Nottinghamshire, and the adjacent parts of Derbyshire
and Leicestershire; and without entering into the particulars
of those disputes, which would be beside the present design,
-suffice it to state, that in the month of November 1811, the
discontents had arisen to such a height, that a mob, consisting
of several hundred persons, assembled at Sutton in Ashfield
in open day, and broke the stocking and lace frames of vari-
eus obnoxious manufacturers. Before this mob was separated,
some of the ringleaders were taken into custody by a party
of yeomanry cavalry, and were afterwards committed by the
magistrates to Nottingham gaol. From this disaster the mal-
contents learnt caution ; and as the frames used in this manu-
facture are of a very delicate texture, and rendered useless by
a single blow from a heavy instrument, they seldom, from
this time, carried on the work of destruction openly, or in
large bodies, but watched the opportunity of effecting their
purpose individually, or in small parties, under cover of the
night, and in spots where the machinery was least protected.
This purpose was aided by the circumstances, in which the
manufacture is carnied on in the vicinity of Nottingham.
The frames, which are of considerable value, commonly be-
long not to the persons by whom they are worked, but either
to the master manufacturers, or to individuals unconnected
with the trade, who let them to the artisans at a weekly rent;
and thus the frames are scattered in detached houses about
the country, and are usually in the custody of persons who have
no interest in protecting them from violence.
4. In
( vii )
In the neighbourhood of Nottingham, which was the focus
of turbulence, the malcontents organized themselves into re-
gular bodies, and held nocturnal meetings, at which their
future plans were arranged. And, probably with the view of
inspiring their adherents with confidence, they gave out, that
they were under the command of one leader, whom they de-
signated by the fictitious name of Ned Ludd, or General Ludd,
calling themselves Ludds, Ludders, or Luddites. There is no
reason to believe that there was in ti uth any one leader. In
each district, where the disaffection prevailed, the most aspiring
man assumed the local superiority, and became the General
Ludd of his own district. These petty tyrants, doubtless,
took their tone from the centre of the operations, but not (so
far as has been traced) from any individual.
Under this system the Luddites, in the winter months, de-
stroyed a very considerable number of stocking and lace frames,
and infused such a terror into the owners of all, as to drive
them to the piecaution of removing them from the villages
and lone houses, and placing them for security in warehouses,
where they could be protected from injury. The evils, which
the misguided journeymen proposed to remedy by their mea-
sures, were of necessity much aggravated by throwing a
greater number of hands out of work.
Although detection was difficult from the mode in which the
offences were committed, yet it did in some instances take place;
and in the calendar of prisoners for trial at the Nottingham
Spring Assizes, there were 18 committed for offences connected
with the existing disturbances in that county.
As the Intimidation of the master manufacturers and owners
of frames was found to render them extremely averse to pro-
secution, and it was therefore little likely that any prosecution
would in their hands be carried on with effect, it was deemed,
by the Government, to be absolutely necessary for the public
good; that the course of justice should be opened, by taking
- b 2 the
( viii )
the indictments out of the hands of the nominal. prosecu-
£OrS. And accordingly the whole of the causes were con-
ducted by the Counsel for the Crown. It must be admitted
- that great lenity was shewn in these prosecutions. . N one of
the prisoners were capitally convicted ; and in many of the
cases, where they were found guilty of felonies within the
benefit of clergy, the punishment awarded fell far short of that
which the law. would have authorized. How far this lenity
was misplaced, will be seen in the sequel. • . .
Whether the Luddites were encouraged by the mildness of
the punishments which their confederates received at Notting-
ham, or by doctrines which were broached about the same
period, casting doubts on the moral guilt of destroying ma-
chinery, or from any other causes; certainit is, that immediately
after the Nottingham Assizes in March 1812, a spirit of dis-
content, which had for some weeks been brooding in other
manufacturing districts of the North of England, was ripened
into acts of open outrage; and we find hat the south-western
part of Yorkshire, and the contiguous parts of Lancashire,
- and Cheshire, in which the principal manufactories of woollen
and cottom, are established, immediately caught the flame of
Luddis.n. Not only did the disaffected assume the appellation of -
the same supposed leader, but they followed the example of n
their Nottinghamshire brethren, in holding nocturnal meetings,
dividing themselves into societies, which communicated with
each other by delegates, exacting a tribute from all manu-
facturers in the same trade within their district, requiring .
obedience from their adherents in any scheme which should
be resolved upon by their self-constituted rulers, and above all
ensuring that obedience by the administration of an * Oath, ,
binding the party sworn to keep secret their designs, and to.
punish even with death any one who should betray their
counsels. After securing, as they vainly imagined, a con-
- siderable -
* See p. 110, 121, 89.
( ix. )
siderable number of partizans, by means of these illegal oaths.
they proceeded to the execution of those purposes which they
had primarily in view, namely, the destruction of the improved
machinery, which is vitally necessary to the woollen and
cotton manufactures, but which these deluded men, in their
folly, in agined to be prejudicial to their interests. This idea
is proved to have been carried from Nottinghamshire * into
Yorkshire. But in the latter county, and in Lancashire, the
principle was acted upon to a greater degree, and with much
greater boldness, than it had been among the stocking manu-
facturers. Two greate outrages never were witnessed in a
eivilized country, than the attack made on the 11th of April
upon the mill of Mr. Cartwright (which is the subject of one
of the succeeding trials t) and the burning of Messrs. Wroe
and Duncuft's manufactory at West Houghton in Lancashire,
on the 24th of the same month, for which several culprits were
executed at Lancaster. Yet the spirit of outrage did not stop
here: for the Luddites at length did not scruple to avow, that
the breaking of the machmery was of no use, while the masters
of that machinery were alive f; and from thence they per-
suaded themselves that they should render a service to the
public by the destruction of those masters, of whom several
were personally attacked, and in one instance (which will be
detailed hereafter ||) with fatal success.
About the same period the high price of provisions caused
some riots in the markets at Sheffield, Manchester, Maccles-
field, and a few other places, where the venders of provisions
were either plundered of them, or compelled to sell their
articles far below the market price.
The exertions of the Magistracy in Lancashire and Cheshire,
had, early in the month of May, filled the gaols of those counties
with
* Evidence of Joseph Sowden, p. 154,
# Flaigh and others, p. 134,
# See p. 50.
| Mellor and others, p. 35,
( x )
with prisoners charged with the various offences before alluded
to. And upon representations from thence, it was determined
to send down, without delay, commissions into each of those
counties, for the trial of such prisoners. Those Commissions
were accordingly issued, and were opened at Lancaster on the
23d, and at Chester on the 25th of May. Under each of those
Commissions numerous convictions took place for every grada-
tion of offence; and of the capital convicts, eight at Lancaster,
and two at Chester, suffered the penalty of the law.
In Yorkshire, the course of justice was slower; and
although the tide of Luddism appears to have been cheeked
by the executions in Lancashire and Cheshire, and by the
* Acts passed by Parliament relative to this subject, yet no
very important discovery of the perpetrators of the more
atrocious crimes committed in the county of York, was made
earlier than the month of July. In that month some commit-
ments took place, and information was obtained, which
gradually led to the detection of the parties to the nefarious
scenes recorded in the following pages. And it is but justice to
say, that these discoveries have been in a great measure
owing to the unremitting zeal and persevering courage of one
magistrate residing in the very hotbed of disaffection, near
the town of Huddersfield.
Early in the present winter, the gaol of York having become
thronged with prisoners, and some of them committed for
very heinous offences, it was resolved by Government to issue
Commissions for bringing them to an immediate trial; and
those Commissions having been directed to Mr. Baron
THoMSoN and Mr. Justice LE BLAN c, they appointed the
2d of January for opening them at the Castle of York.
The cases which will be detailed in the following pages,
will exhibit a melancholy portrait of the depravity of human
nature. We see young men, capable of gaining an ample
livelihood
* 52 Geo. III, c. 17, 104, 130, 1634.
( xi ).
Hivelihood by honest industry, led to the commission of the
most heinous crimes, without any adequate, it may almost be
said, without any, motive. They fancy themselves aggriev-
ed by the improvement of machinery. They take redress
into their own hands. To secure their object, they form
societies, linked together by illegal oaths of secresy. They
thus fancy that they have secured to themselves impunity, and
they proceed to the perpetration of the most horrible outrages
on the property and persons of individuals, agáinst whom they
are actuated by no personal malice; and do not even stop
short of shedding the innocent blood of men, who have given
Ho other cause of offence, than by firmly pursuing their lawful
callings, not only in a harmless manner, but in that best cal-
culated to promote the interests of the community.
We see, in several instances, that the disaffected had ex-
perienced such success, as to make then speculate on * over-
setting even the Government of the Kingdom; and it is to
be feared, that the embers of revolutionary principles, which
had been smouldering for several years, were revived in the
country where these scenes were acted, by the fancied grievance
of improved machinery, and the temporary success, which its
destroyers met with in the vicinity of Nottingham. Encou-
ragement was given by the doubts cast on the moral turpitude
of these crimes; and the evil was raised to its height by the
religious fanaticism, which unhappily exists, in an excessive
degree, in those populous districts. /
The supposed grievance of which these deluded men com-
plain, arising from the improvement of machinery, has been
denominated a fancied grievance. It would be wasting time to
argue upon the undoubted right of every subject of this king-
dom. to conduct his trade in such manner as he may degå most
conducive to his own interests, unless where the wisdom of
Parliament
*
* - –º *—t – #.. t. * *_x —-i-º-º-tº- *— `--—º *-* !-- * ~. x_*. Hººdºº
* See. pp. 89, 112, 124.
( xii )
Parliament has controlled him by regulations. But the events
of the last year prove that it may not be altogether superfluous
to shew how it is that the improvement of machinery is bene-
ficial, instead of being detrimental, to the interests of the la-
bouring manufacturer, as well as to the community at large. It
is obvious, that the demand for any commodity increases with
its cheapness, and that the purchaser will resort to the market
at which it is sold at the lowest rate; and therefore, that every
thing which contributes to the cheapness encreases the demand,
and gives an advantage to the manket, where such cheapness
exists, over all other markets where, from local causes, the
commodity cannot be sold at so low a price. Where the
demand encreases, the number of hands employed will encrease
also. But nothing has been ever found to contribute so much to
the cheapness of a manufactured article, as the use of machinery,
which enables the same Wolk to be done, not only in less time
and with fewer hands, but by persons of earlier age and of less
robust constitutions, than can render themselves useful while
all the operations are to be performed by bodily strength. Hence
all the members of a family are now enabled to contribute
towards its support, instead of relying (as formerly was the case)
altogether upon the exertions of the husband and father, who
still has many parts of the manufacture to which he may apply
his vigour, and earn ample wages. What then would be the
consequence, if the endeavours of the disaffected could succeed
in the expulsion of machinery? The wife and the young children
would be thrown out of employ; the husband and the father
must support them entirely by his own labour; the price of the
manufactured goods would be raised, the purchaser would resort
to a cheaper market, where the use of machinery was encou-
raged ; the trade would decay; the manufacturer would gradu-
ally discard his journeymen, or reduce their wages; while their
families would become more and more burthensome; and finally,
nothing but poverty and misery would prevail. .
A notion
( xiii )
A notion has been entertained by some, that the d'stub-
ances have been in a great degree ascribable to povelty and
distress, arising from the want of foreign markets for our
manufactures. It has been already stated, that at a few
towns, in the spring of the last year, there were some riots
arising from the high price of provisions; but in the neighbour-
hood of Huddersfield, which was the metropolis of discon-
tent, not the least symptom is to be discovered of Luddism
having arisen from these causes. On the contrary, many
of the prisoners tried at York rested their defence on stories,
which depended for their credibility on the fact, that work was
superabundant.
It is now time to close these Preliminary Remarks, and to
proceed to the Report of the Trials. But there shall be first
given an alphabetical List of the 64 Prisoners delivered out
of York Castle upon this occasion; which, by containing a
statement of their residences, occupations, and ages, and of
the crimes with which they were charged, will exhibit at one
view the seat of Luddism, the description of its adherents, and
the offences which are immediately connected with it, or are
consequential on it; and by containing the result as to each
prisoner, with a reference to the relevant page, will serve as
an index to the book.
Alphabetical
Alphabetical LIST of the PR IS O N E R S delivered from the Castle of
( xiv. )

Name. Residence. Occupation. Age.
ANSON, William - º ºs Elland, Shopkeeper, 25,
ARMITAGE, Abraham tºe Holmfirth, Labourer, 30,
|BAJNES, John, senior - tº Halifax, Hatter, 66,
BAINTS, John, junior - * Do Sheemaker, 34,
BA IN ES, Zachaniah - * Do Labourer, 15,
BATLEY, John - º * Thornhill, Clothier, 31,
BEAUMONT, George º - Holmfirth, Labourer, 42,
3LAIKEBOROUGH, William Halifax, Shoemaker, 22,
| º
BOOTPI, Samuel - sº *-*. Huddersfield, Cloth-dresser, 33,
D
BROOK, George — gº º Dalton, Do , 45,
BROOK, George - ** *-* Lockwood, Bo 18,
BROOK, Jancs - º * Do De 26,
\ f
PROOK, John - º * Do Do 22,
BROOK, Joseph - - - Raistrick, - Tailor, 40,
BROOK, Thomas º- * Lockwood, Cloth-dresser, 32,
BROOKES, George - º Holmfirth, Do 40,
CARTDR, Joseph - - - Greetland, Cotton-spinner, 22,
COCKCROFT, Charles as Huddersfield, Cloth-dresser, 19,
COOKSON Craven, - gº Barnsley, Weaver, 31,
CRöWTHER, Joseph - tº Sowerby, Cotton-spinner, 31,
DEAN, Jonathan - tº º Huddersfield, Cloth-dresser, 28,
DUCKWORTH, George º Halifax, Shoemaker, 23,
DYSON, James - - 2, Longroyd Bridge, Cloth-dresser, 21,
EADON, John - - - Barnsley, Weaver, 34,
( )
XV
Y OR K, under the Commission of Gaol Delivery, in JANU ARY 1 8 13.
V.
t Offences.
w
Result.
| Charged with beginning to demolish William Cartwright's Mill
Charged with Burglary at Far Town, on 29 November -
Indicted for Burglary and stealing Arms at Foolstone,on 18 May $
Charged also with four similar I5urglaries, on 7, 24, & 29 Junº
Convicted of administering an unlawful Oath to John M“Donald, !
at Halifax, on 8 July º-
Convicted of abetting the same Offence - -
sº º º º - sº-
- - - - - -
Indicted for the same Offence
Convicted of Burglary and stealing sundly Goods at Kirk- ?
Heaton, on 3 July - - $
Indicted for Burglary and stealing Arms at Foolstone, on R
18 May; w
Charged also with five siniilar Burglaries, on 7, 24, and 29 June $
Convicted of abetting J. Baines in administering unlawful Oath &
Indicted for ripping Lead floun a Building at Ilalifax, on 15July 5
Indicted for breaking Shearing-frames of J. Hist at Lindley, R
on 23 February ; $
Charged with another like Oſſence on 15 March - 4-
Indicted for breaking Shealing-frames of two persons at 8
Lindley and Linthwaite, on 23 February
Indicted for Burglary and stealing a Gun, at Wooldale, on
1 May : * *
Charged with seven other Capital Felonies in stealing Arms,
and breaking Shearing flames -
Acquitted of beginning to demolish William Cartwright's Mill,
Indicted for and charged with the same Offences as the pre-
ceding prisoner -
- •- *-
§
&
$
s * -- sº º anº- *
Discharged with Piosecution
Discharged on Ball to appeal
to the Indictment, when
required
Transported for 7 Years
- – D* - -
Acquitted - ta
Hanged, January 16
$
&
Discharged on Ball, &c.
Ş
R
Transported for 7 Years
Discharged on Ball, &c.
Do
Do
Do
-
- - D9
The same as James Brook
Indicted for Burglary and stealing divers Goods at Kirk-
Heaton, on 3 October *
Convicted of beginning to demolish William Cantwright's
Mill on 11 Apial *
Indicted for Burglary and stealing Guns at Foolstone, on
18 May :
Charged also with five simila Burglaries, on 4, 7, and 29 June
Admitted Evidence against Joseph Crowther and others -
º- - - * * e- - *-
&
$
!
R
Indicted for administering an unlawful Oath to Thomas R
Broughton, at Barnsley, on 8 August - $
Convicted of robbing a House at Fan Town, on 29 November 3
Charged with other Burglaries on same day - $
Convicted of beginning to demolish Wallham Catwight's Mill ;
Charge with eleven othe, Capital Felonies in destroying
Machinery, and stealing Alms *
Convicted of abetting John Baines in administering an unlaw- ?
ful Oath $
Charged with beginning to demolish William Cartwright's Mill,
and with four acts of breaking Machinery *
Convicted of administering an unlawful Oath to Richard
Howells, at Barnsley, on 21 May ;
Indicted for similar Offence on 8 August
Aº º
i
C
Discharged with Prosecution
$.
&
$
&
Acquitted - * -
Hanged, January 16 - }
-
JJischarged on Bail, &c.
Dischanged - - 186, 196,
Acquitted by consent
IIanged, January 16
-
- - D9
Transported for 7 Years }
Discharged without Piose-
Cullon -
$
t
Transported for 7 Years
114
| 9 |
208
21 1
134
208
21ſ
115
206
211
104.
206
114
Acquitted by consent
g
(continu
ed)
sº
sº
xvi )
k Alphabetical LIST of the PRISON E R S delivered from the Castle of
Name. . Residence. Occupation. Age.
FISHER, Joseph - * * - º * Briestwhistle. Coal-miner, 33,
FITTON, Robert - * -> -> ess Holmfirth, Weaver, 44,
GREEN, Thomas - * wº -> & Horbury, Carpenter, 31,
HAIGH, Jat.)es - º - º ºr Dalton, Cloth-dresser, 28,
HAIGH, Joshua - sºr º - ºs Lockwood, i Do 27,
HAIUH, Samuel - dºe º º gºs Holmfirth, Jabourer, 34,
IHARLING, Samuel wº - º * Crossland, Hawker, 69,
HARTLEY, William - ~ º sº Warley, Tailor, 41,
| \
HEY, James •º * --> • º Skircoat, Woollen-spinner, 25,
HEY Job - & *> = Greetland, Waterman, 40,
HILL, Jöhn º º * * * Do Cottom-spinner, 36,
IIILL, Mark * º º - * Dalton, Cloth-dresser, 26,
HINCHLIFFE, Benjamin 4- * tº IHolmfirth, Iabourer, 24,
HIRST, John º ºss -> gº sº Liversedge, Cloth-dresser, 28,
HOBSON, Cornelius - *- wº *g Nether Thong, T}o 19,
HOYLE, Nathan - tº - tºs tº- Skircoat, Weaver, 46,
LODGE, George - *s -> --> º IIuddersfield, Cloth-dresser, 42,
|
LUMB, John wº ge - rs <sº Thornhill, Coal-miner, 32,
MELLOR, George - - º - Longroyd Bridge, Cloth-dresser, 22,
MILNES, Charles - - - º Halifax, Cardmaker, 22,
MOORHOUSE, David - - - - || Kirk-Burton, | Stonemason, 26,
OGD'EN, John - sº --> re - Huddersfield, Cloth-dresser, 28,
RIGGE, George - cy & E; ge Dº Fºo 29,

H
!
t
)
( xvii
OR K, under the Commission of Gaol Delivery, in JANUARY 1 8 13.
+
*
Offences. Result. page.
Convicted of Burglary and stealing sundry Goods at Kirk- Hanged, January 16. - sº
Heatón, on 3 July - tº º tºº * º ū-e - 5 211
Indicted for Burglary and stealing Arms at Foolstone, on
18 May; Discharged on Bail, &c. 205
Charged also with a similar Burglary on 29 June sº gº *
Charged with a Burglary and stealing divers Goods at Nether 3 Discharged with Prosecution 211
Shittlington, on 3 June - tºº tº -º *º &=} gº - 5
Convicted of beginning to demolish William Cartwright's Mill; & 134
Charged with three other Capital Felonies in breaking X| Hanged, January 16, -8 203
Machinery - - wº gº * * dº sº &= 211
Charged with beginning to demolish William Cartwright's Mill - Discharged with Prosecution. 211
Indicted for Burglary and stealing Arms at Foolstone, on * *º. i
18 May ; Discharged on Bail, &c. 205
Charged also with a similar Burglary on 29 June * * º
Charged with threatening the Life of Joseph Radcliffe, Esq. - Pischarged with Prosecution. 211
Convicted of Burglary and stealing Arms at Skircoat, on % 181
29 August; sº gº
Charged also with four other Burglaries, and with breaking Hanged, January 16. & ;
Shearing-frames - gººm º º gº sº tº gº
Convicted of robbing in a Dwelling-house at Far Town, on R 191
29 November; - = D* a tº ºf 208
Charged with five Burglaries of same day - - wº - $ 211
Convicted of and charged with the same Offences as William Q | . . Do sº iº $ ;
Hartley * * * * , dº gº gº º - š & 2 11
The Same &_* sº gº * * wº- gºe * sº - - D* - 181, 208, 211
º beginning w demoliº the Mil of williºn : Discharged with Prosecution. 211
Indicted for Burglary and stealing Arms at Foolstone, on 18 May | Discharged on Bail, &c. 205
Indicted for beginning to demolish William Cartwright's Mill - || Acquitted - cº - 134
Charged with administering an unlawful Oath to Robert Harling Discharged with Prosecution. 211
Convicted of and charged with the same Offences as James. Hey Hanged, 16 Jan. 191, 208, 211
indicted for breaking the Shearing-frames of two persons at & ,, . &
Lindley and Linthwaite, on 23 February * sº sº & Discharged on Bail, &c. 205
Convicted of Burglary and stealing divers Goods at Whitley R Sentenced to be hanged, but 7
*Upper, on 4 July—but recommended to mercy by the Jury Ś pardoned on condition of 208
being transported for life. 211
Convicted of the Murder of William Horsfall, on 28 April; 35
Indicted for beginning to demolish Willian Cartwright's Mill, 104
for two cases of breaking Shearing-frames, and one case of X | Hanged, January 8.
stealing Arms; - & gº e- sº sº sº $º. 134
Charged with nine other Capital Felonies. - sº gº 205
º of abetting John Baines in administering an unlaw-
ful Oath; - tºº sº - V - sº - " - sº
Indicted for ripping Lead from a Building at Halifax, on 15July; X Transported for 7 Years. } :
Charged also with stealing Ball-cartridges from the Cumberland 206
Militia * * * is ºne sº sº wº sº
Indicted for a Burglary at Kirk-Burton, on 11 June - - || Acquitted by consent. - 203
Convi tº a * * * * * : ~1.4.9. TV fº 134
º: to demoliº william cutºight. Mill. : Hanged, January 16. - ;
Charged with the same Qffence - - - - - - |Discharged with Prosecution. 211
T
(continuca)
( xviii )

s ===--------------------------→ *
| Alphabetical LIST of the PR IS ONE RS delivered from the Castle of
. Name. Residence. Occupation. Age.
# * i I -s --> r >
SCHOFIELD, John, jun. - - Nether Thong, Cloth-dresser, 21,
SCHOFIELD, Joshua - - gº Huddersfield, Do 22,
* y f l -
SHORE, John - - -> * Holmfirth, Labourer, 32,
SISWICK, Benjamin - º º Horbury, Do 25,
SMITH, John - - - - || Kirk-Burton, Butcher, 33,
| SMITH, Thomas - wº. - - Huddersfield, N Cloth-dresser, 22,
| STARKEY, James - - as Liversedge, Carpet-weaver. 22,
SWALLOW, John º - & Briestwhistle, Coalminer, 37, ,
*
TAYLOR, John - º * * Holmfirth, Labourer, 26,
| THORNTON, Charles - - t- Lockwood, Cloth-dresser, 19,
| THORNTON, Joseph - - - || Huddersfield, D9 29,
THORPE, William - * asº. Do Do 23,
-
| VARLEY, James - - - - || Lockwood, Do 35,
3. A - |
| WALKER, Benjamin - - - || Longroyd Bridge, Do 25,
WALKER, John - - * * Do Do 31,
|
1. WALKER, John - - - ºne Salford, Do 38,
* WHITEHEAD, William - tº Quick, Clothier, 26,
j / t
- S
{
\ |
J. , \"
g ( xix )
Y OR K, under the Commission of Gaol Delivery, in JANUARY 1 8 13.
Offences. Result. page.
Indicted for maliciously shooting at John Hinchliffe at Upper ! Acquitted. - - - || 74
Thong, on 22 July º - - - - - -
Charged with beginning to demolish Cartwright's Mill - - [Discharged with Prosecution. 211
Charged with a Burglary at Whitley - tº- es * - - - D9 - tº- - # 211
Charged with a Burglary at Shittlington - - - - - - - D° - gº - || 211
Indicted for the same Offence as David Moorhouse &= - Acquitted by consent. - 203
Convicted of the AIurder of William Horsfall, on 28 April; º 35
[ndicted for beginnjug to demolish Cartwright's Mill, and for * 104
two cases of breaſing Shearing-frames; s * bs I} Hanged, January 8. - 134
Charged with lin.e other Capital Felonies - * e - 205
Indicted for inciting two men, on 5 September, to blow up Q Traversed to the next As-
Carlwinght's Mill – * *g * - - - * sizes. - * tº - || 204
- - º º -> 7.
Convicted of Burglary at Whitley Upper, on 4 July; - - Hanged, January 16. - y 208.
Charged with five ouher Burglaries - e- - • * ty 211
Indicted for Burglary and stealing Arms at Foolstone, on 18 May | Discharged on Bail, &c. 205
Indicted for Burglary and stealing a Gun at Wooldale, on 1 May - - D* - - - 205
Indicted for the same Offence as John Taylor tº- *- - - - D9 - - - || 205
Convicted of the Murder of William Horsfall, on 28 April , \ 35
Indicted for beginning to demolish Cartwright's Mill, and two 104
cases of breaking Shearing-frames - e. - - X| Hanged, January 8. 134 ||
Charged with five other Capital Felonies - - - - 205
Indicted for Burglary and stealing Arms at Wooldake, on 1 May, Q. Discharged on Bail, &c. 205
and at Foolstone, on 18 May - º º * * - &
* . - e. tº * * * * * * * * 50
T *
Committed as an Accomplice in the Murder of William Horsfall, Discharged - - -& 152
and admitted Evidence for the Crown - * tº º 5 (211
Convicted of beginning to demolish William Cartwright's Mill, 134
Indicted for two cases of breaking Shearing-frames ; – 2- :- Hanged, January 16. 208
Charged with five other Capital Felonies - - - * 211.
Charged with breaking seaſing flame. - at Almondbury, * {{Discharged with Prosecution. 211
15 March – e- tºs -> - ;
Charged with Robbery at Lydgate in Quick, on 20 April -
ſ
D° - - -
.
211
|

protectingg
33rottebingſ;
At the Session of Oyer and Terminer and Gaol
Delivery, for the County of York, held at the
Castle of York, in JANUARY 1813.
N Saturday, January the 2*, the Honourable Mr. Baron Commission
THoMson, and the Honourable Mr. Justice LE BLANC, *P*
opened the Commission.
Monday, 4th January 1813.
AFTER the usual forms, the Grand Jury panel was called GRAND
over; and the following Gentlemen were sworn : JURY.
The Honourable HENRY LASCELLES, Foreman;
The Honourable William Gordon,
Sir Bellingham Reginald Graham, Baronet,
Sir Henry Carr Ibbetson, Baronet,
Sir Mark Masterman Sykes, Baronet,
Sir John Lister Kaye, Baronet,
Robert Frankland, Esquire, .
John Robinson Foulis, Esquire,
James Archibald Stuart Wortley, Esquire,
Thomas Davison Bland, Esquire,
Joseph Radcliffe, Esquire,
Thomas Norcliffe, Esquire,
John Bell, Esquire,
Ralph Creyke, Esquire,
Hall Plumer, Esquire,
Thomas Duncombe, Esquire,
John York, Esquire,
Richard Bethell, Esquire,
Richard Stainforth, Esquire,
Robert Harvey, Esquire,
John Wilmer Field, Esquire,
Henry Willoughby, Esquire, and
Richard York, Esquire.
Mr. Baron Thomson, then delivered the following Charge:
GENTLEMEN of THE GRAND INQUEST,
“WE are assembled, by virtue of His Majesty's Commission, Mr. Baton
to exercise the criminal judicature in this county, at this Thomson's
unusual season of the year for the occurrence of such solem- Charge.
nities. None of us, however, can be insensible of the necessity
which º for a speedy investigation of the charges against
(2. B the
92 CHARGE TO
the very numerous class of prisoners in your calendar. You
will perceive I allude to those persons; who are accused of
having participated (and several of them in repeated instances).
in those daring acts of tumultuous outrage, violence and rapine,
by which the public tranquillity has been disturbed throughout
that great manufacturing district in the West Riding of this
county, for a period comprising, with little intermission, almost
the whole of the year which has just elapsed. *
Those mischievous Associations,' dangerous to the public
peace, as well as destructive of the property of individual
subjects, and in some instances of their lives, seem to have
originated in a neighbouring county, and at first to have, had
for their object merely the destruction pf machinery invented
for the purpose of saving manual labour in manufactures: a
notion, probably suggested by evil designing persons, to captivate
the working manufacturer, and engage him in tumult and
crimes, by persuading him that the use of machinery occasions
a decrease of the demand for personal labour, and a consequent
decrease of wages, or total want of work. A more fallacious
and unfounded argument cannot be made use of. It is to the
excellence of our Machinery that the existence probably,
certainly the excellence and flourishing state, of our manu-
factures are owing. Whatever diminishes expense, increases
consumption, and the demand for the article both in the home
and foreign market; and were the use of machinery entirely to
be abolished, the cessation, of the manufacture itself would soon
follow, inasmuch as other countries, to which the machinery
would be banished, would be enabled to undersell us.
- The spirit of insubordination and tumult, thus originating,
has spread itself into other manufacturing districts; and when
large bodies of men are once assembled to act against law,
the transition unhappily is too easy from one irregular act to
another, even to the highest of crimes against society. And
thus we find that the destruction of tools has been succeeded
by destroying the houses and the workshops of the manufac-
turers; it has led to the violent robbery of arms, to protect
the tumultuous in their illegal practices, and to enable them to
resist or to attack successfully; and from the robbery of arms
they have proceeded to the general plunder of property of
every description, and even to the murder, the deliberate
assassination, of such as were supposed to be hostile to their
measures. A temporary impunity (for the law, though sure,
is slow) has led on these deluded persons from one atrocious
act to another; from the breaking of shears to the stealing of
arms, to nightly robberies, to the destruction of property, and
of life itself. ,’
The peaceful and industrious inhabitants of the country,
where these enormous practices have been committed, have
l had
<& GRAND JURY. 3
bad the misfortune to suffer in their persons and property, from
the acts of men confederated against Society, and executing
the purposes of their association under circumstances carrying
with them the utmost terror and dismay. Arnied bodies of:
these men, in some instances several hundred in number, ap-
parently organized under the command of leaders, and generaliy
with their faces blacked or otherwise disguised, have attacked'
the mills, shops, and houses of manufacturers and others, by
day as well as by night, destroyed tools worked by machinery,
and in some instances shot at the persons whose property they
have thus attacked. But the worst of these misdeeds is yet
behind, a most foul Assassinatiou. While such outrages as
those mentioned were carrying on in that part of the country,
a person in a respectable station of life, returning from Hudders-
field to his residence at Marsden, was fired at and shot from
behind the wall of an inclosure near the road, receiving several
wounds, of which he died shortly after. With this murder
some of the prisoners in the calendar stand charged; and it
will be your province to enquire into the foundation of that,
as well as every other charge to be preferred before you against
any of the prisoners, and to treat them as the evidence before
you, in your judgment, shall require.
\
Probably it may be thought requisite, in order to substan-
tiate the charges against the persons accused of being concerned
in this murder, or other offences that may come before you,
that the testimony of an accomplice should be produced;
which is necessary, in many cases, in order to prevent the
worst offences from escaping punishment. You will however
attend to it with caution, taking into consideration all such
circumstances as may be laid before you, tending to confirm
his evidence, and to satisfy you,.. that in his narrative of the
transaction, in which he would involve others with equal guilt
with hinaself, he is worthy of credit. Such testimony (that
is, of an accomplice) is undoubtedly competent, and it is at ali
times to be received and acted upon, though with a sober degree
of jealousy and caution; and with such caution, you, Gentle-
men, in the first-instance, and more especially those who shall
be charged with the determination of these important issues
in their final resort, will consider them. -
With regard to the guilt, which persons may incur by en-
gaging in any riotous assémbly, the Statute or George I.
commonly called the Riot Act, has enacted, That if any persons,
to the number of twelve or more, who shall be unlawfully,
riotously, and tumultuously assembled together, to the dis-
turbance of the public peace, shall not disperse, but continue
in that state for the space of an hour after such proclamation
made as is directed in the Act, they shall be guilty of Felony
without benefit of Clergy. And by the same Statute, if any
* 13 2. persons,
4. CHARGE TO
persons, so unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled
together, to the disturbance of the public peace, shall unlaw-
fully and with force demolish or pull down any dwelling house
or other buildings therein mentionéd, they shall also be guilty
of Felony without benefit of Clergy. f
So also by the Statute of 9 George III, it is made a capital
Felony, for persons, being riotously and tumultuously assembled,
to pull down or demolish, or to begin to pull down or demolish,
any wind saw-mill or other windmill, or any watermill or
other mill, or to set fire to the same.’ In addition to which,
the Act of 43 George III. cap. 58. has provided against the
maliciously setting fire (among other things) to any mill,
warehouse or shop, with intent to injure or defraud any of
the King's subjects, by subjecting the offenders, their coun-
sellors, aiders and abettors, to a capital punishment.
I do not know whether the offences, of which any of the
prisoners are accused, were committed under such circum-
stances, as will bring them within any of the Acts I have
stated, so that indictments may be framed upon them ; but it
seemed not unnecessary to state these Statutes, in order to
&all your attention to them, in case any such indictment
should be preferred. ' t
But there is one Statute, which appears to apply to the
charges against the greater number of the prisoners; those
who are accused of having destroyed shears employed in the
woollen manufacture. By the Statute of 22 George III.
cap. 40. if any person shall by day or night break into any
house or shop, or enter by force into any house or shop, with
intent to cut or destroy any serge or other woollen goods in
the loom, or any tools employed in making thereof, or shall
wilfully and maliciously cut or destroy any such serges or
woollen goods in the loom or on the rack, or shall wilfully or
maliciously break or destroy any tools used in the making any
such serges or other woollen goods; every such offender shall
be guilty of Felony without benefit of Clergy.
Several of the charges in the Calendar, will probably be
brought before you in the shape of indictments, either at com-
mon law for burglaries, or robberies by violence from the
person, and will deserve your serious attention. Other indict-
ments will probably be preferred for maliciously shooting at
persons; which, by the Statute of George I. is made a capital
felony, though death does not ensue.
I do not know, whether any indictments will be brought before
you against any persons as accessaries, either before or after the
fact, to any felonies which may become the objects of your en-
quiry; but it may not be unnecessary to state, upon this occasion,
that the emay be accessaries to all felonies committed before and
after the fact, whether felonies at common law, or created such by
statute :
- * GRAND JURY. 5
statute: an accessary before the fact being one, who, being absent
at the time of the crime committed, does yet procure, counsel, or
command another to commit a felony ; and an accessary after the
fact being a person, who, knowing a felony to have been com-
mitted, receives, succours, comforts, or assists the felon: And
generally, any assistance given to the felon, to hinder his being,
apprehended or tried, or suffer.ng punishment, makes the assist-
ant an accessary; and, in some instances, accessaries to felo-
nies are deprived of the benefit of clergy, as well as principals.
There is also an offence, which the law denominates Mispri-
sion of Felony; which is, the concealment of a felony which a
man knows; and which is punishable as a high misdemeanor.
There is yet one species of offence contained in your Calen-
ar, which deserves to be particularly adverted to, because it
is, in all probability, that which has been the means of pro-
curing many of the deluded people, who have been guilty of the
outrages imputed to them, to embark and to continue in such
crimes: I speak of the offence of administering Unlawful Oaths.
By the Statute of 37 George III. Cap. 123. it is enacted, That
any person who shall, in any manner or form whatsoever, ad-
minister or cause to be administered, or be aiding or assisting
at, or present at and consenting to, the administering or taking
of any oath or engagement purporting or intending to bind the
person taking it to engage in any mutinous or seditious purpose,
or to disturb the public peace, or to be of any association, so-
ciety, or confederacy, formed for any such purpose, or to obey
the orders or commands of any committee or body of men not
lawfully constituted, or of any leader or commander, or other
person not having authority by law for that purpose; or not to
inform or give evidence against any associate, confederate, or
other person; or not to reveal or discover any unlawful combi-
nation or confederacy; or not to reveal or discover any illegal
act done or to be done; or not to reveal or discover any illegal
oath or engagement, which may have been administercd or
tendered to or taken by snch person or persons, or to or by
any other person or ‘persons, or the import of any such
oath or engagement; this offender shall be guilty of felony,
and may be transported for any term not exceeding seven
years: and every person who has taken any such oath ºr engage-
ment, not being compelled thereto, shall also be adjudged
guilty of felony, and may in like manner be transported: With
a proviso, that compulsion shall not excuse any paity taking
such oath or engagement, unless he shall, within four days after
the taking of it (unless prevented by actual force of sickness,
and then afterwards withi, four days) declare the Šame, toge-
ther with the whole of what he or she shall know, touching the
§ame, and the person or persons by whom and in whose pre-
§ence, and when and where such oath or engagement was
administered
§ \ CHARGE TO
administered or taken, by information on oath, in such manner
as is directed by the Act: And all persons aiding and assisting
at, or present and consenting to, the administering or taking of
any such oath or engagement, as well as all who cause such to be
administered or taken, though not present at the administration
of them, shall be deemed principal offenders, and be tried as
such, though the person who actually administered such oath
or engagement shall not have been tried or convicted. It is
also enacted, That it shall not be necessary, in any indictment
against any person or persons administering or causing to be
administered or taken, or taking any such oath or engagement,
or aiding or assisting at, or present at and consenting to the
administering or taking thereof, to set forth the words of such
oath or engagement, and that it shall be sufficient to set forth
the purport of them, or some material part thereof: With
a proviso, that any engagement or obligation whatsoever, in
the , nature of an oath, shall be deemed an oath within the
meaning of the Act, in whatever form or manner it shall be
administered or taken.
By a recent Statute, the 52d of the present King, cap. 104.
and which took effect from the ninth of July last, it is pro-
vided, That every person who shall administer, or be aiding or
assisting at the administering of any oath or engagement, pur-
porting or intending to bind the person taking the same to
commit any treason or murder, or any felony punishable by law
with death, shall suffer death as a felon without benefit of
clergy; and every person who shall take any such oath or
engagement, not being compelled thereto, shall be guilty of
felony, and be transported for life, or for such term of years as
the court before which he shall be tried shall adjudge: "With
provision for indemnifying a 'person taking the oath, on his
discovering the same, and complying with the terms prescribed
by the Act. -
No one, who seriously reflects on the infinite mischiefs that
may happen to society, from persons associated for any unlawful
purpose whatsoever, thus binding themselves to each other
under what they are taught to consider as the sanction of an
oath, and cementing their union in wickedness by this profane
appeal to the Almighty to witness their desperate engagements,
can conceive that the punishment which the Legislature has
provided for such offences, is in any the least degree severe.
You will perceive, that in the course of the address, with
which I have now troubled you, I have forborne to advert to
any other offences in the calendar than those which appear to
be connected with the ſatai disturbances in the West Riding,
which have produced such dreadful consequences; because I am
not aware that any other indictments will be brought before
you upon this occassion. And if there should be such, º:
Other
GRAND JURY. . 7
other offences do not appear to me to be of a nature, that to
gentlemen of your description, and accustomed to such enquiries,
would call for any observation from me.
I cannot conclude without expressing the utmost confidence
that the country may safely rely on the vigilance and attention,
with which you will proceed in the examination of the different
charges to be brought before you. No indignation at the
outrages, which have been committed, will excite any prejudice
in your minds, when you are weighing the evidence against
each individual accused, and deciding how far he is personally
implicated in the crime imputed to him. And however those,
who have been engaged in those desperate outrages which we
deplore, have thereby despised and set at naţight the laws and
their authority; yet the persons, who are now the objects of
your enquiry, will find that those laws will continue to be
administered, not more for the detection, and punishment of the
guilty, than for the protection and safety of the innocent.
I cannot conclude without also expressing a thorough con-
fidence, that, having discharged the duty which has assembled
you at this time, and returned to those parts of the county
where you respectively reside, your earnest endeavours will
constantly be exerted to restore and preserve the public peace,
and to convince those, who are liable to be seduced from their
duty by the arts and delusions of wicked and designing men, of
the fatal consequences attendant on their giving way to such
evil selicitations, or engaging in any disturbance of the public
peace and tranquillity; and that you will, on all occasions and
in every situation in which the country enjoys the benefit of
your services, be earnest and zealous to ineulcate a firm alle-
giance to His Majesty's Throne, and a reverence to the Laws,
and thus to promote that general regularity and order, upon
which depend the peace and the comfort of civil society.”
-*—
Tuesday, 5* January 1813. THE KING
THE Prisoners were arraigned on an Indictment 7 against
for burglariously breaking the Dwelling-house of John Swallow,
Samuel Moxon, at Whitley, Upper, on the 3d of July John Batley,
last, and stealing sundry articles, the property of Wil. Joseph Fisher, &
liam Moxon;–and Severally pleaded, Not Guilty. John Lumb.
The Indictment was opened by Mr. Richardson.
*Ir. Park.-May it please your Lordships; Gentlemen of
the Jury, 'The indictment, which has been fully stated to you,
is a common indictment for the crime of burglary. From
that circumstance alone, the efore, there would appear nothing
unusual in our present assembly; but, from the number of per-
sons here met together, and from the circumstances under
whica
$. THE KING AGAINST
which this burglary has been committed, it is quite impos-
sible that it can be tried as a common case of that sort.
Gentlemen, I am not aware that all of you (and probably
the contrary is the case) were here yesterday, to know upon
what ground it was that you have been called together at so
unusual a period of the year, Though I believe every one of
you (as I have collected it from the panel from which you
have been called) lives at a distance from the place it.
question, it is quite impossible that any man in the most
remote corner of the kingdom can be otherwise than apprised
of the dreadful disturbances that have been taking place in
one district of this county for a considerable period of time,
amounting almost to a state of actual rebellion; and, the
prisoners at the bar are charged as being a part of the gang
implicated in those disturbances.
Gentlemen, it has been thought wise by those, who admi-
nister His Majesty's Government, to send down a Commission
...to try the persons charged with these offences. And in so
doing they, have acted most wisely for the public interests,
most humanely towards those who may be innocent of the
crimes with which they are charged, and most justly towards
those who have been the objects of these attacks; for it is
fit they should be satisfied, that themselves, their houses, and
their property, will be protected by the arm of the Law. It is of
the greatest importance in every well-regulated government,
that those who either commit, or meditate to commit, great
and heinous offences, should be soon convinced that the arm
of the Law is able to quell such disturbances, and restore
peace, to those who have been ‘so grievously offended, as many
of these prosecutors have been. And it is of great importance,
in a lenient point of view, to those charged with offences,
that if the crimes, with which they are charged, cannot be
brought home fully to them, and therefore in point of law
they are not guilty, although they should happen to be morally
guilty of the offences with which they are charged, they should
not be kept from earning (which I hope those who may be
sent forth from hence, by verdicts, or by any lenity on the
part of the Crown, will go forth to earn) an honest livelihood.
—Those are the grounds, on which their Lordships have been
troubled to come from London, and this great county has been
assembled, at this period of the year.
Having stated this, I will proceed to detail the circrim-
stances of the particular case before you, knowing perfectly
well that no motives upon earth, but an anxious desire to do
justice under the solemn sanction of that oath which has
just been administered to you, will lead you either to convict
or acquit any of the persons who may be brought before you.
It is the greatest consolation to every man, who lowes the
{ coustitution.
swallow, AND OTHERS. 9
constitution of his country, that there is such a tribunal as
this; for, being all sworn under a sanction, which you all feel,
no indignation at the conduct of individuals will lead you to
depart from the straight rule of Law, on the one hand; nor will
any base or cowardly fear, on the other, prevent your doing
that justice to your country, which the necessity of the case
may demand from you. For it will ever be remembered, and
it has been stated by one of the wisest men who ever sat in
a Court of Justice, that at the same time that every pity is
due to persons in the unfortunate situation of the prisoners,
or to persons whom wicked and crafty men lead into such
circumstances; there is also a very great pity due to the
country, and to all who are so disturbed in the peaceful
and quiet possession of their premises, their property, and
their lives. s:
Gentlemen, the four prisoners at the bar were concerned, as
I stated, (and you will always understand, and I say this as a
previous caution, that where I state facts positively, as I shall
do, I am not alleging that they will be proved exactly as I
state them to you; you will attend to the evidence, and not to
my statement of it; and my only reason for a minute statement
is, to draw your attention better to the evidence when it is laid
before you by the witnesses;) the four prisoners at the bar stand
charged with having, with some others, gone to the house of a
person of the name of Moxon, on the night of the third day of
July in the last year, and committed the burglary in question.
The circumstances were these, without applying them, at pre-
sent, to any of the individuals now before you: Four or five
persons (which, I believe, the prosecutor, whose has was attack-
ed, magnified by his fears into a larger number of seven or eight,
though but only two or three entered his house) called for
admittance very vociferously, and fired against his house. It
has come to my knowledge, and will to yours, Gentlemen, not
only in respect of the present trial, but, if you should sit as the
jury on any other, it will appear to be the constant course, that
when houses are assailed, they begin (quite unusually from
other cases of burglary) by intimidation, by firing off arms as
they approach the house, to convey terror and dismay to those
who are within. And it will appear quite astonishing, what a
degree of terror this occasioned in the minds of the persons
attacked. There was used a great degree of force, and threats,
and every sort of intimidation, till Moxon, the prosecutor,
opened his door.
Samuel Moxou, who is the prosecutor, is an aged person:
he has a son, living with him in the house, of the name of
William Moxon. William Moxon is a married man, and has a
family of children; and there are living in this house also an
C appl entice
#
iO THE KING AGAINST .
apprentice and a journeyman. Samuel Moxon is not here;.
through age and infirmity he is totally unfit to be brought
hither, and he knows nothing of the fact, except what his son
will fully prove. When the house was opened, a person rushed
in, covered with a smock-frock, or some white garment put
over his clothes. He seizéd William Moxon, and insisted on
his delivering arms; which is always the first demand made
by those who commit these offences under the name of Luddites.
Moxon answered, “We have no arms.” “Why then,” says
the man, “you have some money.” Upon which, Moxon de-
livered them a one pound note, and ten or twelve shillings in
silver. He was then hurried into the parlour by this same
man, who was armed with a pistol, and it was said to him.
“We know that more money is in the house; and if you do.
not give us more money, we will blow your brains out.” Upon
which, Moxon delivered two one pound Bank of England notes,
which he had about him. He was told that he should be fired
at if he did not give them; and some one of the prisoners said,
“O, stand out of the way; I will fire at him.” However, no
firing took place to injure him personally. They then went
into the cellar of the house, took out a good deal of property,
hung beef, tongues, seven, eight, or nine pounds of butter, and a
Quantity of linen, which was hanging on what is called a winter-
hedge, (I understand it is something of the nature of a clothes-
horse:) And you will find the goods were afterwards divided
among some of the prisoners. *
This, Gentlemen, is the body of the crime;-this is the crime
itself. , Now, the question is, How do I fix this crime on the
prisoners? On that subject (unless my instructions totally
deceive me) I never saw a clearer case. In the first place, I
shall call before you a person, who is an accomplice (I state
that to you in the outset) a person of the name of Earl
Parkin. *
The Law on the subject of accomplices, I state to you now,
Gentlemen; subject of course to his Lordship's opinion, and
that of his learned Brother, by and by, knowing that I shall
be set right, if I should inadvertently state it wrongly; but it
shall be my earnest wish, never to mistate any principle of
law. I may be mistaken, but I will not endeavour to mislead
you. An accomplice is of course a person involved in similar
uilt with the prisoners; he was along with them, otherwise
e could not relate the circumstances. But the Law of Eng-
land has said, and has said wisely, that, inasmuch as the most
enormous crimes would go unpunished, if accomplices were not
examined, they are competent witnesses, and are witnesses
who may be examined before any other corroborative facts are
given in evidence; they are wituesses, upon the credit of whos;
g testimony
Y.
SWALLOW, AND OTHERS. I
testimony a Jury are to pass their judgment, whether they are
speaking the truth. In that respect they stand in the situation
of other witnesses. But, inasmuch as they come into court
themselves implicated in the same offence, Juries will look at
their evidence with a greater degree of scrupulousness. In
the dreadful situation in which this country has been placed,
it is almost impossible to obtain the ends of justice, without
calling accomplices. It is most important, for our best and
dearest interests, that they should be called ; and a happy
thing it is for the country, that if these men have, from any
bad passions in their own minds, or by the solicitations of
others, been led into error, these errors are endeavoured to be
retrieved. Still always you must examine and sift their evi-
dence. The course which has been usually adopted, and which
will be adopted upon this occasion, certainly is to give corrobo-
rative evidence. We shall give decidedly corroborative evidence
upon this trial; we shall call witnesses to you, who will confirm
the accomplice in many particular parts of his story. But
here I would interpose a caution, in which I shall have his
Lordship's sanction, for I have heard his Lordship lay down
similar law, I have heard other judges lay down similar law,
and I am satisfied I shall lay it down rightly:—It is not neces-
sary, nor can it be, that the accomplice should be confirmed in
every fact. If that could be done, we should not want him at
all. It is default of evidence upon these facts, which renders
it necessary to call the accomplice. Therefore the circum-
stances to be looked at by the Jury, are his own demeanor and
conduct in giving his evidence, and whether he is confirmed
by other witnesses in such particulars as render it proper to
give credit to that which he states.
Under these circumstances, therefore, I shall call the accom-
plice, who will tell you this; That the four prisoners and himself
had assembled together; that they had conversation about
various acts of Luddism (as it was called) and that they set
out on the night of the third of July, to commit the robbery
in question. They went to a place called Bedford's Cab, i.
Several of them there pulled off their shirts, and put tº 3.5.
over their clothes, for the purpose of disguise, You will find
that they were further disguised, by taking soot from the back
of the chimney, and rubbing it over their faces. And this is
another most material circumstance, that these disguises, which
are in themselves a very high crime, and constitute the essence
of ill the crimes lately committed in this county, create a
difficulty of conviction; because it is quite impossible that any
of those, whose houses or persons have been attacked, unless
they happen fortunately (as is sometimes the case) to know
the voices or the general manner of the men by whom they
C 2 & Tº
12 THE KING AGAINST
.*
are attacked, can speak to their persons: So that the very
essence of the crime (as I before stated) constitutes the difficulty
of conviction.
I shall call before you another person, Samuel Parkin, who
was solicited to accompany these men upon this unlawful
transaction. He was threatened and intimidated, and did go
a considersble length with them. Whether he would in the
eye of the law be considered an accomplice, I will not say ; but
he did not know the particular errand upon which they were
going. When they approached within two hundred yards of
the place, one of the prisoners, of the name of Swallow, said,
“ Old Samuel Moxon has a few guineas laid by him, and we
will go and take them.” This witness immediately said, “If
that is what you want, I will go no further.” Upon which they
said to this man “Then we will shoot you.” “Well,” says he,
“I am determined not to go. Shoot you may, if you please,
but I will not go.” And accordingly he stopped.
But the case does not rest here. I shall call a witness
before you, to prove what is certainly a light circumstance; but
it is by light circumstances that justice is sometimes brought
about. It is astonishing what very small circumstances, when
compounded together, will make out such a case as will render
it impossible for a jury not to convict. I shall call before you
Jonas Boocock, a man, who that aſternoon, before the robbery
was committed, saw two of the prisoners at the bar, and Earl
Parkin the accomplice, near the garden of one of them, in close
conference. He spoke to them, knowing them perfectly weli,
and said, “Why you old pensioners have gotten all summed up
together;” upon which Swallow said, “Aye, but we have been
more;” that is, we have been more persons together.
Now, Gentlemen, I come to the most important feature in
the case, as to confirmation of the . I shall call,
before you a person, who lives near to Moxon's house, who was
going home at the time they approached Moxon's house, and
who met in his way several men, two or three with blacked
faces, and two with shirts over their clothes. His attention
was excited, he came near enough to touch them, he observed
one was carrying a gun and one a sword; one of them called
out (and he will prove his knowledge of the voice) and desired
him to walk off; he continued however to observe them, and
one of them (and the voice he verily believes was Fisher's)
called out to the man who had the gun (and which you will
find was Earl Pankin the accomplice) to file, and Earl Parkin
obeyed, and fired over his head. The man, whose name is
Peace, in consequence of this, did sheer off a little, and got on
the other side of the hedge; but being suspicious they were
about some harm, he turned back along the field and quickened
- his
\
SWALLOW, AND OTHERS. 13
his pace, so as to give himself the appearance of a different
person; but they knew him, and called out to him, that if he
did not go off they would fire at him, and they threw a stake
at him, which hurt him upon the loins; and one of them, even
followed him to his house, and said, “You are about lake” (that
is, as I understand, you are in good luck) * to meet with such,
quiet chaps as we are, or you would have been dead long
since.”
Here then is an accomplice, who is to swear to the whole of
the crime. How then is this accomplice confirmed He is
confirmed by Boocock, who saw these men together in the
afternoon; he is confirmed by Samuel Parkin, who went with
them a great way, but retreated, and would go no further;
and he is moreover confirmed by Joshua Peace, who has no
more concern in the transaction than any of you, and who
will tell you that he heard of the transaction at Moxon's
the next morning. He will confirm the accomplice in these
material points, the having the shirts over their clothes, which
Moxon will also confirm; the having their faces blacked, the
having shot over his head, and those other circumstances I have
enumerated. And when these facts are proved, I am at a loss
to see how any case can be stronger.
But the case does not stop here: I shall go on to confirm
this. You, who fill a different situation in life, I dare say
are not quite aware, how very lightly persons in the situation
of the prisoners at the bar, who have been involved and glory
, in these transactions, and think that there is a merit with
society for what they are about, how lightly they communicate
things to each other, which those in a different situation of
hfe would never dream of communicating. This observation
I make, because you will find, that very soon after the trans-
action, a conversation took place, in which there was a
decided acknowledgment by Swallow, that he had been at
Moxon's house during the robbery. He met one Littlewood
on the 6th of July, the next day but two after the fact, the
night of what is called the Gig Fair at Wakefield; he met
him on Grange Moor; they were acquainted, and talked about
the times; Swallow said, “If you knew how to do as well as
I do, there would be no occasion to work.” And after some
further conversation, he asked Littlewood, “Have you heard
what has been done at Moxon's ” Littlewood said, “Yes,
I did hear what was done there " Says Swallow, “There
was little got there, but mine or teu pounds of butter, three
notes, and some clothes; but if we go to a house, and pass as
Luddites, it is only going to the door, and there is no resist-
ance made.”-For the reason I gave you, that they came with
such intimidation upon poor unfortunate persons like the
Moxons,
N.
14 THE KING AGAINST
Moxons, living in lone houses, who have no protection, even of
servants, that they have not the courage to make any resist-
ance, and they generally plunder them when they find no arms.
He then urged Littlewood to become one of them, which is a
eommon course with them also. He said, “No, he would not;”
and he immediately made known the circumstances of this case.
Now, Gentlemen, I could confirm Littlewood also, if it
were necessary; but he is no accomplice. At the time they
were talking, two men came up, Roberts and Sykes, and
they will prove that they saw their acquaintance, Littlewood,
conversing with another man. And here is the fact of con-
firmation. Swallow was afraid of being seen talking with -
Littlewood, and he threw himself down upon his belly, that
they might not see his face when they came up.
Gentlemen, when these unfortunate men were committed
to this Castle, there was a prisoner for debt in the Castle, who
was an old acquaintance and neighbour of Lumb, one of the
prisoners at the bar; and the very next day after they came
into custody, this man said to Lumb, his neighbour, “What
have you been doing to get here?” (an extremely natural
enquiry for a neighbour to make;) and in the presence of
Fisher, one of the other prisoners, Lumb said, “I am here
about Moxon's stir.” That of itself would prove nothing,
it would not prove his guilt, but only that he had been sent
here upon such a charge; but he added, “I was not with them
in breaking into the house, but I was within about twenty
yards of them when they did the job, but I have shared in
the stuff they took.” Fisher was present at this, and Fisher
himself afterwards said to the same effect; and they both laid
the blame on Swallow. Now I, do not state that as evidence
against Swallow. I should be extremely blameable if I did,
because whatever any one of them said, not in the presence of
another, would be nothing against that other. Lumb said,
* I was not with them in breaking into the house, but I was
within about twenty yards.” His Lordship will tell you, that in
point of law, if a number of men engage together in an un-
lawful purpose, they are all involved in the guilt; it is not
neeessary that all should be engaged in each particular act.
If one waits at the door, while another goes in, they are all
equally guilty. And most fortunate it is that the law is so, for
otherwise, a man about to commit a robbery, would send in a
child to commit the robbery, who was not the fit object of an
indictment. But the Eaw has said, whoever stands to aid
and abet those who commit an offence of this kind, or uses
any weapon necessary for the defence of those committing the
immediate felony, they are all equally guilty. Fisher said,
they both blamed Parkin as well as Swalkºw. I state that as
e º , against
, SWALLOW, AND OTHERS. 15
against the man whom I am about to call as a witness; and I
Lave no doubt they justly blamed him, for I have very little
reason to suppose that he was not equally culpable at that
time with them.
This person, who was a prisoner for debt, afterwards spoke
also to Swallow. Upon seeing him, he said to him, “Why,
what have you been thinking of, to go and rob Moxon "
“Why,” said he, “I do not know what I was thinking about;
to be sure, I was there, and it cannot now be helped.” Sö that
here is complete proof, here is an admission of the fact on
behalf of three of the four prisoners, throwing the blame on
each other, certainly. It does not affect Batley; he is not
implicated by their declarations. *.
I cannot tell what instructions my learned Friends may have,
with respect to the prisoners, and therefore I feel it my duty to
the country and to you, I feel it particularly my duty to their
Lordships, in eases of this sort, to leave nothing short of
giving perfect satisfaction to the Court and to you, who have
so very painful and anxious a duty to discharge; and mine is
not less painful. I apprehend the defence will be, that the
prisoners were not there. I have the examinations, which
I shall read to you, of these four persons, all of whom admit
the fact, except Swadlow. But I do net want his examination,
for I shall have his admission, independently of the witness
Parkin. I have the examination of Batley, who says, “–I was
not in the house” (which he certainly was not) “but I was
near to the house at the time.” Then he was upon the spot,
he was one of those who went there to assist in that robbery;
he assisted by his presence, he assisted by his encouragement
and excitement of the others; and I need not state to you, that
in any transaction of life, there is a great comfort and coun-
tenance given by having other persons joined with you. Fisher
says, that at the request of Swallow and Parkin he went
with them, on the night of the 4th of July, being intimidated:
by the threats of Swallow and Parkin, who threatened to kiſi
him if he refused to go. That is no excuse for the crime; it
may be a reason in His Majesty's mind, or the minds of those
who exercise the power of Government, for a difference in
punishment, but it is no reason with you. Then the prl-
soner Lumb says, that on the night of the 4th of July-last
he was in company with Swallow, who produced pistols, and
asked him to go along with him to Moxon's; that he went
to within an hundred or an hundred and fifty yards, and there
stopped; and did not assist in robbing the house. Very
likely not, but that does not signify, as I have already stated
to you. ,”
You will perceive there has been, in these examinations, an
extremely careless blunder on the part of the Clerk of the
- Magustrates,
16 THE KING AGAINST .
/
Magistrates. This is described as the night of the fourth of
July; there is, however, but one night in question, so that no
doubt can arise from this error; and I only mention it for the
Purpose of shewing you that it is not overlooked.
Gentlemen, this is the sort of case I have to lay before you.
‘I have entered into it, perhaps, more at length than their Lord-
ships will fully approve; but I thought it my bounden duty, at
least in the first of these cases, to enter largely into it, that you
may be fully aware of the manner in which I hope to conduct
these prosecutions. It is an extremely painful duty; but it is
a duty that we must perform, with tenderness and attention,
certainly, to the prisoners’ interests, but with manfulness as it
regards the interests of the public. - &
*
THE Witnesses for the Crown and for the Prisoners were
then examined; but as their Evidence is fully stated in the learned
judge's Summing up, it is thought needless to detail it in this
place.
Mr. Baron THoMson,
Gentlemen of the Jury,
Mr. Baron THIS is an indictment against the four prisoners at the bar,
Thomson's John Swallow, John Batley, Joseph Fisher, and John Lumb ;
Summing charging them all with a capital felony. For the charge is, that
*P. they, upon the third of July last, about the hour of one in
the night, broke and entered the dwelling-house of Samuel
Moxon, at the parish of Kirk-Heaton, and that they there
stole the quantities of silver coin which are enumerated in the
indictment, together with some promissory notes for the pay-
ment of money, and some bank-notes, the property of William
Moxon; as also some other articles, such as provisions, butter
and so on; together with linen stockings, and other articles,
which are laid to be the property af that William Moxon.
The question for your consideration is, whether these pri-
soners, or any, and if so, which of them, are guilty of this
charge, which is brought against them in the way I have stated.
And this charge, as you were told in the opening by the Coun-
sel on the part of the prosecution, so far as it is to affect the
prisoners at the bar, is principally to be supported by the evi-
dence of an accomplice, who, you were rightly also told, is a
competent witness to be examined before a jury; but, though
competent to be examined as a witness, is to be heard with
extremely great caution; and juries are always advised by the
Court to pay no more regard to the evidence of an accomplice,
than as, in the course of the enquiry, they shall find him con-
| 4. firmed
SWALLOW, AND OTHERS. 17

firmed by some unimpeachable testimony in some part of that M. Baron.
"evidence he has so given, so as to induce the jury to think that, *
‘notwithstanding the character with which he himself stands *
before them, he is entitled to credit. For, if an accomplice is
materially confirmed in his evidence by such testimony as the
jury think is unimpeachable, then, notwithstanding the char
racter in which he stands before them, he is to be heard
‘and to be credited by them. And you were rightly also in-
formed, that it was not necessary an accomplice should be
confirmed in every circumstance be details in evidence. That
would be atmost a matter of impossibility, and if every circum-
stance to which he has spoken could be confirmed by other evie.
dence, there would hardly be occasion to take the accornplice
from the bar as a prisoner, to make him a witness here ; that
is certainly too much to be expected, and never is required. It
is quite sufficient to see, that, in some material facts, the wit,
mess, who shall have been an accomplice, is confirmed to the
satisfaction of a jury; and that confirmation need not be of
circumstances, which go to prove that he speaks truth with
respect to all the prisoners, and with respect to the share they
have each taken in the tran.ºction; for if the jury are satisfied
that he speaks truth in those parts in which they see unim-
Yeachable evidence brought to confirm him, that is a ground
for them to believe that he speaks also thuly with regard to the
'other prisoners, as to whom there may be no confirmation
Now, Gentlemen, it will be for you to attend to the evidence
which has been Haid before you in support of this charge.
The first witness is William Moxon, a son of the prosecutor;
that is, the person whose house is charged to have been broken
into by the prisoners. The property in that house is laid to be
the property of this William Moxon. He states, that his father
is tenant under a Mr. Beaumont; that he (the witness) lives
with his father, and that there was a foreman and two appren-'
tices living in the house at that time, namely, in the month of
July. He says, that upon the third of July, about midnight,
'or early in the morning, the family having gone to bed between
nine and ten, he was disturbod. He explains what that distur-
ance was. He was called by his journeyman, who came and
awakened him. That journeyman is not here. Probably he
was the first person who heard any disturbance whatever,
he says, the man came to the room door, and in consequence
of what he said, the witness got up and went out of the room.
I}efore he left the room, he had heard a noise and disture-
bance at the door, and voices of some men. He went into the -
house-part, which is apart from his room; the outer door opens
to the house-part, and there he heard a confused heise of voices.
The first thing that he heard was the firing of arms. This he
speaks to positively. It is rather a strange thing; that if thess
* > A. JD ji, a
18 | THE KING AGAINST
* ~, --
Mr. Baron
Thompson’s
Summing
up,
fire-arms were let off, the accomplice should not speak positively
to the fact ; but he does not. But this man cannot be mis-
taken; and it appeared to him, he says, as if there were two
shots, and they were striking at the windows. There were no
shutters to them. Four of the quarries of the windows were
broken, and the door was demanded to be opened. It was in-
sisted, he says, that the door should be opened : and the cry
was, as nearly as he can recollect, “Open the door.” He can-
not say whether that cry came from one or two. On the door
being opened, a man rushed in disguised. There had been a
fire in the house-part, which was nearly gone out. That man
had a pistol in one hand, and a large knife, or something of that
kind, in the other. He appeared to the witness to have some-
thing like a shirt over his other clothes. That is a circum-
stance for your attention, when you come to hear the other
evidence. He said, “I demand your money in a moment.” The
witness could then lear a moise on the outside. The man who
had entered clapped a pistol to the witness's breast. The wit-
Aess told the man, he had got very little money in the house,
and that he had been out that day to Huddersfield to pay for
some wood, he himself being a joiner; that he had only a
guinea uote and some silver in the house. . The man said, he
*ust have it. The pistol was held at the witness's breast. The
witness went into a bed-room where the money was. The man
followed him. The witness gave him the money, which he took
out of a cupboard: there was a guinea note and some silver, some-
where near twelve shillings in different sorts of coins, shillings,
and tokens. The guinea note was a Wakefield bank note. The
man left him in the bed-room, and ordered him to stay there.
The witness saw him go into the house-part, and in at the door
... that leads into the kitchen. As he was goung in at the kitchen
door, the witness heard him say, “What, is that watch agait 3"
This he spoke to the men in the house, who had rushed in when
he came in. The witness had seen two or three come in, when
this first man came in. He came to the witness again in the
bed-room, and said, that was not all the money they had got in
the house, and if he (the witness) did not look quitk, and find
him some more, he would blow his brains out. He was armed
2s before with a pistol, and, something like a knife in his hand.
The witness answered, that they had no more money, he was
sure, unless his father had some; and he did not know that he
had any. i is father he describes as a very infirm man. The
man asked where his father was, and said, if he found him (the
father) and he did not find his money, he would either stab
him, or stick him, or some words to that effect. The witness’s
wife was in the room in bed, and she offered to get him a candle,
to let him look into the drawers. He said he would not have any
candle, he would nake the witness find the money. The wit-
-nass recollected that he had two one pound Bank of England
f notes
SWALLOW, AND OTHERS., x, 19
sotes, and he put his hand into his breeches pocket. The man
then said, “I see you have got your money in your pocket;”
and he then put his hand into the witness's pocket. The wit-
ness is not sure whether he gave the notes out himself, or whe-
ther the man took them out, but the man had them, and said,
“Is that all?” He then put his hand into the witness's left-
hand breeches pocket, and finding some papers, said, “ What
is them ” The witness says, that he had some silver in that
pocket; that he told the man, the papers belonged to some
wood he had bought at Huddersfield; and the man either gave
those papers back, or left them in his pocket, but had the silver,
all but a shilling; and that he is not right sure, whether he
took it, or the witness gave it to him. It was about four shil-
lings, as nearly as he can tell. The man then left him in the
bed-room, and went into the house-part. Some other men
were in the house-part with him. When the man came out of
the kitchen to demand more money, there was another man in
the house-part, who said to the man that had taken his
money, “Stand agait, and I will shoot him.” A candle was
lighted, as the witness was going out of the house-part into the
bed-room to get the man the money the first time. The can-
dle was lighted by the other persons by the fire, and they went
into the kitchen. He speaks then of some wearing apparel
being taken ; a shift, about seven shirts, some stockings, and
other wearing apparel; and also a piece of boiled beef, and about
nine pounds of butter, and a neat's tongue. The money was
his, and the butter was his ; and the wearing apparei belonged
some to him, and some to his father, and some to other per-
sons who inhabited the house. He states, that he knew none
of these persons. They appeared to be disguised. They came
into the house, as nearly, as he can guess, between twelve and
one, and went out between one and two. • * ,
This is the evidence which is given by this witness, the son
of the person whose house was robbed, and which evidence
goes to shew that the house was robbed under the circumstances
which are laid in this indictment, namely, by breaking and
entering that house ; for, though the door literally was opened
by one of the family, if that opening proceeded from the inti-
midations of those that were without, and the force that had
been used, knocking at and breaking the windows, calling and
insisting on the door being opened, and firing of guns; if under
these circumstances the persons within the house were induced
to open the door, it is as much breaking by those who unade use
of that intimidation to prevail upon them so to open the door,
as if they had actually burst the door open. So that you must
see upon the evidence given by this man, that unquestionably
the house was broken open, and that the property in that house
3Was stolen of the description contained in the indictment. But
- - . . . T} $2. x who
Mr. Baron
Thomson's
Summiug
up.
ºčjº - THE KING AGAINST?
Mſf, Baröm
Thomson’s
Summing.
up.
who were the offenders in this case, this witness is wholly
unable to relate, not being able to speak to the persons of any.
of them, only to their being disguised, and to the circumstance.
of their having, two of them at least, something that looked,
liked shifts over their clothes. * --
They next call a witness of the name of Jonas Boocock, who,
states, that he lives in Grange-lane, in Whitley Upper; that
he is a coal-miner, and lives about two miles from Swallow the
prisoner, whom he points out ; and says he remembers the
night when the robbery was said to be done at Moxon's ;
that between three and four o'clock on the day, on the night
of which the robbery was committed, he saw Swallow in a
gården which he has near his own house at Sawood, and that
there were with him the prisoner Joseph Fisher, and Earl Parkin,
who is the accomplice. Swallow was upon his garden-hedge bank,
about a yard, as nearly as he could guess, from the boughs of
the hedge ; the others were on the other side of the hedge, as
near as they could stand. The witness said to them, “What,
you two or three old pensioners are got together " They were
talking together before he got to them. The prisoner Swallow,
said, there had been more of them, and he mentioned their
names. He might stay with him about ten minutes, and then,
he left them together. This witness, you see, fixes the time
of his seeing the prisoners Swallow and Fisher, and Earl Parkin,
together at this garden, to have been between three and four in.
the afternoon of that, day, on the night of which this house,
was broken open. Parkin states their having been so together.
at this place, but will not say whether it was that day or the
day after. He says that he has known Earl Parkin perhaps
half a score years, but not intimately ; that he was an under-
taker himself at the coal pits at which Earl Parkin and
Swallow worked, and was acquainted with them before that.
They then call. Earl Parkin, who states himself to be a
caol-miner, living at Briestwistle, about a mile and a half fronn,
Moxon's; that he knows all the four prisoners; that he remem-
bers the night on which Moxon's house was robbed; that.
Swallow the prisoner is a coal-miner; that he lived neighbour
to him at Briestwistle; that Batley is a cloth-maker by trade;
that he lived at a place called Thornhill, Edge, two miles from
Moxon's. Fisher then lived about a quarter of a mile from his.
*the witness's) house at Briestwistle. He was a coal-miner.
Jumb was a coal-miner, who lived at Thornhill Edge; and
38atley a kodger in his house. He states, that the night that
Moxon's house was robbed he met the prisoners at a place.
called Fallas, in a coal-pit cabin belonging to John Bedford ;
this was by appointment. Swallow had made the appointment
with him. He had seen, Swallow in the town of Briestwistle,
in the open street. Only he audi Swallow were together. Ele
6. - . . . . . . . . . . . . . says
SWALLOW, AND OTHERS. 2?
Hays that Swallow said they were going to rob Moxon's that Mr. Bara.
might, and he mentioned that he (the witness) was to make .*.
ready and meet them at Bedford's at eleven at night, or not Summing
fater than twelve. He lives near Swallow, and he thinks up.
he had not seen him that day before. Iie knows Boocock,
and saw him either that day or the day after (he does not
know which) at Swallow's garden, and there were present
Swallow in his garden, and he and Fisher outside of the
hedge. Boocock, you recollect, had brought these persons
together, as he says, in the afternoon of the day preced-
ing the night on which the robbery was committed. This
witness says they were together, but he cannot say whether
it was that day or the day after. He says, that when the ap-
pointment was made for meeting at night, Swallow told him
he was to bring a gun; and he carried a gun with him. He
went a little before twelve. There were Swallow, Lumb, Fishcr;
Samuel Parkin (who it seems is the brother of this man) the
witness himself, and Batley. They met at Bedford's cabin,
nearly a mile from Moxon's house. The witness had a gun, ,
Swallow bad a gun, and Fisher had a sword. Swallow brought
a pistol, which he gave to one of them, he does not exactly
know to which. Swallow and Batley took off their shirts in
Bedford's cabin, and put them on the top of their clothes.
You will recollect that the witness William Moxon stated,
that two of the men in the house had something above their
clothes, that had the appearance of being their shirts. Earl
Parkin states that this was so, and says that those two
were Swallow and Batley. Swallow and Batley also blacked
their faces with grime from the chimney. He thinks that
no others than Swallow and Batley blacked their faces. They
all six left the cabin together. He thinks it was about
twelve o'clock, whén they went to Samuel Moxon's. He knows
Joshua Peace (who was afterwards called), and he says they
passed near his house, going from the cabin to Moxon's. They
met Joshua Peace at Liley-lane, near his house; they (that is
the party) were going in the lane. Peace was going homewards
when they met him ; they had passed his house; they were all
at that time in the lane. Upon meeting him, they all escaped
out of the lane into the field, getting over a lowish wall towards
Moxon's side. They did not chuse to meet Peace. Peace you
will recollect said, they did endeavour to avoid him. This.
witness tells you that Peace said he had been seeking then, a
great while, and he would go with them. That is the account".
this man gives, not one word of which has come from Peace.
Peace had a little beer in him. They told him to go about his
business. He clicked at some of them. Swallow or Fisher
ordered the witness to fire, to frighten him away. A gun was
fired to frighten him, and then the witness says he took off up
ths lane, and then turned back, Swallow said, something to
- * - him,
$g THE KING AGAINST , N
§r: Bºrst,
'Strömson's
Sºnºming
$9.
/
him, and followed him with a sword, to frighten hire; and a stake.
:ly - 9 Sºx
was thrown at him, and he went away, and then all the party
proceeded to Moxon's house. They kuocked at the door loudly,
and somebody answered from within. He cannot recolleet
whether a gun was fired, or not. That is a very strange thing.
The witness who was in the house and was alarmed, speaks to
hearing two guns actually fired. This man says he caunot
recollect whether a gun was fired, or not. They called on
Moxon, to get up and open the door. The windows were
broken. The door was opened by William Moxon. Swallow
went in, Butley followed him, and then Fisher; the witness
stayed at the door-stone. Lumb stood always off at the building
end of the house. Samuel Parkin (that is, the witness's brother) .
never was at the house, and I think we may take it to be a fact,
that he did not come up at all. He said he would not go to
the place, and stopped at the distance of about two hundred
yards, and did never-come up to the house at all. He says
that nobody ordered him to stop, You will hear presently the
account that Samuel Parkin gave, of his reason for stopping
there. He says that Lumb and himself stopped outside, to seg
whether any person came (as he expresses it) to detect them,
Swallow, Batley and Fisher having gone according to his account
into the house. Batley gave him some clothes from a winter-
hedge that stood on the floor of the house-part, and Fisher also
gave liim some. He took them, and carried them to John
fumb at the house corner. I dire say, Gentlemen, you need
not be informed, that if persons go together to rob a house, and
Some of them enter the house, and hand out things to the
persons outside of the house, or if any persons stay outside the
house to watch, they are all equally guilty, as if they all entered
and committed the robbery. He says he could not see what
was done in the house, or hear the words that passed. Then
he speaks to butter being brought out, and a little boiled beef.
Swallow said there was a guinea note, and they all knew of it;
but he did not to this witness (if he speaks truly) mention any
other money. The things were carried from the house and
were taken to a shrog, a small wood in a valley, belonging to
Mr. Beaumont, near the place from whence they set out.
There the things were divided, and each of them had some.
They were all six there, including (aceording to his ºccount)
the brother, Samuel Parkin. He says his brother was one, he
came there, and each person had something, with the exception
pf Samuel Parkin. That is a circumstance in favour of that.
Samuel Parkin, and it agrees with the account he has given, of
his having no share in the transaction, having declined engag-
ing in it when he knew what was to be done; and according tº
this account he did not share in the booty afterwards divided.
Swallow, he says, kept the money, and said the money was to
loose the witness's watch that was left in pawn for bedr, when
- * * Swalloº,
\
SWALLOW, AND OTHERS. - - 23
&allow, Batley, himself, and some others, were out before that ºr tº:
time; that none of the other prisoners had had that beer, and 3.”
that he got back his watch from Swallow about two days after ..."
Moxon's stir, as it is called. That it seems is the name given
to transactions of this sort; they spoke bf them by a phrase
so familiar as that. They all went to their own homes when
the things were divided. $.
He says, on cross examination, it was Szpallow who ordered
him to meet him that night; he does not know the precise
time, but thinks it was in the afternoon; that he has known
Boocock ten or a dozen years; that he thinks he had not seeii
Swallow that day, before he met him in the street, and fixed
with him. He thinks it was the day after that he saw
Boocock, but he cannot be sure. Boocock, you recollect,
has fixed it upon the same day. At the time Boocock was
passing by, when Swallow was standing in his own garden, he
stopped a little ; what they related, was to him and all; .
some of this talk was about collier's work. He does noš
recollect any gun whatever being fired that night, except that
which was fired over Peace's head to intimidate hin), when he
was watching them and refused to go home. They called tº
Moxon to let them im, and it was in consequence of that, and
not in consequence of any firing, that the door was opened, ac-.
cording to his recollection. However, by Moxon's account,
it appears that it was the firing, which induced him to open
the door. He says, he did not think of meeting Sarnuel
Parkin that night, but he found him in the cabin. It was
mentioned where they were going, when at the cabin, which
was to get what they could out of the house of hioxon. He
supposes it was mentioned in Samuel Parkin's hearing. He
says, there was a road on the back side of the house, and
Parkin stopped in that road. Nothing new was said, whes
they came near the house, before Samuel Parkin said he would
hot go to the house. After this the witness was taken into
custody, and he supposes (and certainly we may presume it was
so) for this charge. He says he never mentioned it to any
body but those concerned in it, till after he was apprehended.
He understood he was taken to be brought to trial, and he
thought it an opportunity of getting off. That certainly is a
thought that occurs to every man engaged in a felony be
offers himself as a witness against others concerned in it,
undoubtedly with a view to save himself. It must be under-
stood to be so. He does not know how long it was after the
robbery, that he was taken up, but he thinks about a month,
when he inentioned the knowledge be had of the transaction.
When Boocock came wp, they were not talking of any design
on Moxon's, but about their coal-work. He did not expect to
sheet Sanuel Parkin at the Moor, . He knew before (that is,
- .**N. be
\
24 THE KING AGAINST . .
ºr, Baron
Thomson's
Summing
tºp-
he did himself) that the attack upon Moxon's house was
intended. It was mentioned at Bedford's cabin, in the pre-
sence of Samuel Parkin. Samuel Parkin, however, has posi-
tively denied his hearing at the cabin any discourse whatever
relative to Moxon's house. He says, at the house the windows
were broken with a sword, before the door was opened; and
they appeared to have been cut, according to the evidence of
Moxon, and four panes broken. He thinks the door was
knocked at, and admission demanded. -
The next witness is Samuel Parkin, the brother of the
accomplice, who states himself to be a coal-miner, and that
he lived at Lees Moor near Thornbill. He knew all the
'prisoners. He lived about a mile and a half from his
brother. He went to his brother's in July, he cannot recol-
lect the day of the month, but it was before Moxon's stir,
about three days. He saw John Swallow at his brother's; only
the brother and Swallow were there then, and Swallow asked
him what he was doing there 2. The witness said he had lost
his work by being localling (or going with the Local Militia),
and Swallow said, “Never mind that ;” and told him there
was to be a meeting, at Grange Moor, of Ludds. The witness
told him he did not understand then, and wished to have no
hand with them. Swallow ordered him to meet at Bedford's
cabin first of all; indeed, to go on to Grange Moor, to meet
ALumb and Batley, and Earl Parkin and Fisher. Earl Parkiſh
was there then. He said there was to be a meeting there,
but did not say what day it was to be, but the hour was to be
between twelve and one at night, representing (according to
this witness's account) its being on some business connected
with these Ludds, that they were to go upon this Moor at
that time of night; which business, it appears, this witness
Parkin did so far consent to be engaged in. The day after
he had been at his brother's, he met Swallow, who told him
the meeting was to be at the cabin three days after. He went
to the cabin between eleven and twelve at night ; he took no
weapon with him : he was the first there. His brother, Earl
Parkin, and the other prisoners at the bar, were there, but no
other persons. He himself had been there nearly a quarter
of an hour before the rest came. They came at different
times. Swallow asked him, how it liked that he had brought
no gun or other sort of weapon with him. He told him he
thought he had no occasion. Swallow and Batley put their
shirts on the top of their coats, and their faces were blacked
with soot from the chimney. They remained near a quarter
bf an hour there; then they set off up Liley-lane towards
Grange Moor, which was towards Moxon's house. He swears,
that when they met at Earl Parkin's; Swallow, who told him
to go to Grange Moor, did not tell him what they were to do;
$13$
SWAiLOW, AND OTHERS. 25
nor when he afterwards met him, and told him the particular
night he was to go there; that he never teard of any design
upon Moxon's till they were within about two hundred yards
of the house, Ile says, that when Swallow asked him whe-
ther he had brought fire-arms, the witness answered, that he
had not; Swallow said he had a good mind to shoot him for
not bringing something with him, T be witness's face was not
blacked, nor his shirt over his coat. About two hundred yards
off Moxon's, Swallow said, “There is old Sammy Moxo~'s,
he has got some money, we had as good go and take it.”
That was the first which he heard of Moxon's. Eall Parkin
speaks of its having been mentioned before ; but this witness
certainly swears that he had never before that heard Moxon's
name ; that he had understood he was to go and mect the Ludds
of Grange Moor, and heard of Moxon's in the way he has
now mentioned; Swallow, a few hundred yards off, saying, that
Sammy Moxon had got some money, and they might as good
go and take it; and that when Swallow talked in that way, he
said, “If that is all you want, I will go no further ;” and
Swallow said he had a good mind to shoot him for so saying.
He said he did not mind what he did with him, he would go no
farther. He stopped about two hundred yards from Moxon's
house. He remained there. He heard tº noise at all; by which
I suppose he must have meant that he heard no gun; or whether
he means to confine it to his hearing no disturbance, I do not
... now. He did not see Joshua Peace that night. IIe stayed nearly
ten minutes before the party came back. That is speaking of
time very much at random, for they must have been, according
to the account of the withess Moxon, very near an hour in
the house. They brought some solt of clothes with them.
Ile saw nothing else. He went with them as far as where
they dealt them, which was Grange Moonside, in a little
shrog bottom. He had nothing Swallow asked him, if he
meant to have nothing aud ke swears he said he would have
nothing to do with what there was. He has not seen Swallow
since that time till now.
He says, upon his cross examination, that the first time
when Swallow told him there was to be a meeting at Grange
Moor, his blother, Earl Parkin, was present; that he was
present when he agreed to meet them at the Moor. Afterwards
the Cabin was appointed, and they were to go there. He is
sure no notice was taken of their being going to Moxon's,
while they were at the cabin ; that if any thing was said as
to going to Moxon's, before the time he has mentioned, he
never heard it ; and he has heard what his broil.cr., Earl
Parkin, has said about their all going to Moxon's ; and that
they told him of it within two hundred yards of Moxon's.
He never got over any stone wall, but over a hedge before that
wall, across the close, on an occasion that he alluded to, and
3- E. attel waits
HMr, Barða
Thon, 201, 's
Suraining
U.P.
26 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Baron
Thomson’s
Summing
Rºº.
afterwards came into the road again; he might be about ten
or twenty minutes. He joined the party again before they
reached the lane where he finally stopped ; he came up to
them about twenty minutes before they stopped. He saw
nothing of Peace, and they did not mention him. He never
heard a gun fired. He says it was not a very still right; it
blew a strongish wind; it was not more than two or three
hundred yards from the place where he stopped finally. He
says he did not stop in the lane at all to watch. He saw no
person passing. He says, that at the first meeting at his
brother's, he was told he was, to meet on Grange Moor some
Eudds. He did not see them get over any wall, but there were
many pieces of wall between Peace's house and Moxon's.
Joshua Peace states himself as living about two hundred
yards, or not much inore, from Moxon's ; and that his (the
witness's) house is about twenty yards from the side of the
highway. Moxon's house is nearest Grange Moor. Going
from Bedford's cabin to Moxon's, you pass the witness's house
in the way. He says he heard of the stir at Moxon's, the
morning after it had taken place; and then he tells you, that
he was out himself that night between eleven and twelve
o'clock ; that he was revurning from Sheard, the cow doctor's
house, and was coming from Liley-lane. In coming from
thence he met some men in the way to his own house, There
appeared to be about half a dozen of them. He met these:-
persons, about 160 yards from his house, in the road. As he
was meeting them, they ran back again, to prevent, as he
thought, any person seeing them. He says he sharpened after
them, to see if he could know who they were ; and they got
over a wall. The witness got very near them as they got over,
within a yard, and stepped up to look at them ; they ordered
him to go on, and ome struck at him with a sword. The
witness jerked back, to avoid the sword. Two of them ap-
peared to have their shirts upwards. They bid him walk on,
saying, “Walk on, good man.” He stood still ; and then a
piece was fired over his head, at about six yards distance; and
the shot passed a yard off him. Then they said, “Walk home,
Sir ;” and threatened, if he did not, they would fire another
piece at him. He went towards his house; and one of them
walked by the side of the hedge to guard him ; and he said,
“Walk on, my good man, walk on.” He attended him for
about 50 yards. He went forward, part of the way home;
but, not being quite satisfied, he turned back to see more ; and,
when he got back to the same spot, he heard a Sound like the
cocking of a gun or pistol; he pursued his journey further
towards Sheard's, back again; and he saw some of them at
the same place where he had seen them the first time. They
had come over the fence. Some stood still, and others ran
3 | from
\
SWALLOW, AND OTHERS. 27.
e
from him. They might be six or seven yards from him. A * Bargº
man on the causeway pointed a gun at him. Nothing was º
said to him. He went on towards them ; and they ran from º º
him, upon the foot-path, towards Moxon's house. He passed
them, and they swore at him, and flung stones at him ; and a
stake was thrown at him, which hit him upon the back. He .
left them, and went towards his own house. One followed
him with a sword at the distance of about ten yards, till
within about 150 yards of his house. He said, “You had
about like to have met such quiet lads, or you would have
been dead long ago.” About six o'clock the next morning
he heard of the robbery. He says, that he knew all the
prisoners well before that day; but he does not, you observe,
speak to the persons of any of them; but that he thought
(this is a matter of thinking and belief only, and not positively
speaking) that he thought there was one man's voice that he
knew, and that he believed it was Swallow's voice. That was
the voice that said, that he was lucky to meet with such quiet
Hads, and so on. There was no other voice that he thought he
knew in particular, unless it was Joseph Fisher's ; there was a
voice which he thought was Joseph Fisher's. He does not
swear positively to that, any more than to the voice of Swallow.
That voice, whosever it was, said, “Walk on ;” and was the
voice of the person who told him So to do.
Upon cross examination, he says, That when he first met
them, he was going to his own house. The conversation he
had with them might be half an hour, or not so much. The
gun gave a right noise, a right crack; a man might have
heard it, he thinks, a mile or more. He says he was some-
what in his cups that evening, not intoxicated, but according
to his expression, he was not without beer. He will not speak
with certainty to the voices, only that he believed them to be
the voices of the two persons he names, namely, Swallow and
Fisher. He says, the persons appeared to be, altering their
voires, and he will not swear that at the time he heard the
voices, he knew that he had heard them before, but that he
imagined them to be something' of the sound of their voices.
This is the evidence which this man has given; the effect of
which is, his having met them, as the accomplice had stated;
he however not speaking positively to the person of any of
them, but confirming the accomplice in the circumstances
which he has detailed as having passed, namely, their pur-
suing him, intimidating him, and firing at him, and bidding
him get away. He confirms in all these respects the testi-
mony of the accomplice, who states that all this passed while
they were in the way to Moxon's house; and he goes further
(it is nothing but belief, certainly) speaking as far as he can to
t § 3. . . X ths
W
28 THE RING AGAINST
Mr. Baron
Thomson's
Summing.
up.
that was after he and Lumb had had a discourse.
knºt he asked Lumb what he had done, to get here? he said,
the voices of Fisher and of Swallow, but not speaking with any
degree of certainty to their voices.
They have then cahed Alexander Littlewood, who is a
clothier at Flockton. He says, that he met Swallow on the
6th day of July last: he knows that was the day, because it
happened to be Wakefield fair. He had been at Grange Ash,
In returning he saw Swallow, and had some conversation with
him about the times. Swallow said to the witness, “How do.
times go on with you now, lad?” He said they were very hard
times, that he could not get bread and ale for a working man.
Swallow said, if he was in the line he was in, he should have
no need to work. He says, that he (the witness) said, that
was the right line, that is, that line in which there was no
need to work; and then he pointed to a public house, and said,
“Dost thou see Nourse's there 2" he said, “Hast thou heard
what has been done at Moxon's "Witness said, “Yes;” and then
according to this witness's account Swallow said, “Damn it, we
got nothing there but nine or ten pounds of butter, and three
notes, and two or three clothes.” Whilst Swallow was with him,
Joseph Roberts and William Sykes came up. They were standing
side by side upon the course; and Swallow threw himself down,
and laid himself flat upon his belly, at the approach of Joseph
*Roberts, and lay on his face. Sykes canne up just after, and .
then Swallow got upon his knees and hands, and began (as the
witness expressed it) making himself drunk, appearing to sham
“drunkenness; that was while Roberts and Sykes were there.
Joseph Roberts has stated, that on the 6th of July, at half
past ten o'clock at night, he saw Lex Littlewood and joki,
Swallow ; that Swallow was lying on the ground, on his belly,
next to Littlewood; Littlewood was sitting upon the grass.
William Sykes was following on the high road, a short dis-
tance.
Then Sykes is called, who says he saw Littlewood sitting on
the grass; that Swallow was with him; that Swallow was lying
on his belly, and when he came near him, he began spreºding
His arms to catch hold of him, but he got out of the way.
Then he says, that he cannot say whether he was druńk or not;
that he did not appear to him to be drunk, but in a freshish
Way. - º f -
They have then called Samuel Stocks, a clothier, who says
that he was a prisoner for debt in this Castle, when the four
prisoners were brought here? that he knew them all many
years before they came here ; that Lumb lived about three
guarters of a mile from him, and he saw him the Sunday
morning after he came here. Fisher, he says, came to him;
He says,
it
SWALLOW, AND OTHERS. 29:
it was about Sammy Moxon's affair. The witness asked him
who was there he said, he was about twenty yards from the
house, but never was in the house; that he stood on the
causeway in the lane, while they were plundering the house.
And you will recollect this is the position and situation in
which the accomplice, Earl Parkin, had stated this man being
placed. He'says that Lumb said he had some part of the
plunder, that Parkin carried itſ to him. He says that after
this, Fisher came in, and they both repeated it was along with
Swallow and Earl Parkin, or they never would have been
there. That was said both by Fisher and by Lumb. Some-
time after this, Swallow and he were together in the gaol, and
Swallow told him he was at Moxon's ; that he had told Swallow
what Lumb had told him, and that he found it would be of bad
consequence; that Swallow replied, -it was done, and it could
Mr. Baron
Thomson's
Summing
up. , '-
not be helped. According to him, he engages in these con-
versations at these different times. Three of these prisoners,
that is to say, Swallow, Fisher, and Lumb, and he speaks of all
of them, acknowledged to him that they had taken a part in
this transaction.
He is cross-examined, and he says, that he came to the
gaol on the 19th of June, for £, 1oz. which he owed to one
Williams, a debt contracted in Wales; he got rid of that debt;
he was superseded, as far as we can collect, for want of pro-
ceedings against him. He is then asked as to some ill will
which he may have against one of these prisoners, namely,
Swallow. He states, that he did bring an action against
Swallow, and one Noble; he cannot tell how long ago, it may
be seven, eight, or three years; that it was an action for
slander Swallow had propagated against him, in saying he had
killed a sheep, which, he says, they could not prove, but that
they were much set against him, and had forged this account,
about which they stood the action. What became of it, does
not appear, but only that he paid his attorney some money; he
says he owed Mr. Blackburn, the attorney, something for his
costs; that he does not bear any sort of ill will against any
of the prisoners; and that Lumb and Fisher had nothing to do
with this charge about the sheep, so that it cannot be supz
posed he bore them any ill will about that slander. Swallow,
he tells you, was tenant under him, of a cottage, and they
could not agree upon terms for which he was to continue
tenant; and after that it was that Swallow propagated that
Scandal which produced the action which the witness has
stated. This is his Evidence, •' - • .
They have then called Mr. Allison, who attended the magis-
trate, Mr. Radcliffe, as clerk, on the examination of the several
prisoners. He states, that there were no threats or promises
made to them, to induce them, to make confession; he proves
* - the
3ry THE KING ACAINST
ºr. Bºth the examination of the prisoners Batley, Fisher, and Lamb, ,
gº's which took place on the 14th September last.
Sºmmºng
*gº. The first person whose examination is entered on this paper,
w is that of Batley; and he states, “ that he was not in Samuel
Moxon's house at Whitley Upper on the right of the 4th of
July last, nor had he a gun, nor a pistol; that he was near
the house at, the time, but w.ts riot within the house.” Now
if he was near the house at the time, and was there for the
purpose of assisting those who were within the house, by
watching, or receiving any thing out of it, he would be equally
guilty with those who were within. He has not denied that
he was there, but on the contrary expressly admits that he
was near the house, though not within it. -
The next examination is that of Joseph Fisher; and his ae-
count is, “ that at the request of Swallow, and Earl Parkin
the accomplice, he went with them on the night of the 4th of
July, to the house of Samuel Moxon;” and as he would account
for his so doing, he says, “being intimidated by the threats
of John Swallow and Earl Parkin, who threatened to kill him
if he refused to go.” He admits, therefore, that he went, but
ascribes his conduct to the threats of Parkin and Swallow ope-
rating upon him. That is the way in which he represents it. .
*
Lumb says, “ that on this night he was in company with
Swallow at the public house, where Swallow produced a brace
of pistols, and asked him to go with him to Samuel Moxon's;
that he went with Swallow till within about a hundred or a
hundred and fifty yards of Moxon's house; and there he stop-
ped (as he says) and did not assist in robbing the house, nor
had he any part of the plunder.” He puts it, therefore, upon
this; that Swallow having produced a brace of pistols to hit.),
saying, that he had a gun, he did go with Swallow till with.n
about a hundred or a hundred and fifty yards, and there
stopped, and did not assist in robbing the house, nor had any
part of the plunder. ! -
Gentlemen, these examinations closed the Evidence that was
laid before you on the part of the prosecution, against these .
several prisoners at the bar. | r
The Defence consisted in repeating each their plea, of not
being guilty. And for the prisoners, a witness of the name of
George Armitage was called, who states, that he is chiefly a
farmer at present at Kirk-Heaton, in which parish Moxon's
house is; that he has lived there ever since he was born. He
is called to discredit Earl Parkin, not in reference to any par-
ticular transactions he has related on this occasion, but with
respect to his general character, and his unworthiness of credit .
on any occasion when called upon to speak upon his oath ; and
he states that he knows Earl Parkin, that he has known º
- r WQ
**. *
SWALLOW, AND OTHERS. 31
two or three years, ever since he wrought at Bradley's mill; he
has seen his manner of going on, and from what he has heard
and known of him, he would not believe him upon his oath;
that he does not know what other persons might do, but he
would not believe that man, Earl Parkin, upon his oath. . 'This
is the account he gives, and that he was brought here upon
subpoena for these men. t
Mr. Wright, a debtor in the gaol, says he has known Lumb,
more than ten or fifteen years, and that he never heard any
thing against the character either of himself or any of his
It is upon the evidence which has been laid before you,
RFr. Baron
'i hº'ºsgra's
Suisſuaitsg
up-
Gentlemen, that you are to decide how far you are satisfied this
charge of breaking and entering this dwelling-house of Samuel.
Moxon, and stealing the property meationed in this indictment,
is brought home to all, or any, and if to any, to which of the
prisoners. That the house was broken open, and by persons
under circumstances of terror, which induced William Moxon
to open the house, and therefore that it was broken open, is not
to be disputed; and that it was performed in the way A16xon
has related, two of the persons (and that is a circumstance
for your consideration) being disguised with shirts, or something
like shirts, over their coats. To the persons of any of the men
there, it is not in his power to speak. Nor is any part of the
property which was taken out of that house, found in circuin-
stances to affect the prisoners at the bar. It is for you to
decide how far the evidence laid before you will or will not
justify you in saying that they are guilty. There is the accor-
plice Earl Parkin, and about the credit that is due to accomplice
I hope I have stated to you enough to enable you to form your.
judgment, whether there are or are hot sufficient circumstances
in this case to satisfy you that, bad, as he is (and most unques-
tionably he is a very bad taan) he has in the main of the
evidence he has given before you, and in which he would int-
plicate all the prisoners at the bar, spoken truth. He has
stated where it was that they set out from. Iie has stated
the disguises, which two of them when he mentions had,
namely, their shirts over their clothes. Those disguises Moxon
spoke to as having been about the persons of two of the men
who entered the house, whoever those men are. Parkiu speaks
to their two names. Batley and Swallow he states to be the
persons who so dressed themselves. He states the part which
they all took in the business, and the final division of the
plunder they had got from the house. He states a circumstance
which took place as they were going there, and it is materiał
for your attention, because Peace, I think, is a very material
witness for you to take into your consideration, as cenfirmatory
*f the account which the accomplice has given; for he has
- - stated
* *
32 TIE KING AGAINST
\{r. Baron
Thornson’s
Summing
up.
stated his being met, in the situation which Parkin has described,
by that party, as they were going in the road to this house of
Moxon's. In those circumstances which Parkin has stated,
the witness Peace has confirmed him, namely, the firing a gun
over his head, by way of intimidating him, and making him
desist from the observation he was taking of these men. Tha
fact is stated by Peace to have taken place. Another circum-
stance was, the throwing of a stake after him: Parkin positively
swears to the fact, and Peace, who has detailed very circum- .
stantially all this transaction, confirms him. He says he knew
all the prisoners before this time, but to the persons of any of
them he does not undertake to swear. He swears however to
his thinking and imagining that the voices he heard, and who
spoke to him, one telling him to go on, and another that he
had good luck to meet with such lads, were the voices of
Swallow and Fisher; not positively swearing to them, but, having
known them before, he thought and believed at the time that
they were their voices. However, upon that subject he con-
cluded his evidence with Saying, that he would not swear
positively to them. *
Then there is the evidence of Samuel Parkin. Perhaps there
might be some doubt whether he himself was or was not an .
accomplice engaged in this transaction of going to Moxon's
house. However, the account of the knatter which he has
sworn to is this, that he was bad enough to agree to go to a
meeting of the Luddites, which was to be held upon this moor,
that meeting having been proposed to him by Swallow; the
appointment being afterwards changed to this cabin, from
whence, according to his account, they were to proceed to meet
the Ludds upon this moor; and he swears that he set out from
that house with no design whatever of going to Moxon's, or
with any intimation that any such scheme was on foot among
any of the party, as that of attacking Moson's house, till they
came to within two hundred yards of it, and that then it was,
that for the first time it was proposed that they should attack
that house, Moxon having money; that he then declined, and
said he would go no further, and that he stopped there : why
he did not then return home, is difficult perhaps to be accounted
for; but his evidence is, that he waited there till the others did
return, and that he went with them to the place where the
plunder was shared, but that he had no share in that plunder
when it was so shared. His brother, who is unquestionably an
accomplice, had stated, that in the cabin that has been men-
tioned, where they all met, the subject of their going, or intend-
ing to go, to Moxon's house, was talked over, and he presumed
his brother heard it; but his brother swears positively that he
never heard any such conversation, nor any intimation at all of
their intention of going to Moxon's till the time he has stated, .
Y f - • , - * when,
SWALLOW, AND OTHERS. - 33
when, according to him, he ceased going any further. He Mr. Baron
did not, it seems, in his way see, or does not give any ſhoº”
account of having met with, Peace ; but it is possible that Summing
what passed between him and the others may have passed when
he was gone over, as he mentions, into the field, and, had left
them for a time, on some occasion, after which he says he
joined them again. -
Gentlemen, you have then, in confirmation of all this evi-
dence, the testimony of Littlewood, who states the conversation
he had with Swallow on meeting him in three days after, and
his talking about hard times; that he questioned him whether
he had heard what had been done at Moxon's, and on his saying
“Yes,” replied, with an oath, “We got nothing there but nine
or ten pounds of butter, and three notes, and two or three clothes."
This man speaks to Roberts and Sykes coming up, and to
Swallow, upon that, turning himself on his belly, and putting on
the appearance of drunkenness, which, whether real or coun-
terfeit, Roberts confirms the account of this witness, of his hav-
ing assumed. * *
|
There is also the evidence of Stocks, as to conversation having
passed between him and Fisher, and Lumb, and Swallow, in this
gaol, in short, with three out of four of the prisoners; which
certainly does amount to an acknowledgment that they had
taken part in this transaction which is imputed to their charge.
Some impeachment was offered of his testimony, by insinuation,
that all that he had said might proceed from some ill wili
retained by him on account of a º wbich is supposed to
have been uttered by one of these prisoners against him, and for
which he brought an action, accusing him, in Substance, of
sheep-stealing; but that applied only to Swallow. There could
be no reason why any such circumstance, as Swallow having
accused him of stealing sheep, should induce him to beur malice
to the other two prisoners, to whose confession he has spoken,
He states, however, that he does not bear them any ill will.
There are then the examinations of three of the prisoners, all
the prisoners, with the exception of Swallow ; who have given
the account which has been read to you. * *
Upon this evidence it is for you to say, how far you are satis-
fied that the case is made out against the four prisoners at the
bar, namely, that they have been all concerned and taken a part
in this robbery; that they were some of them in the house com-
mitting the robbery which was there committed, and others at
the outside of that house, aiding and abetting, having gone
there for that purpose. If you are satisfied that this is the
case, there is proof, in my opinion, to find that the house was,
in law, broken open upon this occasion. If you are satisfied
with the account Parkin has given as to all of them, it will be
~\
* your
34 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Baron your duty to find them guilty. Parkin is undoubtedly a very
Thomson's bad man, and one of the witnesses says he would not believe
*ě him upon his oath; but it does not rest upon the evidence of
up. Parkin alone, nor is it fit itshould rest upon his evidence alone.
You hawg heard the confirmation he has received; and the only
question is, whether in this instance you do not find him so
confirmed, as to be induced to give him credit for his narrative,
which will implicate all the prisoners in this transaction. And
if those circumstances are proved to your satisfaction, which
yóu have heard detailed in the evidence, the case will be made
out against all the prisoners at the bar. It will be for you to
give that ºverdict respecting each of the prisoners, which will
satisfy your conscience, and which will accomplish your duty
to the public and to the prisoners. . If any thing is offered to
ou in the course of the evidence, which enables you to think
you can make distinctions between the cases of the prisoners,
it will be for you to make such distinction. If the evidence
does not satisfy you of the guilt of the prisoners at the bar, you
will acquit them.
The Jury retired at twenty minutes before seven, and returned
in about ten minutes, finding
John Swallow - - Guilty.
John Batley - Guilty.
Joseph Fisher - Guilty.
, , ; John Lumb - - - Guilty, but recommended to mercy.
J
i
: Mr. Baron THoMSoN–Gentlemen, I must beg the favour
of your stating the grounds on which you recommend Lumb to
mercy. . . . " t *
* foreman of the Jury—we find that he has acted under the
finfluence of Swallow; he had no fire-arms, and had not his face.
blacked. ,
* Mr. Park—And he had a witness to his character, which the
rest had not. th
* * * f
ſ
foreman of the Jury--Yes.
Wednesday,..
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. 35
Wednesday, 6* January 1813.
THE JURY were charged with the
Prisoners in the usual form, upon an THE KING
Indictment, which alleged that the Pri- against
soner Mellor, on the 28th of April last, J George Mellor,
fired a pistol loaded with bullets, &c. at ) William Thorpe,
William Horsfall, by which firing he and
received a mortal wound on the left tº Thomas Smith.
side of the belly, of which wound he
languished till the 3oth of April and then died; and that the
Prisoners Thorpe and Smith, were present aiding and abetting
Mellor to commit the said Felony; and that so the three Pri-
soners wilfully murdered the said William Horsfall.
The Indictment was opened by Mr. Richardson.
Mr. Park.-May it please your Lordships; Gentlemen of
the Jury, You are now empanelled, and have been sworn, to
enquire into the matter of blood. I need not tell you, that the
offence with which the prisoners stand charged, is the greatest
crime that can be committed in society. In the investigation
of such a subject as this, the Law, in conformity to the Law
of God, makes no distinction as to the person, whose death is
to be enquired into. The meanest subject of the realm is
equally entitled to the protection of the Law as the highest;
and therefore it is no matter of enquiry, who or what the person
was, whose death is the subject of that enquiry. The matter
for you to investigate is, whether he came by his death by
violent means; whether he came by his death from the malice
aforethought, expressed or implied, of any individuals, and
whether any, or all, of the individuals, whom you have now in
charge, were guilty of that offence. That is the subject-matter
of your enquiry. But in a case of this sort, which is of so much
importance to the country, it is absolutely necessary, that in
detailing the facts, I should state to you the situation in which
the deceased stood, and how he probably came to be the object
of the attack of some persons: Whether of the individuals now
before you, it will be your anxious duty to enquire, and to
decide by your verdict.
Gentlemen, Mr. Horsfall is represented to me to have been a
man rather turned of forty years of age;—he was a married man,
had a family of children, and was in very considerable busi-
mess, in the West Riding of this county, as a manufacturer. I
had occasion to mention to some of you, yesterday, and it is
F 2 a matter
36 THE KING AGAINST
a matter of general notoriety to you all, that, for a considerable
period of time, dreadful disturbances have existed in this county;
but they had not existed in this county, that I am aware
of, at least not in any considerable degree, till the two learned
Judges, who are now sitting here, had returned to their homes
from Lancaster, at the Spring Assizes of last year. But it is
perfectly well known, it is a part of the History of our Country,
that at the Spring Assizes of that year for Nottingham, a
great number of persons had been tied for breaking the stock-
ing frames, and other machinery, connected with the manu-
factures of that county. About that period a similar dispo-
sition manifested itself about Huddersfield, and other places in
that part of this county, to commit outrages upon manufac-
tories. And about the 11th of April, a very violent attack was
made upon the mill of a Mr. Cartwright, which will be mate-
rial in respect of the evidence that will be laid before you
to-day. It afterwards appeared, and will be proved to you, that
in meetings, where the three prisoners, now before you, were
assembled, there was great abuse thrown out upon the master
manufacturers, in their presence, and by them, particularly
upon Mr. Cartwright and the deceased.
Mr. Horsfall is represented to me to have been a man, who
had tºpwards of four hundred persons at work under him, ex-
tremely beloved by his men, and they greatly attached to him.
He had very large manufactories, of course, from the employ-
ment of so many men; and he employed the machinery which
was the object of the abuse of these misguided people. I have
not the means of making such observations as I have fre-
quently and lately heard made, upon the delusion which has
prevailed upon that subject, amongst the lower orders. It has
been supposed that the increase of the machinery, by which
manufactures are rendered more easy, abridges the quantity of
labour wanted in the country. It is a fallacious argument: it
is an argument, that no man, who understands the subject at all,
will seriously maintain. I mention this, not so much for the
sake of you, or of these unfortunate prisoners, as for the sake
of the vast number of persons who are assembled in this place.
. I hope that my learned Friend on the other side, will give
me credit, that I mean to state no facts as bearing upon the
prisoners at the bar, that I shall not, as I conceive, bring home
to theni. But I cannot help making general observations upon
the subject, to draw their Lordships' attention, and yours, to the
case itself. I would rather, for perspicuity's sake, go to the
facts which constitute the crime, and then apply it to the pri-
$oners... Mr. Horsfall was a man, I understand, of warm feel-
ings, cf great and good understanding, and who saw the fallacy
of these arguments; and he, perhaps imprudently (though I do
not think so, for I do not thinkaby man acts imprudently, in
, , t ". stating
N.
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. 37
stating his sentiments on a subject which has been under his
fall consideration) he, I say, stated he would support this spe-
cies of machinery, because he was sure it was advantageous to
the country. He was perfectly well known, in consequence of
the part he had taken in reference to these disturbances; and
it was proposed by some persons, that he should be taken off.
It was perfectly known, that Huddersfield Market was one he
was in the habit of attending, and which was held on Tuesdays,
He went to that market, and returned between five and 'six in
the afternoon of the 28th of April, at which period of the year
we are considerably past the Equinox, and it will be proved,
if necessary, though your own understandings would remind
you of it, the Sun does not set till about a quarter or twenty
minutes after seven; the consequence of which was, it was per-
fectly light. This gentleman was riding from Huddersfield.
Market on horseback, towards his own house, which was at
Marsden, (I believe about seven miles). He had rode as far
as from Huddersfield up to a house called the Warren House,
which is a public house, kept by a man of the name of Armi-
tage, who will be called before you. He at that house stopped
to get some refreshment, still continuing on horseback. He
drank a glass of rum and water, and seeing there two persons
whom he knew, he gave to each a glass of gin and water, paid
for it, and rode on as far as the corner of a plantation, two
or three hundred yards from the Warren House, belonging
to Mr. Radcliffe the ſhagistrate. This plantation on the
back of it opens into a field, then there is a second field
lower down towards the South, a third field towards the South,
then the road from kluddersfield to Crossland crosses, then
there is a way into Dungeon Wood, then there is a house be-
longing to Joseph Mellor, a cousin of the prisoner George
Mellor, and a road to Holmfirth, past Armitage Bridge. At
the corner of this plantation, this unfortunate gentleman,
Mr. Horsfall, was shot. He immediately fell upon the neck of
his horse, called out “Murder,” and soon after fell to the
ground. There was a person of the jame of Parr, who will be
called to you, riding a little way behind, who did not know
Mr. Horsfall, and Mr. Horsfall did not know him; but immedi-
ately on hearing the report of the pistols, and seeing him fall,
Parr rode gp, and heard him call out “Murder.” “Sir” says
Mr. Horsfall, “you are a stranger to me, and H to you, but
pray ride on to Mr. Horsfall's house, and get assistance,” mean-.
ing the house of his brother. Mr.Parrsaid, “Are you'Mr.'Horsfºil
of Marsden?” he said, “I am.” Upon which Parr rode back
to get assistance, ahd a person of the name of Bamnister rode
up and supported Mr. Florsfall in his arris, till a cart came
up, in , which he was carried back to the Warren House,
where he languished thirty-eight hotºs, and then died. This
is the body of the crime. ..
Now,
38 THE KING AGAINST
*
Now, Gentlemen, I would here make one observation in
point of law, upon the indictment which has been stated to
you. My leaimed Friend stated only one pistol as having been
fired, and that was all that it was necessary to state in the in-
dictment. I believe the fact to be, that out of four persons
that were in company, two fired; but that is immaterial. It
was quite sufficient to state one, and no matter by which it was
fired. Though the indictment states the pistol to be fired by
George Mellor, if it was fired by either of the other prisoners
it would be the same. I state this, because it is better you
should have your minds not wavering on points of no signifi-
cance in law.
This clearly is murder in some persons. There was no
prior conversation, there was no previous malice between
Mr. Horsfall and any of these persons; and therefore murder
it must be in those who gave the mortal wound. The question
is, Is it murder in all or any of the prisoners at the bar Now
I proceed to state to you the way in which I shall establish
that. It will be asked, How many persons were concerned in
this murder I state, four ; and I state it upon the evidence
of the witness Parr, who saw the fire (whether of one, or more,
I will not say) but he saw a fire coming from that plantation;
he heard a report, and he saw four men.
I go no further upon that part of the evidence, till I state
to you that I shall call one of the accomplices. To some of you,
who were in that box yesterday, the law respecting accom-
plices was fully stated by one of their Lordships, who was
so good as to confirm what I had humbly presumed to state
in the outset upon that subject. I make no further observations
upon that, because, though I believe the other learned
Judge will take the trouble of summing up this case to you,
I have no doubt the law will be stated in the same manner.
The witness I have to present to you, I state in the outset,
and would therefore save my learned Friend the trouble of call-
ing witnesses to prove, that an accomplice in burglary, or in
the more heinous crime of murder, is a wicked man. I will
suppose him to be as wicked as any of the prisoners at the bar,
supposing them to be guilty; but then the question is (as his
Lordship told the Jury in your place yesterday) Is his evidence
so connected, so well digested, that it brings credit with the
manner of telling it? and is he confirmed in some of those cir-
cumstances, which it is impossible to confirm him in, if he has
not been speaking the truth And it need not be a confirma-
tion of him in all the circumstances, for if we could prove
all the facts without him, we should then leave him to take
that fate which his offence deserved, instead of making him a
witness. Therefore, leaving that matter of accomplices here,
I shall call this accomplice, whose name is Benjamin Wälker,
and
\
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. \ 33
and he will tell you that there was a great deal of conversa-
tion about machinery among the cloth-dressers, on many days,
particularly after the firing at Mr. Cartwright's mill, where
there were some persons killed; that this raised a great indig-
nation against the masters, in the shop of John Wood, where
this accomplice worked with Mellor and Smith. The prisoner
Thorpe worked at the shop of a person of the name of Fisher,
very near to Wood's shop, near Longroyd Bridge. It seems,
unfortunately, it was the constant habit (as will be proved to
you in this case) to read accounts, amongst all the workmen, of
what had been doing at Nottingham. And this business of
the mill created such desperation among them, that Mellor
(who appears, from the evidence I have to lay before you, to
have been the ringleader in this business) declared in the shop,
that he was determined to have Mr. Horsfall taken off. This
I shall prove to you, by witnesses, to have passed before the
fact; and I shall prove it, to confirm the accomplice. The ac-
complice knew nothing of his particular intentions as to the
period of time, till the very day it happened; and he will tell
you, that in the afternoon of that day, at that period which is
called their drinking time, about four o'clock, Mellor called
him into the room where he was (they not working in the same
room) and there he disclosed what he was about to do that
afternoon, that they were determined to waylay Mr. Horsfali
in coming from IIuddersfield market, and assassinate him; and
that he must be one of the party. Walker will tell you, that
this proposal took him by surprise ; that at first he refused to
have any thing to do with it, and that he was so discomposed
at it, that he did not go to his drink, but returned to his work;
he will tell you, that Mellor afterwards came to him, and called
him into his room, and there he found Mellor with a bottle-
green top coat on, which will be a most material fact in this
case; that on his going with him into his shop, he gave to the
witness a large pistol with a fluted barrel, loaded almost up to
the top ; and Mellor himself had a larger pistol with him.
Gentlemen, this pistol which Mellor had with him, will pro-
duce conviction as against that man, young as he seens to be,
and melancholy as it is to see so young a man so desperate a
character. It seems he had been in Russia, and brought
ome with him this pistol, which is of a peculiarly large size,
with a brass mounting. That pistol he had either sold or
given to a man, on Some transaction respecting pigeons; but a
person of the name of Hall, who was intimate with Mellor,
and who will be called to you as a witness to-day, and whom
I do not state to be an entirely innocent man, for he knew
these facts beforehand (but you must take men as they are,
and as the circumstances of the country place them) he had
bought this pistol, and had it in his possession, and will prove
to you that Mellor came that afternoon and borrowed this
pistol
*
4%) THE, KING AGAINST
/
pistok of him, ànd loaded it at Hall's house, at a place called
the Yews, which is half way between Wood's shop and Dua-
geon Wood; he loaded it extremely high; he put in a double
charge of treble powder; he put in one ball of the same kind
which will be produced to you ; he then beat another, or two,
rather flat, and cut them into slugs, and put them as well as
another ball in, and rammed them all down. You will find
this charge was so great, that when he committed the fact, his
finger was shattered by it, and that will be another material
circumstance in this case. The witness said to him, “I hope
you are not going to fire that?” to which Mellor said, “Yes,
I mean to do for Horsfall with it; will you go with me?”
Hall refused to go, and Mellor took the pistol out with him
under his great coat, saying it should be done. So far we go at
present, with respect to Mellor. *
The prisoner Thorpe was seen by this same witness to load
a long horse pistol, at Wood's shop, with balls and slugs, in the
presence of Mellor. They both of them said it was to shoot
Horsfall. He was again asked by some of the prisoners to
join, but he refused, and then Smith or Walker swore that he
would go. This man's previous knowledge I have no difficulty
in saying, he ought to have communicated, if he believed it;
and the only possible reason why a man should not have dis-
closed so heinous a transaction, ought to be, that he did not
believe they would do it. But these declarations prove the
state of the country, that they had no difficulty in making
these communications, which other men never would make, if
they were wicked enough to meditate the crime, and which
hardly any of these men would have made under any other
'circumstances than those before him.
Gentlemen, it will be proved to you further by the accom-
Plice Walker (and I only stepped out of the way to shew how
he was confirmed) that he really objected to going; but he was
told, “As I have told you l- mean to execute this to-night,
and you now know the secret, if you do not go I will shoot
you.” And the man says, that he went accordingly, Smith
and he were told to go together, and they went up the roadr
way to the eorner of the plantation. Mellor told them where
to go, and Smith said, “I know where to go.”. As they went
along the road, the accomplice said to Smith, “We really had
better not meddle with such a thing as this.” “Why," says
Me, “we had better go there, because if we go back they will
suppose we have told, and we shall be shot;” (I stake this in
favour of Smith) “but we will endeavour to persuade them uot
to do it.” And they went on. The other two men did not go
up the road, but went across a place called Dry Clough close,
and up that way to the corner of the plantation. Thorpe and
Mellor were at the point of the plantation.nearest to the *
13 *Y
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. 4t
On their arrival, Smith went to them, as he told the accom-
plice, in order to reason with them against the doing this act;
|but he shortly came back and said, “I have not been able to
prevail; we are to stand at a little distance from them, and we
are to fire our pistols if theirs should miss, and they are to
whistle or to give notice when Mr. Horsfall comes.” A stone
had been removed out of the wall, to command the road; and
Soon after it was called out that Mr. Horsfall was coming,
Mellor and Thorpe fired. As soon as they had fired, they re-
tired into the back part of the wood towards the other two
men, and told them they were afraid, or used some expression .
to denote timidity or effeminacy of conduct: “You should
have fired at all events.” Thorpe gave his pistol to the accom-
plice. Whether he meant that he should carry it off, and him-
self be relieved of it, I know not, but he put it into his hand.
The pan was then open, and the lock down, shewing it had
been fired. You will find the materiality of this. On the way,
Walker threw it down, and said he would have nothing to do
With it, and Thorpe took it up and proceeded to Dungeon
Wood; and then Mellor said, “We must separate.” And ac-
cordingly Mellor and Thorpe proceeded westward across a
footpath by the Yews up to Wood's shop : and that very night
Mellor shewed himself in Huddersfield, for a very good reason
probably ; I do not know that it may be attempted in this case,
but it often is in cases of this sort, that it might be proved hé
was elsewhere at the time. But the circumstances I have
presently to detail to you, will leave no particle of doubt in
your minds; and if it should be so that no doubt is left in
these cases, it is a great consolation to those who have to
administer the justice of the country. Tha, he was seen at .
Huddersfield at some period that evening, I give then as a
fact; but the distances are so inconsiderable, that the whole
circuit, beginning and ending at Wood's shop, might be per-
formed in about one hour and ten minutes. The accomplice's
story is, that he parted with Mellor and Thorpe in Dungeon
Wood, and that he and Smith went on to Honley.
Here for the present I leave them; and supposing nothing fur-
ther takes place, how shall I confirm the accomplice as to these
facts? I shall confirm him as to there being four men by Parr, in
the way I have stated. I shall confirm him as to the retreat of
four men, for I have no less than three or four different persons
who at different parts of the route saw four men running in the
direction to Dungeon Wood, and getting over the wall into
Dungeon Wood, and looking behind them for the purpose of
discovering whether any body was within sight. And I shall
prove this fact, which is decisive, that one of the witnesses,
who has no more concern with this transaction, than any of
you, saw in their getting over the wall a brazen-mounted
G pistol
4? THE KING AGAINST
pistol from under the coat of one of them. It had discovered
itself. He said, “ There go Luds, and we shall have mischief
to-night,” not knowing what had passed with respect to .
Mr. Horsfall. Whether the prisoner heard this I do not know,
but he looked down, and put the flap of his coat over the
pistol. I do not know whether the witnesses will state that
they knew the particular persons, but I shall prove these facts
applying to four persons. s
There is another circumstance I shall prove to you by the
accomplice; that two of them had top coats of a dark colour,
and the other two had common coats of a dark colour, I shali
prove to you by Parr, that all the men had dark-coloured clothes.
The accomplice will swear, that he and Smith had short coats;
and to show that Thorpe and Mellor had the two top coats,
I shall plove their going, after the murder, to the house of
Joseph Mellor, the cousin of George Mellor, which is at the
bottom of Dungeon Wood; I shall prove their depositing these
top coats there, that they might go without them. I shall
prove, what is decisive of this case, their depositing the two
pistols there; the Russian pistol and the other. I shall call
to you one of the apprentices of Joseph Mellor (the other
has escaped, and does not answer his recognizance; but he
shall be called upon it.) I shall eall the apprentice, with
whom Thorpe went up stairs into one of their rooms, and hid
these two pistols; and told him to give those pistols to his
master, when he came home. I shall prove that they were
afterwards shewn to another apprentice. And I shall call the
master, who at the time was at Huddersfield market, whº
will tell you he went up with his apprentice to that room,
and the pistols were shewn to him ; and that aftewards,
hearing that soldiers were about making enquiries, they took
them from that place, and deposited them in the barn, and hid
them there. I shall prove that one of those pistols, so de-
posited by Mellor in the house of his cousin Joseph, was the
very pistol he had borrowed of Hall that afternoon; and I shalf
prove, morcover, that though Hall saw him load it, when he
deposited it in Joseph Mellor's house it was unloaded.
There is another circumstance most material. It will be
sworn by the accomplice, that Thorpe complained, in the
plantation, of having wounded his cheek: and Mellor com-
plained of having wounded his finger; by the recoil of the
pistol, I suppose. I will prove, that Mellor declared, the next.
day, to another man, who was not of the party, that he had
hurt his finger, by having over-loaded the pistol. Then as to
Thorpe hurting his face; I will prove that George Mellor, who
went with him to Joseph Mellor's, desired water for his friend
to wash his cheek; and he accordingly got it. Gentlemen,
are not theseticumstances extremely strong to corroborate at
ſ: 1 accomplice
/
MELLOR, AND OTIIERS. 43
accomplice? How is it in the ordinary chain of human events
that you can get such evidence? I have for one always:
thought, before I dreamt I should have any concern in such
an unfortunate business as this, and shall to my dying day
thilak, that circumstantial evidence of this description has tea
times the weight to satisfy the mind of a jury, of the positive
declaration of a witness. For an individual may be wicked.
enough to swear to facts that do not exist; but a strong, well-
connected chain of circumstances, will not hing together
without being true; there would be such dreadful breaks in the
chain, if they were not true, as would expose the fallacy in a
moment. But, give me leave to say (for that is often misunder-
stood by gentlemen in your situation) subject of course to be
set right by their Lordships, that you are not to suppose that,
because A*B. C. and D. who are witnesses in the cause, and
have seen the same transaction, do not give exactly the same
account as each other in words; therefore it is not true.
Every slight discrepancy of the evidence in that respect, gives
it confirmation. Such is the imperfection of human sight,
that you and I perhaps, who mean to speak perfectly truly,
may differ in some of the circumstances. But you are to look
at the great, mass of facts, and see whether the witnesses do
not comfirm each other. /*
I do not know whether I mentioned, that George Mellor
borrowed of the wife of his cousin, Joseph Mellor, a handker-
chief, to bind up the hand of himself, or the face of his com-
panion; and stated, that he wanted work for this companion.
They asked the woman, when Joseph Mellor would conne
home; the answer was, “Ile seldom comes home much before
ten ; he is at Huddersfield.” They proceeded to the Yews,
and afterwards on to Huddersfield.
I have stated to you, that Mellor and Thorpe parted from
the accomplice and Smith in Dungeon Wood. The accomplice
will tell you, that they went down to IIonley, and did not
return till ten at night. At Honley they stopped at a public
house, kept by one Robinsºn. So says the accomplice. Is
that true? I shall call the accomplice, and the wife of the
publican. The accomplice says, they had several pints of beer.
I shall prove by the wife, that two young men (for so, unfortu-
nately, they are, neither of them being, believe, above twenty-
three) were at her house, and drank several pints of beer. I’
do not know that she will prove that she knows them now.
You will naturally ask, What made them take any observation
of these young men —There was a drunken collier in the house;
So drunk, that he does not himself know any thing that passed,
A person came in, and stated that he had, in coming from
IIuddersfield market, heard of the death of Mr. Horsfall; and
Smith immediately beg, n whistling, being a fine whistler,
($ 2 which
4+ THE KENG. AGAINST
which drew attention to him; and he whistled so well, that
this drunken collier got up to dance. And this is the circum-
stance that has brought it to the recollection of the publican
and his wife; and they stated, that one of the young men
whistled famously, not having the least idea that the accom-
plice had given this evidence, and mentioned that circum-
Stance.
But I have not done with the case yet. I ought to tell you
another reason why disclosure was so easily made to Hall, who
was not an accomplice. Hall was a bed-fellow of the prisoner
Mellor, and Mellor told him that night, or immediately after,
that he had committed this murder, and that Thorpe and he
had left their two, pistols at Joseph Mellor's, at Dungeon,
amongst some flocks, and had left word with the apprentices,
that they must be given to their master when he came home;
and then he said, “Thorpe and I went through Lockwood, and
so to Huddersfield, and there we parted.” These men being so
intimately connected as to be bed-fellows, the wonder (even
independently of other circumstances) was the less, that a com-
munication should be made so freely. Smith was not a bed-
fellow of theirs, but he slept in the same room. I stated to
you, that he and the accomplice had gone to Honley, having
buried their pistols, which were loaded, in some ant-hills.
Hall will state, that it was late when Smith came home; and I
ought to have told you, that it will not rest, as to declarations,
upon the evidence of Hall or of the accomplice only, but on
the testinlony of a person of the name of Sowden, whose evidence,
i will not go through.
The next day (though enquiries could not at that time be
made to the full, and, as you are perhaps aware, were not
made with any effect till the month of October last) it occurred
to these men, that as enquiry necessarily would be made, there
should be some more secrecy observed; and accordingly you
w ill find, that Thorpe aſterwards insisted upon the accom-
plice Walker swearing, in the way they have done in too many
Instances, never to reveal the fact. He pulled out a Bible, and
administered the oath, which he had prepared. It was admi-
, nistered first to one of the witnesses, to whom I before alluded,
of the name of Sowden, in consequence of their having ac-
quainted him with their intentions the day before; and you will
find Mellor was present at this.' Thorpe afterwards brought in
Smith, and Benjamin Walker the accomplice, John Walker his
father (who was a workman in the same shop, and whom he
Supposed to have heard the fact from his son ; but the father,
I believe, will tell you, that the first he heard of it was
from Mellor himself.) William IIall, and another person.
Thorpe said to Sowden, “You must administer the oath to
all these, or I will shoot you.” He complied, through fear of his
* liſe;
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. 45
*
life; and they all took it, except John Walker, who refused to
take it, saying, he had never taken an oath in his life, and would
not do it; and they said, “If you make any declaration
about this, we will shoot you, or whoever it may be.” The
witness sometime afterwards met him in a field, when he said,
“I am afraid it has been blown about that I have had a concern
in the murder of Mr. Horsfall, and it is time I should be off to
America.” I shall prove also his declaration about going to
America by another person. And he said to the witness, if he
heard of his repeating it, he would shoot him; but the witness
told him he had not. -
Thus, Gentlemen, do not I confirm the accomplice by such
a variety of witnesses, that I feel almost ashamed of going
through the statement; though I ought not to be ashamed of
fully stating a case so materialiy affecting the prisoners. But
it appears to me nothing can be clearer than this mass of
evidence I have to lay before you. I am not aware that I have
omitted to state to you any fact that is material. I have not
gone through the detail of the facts, for that would fatigue you.
One cannot but most feelingly lament, that young men, no
older than these, should be charged with a crime of so deep
and heinous a dye, as that which you are sworn to try; and
the efore (as I said in the outset) you have a most important
duty to discharge between God and your own souls. If these
young men have not committed the murder, for God's sake let
them go free; but if you see the finger of Providence pointing
at them in as satisfactory a manner as if you had with yöur
bodily senses seen the cline committed, however painful the
duty, it is your duty to pronounce them guilty; and guilt must
be followed by punishment. For the Law of God itself has
declared, “Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his
blood be shed.” And it is said by the same authority, that the
land can only be cleansed from the poklution it has received
from blood, by the blood of him that sheddeth it.
THE EVIDENCE, having been gone through, was
summed up by /
Mr. Justice LE BLANc.
Gentlemen of the Jury,
THIS, which has so long engáged your attention, is a charge
brought against the prisoners at the bar, George Mellor, IVâl-
iiam Thorpe, and Thomas Smith, of the wilful murder of William
Horsfall. It is not necessary particularly to call your attention
to the manner in which the charge is made. The indictment
charges that they or one of them, and it is perfectly immaterial
which, or whether one or two of them actually fired the pistol,
or whatever piece it was that was fired; but that one or other
of
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
46 THE KENG. AGAINST
Mr. Justice
F.e Blanc's
Summing
tºp,
of them, firing a piece at Mr. Horsfall, inflicted the wound
which occasioned his death, and that the rest were there. It
charges them all as principals in the murder; and there is no
doubt in point of law, that if all or any of the prisoners at the
bar went out with a formed design, known to all of them, to
waylay William Hofsfall, for the purpose that either all or any
of them (as should be Most convenient) should take an Oppor-
tunity of firing at him and wounding or killing him, and in
consequence of that a shot was fired by any of then which
produced his death, it is murder in all of them. There is
as little doubt in the present case, that the person, respecting
whose death we are enquiring, has been mºrdered; because
theré is no circumstance which has appeared in the case,
which in point of law can make this otherwise than a murder
of the fotilest description. No question therefore will arise on
the nature of the offence; and the only question you will have
to attend to is, whether or not the evidence which has been
laid before you, and which I will detail to you as well as I am
able, shall or shall not satisfy you that the three prisoners
charged with this offence, or any of them, are the persons who
were so concerned in waylaying him and firing the fatal shot.
It will be only necessary just to advert to the time, as men-
tioned by the person who proved the fact. It appears that
Mr. Horsfall had gone to Huddersfield on the 28th of April in
the course of the forenoon, and had attended Huddersfield
market in the course of his business. It appears that he was
in the habit of going there ; so that it was perfectly known
that his course of proceeding was to attend the market, and
to go home again afterwards to his house at Marsden, at the
distance of about six or ‘seven miles from Huddersfield. It
was in proof, by a person of the name of Armitage, who kept
a public house at Crossland Moor, called the Warren House,
that he had seen Mr. Horsfall go to Huddersfield market in the
morning; that he seldom missed going on a market day; that
he had called at his house on his return back, and he says as
far as he can fix the hour (speaking at this distance of time
not very particularly, and no one can speak pal ticularly as to
time, unless his attention was called to it) it was a quarter
before six it, the evening that he stopped at his door, the Warren
Ilouse, on his way back, being then on horseback. He says
that he drank a glass of rum and water at the door, and that
there were two men of the name of Sykes, who were workmen
and had been employed under him, whom he treated with a glass
( f liquor each, and he went away, never having got off his
horse, but having stayed at the door about twenty minutes. So
that according to his account, it was a few minutes after six
'o'clock when he left the Warren House, to proceed on to his
house at Marsden. Then he says Mr. Iiorsfall rode home-
* wards.
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. 47
wards. He describes the plantation of Mr. Radcliffe, as being Mr. Justice
by the road side as he proceeded along. According to the map Le Blanc's '
it is on the left-hand side of the road as Mr. Horsfall was going Summing
homewards. That plantation, he says, is something better "P"
than a quarter of a mile from the Warren House. So that ac-
cording to his account of the time (supposing him to have
stopped there about a quarter before six, and to have stayed
twenty minutes, and to have set out five minutes after six) he
would have had to go a quarter of a mile before he came to
the plantation where this circumstance happened; which would
bring it to a short time probably after six o'clock. He says
that at nearly half past six o'clock that evening, as nearly as
he can recollect, some children brought the account to his
house, that Mr. Horsfall had been shot. That tallies very much
with the account he Jhad before given of the time Mr. Horsfall
had been at his door, and the period which must have elapsed
before this unfortunate accident happened. He says that he
and the two men of the name of Sykes, who had been just
before treated with some liquor by Mr. IHorsfall, set out imme-
diately, and so soon that they had not finished the liquor
Mr. Horsfall had ordered for them; that they found him sitting
by the road side about thirty yards below the plantation, and
rather nearer to his house than the plantation was. It appears
that a person, who had been upon the road at the moment, had
assisted in keeping him upon his horse for a time. He says
Joseph Bannister was at that time with him; that he found
Mr. Horsfall bleeding very much ; that they got him down to
his (the witness's) house as speedily as ever they could, and
he died the next day but one. He is particularly asked as to
the time, and fixes it at that hour, as nearly as he can recollect
it. He says that many people come into his house, and he is
frequently looking at the clock to see when their horses are to
be ready; and that he is sure it was nearly half past six, when
the news came that Horsfall had been shot, because a person
went to look at the clock at that time. So that according to
what he says, it must have been between ten minutes or a
quarter after six and half after six, that this act (whoever did
it) must have been done at the plantation.
The next witness is a person of the name of Parr, who gives
this account: He was going home from Huddersfield on the
same road that Mr. Horsfall was going; he passed this inn,
where Mr. Horsfall had stopped, and before he got to the plan-
tation he heard a very large crack, like the report of a gun or a
pistol, and it seemed to him to come out of Mr. Radcliffe's
plantation, out of that nook nearest to the public house where
Mr. Horsfall had stopped; that he saw the smoke arising from
the spot where the gun had been fired, and he saw four persons
in that corner of the plantation. IIe says that he was himself
at:
48 THE RING AGAINST
Mr Juštice
Le Blanc’s
Summing
tº P.
at the distance of about one hundred and fifty yards from the
plantation, going along the road, at the time he heard this noise
and saw the Smoke, and saw the persons who were in the plan-
tation; so that he was in a different situation from the person
who was just abreast of the plantation in the road. So far
things would have a different appearance, and persons might be
visible in a wood or plantation from one point, who might not
from another. He says that all the four persons, he so saw
in the plantation, had dark-coloured clothes on ; that at that
time there was a person riding along up the road before him
(that is, going the same way that he was riding); that after the
report of this gun or pistol, that person's horse turned round as
quick as possible, and the man immediately fell with his face
upon the horse's neck; he raised himself up by the mane, and
called out “Murder.” As soon as he had called out murder,
there was one of the four men got on the wall with one hand
and both feet; he called out to this man, and said “What, are
not you contented yet?” and immediately put his horse into a
gallop, to ride up to the spot as fast as he could; and the four
men ran out at the side of the plantation farthest from the
road, that is, going the other way ; he himself rode up to
Mr. Horsfall, and perceived that the blood had just flowed on his
breeches; he was sitting on houseback when he rode up to him ;
he said, “Good man, you are a stranger to me; . I am shot;”
and he seemed to fall sick, and was going to fall off his horse;
upon which the witness held him upon his horse, and the
horse went on a foot pace; and while he was holding him
upon his horse, the blood spouted out upon his side; he then
desired him to go to Mr. Horsfall, a relation of his near
that place, and immediately he fell off his horse; that he put
him straight at the side of the road; and that the e were two
boys, sons of Abraham Willey, a witness afterwards called
before you, who were gathering horse-dung upon the road, and
that he called them, and left then, with this gentleman who
had been so shot, and gallopped towards the other Mr. Horsfall's,
in order to inform him of what had happened. He describes
this plantation as being narrow, not more than thirty yards
over. He is sure he saw four men; that they were all
strangers to him, he did not know them ; he saw them walking
about in the plantation, before he heard the crack of the
gun or pistol, before he got up; and he says, that when
Mr. Horsfall seemed to get up abreast of the plantation, that he
observed one of the men stoop under the boughs of the trees,
and then be saw the smoke and heard the firing, and that the
other three seerned to be standing behind. That is the ac-
count given by this Mr. Pair.
Mr. Joseph Bannister, a clothier, states, that he was upon
the road on the same evening, the 28th of April, and he fixes it
at neally half-past six, when he met Parr, who had assisted
Mr. Horsfall,
MELLOR, AND OTHERS, ..º. 49
Mr.IIorsfall, and had left him in the care of the two boys, gallop- Mr.Justics
ping upon the road. This tallies with the account which Armitage 5. Blanc's
had given, that this happened by a quarter past six or there- ...”
abouts, IIe states, that immediately on being informed by Parr Ps
of what had happened, he galloped up, and found Mr. Horsfall
lying by the side of the road, very bloody; and that he was
removed from thence to the Warren House, and he remained
with him there some time. --
At the Warren House he was visited by Mr. Houghton, a sur-
geon, who tells you, that he was informed he was sent for about
seven o’clock, and that another professional gentleman had
got to Mr. Horsfall before he reached him, he did not get to
Warren House till between eight and nine in the evening,
when he found Horsfall lying on the bed; that he appeared sick
and pale, and his pulse was so much exhausted, that it was
scarcely to be felt; it was a weak tremulous pulse; he exa-
mined him, and found two wounds on the upper part of the
left thigh, three inches asunder; there was another wound, on
the lower part of the belly, on the left side; two more on the
right thigh, and a slight bruise on the lower part of the belly.
He says, one of the balls had been extracted before he came,
and he extracted another large ball from the inside of the
right thigh, near to the hip joint; that he thought very ufavour-
ably of him, and particularly as that one ball he describes
as having entered on the left side (the plantation being on
Mr. Horsfall’s left hand) had penetrated from the left side to the
right side, and had nearly penetrated the femoral artery, and
that he had no well-founded hope of his recovery from the
beginning. In fact, this Gentleman died the following day, and
there is no doubt but that this wound, which the surgeon
points out, which had penetrated from the left side to the
right, was the cause of his death. And the two bullets were
produced, one being a pretty large bullet, almost the size of a
musket bullet, and one which appeared to have been cut and
flattened. One of these was extracted by Mr. Houghton, and
another by a gentleman who was there before him: they were
produced by two relations of Mr. Horsfall, with whom they
were deposited after they were extracted. That is the evi-
dence with respect to the cause of the death; and to be sure
there cannot be a doubt that this person being so shot at, as
he was proceeding on the King's highway, it was wilful
murder, unless it can be shewn by some circumstances, that
it was merely accidental.
Then they call witnesses, for the purpose of shewing who
these four persons were, that were seen in this plantation by
Mr. Parr, who was following at some little distance after
Mr. Horsfall, and who actually saw the fact committed, hearing
k ** H the
56 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justice the crack, seeing the smoke, and seeing the men run away out
Le Blanc's of the back part of the plantation after the deed was committed.
Summing
up.
They call first Benjamin Walker, a person who himself professes
to have been one of these four men; and you are to attend to the
account that he gives. I need not state to you that a man who
is produced, admitting himself to have been one of the four
men who lay in wait armed for the purpose of shooting an-
other, and who had gone out because he was asked so to do, was
himself an accomplice in the deed that was done; and that
therefore he does not stand in the situation of a witness, to whom
full and perfect credit is to be given, So far his testimony is
to be received, as the account given by himself, and the corro-
boration given to it by other witnesses that shall be produced,
may satisfy you that the account he gives is true.
Benjamin Walker says he himself is a cropper, and that he
worked as a cropper at the manufactory of Mr. Wood, at Long-
royd Bridge, which is between Huddersfield and the place where
this transaction happened; that he had worked there nearly
two years; that it is a distance of only a quarter of a mile from
Huddersfield; that Mellor and Smith worked at this same
manufactory of Mr. Wood; that since April, Smith left that
service, where he was an apprentice; that the other prisoner
Thorpe worked at the manufactory of a Mr. Fisher, in the same
business of a cropper as he himself worked, and that Fisher's
manufactory and Wood's are not more than two or three hun-
dred yards distant from each other, both very near Longroyd
Bridge; that he was not so well acquainted with Thorpe as
with the other prisoners. He states (alluding to what has been
heard perhaps in the county, but is not the subject of the pre-
sent enquiry) that an attack had been made by a very mis-
chievous description of people, on some manufactories or mills
belonging to a Mr. Cartwright, some short time before; that
on that attack on Mr. Cartwright’s mills and premises, the
assailants had met with a proper resistance, and in that
'resistance some of them had been wounded and killed; that
they were talking, in this manufactory of Wood's, about
what had happened at the attack on Cartwright's, and that
they had said it was a hard matter that these men, who had
attacked the property of others, had had the misfortune to be
killed themselves, or wounded in the attack; that upon that
occasion George Mellor said that there was no method of
smashing the machinery, but by shooting the masters; that
they had lost two men in this attack on Cartwright's. He
further states, that the day Mr. Horsfall was shot, he was at
work at Wood's ; that George Mellor and Smith worked together
in one room, and he (Benjamin Walker) worked in another;
and that on that day, between four and five in the afternoon,
&eorge Mellor, the prisoner, came to him into the shop where
18 he
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. 51
he was at work, and he describes William Hall, and his father Mr. Justige
(John Walker) and his brother (William Walker) as being in the s: Blanc's
shop at the time. He says that Mellor asked him to go with º
him to shoot Mr. Horsfall; that he did not consent at the time, *
and Mellor went away, and he himself went away to his drink.
This was between four and five o'clock. He was absent about
half an hour, and came back, That would bring it to about
five o’clock. When he came back, he found George Mellor in
the shop; one Varley was there, and Hall, and his father; and
then Mellor came again, and gave him a pistol into his hand
loaded, and said that he must go with him to shoot Mr. IIorsfall,
and told him it was loaded with double ball. He lifted up the
pan to see whether it was primed, and found that it was loaded
nearly to the top, and primed. To be sure, Gentlemen, it is an
extraordinary thing to those who have not been in the habit of
hearing such occurrences, that any men in this world should hold
such converse so openly together; but this is the account given.
Upon which this man (Walker) says, he said he would go with
Mellor, and an order was given to go to Mr. Radcliffe's planta-
tion, and he thinks that both the prisoners Smith and Thorpe
were present; and Mellor directed Smith to go with this wit-
ness to the plantation. He says, that at the time the pri-
soner Mellor came into the shop to him, Mellor had on a drab
jacket, but afterwards when he joined him in the plantation
(for he did not see him till he joined him in the plantation,
he and Smith being ordered to go to the plantation and wait
there for him) Mellor had on a bottle-green top coat (and it
becomes material, in considering the circumstances given in evi-
dence in confirmation, to attend to the dress of the prisoner;) and
that the other prisoner Thorpe had on a dark-coloured top coat.
He says that Smith and himself, who had been ordered to go first
up to the plantation, had each of them a dark green coat on,
but no top coats. He says Smith and he got up to the plan-
tation first, and that they went there by the high road most
part of the way, but part of the way they went through the
fiélds, and then they got into the plantation; that the prisoner
Smith had a pistol with him; Smith told him it was a pistol
which he (Smith) had bought of one Mills, and that it was
without a cock when he bought it, but that he had since put a
cock to it; that when he saw it, it was loaded, as Smith told
him. This man himself had a pistol, which Mellor had put
into his hand, and put into his hand, as he says, ready loaded.
He says, that when Mellor and Thorpe got to the plantation,
he and Smith had been there about ten minutes. Mellor and
Thorpe came over the fields, he thinks not the same way that
he and Smith had gone. He says, that he had had some con-
versation with Smith, as he went along, in which he expressed
to Smith that he did not quite like the business they were
going on, and that he was not for going any further. How-
H 2 ever,
*.
52 THE RING AGAINST º
$3r. Justice
Le Blanc’s
Summing
up.
.*
ever, Smith said, “Let us go forward, and then let us counsel
the others to go back again; it is a pity to go.” However,
he says that Smith afterwards went up to the other two,
when they were in the plantation, that is, to George Mellor and
Thorpe, but that he (Benjamin Walker) did not go up' with
Smith, that they were at the distance of twenty yards, and
when Smith came back, he told him that Mellor had said, that
if they offered to leave him, he would shoot them dead. He
fixes the distance, at which he says Mellor and Thorpe were
from him in the plantation at that time, at about twenty yards.
He says he himself could not see them at that time when they
were in the plantation, but he himself was at the distance of
only twenty yards from the wall which separated the plantation
from the road; that both Mellor and Thorpe were out of his
sight, while they were in the plantation waiting for
Mr. Horsfall's coming up; that he got sight of them again after
the piece had been discharged. Their seeing one another, or
not, must depend very much on the situation of the plantation,
or the wood being more or less thick in the particular line in
which they were viewed; they might not see each other,
and yet they might be visible to persons looking from another
point, as Parr describes himself to have seen them. I think
there is no contradiction in that respect. He says that he
himself did not see either Mellor or Thorpe, but he had seen
Meilor have a pistol before that time, and that he saw it
in the wood after this job (as he calls it) was done ; that
Mellor’s pistol was a large horse pistol, the barrel of it nearly
half a yard long; and that the account Mellor had given of it
was, that it was a pistol that he had brought with him from
Russia, where he had been, and that he had sold it to a
man of the name of Hartley. Then Walker says, that
when they first got to the plantation, Smith told him that
the orders which they had from Mellor were, for them two
to stand twenty yards distance from Mellor and Thorpe, and
that they (Mellor and Thorpe) would stand in the nook of
the plantation by the road side nearest to the Warren House,
and that he and Smith were ordered to fire, if Mellor and
Thorpe missed Mr. Horsfall. TKe consequence of that was,
that they remained, as he says, twenty yards off, Mellor and
Thorpe being close to the wall at the corner. It was intimated
before, that one of the other two was to give a whistle, to
intimate when Mr. Horsfall was coming; that no whistle
was given, but one of the people, and he thinks Mellor, said
Mr. Horsfall was coming; that the wall which separated the
plantation from the road was about a yard and a quarter high;
that he and Smith got up when they heard Mr. Horsfall was
coming. From that account, I should suppose they had been
upon the ground before, but that the wood was so thick he
could not see what Mellor and Thorpe did, whether º lay
* \ own,
MELLUR, AND OTHERS 53
down, or stood. But he heard the pistol go off, and then, he Mºustice
says, immediately upon the pistol going off, he and Smith 5. Blanc's
fled a bit backwards, and directly after they were joined by iºns
Mellor and Thorpe. At that time Thorpe put his pistol into
the witness, Benjamin Walkei's, hand, saying, he would not
go with it any further, and at that time he saw Mellor's pistol
in his hand; that Mellor, on coming up to them, swole at
them, and damned them for not shooting. He said that he had
shot, and that they ought to have shot, however it had been,
whether the others missed, or not; but, however, they did not
shoot. He says, that at that time the pistol Thorpe put into his
hand was warm in the barrel, and there was no priming, so that
it had been clearly fired off. He says, he himself did not see
Mr. Horsfall, for that he was in a thicker part of the plan-
tation. This is the account he gives of what took place in
the plantation, making the number of four persons agree with
the account of four persons whom Parr had seen in the plan-
tation as he rode up, just before the piece was fired and the
report heard, which he gave an account of, and all in dark-
coloured clothes, which, according to this man's account,
they all had on. And then his account is, that after this had
happened, they all four went straight forward out of the
plantation, over several fields, to a wood called Dungeon
Wood, and to get to which they crossed a road which goes .
between the fields at the back of the plantation and Dun-
geon Wood, a road from I Juddersfield to Crossland; that
they crossed that road, and when they crossed that road to
Dungeon Wood, they were going as fast as they well could;
that they all got into Dungeon Wood together; that he threw
Thorpe's pistol down before he got into the wood, in crossing
the closes, and that upon that George Mellor took it up;
that what became of it afterwards he himself, Walker, did
not know; that when they got into Dungeon Wood, Smith and
he hid their pistols in some ant-hills in the wood; and that in
Dungeon Wood these four persons separated, George Mellor
and Thorpe ordering the other two to go towards Honley,
being a different way from that which they themselves were
going; that upon that George Mellor gave them two shil-
lings, because they said they had no money to buy any beer;
and accordingly they (the witness and Smith) separated, and
saw no more of George Mellor and Thorpe at that time
but proceeded on to Honley, which is about two miles,
from this Dungeon Wood; that he had a powder-horn from
Mellor before he went, which, he says, he hid at the bottom
9f Dungeon Wood. Nothing particular turns upon that, for
it was not found afterwards. Then he gives an account
where he and Smith went to at Honley; that they went
into a public-house, he does not know the name of it, it is at
the bottom of Honley, on the left-hand side; and he i.
there
54 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justice
v Le Blanc’s
Summing
up.
}
there was a collier drinking there, who appeared to be pretty
fresh in drinking; and that some men came into the public-
house from Huddersfield market, and brought an account that
Mr. Horsfall had been shot; and upon that being said, Smith,
the prisoner, who whistles particularly well, fell a whistling;
and that this collier, who was in liquor, was pleased with the
tune he was whistling, and got up, and attempted to dance.
That is mentioned as a circumstance, because you will find it
confirmed by other persons not connected with the transaction,
who remember what passed at the time, from that circum-
stance. He says they drank as much as seven or eight pints
of ale at this public-house, and left it between eight and nine
o'clock, and it was near ten o'clock before they got home to
their own house. That was the conclusion, according to his
account, of what passed that night. The next morning, he
says, the prisoner Thorpe came into the shop at Mr. Wood's,
where George Mellor worked, and then George Mellor sent
a workman, of the name of Sowden, to fetch this witness,
Benjamin Walker, into the shop where Mellor worked. He
says he went in, and he there found George Mellor, and
Thorpe and Smith; and that then they ordered him to be
sworn, in order to keep the counsel, to keep it, secret; and
he says, upon that occasion the prisoner Thorpe produced
a book, which he said was a Bible, and that Mellor said he
(Benjamin Walker) must be sworn; and that Varley, and
Benjamin Walker's father, and a brother of his, William
Walker, Sowden and Hall, had been sworn; that he took
hold of the book, and Thorpe read the oath to him, while they
held the book, but he does not know what it was that he read;
and after it had been read, Thorpe ordered him to kiss the
book, which, he says, he did. Then he gives this further
account; that Mellor told him that he had hurt his finger
with the firing, and that the next morning, when he saw him,
his finger was tied up; that when they were in Dungeon
Wood, after the deed had been done, the other prisoner's
(Thorpe's) face was bloody, and the account he gave of it was,
that he had scratched it or hurt it in the plantation. And
he further says, that the next day George Mellor told him
that he and Thorpe had been at Joseph Mellor’s, at the back
of Dungeon Wood, after they had parted the day before.
He is then cross-examined on the part of the prisoners, and
is asked, Where he had been for some time past; and he says,
That he now comes immediately from the Castle here; that he
was brought to York a few days ago, that he had been at
Manchester, and from thence at Chester ten or eleven weeks,
when he was brought here. He had been probably appre-
hended, or charged with being concerned in this foul transac-
tion, and in consequence of that he was committed to safe
custody,
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. 55
custody, that he might be forthcoming, to have his testimony Mr. Justice
submitted to a Jury, when this matter should be enquired into. Le Blanc's
IIe says he supposes it to have been about six o'clock when Summing
this affair happened ; that a man of the name of Varley, Wil-up.
liam Hall, and his father, and brother William, were all present
when the pistol was delivered to him, and he expects that they
saw it and heard the conversation; that Smith was in the other
shop; that before firing in the plantation, they were never
nearer than twenty yards to George Mellor or Thorpe, and
that he was never in the nook or corner of the plantation ; that
he and Smith were behind, at nearly twenty yards distance.
He is then asked when he first made this discovery : He says
he first told this to his mother and to his father, the same
night, after he came home, and that his father had heard what
they were about before ; that his mother went to Mr. Rad-
cliffe's about eleven or twelve weeks ago, in order to give
this account, and to get her son examined, (as a witness,
I suppose ;) that Thorpe and Mellor had been taken up before
she went to Mr. Radcliffe's; he says they were not all taken
up together, that Mellor and he were taken together; that
a reward had been offered for the apprehension of the mur-
derers, that he heard from Sowden, it was ſ. 2000. He
is then asked, whether he had sent any message to a woman
of the name of Hartley ; and he says, that while he was in
custody, he sent a person of the name of Mary Dransfield to
request Mrs. Hartley to go before the Magistrate, to prove
that he (Walker) had been at some other place at the time this
murder was committed. He says that he told Mary Drans-
field that he had told Mr. Radcliffe that Mrs. Hartley was
the first who came into the yard to tell of Mr. Horsfall having
been shot, and that he thought she would be a safeness to him
by shewing he was in the yard at the time, which he was not ;
that he told a man of the name of Firth, that he knew nothing
of the murder; that he was examined before Mr. Radcliffe,
when he was first taken ; that he had William Hall as a wit-
ness for him, and had sent to Mrs. Hartley to tell her that he
had told Mr. Radcliffe that she was the first that came to tell
Mrs. Wood, thinking she might say Something to his advan-
tage 3 and he says the reason was, that George Mellor had
told him that Mrs. Hartley had been the person that had in-
formed the people at the works, of Mr. Horsfall having been
shot. That is the account which is given by this witness, who
certainly by that account makes himself out to be one of the
persons, who (if his account is true, and he had been standing
at the bar) must have shared the fate, which the others wili,
accordingly as your Verdict passes for or against them.
Therefore you will examine the different parts of the account
he has given, and see how far there are different circumstances
Proved by other witnesses, which induce you to doubt the
truth
W
§ſ
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc’s
Summing
*p,
56 THE KING AGAINST
truth of what he has said, or to believe that the account he has
given is irue. .*
The next witness called, is a man of the name of William
Hall. He does not stand here in the situation of an accomplice
in this felony; but he does not stand free of blame, any more than
several others who worked in this manufactory of Mr. Wood's;
because language, dangerous in the highest degree, appears,
according to their account, to bave been used among them,
without much fear of exposure, as to liberties intended to be
taken with the lives and the property of others. But he does
not appear to be a partaker in this particular transaction. The
account he gives you is, that he was a cropper, employed at John
Wood's; thº he remembers the day on vhich Mr. Hors-
fall was shot; that on that day George Mellor applied to him
for a Russian pistol, about four or five in the afternoon; that
was a pistol which George Mellor had brought from Russia;
that he, William Hall had bought it of a man at the top of
Mirfield Moor, so that it belonged to William IIall; Mallor
had sold it to one Richard Hartley, who sold it to somebody
else, who sold it to Hall; and then he gives a description of
it, that it had a brass hoop, and that the barrel of it was about
a foot long; that he accordingly lent Mellor that very pistol
that day. This, he says, was about four or five o'clock in the
afternoon of this same day; and that is the same on which
Benjamin Walker tells you application was made to him
for the first time, that he would be a party to go out
with then to shoot Mr. Horsfall. He then relates, that
George Mellor went home with him (William Hall) to a place
called the Yews, which is just by their manufactory, and there
he took the pistol, and put it under his coat; that the pistol,
when lie gave it to hinn, was unloaded ; that he saw Mellor load
it at his (William IIall's) house; and that he put near two pipe-
heads full of fine powder into it, and then put one ball into it,
and afterwards sonne Siugs that he flatted out from other balls
by hammers, and put them with the one bullet he had first put
in ; and he put in another ball at top, and, he rammed them
all down ; that seeing him do that, he asked Mellor whether
he meant to fire it, for he thought that the pistol would jump
back iſ he did ; he said, “Yes,” he meant to fire it, and
meant to give Mr. Horsfall that, and that George Mellor
set off directly. This is the account this man gives. He
does not stand, I think, clear of blame, by any means. Being
applied to by Mellor, to lend a pistol; he lends that pistol; he
sees him load it in the way he describes; and if he believed the.
man sincere, and suffered him to go out of his presence without
giving an alarm, he cannot stand as an innocent man. How-
ever, this is the account he gives upon his oath. He says,
George Mellor had before asked him (William Hall) to be i.
* ^ the
MELLOR, AND OTHERS, 57.
the party, and to go out along with him, and he said he did not
like to go; that Mellor put the pistol into his pocket, and went
away. Then he gives the same account, as to the dress of George
Mellor, as Walker had done, that George Mellor had at that
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc’s
Suniſhing
up.
time a bottle-green top coat on, and an under coat; that he had
seen Thorpe that same afternoon in John Wood's shop, and that
he was possessed of a pistol of nearly the same size with Mcllor,
and that when he saw him in the shop, he was braying some
slugs at the window (which I understand to be hammering them
out); that Benjamin Walker and Smith were in the shop at the
time; and that when Mellor asked him (Hall) to go, and he
refused, one of them said, he would go. He then gives an ac-
count of what passed the next day in this shop of John Wood,
the father-in-law of Mellor; that Mellor produced a Bible, and
that he (William Hall) was called into the shop; that Thorpe
was sitting there, and a man of the name of Sowden, and one
or two other men whose names he cannot recollect; that a paper
was read over to them; he says he does not recollect the whole
of what the paper contained, it was something abºut “if ever
we revealed any thing concerning that business, we should be
shot by the first brother;” that the Bible had been put into
his hand before, and after it was read over, he (William
Hall) kissed the Bible. He farther says, that he slept in the
same room with Mellor on the night Mir. Horsfall was shot;
that when they were going to bed, Hellor said he had hurt one
of his fingers by firing off the pistol, and he did not know
whether it would be right again or not. You have heard the
3.cbount which this man before gave of the manner in which
the pistol was loaded. He goes on to relate, that he heard that
same evening, about seven o'clock, that Mr. Horsfall had been
shot; that he heard it in Wood's shop, where Mellor works,
and the woman who brought the account in was Dame Hartley;
that that same night, as they were going to bed, Mellor told
him that he and Thorpe had called at his (Mellor's) cousin's,
Joseph Mellor, at Dungeon Bottom, and that they had left-
there the pistols in some flocks. This certainly is a very ma-
terial fact, when you come to consider the evidence given on
that part of the transaction, and compare it. He represents
Mellor to have added, that there were two apprentices of
Joseph Mellor's there, whom he had told to give the pistols to
their master when he came home, and that he and Thorpe had
gone through Lockwood to Huddersfield. ' That I take to be
the straight way from Dungeon Bottom, where they parted, to
-* *
- * - - • - irº . ." - * , - - * - - ... • -
Huddersfield. The other two men had gone, according to the
account of Benjamin Walker, to Honley. Hall says, that
Smith, who went the other way with Walker, came home that
night, and he likewise slept in the same-room with the witness;
Smith said they had been at Honley, and that they had hid
their pistols in Dungeon Wood as they were going through;
\ lº s (Benjamin.
58 THE KING AGAINST .
Mr. Justice
i.e. £3 lanc’s
Summing
up. -
*
(Benjamin Walker, you may remember, says they hid them #1,
some ant hills), and that they had some beer at Honley; that
the Sunday after this he saw the prisoner Mellor give Smith
a guinea or a pound note; and that it was as much as three
weeks after this, before he (Hall) got back the pistol which he
had lent to George Mellor, and which, according to their
account, had been left at the cousin Joseph Méllor's house, at
Dungeon Wood. - He says after that George Mellor asked him,
one Sunday, to lend his pistol to go to Leeds, saying that there
were some people come from Leeds, that wanted some arms;
and accordingly he let it go. He gives this further account,
that on the Saturday night, two or three days before Mellor
was taken up, and when he was expecting to be taken up, he
asked this witness if he would have that coat that Thorpe
had on, to go before Mr. Radcliffe the magistrate, as he (Hall)
was the most like Thorpe; that he asked him to put on
Thorpe's coat, that somebody might mistake him for Thorpe;
... that he waſ to go to the justice's with that coat on, when he was
called on, and say he was the person who had gone with George
Hellor to his cousin Joseph Mellor's, and lºad asked for
employ in his work: but he would not do that. On the Sunday
after Mr. Horsfall had been shot at, Smith asked him to go.
with him to seek the pistols that were hid in the ant-hills;
they went to Dungeon Wood, and hunted for them among the
ant-hills, but did not find them that morning, and they were
never found. Two or three weeks after, Smith shewed him a
pistºl, and told inim somebody had been with him, and found.
that of his. He is particularly asked, whether, when lenjamin
Walker was taken up for this offence, he had sent for him.
(William Hall) to be his witness. He says he was sent for,
but was not examined on tehalf of Walker, but was examined
relative to some other subject of shear-breaking, that has
nothing to do with this business. That is the evidence of
Wilſiam Hall; whose testinomy, though he is not an accom-
plice, you will consider very attentively, as he is certainly
very much tainted.* ~ * - -
The next witness is Joseph Sowden, who says he is a crop-
per in "Wood's shop; that he saw all the three prisoners the
day Mr. Horsfall was shot; that at about half past four, or
between that and five, he saw Thorpe and Mellor enter the
shop, while he was getting some refreshment, with each a
pistol in his hand; that was the shop where he and Ben.
Walker worked; Mellor worked in anotlier shop. He says,
Ben. Walker, William Hal, John Walker, and his son Wil-
liam, and a man of the name of Varley, were there. He
says he heard Gerge Mellor, the prisoner, order Benjamin
Walker to go home, and to fetch top coats and a pistol; that
Benjamin Walker accordingly, went out, but he was not there
-. when
."
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. 59
when he returned, as that day he was working in what they call Mr. Justice
the raising shop; that he did not see Smith that day at all. Le Blanc's
He says that one pistol, which they came in with, was Smith's, Summing
that the other was brass mounted, with a brass guard, and was lP.
three inches longer in the barrel than the other pistol; that
he saw 'no more of any of the prisoners till he heard of
Mr. Hiorsfall's death; that what he heard pass was, in Wood's
kitchen, after he had got home; he had before that heard of
what had happened to Mr. Horsfall. The next morning, he
says, the three prisoners and Walker, both jointly and severally,
related to liim the particulars of their lying in wait for
Mkr. Horsfall. He did not repeat the particulars, but he said
that they all of them had related what had happened, and that
the next morning, or the morning after, Thorpe called him out
of the shop, and he followed Thorpe into the press shop; that:
Thorpe said to him, “Sowden, I'must have you sworn to keep
the murder of Horsfall a secret in all its circumstances.”
Sowden states, that he said he never took an oath, either legaſ
or illegal, in his life; that he never liad had occasion to be
examined before a magistrate, and he did not chuse to take any
oath; upon which, George Wiellor swore that he should take
it, or he would shoot him dead; that through fear of his life,
knowing that he had it in his power to realize his threats, and
having ſeason to believe that he never went without loaded
pistols, he submitted, and received the oath, which was ad-.
ministèred in the press room; that Thorpe produced the oath
out of his pocket, and that the substance of it was , to keep
the murder of \! r. Horsfall a secret in all its circumstances,
under pain of being followed by the most unceasing vengeance,
and finally put out of existence by the first brother he should
meet; that there was a Bible at the time produced; that they
afterwards, by the same threats, forced him (Sowden) to be
the person to administer that oath to ali who knew of the
murder of Mr. Horsfall; and that he accordingly administered
it to 13enjamin Walker, John and William Walker, James
Varley, William Hall, and Smith, who were all the persons
that appear not only concerned in it, but aware of the commu-
nications which had been made from one to the other.
. He says, upon cross-examination, that when Mellor came in,
the ordered Ben. Walker to go home and fetch great coats and
pistols; and that he did not himself know at that time what
they were going about. -
They then produced on the part of the prosecution, John
Walker, the father of Benjamin Walker, who had been referred
* to as a person who was in the shop and heard what was
passing, and as having been sworn. They called him up, to
ask, whether he was there at the time, in this shop; and in
order that the other side might have an opportunity of putting
^ - | J $2 what
60 - . THE RING AGAINST
Mr. Justice
I e Blanc’s
Summing
up.
what questions they pleased to him. However, no questions were
put to him. This is the evidence as to what took place on the
day on which Mir, Horsfall was shot, on the night when they
returned home, and the next day, when, according to the ac-
count given by these witnesses, all those persons who knew any .
thing of the transaction, were bound by this abominable oath
(if it was administered) to keep this matter secret. -
*
They then proceed to the other points of the case opened.
on the part of the prosecution, as circumstances to affect the
different prisoners in the parts they took in the transaction
after the murder of Mr. Horsfall had been committed. And
they first call Martha Mellor, who says that her husband,
Joseph Mellor, is the cousin of the prisoner George Mellor;
that she and her husband live at Dungeon, about two hundred
yards from Dungeon Wood; and that to come from Mr. Rad-
cliffe's plantation to their house, the nearest way is to come.
through Dungeon Wood. She says that she heard of Mr. Hors-
fall having been fired at, between eight and nine o'clock in the
evening on which it happened, by the report of some persons
that came in. She states that her family consisted of her hus-
band, herself, one child, four apprentice boys, and a servant girl.
She speaks of one of the apprentices having misbehaved, and
run away; and two of the apprentices being here. She says
that her husband is a cloth-dresser ; that on the same evening
on which she heard aſterwards: that Mr. Horsfall had been
shot, she saw the prisoner at the bar, George IIellor, about a
quarter after six, when he came to her house with another
person whom she did not know ; that they came first into the
workshop, and then from the workshop into the house;
that George Mellor asked her, if her husband was within ; she
said that he was gone to market; he then asked, if they wanted
a man to work; upon which she said, No, there was no oc-
casion. They had no work, I suppose, in which they wanted
to employ him. He then asked her to lend him a handker-
chief; it does not appear for what purpose ; and she lent him
a black silk handkerchief; and then George Mellor asked her
to allow the gentleman who was with him to wash himself,
and she accordingly allowed him to wash himself; and she
describes George Mellor as having on a dark-coloured coat,
but no top coat on at that time, that is, when he came into
the house, he having been in the shop. She says the gem-
tleman who was with him had a dark-coloured top-coat on.
They stopped there about a quarter of an hour. George
lºſellor asked her to lend him a coat; she told him her hus-
band's upper coat was in the shop; and accordingly both these
men went through the shop, the same way they had come into
the house; and they said, if they did not meet her husband,
they might probably call again about ten o'clock that night.
f w - She
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. 61
* -- -
She says, she thinks it was a quarter past six o'clock when Mºre
they came, for she guessed they had been gone about half an .
hour before her husband came home; and she thinks he came ...”
home about seven o’clock. She is asked, whether the prisoner,
George Mellor, has borne a good character ; and she says
he has. . . 4
Then the whole of this transaction is closed by the account
of the apprentices. They had seen these persons come in, for
they came into the shop first. Durrance, one of these ap-
prentices, who is about seventeen years old, says, he saw
George Mellor at his master's house at Dungeon Bottom this
night, when Mr. Iſorsfall was shot ; that he was in the shop
when George Mellor came in, and a man with him, who he
thinks was like Thorpe ; that, at that time they had dark-
coloured top coats on, but George Mellor took off his top coat,
and put it on a brushing-stone, and he then had a green coat
on ; that he asked the apprentice to go up stairs with him, and
he went up with him ; the other man stayed below ; that
when they got up stairs, George Mellor gave the apprentice
two pistols, that they might be two feet long, that they put
these 'two pistols under some flocks to conceal them, that he
himself did not take particular notice of then to know whe-
ther they were loaded or not, and that George Mellor told him
he had no occasion to say any thing about them ; but he says
that when his master came home, he (very properly) told his
master who had been there, and what they had left there; that
he and his fellow apprentice stopped at his work, and George
Mellor went down ; that he shewed the pistols to his fellow
apprentices, ‘Kinder and Oldham, and that Kinder told him at
the time that it was George Mcllor, he himself not knowing
him. Now, he says, he thinks that the first prisoner is the
man. He says, when his master canne home, he told him his
brother had been there, and what he had left there ; that he
shewed his master, Joseph Mellor, the pistols, and that his
master, Joseph Mellor, and the apprentice, took them from
under the flocks, and, carried them into the laith, and hid them
under some straw in the laith. He says he has himself been
before Mr. Radcliffe the Magistrate, and that after he had been
before Air. Radcliffe, George Hellor gave him (this apprentice)
five shillings, and bid him give the other apprentice, Kinder,
half of it, to speak the truth of what they had seen; but he
told him to keep the pistols a secret, that is, to speak the truth,
but not the whole truth.
On his cross-examination, he says they stayed but a short
time ; that the time when his master came home was an hour,
or an hour and a half, after these men had been at the house.
Then the other apprentice, John Kinder, who saw Hellor
come in, and told his fellow-apprentiec who he was, is called.
He
62 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justice
‘Le Blanc’s
Summing
up.
He says that he remembers the night when Mr. Horsfall was
shot, that he saw George Mellor come in, and Durrance asked
him who that was that came, and he told him he thought it
was George Mellor; that he himself was in the ſold, that he
met Mellor coming down again after he had been in the shop;
that Durrance shewed him the two pistols Mellor had left
there, that they took them from under the flocks, and he
thinks they were not loaded, and that for a very good reason,
because he opened the pan and blew through the touch-hole;
and he confirms the account of having received from Darrance
half a crown, which, Durrance says, George Mellor had given
him to speak the truth of what they had seen, but not to say
any thing about the pistols. V ^, |
\
Joseph Mellor the cousin, who was not at home when they
came, is the next witness. He says he was at market on this
afternoon, that he got home, as nearly as he can guess, about
seven in the evening; that Durrance the apprentice, when he
came home, shewed him two pistols; that he had, before he
got home, heard that Mr. Horsfall had been shot, and when
Durrance shewed him the pistols, he went with him, and hid
them in the laith, because he was afraid of their being found
upon his premises. He says the pistols were nearly of a size,
but one was of a larger bore than the other, the larger one was
brass-mounted, and he himself had heard George Mellor before
say, that he had brought a pistol from Russia. He says this
too, which is a material circumstance, that he found a dark-
coloured top coat upon the brushing-stone in his shop, and in
the pockets of that there were two ball cartridges, and he
found a dark bottle-green coat behind the door, but neither
of them belonged to him ; that a man of the name of James
'Varley came the morning after, and he told Varley he had the
pistols; and in about a week after the pistols were gone, but
how they got away we do not know, there is no account of who
fetched them away. He also says that he had left a top coat of
his, which was a drab top coat, at home, and that was gone.
Now, the evidence of these four last witnesses, is evidence,
which, as it respects George Mellor in particular, calls very
much for some explanation; because on this very night, and at
this very time, according to the evidence of one whom you
cannot suspect at all of being influenced by any bias against
these prisoners, George Mellor and a stranger came to the
house of the cousin, and having been before in the shop,
asked the wife of the cousin, whether they could give any
work to this man who was with him? She said, No. He then
asked for the loan of a handkerchief; and it appears by the evi-
dence before you, that one of them had hurt a finger, and one of
them had scratched his cheek in going through the wood. It
also appears, according to the evidence of the apprentices who
! . . S&W
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. 63
-3.
saw them come into the house, that each of the two persons
who came, had dark-coloured top coats on; that they took theme
off; that George Mellor Haid his upon the brushing-stone, an
there was another dark-coloured top coat hung behind the
door, which Joseph Mellor found when he came home; that
both having top coats when they came (and dark-coloured
top coats) George Mellor asked his cousin for her husband's
coat, and took away a light-coloured drab coat of the husband's,
which was hanging up there. That, to be sure, has the ap-
pearance very much of a desire of changing clothes, so that the
dress in which they had been, and might have been observed,
should not tend at all to betray them. But there is another cir-
cumstance: the first thing done by George Mellor, and this per-
son, who is not recognized except by one of the apprentices, is
to hide a brace of pistols, which the apprentice is desired to say
.nothing about, and they are both of them discharged pistols.;
they are afterwards taken into a place of concealment, because
the cousin, Joseph Mellor, thinks it not safe for them to be
found on his premises; and they are afterwards ſº away,
but nobody is here to tell us who fetched them. Joseph Mellor,
when he comes home about an hour after, finds his coat gone, but
two dark-coloured top coats are left, one on the brushing-stone
and one behind the door; in the pocket of one of which there
are two bºlls. This is left wholly unexplaiaed. This is fixed
to be George Mellor, by the wife of the cousin. And if these
eurcumstances were unconnected with this transaction, some
account might have been given by evidence, with what trans-
action they are connected, so as to shew that they are to be
considered features in some other transaction, and not features
applicable to that which is the subject of our present en-
q'ury. That is the end of the evidence, with respect to what
, took place at Dungeon Bottom.
The only additional evidence is that which is produced by
Mr. Staveley, the Governor of the Gaol. The top coat taken
off Mellor, the prisoner, when he came here, which is
acknowledged by Mrs. Mellor ‘to be the same that had been
left at her house, and Joseph Mellor says is the same
that he found left at his house, when he got home that
evening.
The Counsel for the prosecution next call witnesses who
had nothing to do with this transaction, for the put pose of
giving an account of what they saw in the neighbourhood of
this plantation. Abraham Willey says he was a workman for
Mr. Radcliffe; that he was at well about two hundred yards
from the spot where Mr. Horsfall was shot, that is, in a field
xwhich I would describe as behind the plantation, with respect
to the situation of the public road along which Mr. Horsfall
was travelling; that he heard a gun, but did not see it, being
lil
Mr. Justice
e Blanc’s.
Summing
up.
64. THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justice in the stable. He says it came from the no# of the planta-
- º next the road; that upon hearingition soonaſter; he weſtº
.***up, and saw four-man-running down by the end of the buildº,
“. . .ing, across the fields: between the plantation and Bungéoilº
*Wood, and making for Dungeon Wood; that they were not
nearer to hijñ, than fifty yards, and that all the four men (hes
agrees in the account given by Parr and others), had dark-º
coloured coats on at that time; and he says that this must a
have been the time Mr. Horsfall was shot, because in-two orºž
thrée minutes afterwards, his two boys, who are referred to..byss
andther of the witnesses, as being collecting d ung in the road, is
came and told him what had happened to Mr. Horsfall: So -
• that the point of time is fixed. . . . . . . . sº
* : * *
*x;
r
}
M
} * * *
- *.
Their further, as to that part of the case, a person of the
name of:Hartley was going along the road from Grossland tòº
Logixwood, which runs at the back of the fields, aird of Mr. Rad-
cliffe's plantation; and would give him the cominatid of their
sight of those fields and of Dungeon-Wood. He says; as he was:
going along that road, he heard the report ºf a piece, and that 3.
where he got to the top of the close of land, where he was,”hé"
sawfour men come out of Mr. Radcliffe's plantation, and jumpº
over-the-wall that went to Dungeon Wood, and so into Euniº
geogwood; that they had all dark-coloured clothes on; thät.
as they were getting over the wall, he observed ºthätisoneºfºº
they] had a pistºl, with a brass endºta.it, under, his goaf, bé-
cause the goat flew back as he jumped over the wall, and dº sº
theºman Jøgking back, and, as he supposes, taking notice 98.33
him...he pºiſºd; his coat 9Ver the end gf the pistolº &Phºtºiº
again cºnfirms th9..account, that the number who did thisis:
consisted ºf four;
:

ºagd, that they immediately made: off that:- s
. . . . . asi . . . ºr ; : . . .'; 3 . . . . . . . . ; :: ), *, *, *g £32ds *
- Wºlyºk: ;43 3. ; : *... is ‘. . . . . . ; : * ~ * : * : * : – ---. * ~ * * * >
Märy Robinson, the kindlady of the public hoise at FIonfey, sº
**. -, -7.1x * > . . . " : , t . . a " ' " • * > . . . . ... * : * * • r ** 1: …< *ś - tº 3. Sº "k.
to which theºrisóñer Smith, ind the accomplicé (#8cording”
- I - * , § Nº) . sº
; : * ~ * ~$ _* * * * ... ſº '''I Y. 2, 3 s , : *::.. " ºf T. .* ‘. . . . ; '?'.2 tº: & * † " , , ; ... Nº * *
to the account of Benjamin Walker) retired”áftër the "itiuſ.
*** ***.*.*.*.13% ºf . is . .4 tº £ 1&as, 31sas C.K.S. . … :::::::.--f:: ****
der had taken place, says, that lier husband keeps a publić.
*
house, at Hônley; on the left hand; at the bottom of the towit;
that they heard that Mr. Horsfall was "shot on the same.”
evening; by some market people coming ifi; that of that.”
eveniñg two young men came to their liquse; and had sºmeº.
thingſtoºdrink; that she recollèëts’ā collier being at her house,” s
who had got a #ttle fresh with liquor; and that whén the fiéws
was brought, soon, after these young men came in... that."
Mr. Höſsfälpwas shºt;Smith; ºrie of these two yūgmán, who
ge à trº... …in ºns.si.e. º. º.kºlai Kºśa ºasijääºiâûâ.”
whistled wéry well,” begåm to whistle; aftāpleåså #886hiº.
and that he began dañcing.” She says that the tiſfiewfién theº
youtgºmehºcaine in; 'wāšº'between'sévenºid"eight in theº;
evening did that they went away a little ºeſołºńe: "ºt
talliès'íeaffy with the accāght Benjamin Wºº. Şāº
i . . . .''.
N

• ** *x ** •,• , , ,-i, º, . ~.. ." * , ,"* . • * x * : . *** **, * * * * $2 *& ſº tº º § • . •:A &
§§§: **ś §§§ 3 ; ; ; ; ; ; (12 $';***** * * j, tº 5: S33. ště a 'sº
*~ *** -
- “T i
** z. ºf 4) . . -
r) • * r *- : * >
# * * * * * . *
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. 65
she says, that when her husband came in, he asked them where
they came from and they said they came from Longfoyd
Bridge; which is the place where these two persons lived.
This is the Evidence on the part of the prosecution, which
consists-of the evidence not only of Benjamin Walker, who
is, in the strictest sense of the word, an accomplice (going out
with them, and continuing with them, though he says, the
latter part of the time against his will, being afraid to go back)
but of the different other witnesses belonging to the same
manufactory, who appear to have been witnesses to prepara-
tions going on, and declarations made after the act had been
done, so as to know what had been done, and for a considerable
time at least never to have disclosed it, though they were not
themselves parties in the act itself. There is the confirmatory
evidence of those persons who saw the four men, immediately
after the report, making off in the direction described by the
accomplice, and dressed, as is described by the accomplice, all
in dark clothes. And above all, there is the transaction
which took place at the house of the cousin of George Mellor,
where the two dark top coats, and the pistols not loaded, were
left, under the circumstauces which the witnesses have detailed
to you; and likewise what took place at the public house where
Walker and Smith went, according to Walker's account.
On the part of the prisoners, they have called witnesses
to shew that this account is not true, for that some or all of
the prisoners were seen by different witnesses at places and
times, where they could not have been, if they had been con-
cerned in this transaction. You see, no proofs are given to
explain any of those strong passages of the evidence, which I
observed upon to you as I went over it, and those in part from
persons connected with one of the prisoners; but witnesses
are produced, to shew that one or other of the prisoners, and
all of them in some instances, were seen at such a time in the
evening, that they could not have been at this plantation when
the piece was fired off, by which Mr. Horsfall was shot. This
must depend very much, not only on the credit given to those
different witnesses who have been called, but certainly, at this
distance of time, upon the accuracy of their recollection; and
some of them, you will see clearly, according to the account
given by the other witnesses, must be mainly mistaken as to
time. A **
The first witness called, is William Hansard, who says he
was at Huddersfield (where he lives) on the 28th of April last,
the day on which Mr. Horsfall was shot; that he knows the
prisoner George Mellor, to whom he particularly speaks; that
he saw him about a quarter of a mile out of the town of Hud-
dersfield at a little before seven o'clock in the evening; that
he had heard of Mr. Horsfall's being shot, and that Mellor was
\ ^ - K passing
Mr. Justics
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
f
§5 THE KING AGAINST
ºnstiee passing as if going to Longroyd Bridge. I do not knºw
ºne’s whether that is consistent with the date at which the firing
Summing
GP.
- •
appears clearly to have happened. It must have happened
some short time after six o'clock, according to the account of
the first witness, Armitage. As nearly as he can recollect, it
was a quarter before six, when Mr. Horsfall stopped at his
door, and he fixes the utmost time he stayed at twenty tajnutes,
which would bring it to a quarter after six, and he had a very
little way to go to the plantation before the shot was fired; Sp
that it would probably be between a quarter after six and half
past six, when the shot took place... This witness fixes it a
fittie before seven, when he saw Mellor on the road, as if *
to Longroyd Bridge. That comes very nearly to the time H.
was at Joseph Mellor's. The woman says he was there at-3.
quarter after six o'clock; but clocks vary, and the memory of
people varies as to time; and therefore one cannot try very
correctly by that test, unless one has something more than the
mere recollection of persons. However," he says that a little
before seven he met George Mellor upon the road, going, ſo
fongroyd Bridge. * !
Jonathan Womersley, a clock-maker at Huddersfield, says
that he saw George Mellor on the evening on which Mr.
Horsfall was shot, about six o'clock, or a quarter or ten minutes
after, at the corner of the Cloth-hall-street in Huddersfield;
that they went to Mr. Taverner's, to settle a little account,
where they had one pint, and then a second; he stopped titi
he got his money, and then he left Mellor there, and their
he went to the Brown Cow in the market-place, and the
soldiers were then riding over the mārket-place, full speed.
i suppose, upon the alarm of this person having been shot, the
soldiers had been ordered out; that has not been proved, but
I suppose that is what is to be understood. IIe says that he
saw him about six, or a little after that time. Accoiding ta
the account of his cousin, he was at Dungeon Bottom at a
quarter after six. They may all think that they speak ac-
eurately, but still it shews the little reliance which ean be
placed upon evidence as to particular times, when you come to
be bringing several transactions within the space of pretty
nearly an hour. Mrs. Mellor says that they stopped a quarter
of an hour; so that according t? her account, Mellor did not
*ie
ieave her house till half after six.
The next witness is William Battersley, a shoemakery, whº
was at Huddersfield and at Tayerner's at the time, the gthar
man speaks to; he confirms his account, that they had two
pints of beer, and that they remained in company till, they had
drank it, and he thinks they stayed half an hour at Tayerner's,
it apiglit be more or lºss, That does not carry;it *:: £9
* line,
* MELLGR, AND, OTHERS. 67
^
e
time, only that he was there with Womersley. The only Mr. Justise"
º
*stion is ~ * Sooner or later. Le Blaae's
question is, whether it was Summing
John Thorpe says, he lives at Castle Gate in Huddersfield; up. ".
that he knows George Mellor; that he remembers, the day
Mr. Horsfall was shot, that he met George Mellor opposite
the George Inn in Huddersfield, about ten minutes before six
o'clock; (that is carrying it, you see very early ;) that he,
stopped in the street with him a few minutes; he says he
knows it wanted ten minutes of six, for that he had a watch
le wanted to sell him, and he asked him if he would buy it;
that he took the watch out, and that that makes him know it
was ten minutes before six o'clock. That is not reconcileable at.
ăll with the account given by the cousin, but by supposing that
the clocks or watches vary very much, or that the memories
of the people vary very much.
. . Jonathan Battersley, a shoemaker at Huddersfield, says lie.
saw Mr. Horsfall on the evening when he was shot; that he
went up the street towards the Market-place, a little after five
eclock; that he (the witness) then went into his own house,
that he drank tea, and then he put on his coat, and went up.
the street about a quarter of an hour after Mr. Horsfall had
got on, horseback (that would be about half after five o'clock;)
, that he went across the Märket-place leading to New-street,
where he met George Mellor, coming towards the George Inn;
that they passed a few words, and were not above a minute or
two together at the furthest.; that he went home; that it was
not quite six o'clock, when he left George Mellor, and he did
not hear of Mr. Horsfall's being shot till after he had got
home. Still these all fix him to have been in Huddersfield
at a time not at all consistent with the account given by
Mrs. Mellor of his being at Dungeon Wood.
George Armitage, who is a blacksmith at Lockwood, says;
that his shop is between Joseph Mellor's house and the town
of Huddersfield; that he was it; his shop between five and six,
and that he saw George Mellor come past, but he cañnot say
within a few minutes as to time; that the had not been at
his drinking that evening, that they generally drank between
five and half after five, but that he had been shoeing a horse,
and perhaps it might delay him ; that when he saw George
JMellor pass, he was coming as if from Joseph Mellor's, arid
going towards Huddersfield, Now between this man and
Joseph Mellor's wife, there must be a mistake ; because she
says, according to her account, he did not leave her house till
half after six, and this man says he came past his shop be-
tween five and six. He says he has known George Mellor
some time, and that he never heard any thing against his cha-
racter; that the account he gaye was, that he had beam at
J oseph's Mellor's, with a man that wanted work. To be sure,
J. N IN 2 either
*
68 THE-KING, AGAINST .
Mr. Justice
łº sºlºphºſe loºſe of this man, must have erred very
*...* much in the time. They were not aware, perhaps, of ºch
Summing other's evide * . T ſ t
up.' , other's evidence. tº } j^ , , , º
. . . . ; ; ), "3 - * | *
Joseph Armitage, a brother of the last witness, says, that he
saw George Mellor, on the day on which Mr. Horsfall was shot,
at the shop-door of his brother; that his mother came to call
them in to their drinking, and that he went to, the door, and
saw his brother talking with George Mellor. He does not
fix the time, only that it was after his mother had called
them in. * - . . . . . . J ‘’ - * : * *
& The next witness speaks particularly with respect to the
prisoner Thorpe. Charles Ratcliffe states, that he is a cloth-
dresser at Huddersfield; that he remembers the ºright
TMr. Horsfall was shot at; that he was at Mr. Fisher's, at
-Longroyd Bridge; that he went there at half past five o'clock
that evening;s that he went into a room at Mr. Fisher's, called
the raising:shop, and that he saw Thorpe there raising a blue"
coat cloth, that he had a conversation with him for a quarter
of anchour, and left him there when he-eame away; that
there was a youngswomani fetching water out of the cistern in
the shop; in a can; that he returned to Huddersfield immé-
diately, and that when he got there, it was about a quartersdr
twenty minutes after six by the Cloth Hall Clock; and that
half an hour after that he heard of Mr. Horsfall being shºt.
o that, according to his account, he saw Thorpe, in the
§ - '4 S ', £ 4 - - ... ; .' ' ', , e - C.
raising shºp at half past five o'clock that evening, and he
stayed,théré nearly a quarter of an hour, which would bring
it toº nearly a quarter before six, with the variation of clocks.
I apprehend a very little time would be necessary to go from
Löngroyd Bridge to the plantation. ... Still, if they are accurate
ii speaking, by the same clocks, the account, appears incon-
sistent; but, accounting for the difference by the difference in
clocks, and memories, I do not think it is so very striking.
‘Ratcliffe states, that Thorpe was the only man at that time
who was at work in the shop, ' , 4
f
* } | , , ) is
3.j Frances. Midwood, a young, woman living with her father
at Longroyd Bridge; states, that she recollects the 28th of
April; that they were to wash the next day, and she was
fetching water from, the raising-shop of Mr. Fisher, for washiñg
the next day; that she began going about five o'clock; that
the first time she went there was nobody there; that when
she went about, ten minutes after five, William Thorpe was
there, and again the third time William Thorpe, was ºthere,
taking, with another many but she did nöt know who he was ;
that she went repeatedly, and continued going until'sherheatd
some, report about Mr. Horsfall heing shot; and that their she
did not fetch any more water, but that evéry time she went to
the raising-shop; after the first; she saw ſhorpethere; and that
* , , Oſlº
MEłżóR; ANā‘GT#ERS. 69
one of the times when she was there she saw Abrahám Piffing, Mijºtić.
whº had been making, her a pair of shoes, and had followed LeBline's
her to the shop, which he saw her go into. ~ : X , , -, - *
‘. . Then Abraham Pilling is called, who is a shoehiäker in
Huddersfield. He says, that he had made a pair of 'shoes
for the last witness, Frances Midwood; that he delivered a
pair of shoes to her on the night Mr. Horsfall was shot; that
he was going to her father's with them, and saw her crossing
the road with a can, that he followed her into the raising-
house, where he found her and William Thorpe; that she was
lading water out of a cistern with a can ; that it. wanted a
quarter to six when he set out from home, and Longtoyd
Bridge is better than a mile from his house. So that, according
to his account, it must have been past six o'clock probably
before he got there. He says that Fanny Midwood took the -
ish bes, and asked him what was to pay; and she went to fetéh
3ºoney to pay him; and in the mean time he talked with
Thorpe, and ºtheri, she came back with a note. He'stayed
a little while longer, and then he went forward a mile another
way, where he was going : and that as he was going out of
the raising-house, the neighbours told him that Mr. Horsfall
had been shot. , ' S ... " ... * ~ 3 ſ tº
* *
* ...a
"John Bower, who is apprentice at John Wood's at Longtoyd
Bridge," says, that the day when Mr. Horsfall was shot, }.
såw'George Mellor on Mr. Wood's premises; that they wers
hard-pressing, that George Mellor was assisting him at the
thärdening of the press; that Thomas Smith, Benjamin Walker,
James Varley, and John Walker, were there assisting, and
ºthät the time when they were so doing was somewhere near
*śćven o'clock in the evening; that they stripped up their
shirt-sleeves to work; and that he saw the prisonèr Smith go
to his drinking about six o'clock; that he had seen him a good
many' times at work between noön and six o'clock; that he
*went into his drinking about six; that he was at work in a
different room from Smith, but that he went into the room
where Smith, was; to fetch the pieces for the press; that he
Islept in the same room, with Mellor, the hight Mr. Horsfall
was ashot, and Thomas Smith'slept in the same room; that
g|William Hall had a house of his own, but he cannot recollett
5 whether he slept in the same room that night or not. William
*Hall says that he'did. The boy then gives an account of
: a transaction, that he saw the Widow Hartley come down
, the yard, about seven that evening, and that she first brought
the account of whatſhadhhappened to, Mr. Horsfall, and that
he and William Hall were then in the press-room; that she
słrought the news of Mr. Horsfalº's accident before Mellor and
othe others:came to harden. Nowſhedoes not speak to having
seemptbemaſºcºmºto\hardensitill: after the newsivas brought.
Q}}º 3e
7g. THE KING AGAINST .
Mr. Justice He fixes it about seven o'clock; how much later it was, he
Le Blanc's does not say precisely, but that it was about seven. It could
*& not be, consistently with the others, unless it was some time,
up. after. He says he had been to call them before she came,
that it was a particularly busy day, and they did not go to their
drinking till six o'clock ; that he had not seen George Mellor
there, from three in the afternoon, till they came to harden.
You have the account as to George Mellor, where he was
a part of the time, from those who knew him well; that he
was at his cousin's short of seven o'clock, and somebody
with him, whom the apprentice believes to have been
Thorpe. * ,
Then Mary Thorpe, a servant to Mr.Wood, says, that on the
*8th of April she saw Smith and Bower coming in at the
kitchen door, they came in at six o'clock to have some drink,
that it struck six as they came in ; that Mr. Wood's clock is
kept pretty accurately by the Cloth Hall clock; that she supplies
the men who live in the house, every day, with beer; that John
Bower, Thomas Smith, George Mellor, and William Hall, live
in the house; and she states this circumstance, that Smith has
a very good knack at whistling. . . . .
The last witness called, is a man of the name of William
Hirst, who lives at Longroyd Bridge, and lodges in the house
of Mr. Wood, with whom host of these men work and mány
ôf them lodge. He says he knew Benjamin Walker, that is,
the accompfice; that he remembers the day when Mr. Höfsfälf
was shot, that he was at Mr. Wood's house that evening, that
he went down the yard about seven o’clock, and that he rhet
Benjamin Walker there. He says he had heard of Mr. Horsfall
being shot, before he léft Huddersfield; and that his son is a
mercharit fiving at Huddersfield, who employs Mr. Wood as he
does other persons, to do his work. *
This, Gentlemen, is the evidence produced on the part of
the prisoners, evidence of different persons coming in at différent
times; for the purpose of shewing that, at points of time in that
evening which they fix, they saw either fall the prisoners, or
$ome of them, in situations not consistentſ with the time allotted
by the account given by the other withesses for this trans-
, action, When you see the point of the at which it took
place, and the nearness of all the different spots where they
were to the place in question, perhaps, #is not so surprising
that there should at such a distange ºf time be so much
variance in the account given by different witnesses, as to the
periods of the day, as there appears to be upon the present
occasion. Even supposing the witnesses tº come under no im-
proper bias or influence in what, they are saying; they are
speaking of a transaction, which not only took place along
time agg, but was not imputed to the prisoners at the bir till
& COW-
-
MELLOR, AND OTHERS. ‘7t
a considerable time after it had taken place. For this, took
place in the month of April, and it does not appear that enquiry
was made before the magistrate, or any of these persons com-
mited, till the month of October. Nothing happened imme-
diately after the transaction, to lead these persons particularly
to watch, so as to be accurate in the hour or time on that par-
ticular evening when they saw these persons at a particular
place; and we know how apt persons are to be mistaken, even
when care is taken, in point of time. However, Gentlemen, it
is for you to compare the evidence. The evidence on the part
of the prosecution rests, not on the testimony of Benjamin
'Walker only, but of several other workmen in this manufactory,
who are not accomplices in this transaction, though they appear
to have had a knowledge of it, which I cannot say is not to a
certain degree guilty. For I cannot hºld them innocent in
knowing of such a transaction going on, and treating it so
lightly as to give no information respecting it, and to keep it
concealed longer than while there was an immediate impression
of fear of personal danger to themselves. But, independently
gf this, you have evidence of that, which appears to me to be
the strongest part of the case, and to require the most explana-
tion, but which has not been explained, and which applies
particularly to the prisoner Mellor, and to Thorpe, if you are
satisfied he was with Mellor : I mean, the transaction which
'took place at Joseph Mellor's, house at Dungeon Wood, and
.xyhich goes to contradict, in point of time, the evidence given
by the different witnesses on the part of the defendants. The
enquiry is a serious one, not only as it regards the prisoners
themselves, but, as it regards the public peace and security.
You, who have heard the evidence, will lay the facts together
in your minds, and will do justice between the country and the
prisoners. ' -
The Jury retired at half past seven, and returned at five
minutes before eight, finding s
George Mellor - - - - Guilty.
William Thorpe - - - - Guilty.
Thomas Smith - - - - Guilty.
The prisoners being severally itsked in the usual manner, by
the Clerk of Arraigas, if they had any thing to say, why
sentence of Death should not be pronounced upon them :
answered, º f *. * *
º, Mellor—I have nothing to say, only I am not guilty.
Thorpe—I am not guilty, Sir ; evidence has been given
false against me; that I declare. Y
Smitkºwa suilty, Sir. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$º. {
* , s t *Mr.
Mr. Justige
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
72 THE KING AGAINST
Señtence.’
, Mr. Justice LE BLANC immediately passed sentence of
** ~...--
. Death upon them, in the following words: " . .
“You, the several prisoners at the bar, have been tried and
convicted of wilful and deliberate Murder; under all-circum-
stances an offence of the deepest malignity, but:under, the
circumstances which have appeared in this case in particular,
as far as one crime of the same denomination can be distin-
guished from another, this may be pronounced a crime of the
blackest dye. In other cases, the Court has been able to liś:
cover something which might work upon the passions ºf
mänkind, and might induce them to commit an act, at whičh;
in their cooler moments, their minds would have revolted:
But, in the present case, the crime was committed ‘āgatist à
man, who appears to have given no offeuce to any one of yºu,
except that he was suspected of having expresséd himself with
a manly feeling against those who had set up a right to vidläte
all prºperty,’ and to take away the life of any man who had
been supposed to encourage others tº do, (what’t trust tº
still aréâmen sufficient in this country to do) to stand manſūſīy.
forward in defence of their property. For that reason, he was
marked out by yoã as an object of the most cowardly revenge:
You, attempting to associate with yourselves such then as yºu,
could prevail upon to join in your wicked purposes, way:lay
him at the moment when he is returning home, almöst in
mid-day, with a boldness which one has scarcely ever witness;
in trying offences of this description. But if the course of ºil.
triá; proëeedings have come beforé the Cºurt, at which hº
naturesHüdders. That the national character should 'hºs.
debased; that men, who ought to boast of their charactérºs
Britons, should have dared to hold forth, in the language in
which you have held forth, and with so little discretion; that
assassination and destruction of property, were jnstruments in
your hands, to be exercised at your pleasure, and against any
pérson who had happened to offend-you-independently,9f this,”
that you should have dared to take into your hands the Holyo
Scriptures, and to administer an impious oath to those who,
were cognizant of your offence, calling the Almighty.<asºn.
witness (that Being whom you were conscious you had effended
in the highest degree,) caſſing upon Him for vengeance upon,
the heads of those who shouke discover your crimes—these are
circumstances which have appeared in the course of this trial,
and which have scarcely ever appeared in the course of any
trial which has been brought before a court of justice. p

“It is not upon the testimony of one, or of two, or of three
Witnesses, that your guilt depends; and let me advise you not
to lay that balm to your souls, that you have been deprived
by false accusation, and by false oaths, of your lives. A chain
of circumstances has been discovered in the course of º
5 triºl,
MEſ.T.OR, AND OTHERS: 23
-- - ~ *- - * * * ~! ~~ Y
*rial, which does not depend upon the: oath of any one, or Sentense,
twääßeºi, whºyonºnay denºmia; even äs bad
as yourselves. But even from the testimony of thºse, whº, if
they had not been honest to a certain;degree; would have given
a different evidence, it is clear that twos at leastofsyou were
găilty; and as little doubt remains, from other evidence; upon
the guilt of the third of you. . . . * * * * * * .
jº:g. thºshop where you have worked, some of you appear
tàhayegained such an ascendancy over the minds and over the
cºnsciences of the workmen, who were in some degree under

*
º
yºft göntrol, that you could mould and fashion them to any
§§ed purpºse you yourselves inight imagine. Their eyes,
hºpe. will be opened by the fate which awaits, you; they
will see; that though for a short time the career of the
icked may continue, yet the law is sure at length to overtake
***** -- . .” - . . . . <!" - -º * *. - * . . . . S. - -
.# Toyou, the unfortunateP.": who stand at the bar, (for
#Väry man who has disgraced his character as you have, must
Heisened unfortunate) to you the only kindness I can offer,
is in the advice to prepare, as speedily as you can, for that
ešion of this sentence, which, must shortly await you; to
ift the best use you can of the period, still allotted to you
s'í83 & A.Y. 83- * = * * -
iññāşārīd-longer far than was allowed to the unfortunate
4%-º
..ºne ºf * * * **, *, * * * * * * ** et \! *
ărăgăwho was the object. of your revenge; that you will take
* *
ºpfºrtunity of making your peace with that, Almighty
#ig whom you have offended; that by the sincerity of your
#. fulness of your confession, and, the acknows
§gient of your offences, you may endeavour to obtainsthat
fºrgiveness in the world to come, which I cannot hold out to
##y hopes of obtaining in this world. . . . . . . . . .

<!-- sº *.*k
wº. It remains only for me to pass upon you the sentence of
the law. § That sentence is, That you, the three prisoners at
the bar, be taken from hence to the place froñi, whetice yöd
came, and from thenee, on Friday next, to the placé of éxé
cution; that you be there severally-hanged by the neck until
you are dead; and yūur bodies afterwards delivered to the
fºrgeons to be dissected and anatomized, according to the
directions of the statute, And may God Haye fºerty upon
your souls.” r - & . . . . . , y & *
I. *Tºuriday,
74 THE KING AGAINST
Thursday, 7% january 1813.
For maliciously shooting at John
Tºº Hinchliffe. The indictment contained
join Schofield four counts; the two first framed on the
Stat. 9 Geo. I. c. 22. and the two last
on the Stat. 43 Geo. III. c. 58. The first count charged; that
the prisoner and a person unknown fired at Hinchliffe. The se-
cond count charged, that the person unknown fired at Hinchliffe,
and that the prisoner was present aiding and abetting. The
third count charged, that the person unknown fired at
Hinchliffe with intent to murder him, and that the prisoner
was present, counselling, aiding and abetting, and privy to the
firing. The fourth count only differed from the third, in
stating the intent to be to do some grievous bodily harm. to
Hinchliffe.
The prisoner having pleaded Not Guilty to, this Indictment,
it was opened by Mr. Richardson. ; : - i
Mr. Park.-May it please your Lordships; Gentlemen of
the Jury, The prisoner at the bar stands indicted before you,
upon two different Acts of Parliament, one (which is com-
monly called the Black Act) passed in the reign of his
Majesty King George the First, and the other in the present
King’s reign, in the year 1803. Probably this case will re-
solve itself more into the latter.statute than the first.
Before I state the circumstances of this case; I will shortly
state to you the law upon which the prisoner stands indicted;
and the framer of the Act seems almost to have had in view,
by the preamble of the statute, the disturbances which have
taken place in this county lately. For the Act, says–
“Whereas divers cruel and barbarous outrages have been of
late wickedly and wantonly committed in divers, parts of
England and Ireland, upon, the persons of divers, of his
Majesty’s subjects, either with intent to murder, rob, or to
maim, disfigure or disable, or to do other grievous bodily
harm to such subjects, be it enacted,” (the words upon which
the present indictment is framed) “That if any person shall
wilfully, maliciously and unlawfully, shoot at any of his Majesty’s
subjects, or shall wilfully, maliciously and unlawfully present,
point, or level, any kind of loaded fire-arms at any of his
Majesty’s subjects, and attempt, by drawing a trigger, or in
any other manner to discharge the same at or against his or
their person or persons,” and then it goes on to state other
crimes, with which I need not trouble you, “ then and in
every such case, the person or persons so offending, their coun-
scilers, aiders, and abettors, knowing of, and privy to such
3 c{fence,
g
JOHN SCHOFIELD. 75
offence, shall be and are hereby declared to be felons, and
shall suffer death as in cases of felony without benefit of
.." This is the law upon which the prisoner stands in-
dicted; and I need hardly state to you (because the point has
been frequently stated during the present session) that the
question is not so much, whether the prisoner at the bar him-
self, by his own hand, fired at this individual, John Hinchliffe,
as, whether he and the person who did actually fire at John
Hinchliffe, went thither with the unlawful purpose to do some-
bodily harm to him. For there are two counts in this indict-
ment; one stating, that he went with intent to murder, and
the other, that he went with intent to do some bodily harm.
Gentlemen, there are in these cases two main questions for
the consideration of the Jury; first, whether the crime itſelf
that is charged has been committed by any one; and if it be
established that it has been committed by some one, then
whether the person now charged before you has been guilty of
that crime.
*Of John Hinchliffe being wounded, there will remain no
doubt. He is a person of respectable and decent situation in
life, residing in Holmfirth in this county; besides being the
parish clerk, he is a professional singer, teaching to the
country people that art, and among the rest, he had the pri-
soner at the bar for his scholar. The prisoner had been
learning for a confiderable time, so that Hinchliffe was, well
acquainted with him. In the night of the 22d of July, the pro-
secutor, being in bed, was called to by a voice without his
house, and desired to come out of the house. He will swear,
that he immediately knew the voice to be the voice of the
prisoner. He had had a very good mean of knowing his
voice; and it is hardly necessary you should see the person who
speaks to you, for you will equally know him by his voice, if
you are acquainted with it. He was some time, being in the
dead of night, before he would come out; however, at last
he came out. I am not sure whether he slept on the ground-
‘flöor or hot. As soon as he opened his door, he was immedi-
'ately seized by two men armed with pistols, and dragged some
considerable way from his house. There were two persons,
neighbours of his, one of the name of Thomas Hinchliffe (no
relation of his) and another of the name of Jonas Moody,
, living in another house, still nearer to him. When he had
been dragged out of his house, it happened most providentially
(for I have from the statement made to me, very little doubt
'that this person had a more evil intent than was afterwards
accomplished) a horse without any rider trotted up, and
alarmed these two men. They thought of course that some-
body was upon it, and were immediately alarmed; upon which
Hinchliffe, the prosecutor, escaped from them, and ran ww.
i L 2 tile
z
76 THE KING AGAINST
the house of his neighbour, Thomas Hinchliffe. Immediately
on his doing so, the other man, who is not found, and whose
name and person we know nothing about, presented his piece,
and fired it off; and Hinchliffe has entirely loſt his eye. He
screamed out, and the two men fled. Thomas Hinchliffe got
up; and the prosecutor having called out, that his eye was
bruised to pieces, which it was, he was taken first into the
house of Thomas Hinchliffe, and then into his own. This is
the fact which has been committed ; of that there can be no
doubt, for the man will be examined before you. . \
}
The next question is, how is this brought home to Schofield
the prisoner On that subject, I will minutely detail the evi-
dence by which we propose to bring it home to him. In the
case of all crimes of this sort, it is desirable, if it can be done,
to find out a motive for the act. You will naturally enquire
what motive there can be in this case. Here is a man living
(as it should appear) on terms of intimacy with him, and why
should he commit this outrage 2 for there is no attempt to rob
his house, nor his person; indeed he had no clothes upon him.
Gentlemen, I am afraid there will be a motive most apparent.
This young man had joined a party of (what are called in that
part of the country) Luddites. Some time previous to this
offence, I believe so long before as the month of May, this young
man met John Hinchliffe, and talked to him a considerable
time. They walked together, and Schofield enquired, of
Hinchliffe, whether he would join the Luddites; and, told him
that he himself was enrolled in the society of Luds. He took
a paper from his bosom, and read it to him, which contained
words which he does not exactly recollect, but, he will tell
you they were to this effect: “In the name of God. Almighty,”
and then, that “ any brothers who informed of each other,
were to be punished;” with a variety of words of that descrip-
tion, importing an engagement of secrecy. Schofield went on to
tell him, that the kingdom was to rise; that they had got over
a whole regiment; and a vast variety of particulars, which I
shall not go into further. Hinchliffe immediately said, very
properly, “I will have nothing to do with it;” and he was so
uneasy about this, that he thought it his duty some, time
afterwards to communicate what had passed to two or three
respectable persons in his pariſh. Whether they bruited' this
abroad or not, I do not know; but on the day or day but one
before this offence happened, John Hinchliffe was called out of
his bed at six in the morning, by the prisoner at the bar, who
wished him to take a walk in the fields with him, which he
clid; and the prisoner, said, “Have not you disclosed to
Blythe, the constable, what passed between usion such a day tº
He said, “I have not to Blythe, but I have to A. B. and S."
The prisoner said, “I do not know how I am to get o; :
COUl


"JOHN:SCHOFIELD. 77
I could get rid of every thing but the oath;” and so he went
on, complaining. - Gentlemen, when the outrage itself was
committed, it will be proved to you, that the man who fired
the pistol, said to Hinchliffe, “What have you been doing?
Hinchliffe answered, “I have done nothing of which I am
ashamed.” “Yes,” said the other, “you have been declaring
something about John Schofield.” --
. . Still it will be asked, how do you prove John Schofield was
one of the party at this house? It will be proved to you by
Hinchliffe, that he was perfectly acquainted with the voice that
called upon him to come out; and that he knew the voice, at
the time, to be the voice of Schofield. This man had some-
thing over his face, which appeared to be a light-coloured
handkerchief; and, some accident blowing the handkerchief
aside, Hinchliffe immediately knew the man to be the pri-
soner, and he will swear to you that he has no doubt of that
fact.' ' s
"The prisoner at the bar is a married man, and has a child;
he lived with his father, who is also, I believe, a married man.
He was a workman with his father, both as a farmer, and in
his other business, whatever that was. The very morning
“after this outrage was committed, the prisoner set out from
this county to London, leaving his wife and child behind; he
fled, taking a very small quantity of clothes with him, as you
will find proved. There was immediately a reward offered
"for his apprehension; he was described, and his dress de-
scribed. The witness who will be called, will describe the
kind of pantaloons, or long breeches, he had on at the time of
the fact; that they were lead-coloured breeches. Immediately
upon-his person being described and his name given, an officer
of the police at the Whitechapel Office in London, who will be
called before you as a witness, went on board a ship destined for
America, and found the prisoner. And it is due to the pri.
'soner to say (for I will state every thing for him, that I know
of, as well as against him) that he had not gone on board the
ship under a false name. "He was immediately asked, whether
he came from Yorkshire, and he said, he did. He was asked,
whether he knew a person of the name of John Hinchliffe, of
Upper Thong; and he said, he had never heard of such a man
in his life. He was asked to read the advertisement. He
said, he had never heard that such a person had been shot at,
before he left Yorkshire; though it will appear in evidence,
that he left Yorkshire the morning after. He said, “I have
"no"dºubt"I"am the person here described, for this is m
description; upon which the officer said, “I must take
you before Sir Daniel Williams,” one of the police magise
trates in London. { --
, ; , ; After
78 THE KING AGAINST
After this, on a request from the magistrates in Yorkshire
in consequence of a description of the handkerchief with which
Schofield’s face was disguised, the police officer went on board
the ship again, and opened his trunk, the key of which the
prisoner gave him; and in that trunk the very handkerchief
was found. He had on a pair of lead-coloured pantaloons at
the time of his apprehension; they did not appear to be very
new ; but he was asked, where he got them; and he said, he
had bought them since he came to London, at a shop; he was
naturally asked, where that shop was; his answer was, “O,
I do not know the name of the people, but I could shew it
with the greatest ease, it is near the London Docks.” The
officer afterwards solicited him to point out the shop, and he
could point out no such shop; and the officer went to three or
four shops, but could not find that any such article had been
sold to any one. And there is a decisive fact, with respect to
these pantaloons; if he had bought new pantaloons in London,
the old ones with which he left the country, would probably
have been in his possession; but there were none such.
The prisoner was examined before the police magistrate in
London, which becomes material, lest there should be any
idea of fallacy in the memory of the witness, as to his not
knowing John Hinchliffe of Upper Thong. In this examina-
tion, John Schofield says, “I come from Nether Thong, in
Yorkshire;” and so on. “I am a farmer; I worked with my
wife’s father, Samuel Jagger, who has a farm at Nether Thong,
which place I left a fortnight since to-morrow.” In another
part, he says, “I set off from Nether Thong on Thursday morn-
ing, the 23d of July.” The deed was done on the 22d. “I do
not know any such person as John Hinchliffe of Upper Thong.
I did not hear that he had been shot at, before I left the
country.” Now if he did not know such a person as John
Hinchliffe of Upper Thong, it was right he should say so; but
if he did know him, and had done no injury to him, what
motive could there be for his concealing the fact; and when
he came into Yorkshire, you will find he admitted the fact.
Before the magistrate in London, who knew nothing of him,
and who, he thought would never find out the truth of the fact,
he denied it; but being examined afterwards in Yorkshire,
where the facts were better known, he said, “I am well ac-
quainted with John Hinchliffe, of Wickens, in Upper Thong;
I have been with him many hundred times singing, he taught
me to sing.” So that here is a direct contradiction between
the one examination and the other; and I read them to you
for the purpose of shewing that contradiction. . The first exa-
mination was taken before Sir Daniël Williams, so early as the
5th of Auguſt 1812, the act having been committed on the
zzd of July; and the second examination taken of course wº J
&
JOHN SCHOFIELD. 79
he was brought into the county of York. These are the cor-
roborating circumstances of the case.
I am told, Gentlemen, and I mention every thing that I am
aware can be stated (because it is right to the prisoner, as well
as to the public, that it should be stated) I am told, it is to be
said, But John Hinchliffe of Upper Thong did not always tell
the same story; when he was first examined about it, he did
not mention this man. I dare say that is true, but he could
not have been long in mentioning him, for he was apprehended
on the 5th of August, in London. But it is extremely probable,
such was the danger and apprehension of every body in this
county at the time, particularly people living in that part of
the county, and unprotected as this poor man seems to be,
that these people should be afraid of speaking out, till they
found they were under the protection of the government, or
the military. But you are to judge, as in all cases you must,
as to his degree of credit, in the circumstances under which he
made the concealment. I am also told, we are to have an
attempt in this case to establish an alibi; that is, that the
prisoner was in another situation at the time of the fact being
committed. I believe none of you sat in that place yesterday,
when every thing upon that subject was most accurately
stated; but you know, Gentlemen, that the thing depends very
much upon the accuracy of the prosecutor’s memory. You
will remember, when these facts were committed, that this
man was waked out of the dead of sleep, and did not know the
time; and if it stood upon that only, the man might be mistaken
as to half an hour, or an hour. I believe it will turn out, that
in the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution in this
case, the account of one as to time will materially differ from
the account of the other, and yet there was but one time at
which it was committed. That the fact was committed, there
will be no doubt, no man will dispute that fact, but the time, I
believe, will be stated differently; but does not the clock of
one neighbour differ from the clock of another ? and is it to be
expected, that the clocks of all persons in this situation of life
should agree ? You will attend to the evidence of the persons
called to prove this alibi, and will consider whether they
may not be mistaken; and when you find differences of a quarter
of an hour or half an hour, it is impossible that such evidence
alone can afford a good defence. All these are circumstances
for your consideration. I only draw your attention to them,
because, by the proceedings in this case, it is not open to me,
nor is there a necessity, for my addressing you further. These
I understand to be the grounds of the defence. I shall call
my witnesses, and prove the facts, I have opened; and if I
prove them satisfactorily to your minds, it will be your duty
t()
i
$o "THE KING AGAINST
Legal Ob-
jection to
the Indict-
ment.
to find the prisoner at the bar guilty of the charge imputed
to him by this indictment. |
The first witness called was the prosecutor, John Hinchliffe;
who proved the previous conversations with the prisoner in
May, and on the 28th of July, as stated by Mr. Park; and that,
on the night of the 22d of July he was called out of bed, and
on opening his door, was seized by two men, both armed with
pistols, who dragged him out of the fold before his house, say-
ing at the same time, that they would not hurt him, but wanted
him to shew them the way some where; that, being alarmed
by the passing of a stray horse, one of the two men (whom he
swore to be the prisoner) ran away; that the man who re-
mained, asked the prosecutor, what he had been doing ; to which
the prosecutor answered, that he had done nothing amiss to any
man; that the assailant said he was a liar, and had fetched a
warrant against John Schofield; that the proſecutor replied, he
never had, and had never been before a magistrate in all his life
on that business or any other; that the stranger then whistled,
upon which the prosecutor ran towards Thomas Hinchliffe’s
house, and the stranger fired and wounded the prosecutor; and
that this conversation was the whole which passed, between the
running away of Schofield, and the shot being fired.
As soon as John Hinchliffe had concluded his evidence, it
being understood that this was the whole proof going to the gist
of the crime, the prisoncr's Counsel took objections to th
indictment. *
Mr. Hullock—I submit to your Lordships, that the facts
given in evidence do not support the indictment, upon either of
the statutes. I understood in the opening, that circumstances
to shew a malicious motive were intended to be given in evi-
dence; but no such circumstances have been given in evidence
at all. There is no fact before your Lordships, to prove that,
antecedently to the man firing the pistol, any malice or ill will,
or any sentiment of that description, had existed in the mind
of the prisoner at the bar towards the prosecutor; and the very
last words, except stating that they wanted to enquire the
residence of a man, were, from one or other of the two men,
(he does not know from which) that they would do him no
harm. J submit, there is no evidence here of that mind, which
must constitute an offence in this individual. Perhaps it may
be contended, that although this man was not corporally
present, yet in legal intendment he might be considered as
legally present. But I submit, there ought to be previous
evidence of malice, in order to warrant the conclusion drawn
by this indictment. There is not one particle of proof yet
given, and I apprehend none can be given, that this individual
either had threatened or intended any harm of any description,
before
g “joiſN SCHOFIELD. 81
before this time: ''The only circumstance-from which any
inference can be drawn, is, that these - two individuals had
pistols; and my learned Friend haying alluded to the situation
and state of that past of the eountry, I may, do the same. It is
tod: inelandholy a truth, that at that period: the whole of that
£ountry, almost, was, armed with jhat species of weapon. But,
because this man was called up under these eircumstances,
I submit, in an indictment for a capital-felony, it is too much
$9:State; that there is any evidenceſtesga to the Jury to sustain
this iſidictment. - “. . . . . . . . . ; ºr 2 *- : , , , . *
*TMr. Williams-I trist: 'your: Lordships will excuse my
follºwingºmy learned friend, Mr. Hålock; and it shall be
Precisely upon that point he hās subinitted tâyour Lordships;
thäßis to say, whether the ehārge, as laid; is made out at all;
aid not whether there is any evidenee for the Jury to comment
#on.”And; my Lºrds; F apprehehā āhātº there ean be no
#gåent raised againstºus from theºlāńguage of the Black Aet,
cášströnger, or as-móre powerful,” than theºlanguage of the
tätter-Aét: but that upon each, this &#se must resolve itself
'simply into this; whether or not this man’was, at the time, in
‘Féâtbf'law; a principal felon, or an accessary in the first
degree, aiding and abetting at the fact?'...That certainly is the
squestion; because these large and general-words, counselling,
:aiding and abetting, are inere formal descriptions of the intent
said meaning of law"; they are the legal periphrasis for the
shorter phrase, accessary to the fact in the first degree. And
I apprehend, that it makes not a tittle of differenee, whether
these words are there or not; for I could not contend before
Yöur Lordships, that, supposing there is a new felony created,
at the incidents of felony would not follow ; and ºtherefore
Fapprehend, that these words being there, do in no degree
‘ihake the case weaker or stronger; and consequently, that the
Śāmé rule applies to both statutes. Y fº
Now, my Lords, what is the rule in these cases? I apprehend,
that the rule is plainly this; that if the party does not himself
do the act, in order for him to be bound, the act of his fellew
must be done in prosecution of the original design in which
«they set out... I presume that my learned friend, who is of
• Counsel; for the Crown, assents to me in that point. If he does
not,’ſ shall be glad to hearin what it is that he disagreestwith
“that proposition. “I apprelsend that that is the rule; and it is
* with a view to that rule, that we are stq enquire precisely,
axwhether there is...evidence in this ease. I shall not waste your
Lordships time upon that point: My learned friend, Mr. Hul-
Hocky' has drawn:your attentiºn to, the fact; and I will take
leave very shortly to ºpenind your Lordships of some cases
which?have been decided; with a view to illustrate what the
law is.
M Aſ ºf
tº
Legal Ob-
jection to
the Indict-
IDéilt.

g
$'
THE KING AGAINST .
Legal Ob-
jection to
the Indrct-
Maélit.
My Lords, I recollect in Mr. Serjeant Hawkins's Treatise
updh the Pleas of the Crown, he lays down this (and I mention
it not as a case in point, but as illustrating my ‘principle).
upon the subject of unlawful assemblies: He puts the case of
a large assembly of persons, who as to numbers, and as to the
quality of their meeting in general, would, in point of law,'
clearly be rioters, supposing they had no intent to explain
away that illega} purpose. I mean a meeting of persons at a
fair; a meeting of persöhs at a market; a meeting in any
other way, where the number of persons would be sufficient to.
eenstitute a riot; unless there was some other meaning. I will
suppose an election, which is a case somewhat stronger, and,
where there is a degree of latitude allowed which there is in
no other. What does Mr. Serjeant Hawkins say upon that P.
Supposing two men fall out and fight, or three, or four, that .
does not constitute any riot. Why not? Because it is a distinct
act, collateral to and independent of the original purpose; ºběs.
cause the other persons are not to be fixed with an act, which,
is by the bye, which is collateral,which does not spring out of the
original design; but is a simple and individual act of the party,’
who himself is guilty of it, and who is therefore the only person
answerable for it; but he does not contaminate or affect any
person by-standing. Let me, with great humility, apply this.
doctrine. - What does my learned Friend say is the purpose in
this case? I leave that to him. I wilſ suppose that it was,
some felonious purpose; that is of course, or the indictment,
eould not be sustained. He has stated it to be to shoot. , My
learned friend, Mr. Hullock, has already commented. upon
the fact. I will only remind your Lordships, with a view to
apply what I have taken leave, with great humility, to state,
that in point of fact the party had aetually's gone away,
was clearly removed from the spot. The person supposed to
be the prisoner being removed, and an altercation actually.
arising between the other man who was left, and who com-
mitted the deed, and the prosecutor, that other man after
that time, and not until the man now before your Lordships.
(if it was he) was withdrawn from the spot, independently,
individually, of his own malice and wantonness, fired the shot.
This man being in no shape or way present, countenancing or
directing the other to do the act, but being too far removed
to do any thing of that description; then, in point of fact is
the evil act done, which is the subject of the prosecution,

With great deference to your Lordships, I will, put one other
case; and having done that, H will trespass no further upon
your Lordships' time. In Mr. Easſ’s book; there is a case of
sophe persons going"to rob- an orchard, four or five I think
were concerned in the case. One of the party; without that
pirpose, independently of that purpose, for -no reason ton-
: 1. * * nected
JOHN SCHOEIEf E). 83 .
nected with that purpose, or necessary for the prosecution of Legai Ob-
it (and, my Lords, I keep distinctly within the rule which jºtiºn to
I take to be the question here, whether the thing was done in * -
the prosecution of an original plan), fired a shot at a person ſº
and killed him. It was held individual murder. Why?
Because he did the act of his own will, it being unnecessary
-for the prosecution of the general purpose which the five had
in view, and therefore he answered individually, and the four
were held blameless. That is the way in which I, with great
deference, and upon very general recollection (for I have nôt
had an opportunity of looking at the cases), do with great
humility submit to your Lordships, that the act of the man
who fired the shot was his individual act, after the purpose
(whatever -it was) for which the two were united, was at
‘an end. *
Mr. Brougham.—After the full and able way in which my
learned Friend has argued this question, it only remains for me
in one single sentence to remind your Lordships of the point.
The corpus delicti cannot be varied by the evidence to be given,
but all which is to be done, is more fully to identify the prisoner.
The question therefore is, whether (admitting, for the sake of
argument; the person who went away before the act commit-
ted, to be the prisoner) whether any thing is proved; sufficient
to at thorize yöur Lordships to let it go to the Jury, he not
having been present at the time, and not having assisted in
the act; whether any evidence, now given, is sufficient of
his having come thither with an intent, which intent may
appear from the facts to have given rise to that act, not com-
mitted by him who was absent, but by the person who
remained. We submit- to your Lordships, that the facts do
not merely not prove that, but that they negative it as far as
they go. The ſacts are, that this person (whom, for argument.
sake, we take to have been the prisoner) came with an un-
known person; that being there, they entered into a conversation
with the prosecutor; that in the course of that conversation
the prosecutor expressed some alarm, which was quieted
by some expressions by one or both of them, and that he
then acceded to the lawful request of going out to shew them
the way to some person's house; that when they were sé
going, a noise happeñed, that induced the one person to go
away ; and that after a certain interval had elapsed, the other
person did some unlawful act; and we submit, there is no
evidence fixing that other person, who had gone away, with
an intent to do that unlawful act.
Mr. Baron Thomson.—The Counsel for the prisoner have
idolae their duty, in endeavouring to raise any objections
which they could on his behalf. Bui, as far as those objections
*pet my understanding, I think there is, no foundation for
* * M 3 them.
84 THE KING AGAINST
Legal Ob-
jection to
the indict.
EReſºłº
them. It has been suggested, first, that in order to bring
this offence within either of the Acts of Parliament, it is
necessary to shew some previous malice, to shew that this
was a malicious act. Certainly no such evidence is requisite
in any of these cases, because the act itself sufficiently imports
malice, unless an explanation of that act can be given ;
and it is no more than in the case of murder, which neces-
sarily implies the act to be maliciously done. No prepense
malice is necessary to be proved; in many cases it cannot ;
but res ipsa loquitur. And so it is here. Supposing the pri-
soner to be the person (and it has been admitted, for the sake
of the argument, that he was the eompanion of the man who
fired), the question is then, whether there are circumstances
Jhere involving him in that guilt, which it is clearly admitted
attaches upon the other ? It is stated that there are none
such. That ought to be left to the Jury for their consideration.
Now see what the evidence has been, as far as it has at present
gone. The other man, and the prisoner at the bar (taking
him to be the man) go together, at the dead of night, armed
with pistols, to the house of the prosecutor, who is in bed;
they knock at his door, and call him up, asking if he lives
there : and when he comes to the door, and asks them what
they want, they tell him that they want him to shew them
their way to a man (a very idle account of their errand, not
saying what man they wanted him to shew them the way to);
but they proceed further, and actually lay hold of him by each
arm, and he is in that way brought out of his house. They
tell him, indeed, that they do not mean to do him any harm ;
|but what they said is certainly no evidence of their not having
any such intention. The prisoner at the bar stays there
during the time that I have related : a noise is discovered of
the trotting of a horse, upon which the prisoner (hearing-
it, I suppose, for the prosecutor heard it) runs away. As
soon as he is gone, a conversation takes place between the
other man and the prosecutor, and which conversation is
applicable entirely to the prisoner; it is a very short one;
there is no altercation at all, no quarrel arising at that time
between the prosecutor and the other man after the prisoner
is gone; but there are a very few questions, which shew deci-
sively the purpose for which that man at least had come ; and
it will be for the Jury to say, whether the prisoner had not
accompanied him for the same purpose, and from the same
motives. For as soon as he was gone, the man left asked the
prosecutor what he had been doing, and this all with relation
to the prisoner; he said he had been doing nothing amiss;
that man immediately replied, that he had been fetching a wal-
tant against John Schofield; and it is in evidence, that Schofield
himself, only I think two days before this, was apprehensive
(for that appears from the conversation that he had had with
* * * the
JOHN SCHOFHE}_i|). 85
the Prosecutor) that a legal information had been laid against Legal Ob-
him; he inquires about it, and is very anxious to know jection to
whether the prosecutor had related to the constable and to lºº"
other persons, the conversation that had passed between him “
(Schofield) and the prosecutor, relative to Luddism, and that
he had been anxious to swear the prosecutor into that strange
and wicked fraternity. He was then afraid, as appears from
the evidence of the prosecutor, that such an information had
been laid, and indeed the prosecutor told him he had related
that conversation, not to Blythe the constable, but to other
persons whom he named. The prisoner, Schofield, expressed
his apprehensions, that in consequence of that he should be
sent to York, for that Blythe had threatened to get him sent
there. Now, after the prisoner, Schofield, had run away,
having accompanied this other man to the prosecutor's, and
assisted in laying hold of him by the arm, nothing more passed
between the prosecutor and the other man, than what I have
now related, namely, the inquiry whether he had not given
information againt Schofield, and the telling him he was a liar
when he said that he had not, before the other man imme-
diately set up a whistle, the prosecutor ran off, and as he rau
that other man shot him. Surely, here are facts, and facts
enough to be left to the Jury, in my opinion, that what that
other man did was in consequence of their concert and agree-
ment to come together to this place to do this act. They
come at the dead of night armed with pistols, they enter into
conversation with the prosecutor, they endeavour to get him
out of his house, the one taking him on the one side, and the
other on the other; and it will be for the Jury to say, whether
the reason assigned of his shewing them some person, whom
they did not name, was not an idle pretence for getting him
out to use one of these pistols: and one was used, which
happily had not the effect of depriving him of his life, but
deprived him of his eye-sight. In the view I have of this
case, and consistently with all the circumstances, there is
enough to go to the Jury; that they both went together for
this purpose, and that this act was in consequence of pre-
vious concert on the part of both ; and if the prisoner
left the other man only in consequence of his taking alarm
on the horse trotting up, it appeals to me he must be con-
sidered as aiding and abetting, iſ the Jury shall be of opinion
that they did their endeavour to get the man out of the house,
for the purpose of using the pistols. It appears to me there
is enough in this case, as it now stands, to be left to the Jury
for their consideration. wº
/
Mry Justice Le Blanc.—The manner, and the stage, at which
this objection is brought before the Court, calls upon them to
decide, in some degree, upon a supposition as to what the opi-
* njon
$6 THE KING AGAINST
i.egal Ob-
jection to
the Indict-
H]eilt,
.*
nion of the Jury may be upon the facts. With respect to the
legal authorities which have been stated by the Counsel on the
part of the prisoner, I agree with them; but it is in the appli-
cation of those legal authorities to the presents case, that I
think they are not correct. In the present stage of the pro-
ceeding, the question is, whether, supposing all the facts that
have already come out, to be true, and supposing that which
hereafter is urged on the part of the prosecution to be made
out, if it shall be made out that the prisoner was with that
unknown person; whether, in any light in which the Jury, con-
sistently with their duty, may view the case, the prisoner can
pe said to fall within the meaning of the Statutes under which
he is indicted P *
I do not think, in point of law, there is much difference
between the one Statute and the other; but, taking it upon the
last Statute, the 43d of the King, which is more express in
stating that the parties shall maliciously fire, with intent to
kill or to wound, and that persons aiding and abetting; privy
to the design, shall be equally culpable with the man who
executes it; it will be brought to two questions. The first
will be, whether these two persons came with an innocent
design, or not; and what their design was, must be collected,
not merely from the expressions they used, but from the time
at which they came, from the manner in which they were
armed, from the language which had been used by the one of
them to this party a few days before, and the conversation
which appears afterwards to have been followed up by the
man who actually fired, shortly after the other had run away;
whether, from these circumstances, the Jury shall infer that
this fran, at that time of night, came upon an innocent pur-
pose of merely asking the way to a man's house, whom he
did not name, or whether the two came for the purpose of
doing this prosecutor some bodily injury. If the Jury shall
be satisfied that their purpose was purely inquisitive, without
any illegal intent, the verdict may be onc way; but if they
shall be of opinion, that they came for the purpose of injuring
a man, who had made a discovery dangerous to one of them,
then it will become a question, whether the man, who had run
off in consequence of the alarm of a horse coming, can be
said to be present, aiding and abetting? Taking it to be satisa
factorily proved, to the minds of those who are ultimately to
judge of it, that their purpose in coming was to do mischief,
it is not by one of the parties running away at the instant of
the act, and before the piece is fired, that he can extricate
himself from the consequence of his companion's act. With
respect to the intent with which it is done, in none of these
tases is an express wicked intent, or malice, necessary to be
proved; the intent follows from the act itself; and if the neces-
sary consequence of the act done, namely, the necessary con-
* Šequence
*
JOHN SCHOFIELD. 87
sequence of firing a pistol at a man, is, that if it hits him, it
shall wound him, or do him a bodily injury, the man who
fires it at him, of course, dºes it with intent to do him some
bodily injury. It appears to me, therefore, that we should not
be justified in stopping the case in the present stage, but that
the proper course will be, to let it go to the Jury, who must
ultimately decide it. What the other facts may be, or what.
the result may be, it is not for me to intimate in the least
degree. -
The rest of the Evidence for the prosecution having been
received, and the prisoner having called witnesses to prove that
he was at home at the time when the shot was fired, the whole
was summed up by
Mr. Baron THOMrson.
Gentlemen of the Jury,
THIS indictment charges the prisoner at the bar with having
been guilty of a capital felony. The indictinent is framed upon
two Acts of Parliament, made in the same matter, and which
Aćls of Parliament are levelled against the offence of any person
shooting at another. An early Act in the reign of King George
the First, had made it a capital offence for any person to shoot
at another. The construction upon that Act always has been,
that the shooting, to bring it within the offence against which
the Act was made, must be such a shooting, as, if pursued with
Legal Ob-
jection to
the Indict.
Ident.
Mr. Baron
Thomson's
Summing
effect, would make the fact amount to the crime of murder. -
The other Act is rather an extension, by words more full than
those of the former Act, to that which was the object of such
former Act. It is made a capital offence (among other things)
for, any person to shoot with any instrument, loaded gun, or
pistol, at any other, with intent to murder, or to do any per-
sonal injury or bodily, harm to that other person; and it de-
clares all persons principals, not only who shall shoot, but who
shall be present, aiding, abetting and counselling the fact.
Upon these Acts of Parliament the indictment is founded;
and the charge in the first count is, that the prisoner, and ano-
ther man unknown, shot at this prosecutor of the name of
Hinchliffe. It is varied only in this respect, that the charge in
the second count of the indictment alleges, that a person un-
known shot at Hinchliffe, and that the prisoner being present
was aiding, abetting, and counselling that person unknown in
shooting at him. The two other counts are founded on the more
recent Statute; and in order to bring the offence within its pur-
view, the third count charges, in so shooting at him, an intent
to murder; and the fourth count, an intent to do some bodily
harm to Hinchliffe. These are the only differences.
There can be no doubt, and I do not leave it to you as a
question at all, whether the prosecutor, IIinchliffe, did receive an
d injury
\
3S THE KING, AGAINST
TMr. Baron
Thomson's
Summing
lup.
\
injury of this description from the hand of some person or other;
and it is not pretended that the prisoner at the bar was the hand.
that actually fired. The questions, therefore, foryour consideration
will be, first, whether he was the person who was present with
the other man at the time that this act was committed :—I do
not mean literålly when the pistol was firing, but whether the
prisoner was the person who went with the other with pistols,
in the way you have heard described; and if he was that per-
son, then, whether he went with an intent to execute with the
9ther that fact which the other did execute.
: In support of this indictment, John Hinchliffe has stated , that
He lives at Wickens, in the township of Upper Thong. He is
a woollen manufacturer, and had been parish clerk of Holm-
firth not quite a year. He has known the prisoner, Schofield,
many years; they got acquainted with regard to music, Hinch-
liffe being a little in the habit of teaching persons to sing, and
the prisoner being one of the persons whom he taught. These
were questions put, to let one see how far he knew his voice;
and he says, that from having taught him to sing, and occa-
,sionally meeting him at other times, he became well acquainted
with his voice. He says, that he has lived in that neighbour-
hood himself either six or seven years; that he is married, and
has six children, who, in July last, all lived with him. Jonas
Moody was his next-door neighbour, and Thomas Hinchliffe'
lived next to Moody. It seems these three houses of theirs
were all under one roof. There is a fold before each of
the houses, and a road before the fold. In July, the prisoner
lived at Lower Thong, about a mile from Wickens, and he has
lived there ever since the witness knew him. Upon the 22d of
July, the witness went to bed, with his family, between ten and
eleven. In the night somebody came and knocked at his door,
he thinks between eleven and twelve, but he says he has no
elock. Most probably you all know with how much uncertainty
people in the country speak of time, when they have no clock
to go by; and indeed, how frequently it happens, even in mo-
derate houses, where there is a clock, that is not always at the
right time of the day; so that persons speaking of the time of
the day, at different places, may speak very differently indeed.
The voice called out, “Does John Hinchliffe live here?” He
was waked with this noise, and said “Yes;” and he Šays that
he knew the voice that called out so, and it was the prisoner
John Schofield's; and that he has no doubt about it in his.
mäd. He says he got up and went to the door, just as he got
out of his bed; he opened the door; he found at the door two .
persons, both of whom had pistols, in their hands, and had
hats on, and one of theim had over his face what appeared to
#he witness to be a handkerchief of a light colour. He made
an attempt to shut his door again, when he saw the pistºls,
that £ould not. A voice spoke, ºnd said, they would *
. . . till.
John SCHOFIELD. 89
him. They both fastened their arms on his shirt (he being Mr. Baron
quite naked, except a shirt) one on one side, and the other ...”
qn the other. He told them they would hurt him; they º III.g
said they would not; and they asked the road to a man, not
mentioning the name of any man. Just at this time a horse
came up the lane, trotting, Schofield (as he calls him) had
a handkerchief over his face, which was accidentally drawn on
one side, so that he swears he saw part of his face; that he
knew his person, and he saw so much of his face as to know it
was his. He says it was very light, the moon being near the
full. Schofield, on the horse coming up, ran away. After
Schofield ran away, he cannot tell how far, the man that was
left asked him what he had been doing. He said he had been
doing nothing amiss to any man. The man said he was a liar,
and that he had been fetching a warrant against John Schofield.
The witness said that he never had ; that he never was before
a Magistrate in all his life, on that business, or any other. He
says this was all that passed, after the first man had taken to
his heels, and, it took up a very short time ; that then the
man, who was left, whistled, and he himself set off, and rail
towards his neighbour, Thomas Hinchliffe's, and the man
who remained, fired at him, and he was struck in his left eye;
he cried out with all his might; the man ran away, and he
himself was let into his neighbour Thomas Hinchliffe's house.
He then says, that in the month of May preceding, he had
seen Schofield (this was in July, you will recollect), it might be
ten weeks before; that he saw him in Upper Thong Lane, when
the witness was going home from Holmfirth Chapel, on a
Sunday, between five and six in the afternoon; that Schofield
overtook him on the road, and said he was going to get some
.drinking with him; that was about half a mile from his house;
that when they came to a turn in the road, Schofield wanted
him to go with him a different road from that which led to his
own house; and he accordingly went with him to a place
called Wickens Dyke, two or three hundred yards, when
, Schofield, asked him, if he was a Ludd; that he said “No;”
and Schofield asked, “would I be one ** the witness says he
said “No ;” but Schofield took a paper from a breast pocket,
and began reading to him from that paper. He remembers
, the name of God Almighty being introduced, and about a
society, and what would happen to any one who declared
what passed. He says the prisoner told him they were
wanting to get a body of men within the Liberty of Holm-
firth; that they had got one at Huddersfield, and wanted to
get a body of men in all places, and then it might be settled in
a moment; and every place might do its own, and overturn
the Government. You, Gentlemen, will bear in mind all the
ºwhile, it is not for any offence of this kind; not for any of
this seditious conduct, that the prisoner is now trying. How-
N \ , ever,
90 TIE KING AGAINST
Mr. Baron
Thomson's
Summing
&p.
ever, he stated to the witness, that he had been upon that
business that morning, and was going to a meeting then, and
there would be men from Manchester, and different places, at .
the meeting. He said two delegates were to be fixed, to go to
Londºn, to the House of Commons, to see what they could do
there; that there was a regiment of soldiers twisted in *, all but
one serjeant, officers and all, and four of the Queen's Bays too:
Then they parted, and the witness went to his house. This
was in May, about ten weeks before this fact which we are
now enquiring into, took place. Then, he tells you, that
on the 20th of July, two days before this fact was committed,
he again saw the prisoner; that he came to his house at
Wickens, in the morning, it might be between six and seven;
that he was in bed, and his family was up ; that the prisoner
asked him, if he was not for getting up, and the witness got up
directly ; the prisoner said he wanted to speak to him,
he wanted him to go out with him, which he did, into a
field. Then the prisoner asked him, whether he had
declared what he (the prisoner) had said to hini, for he
had heard the witness had declared it to Mr. Blythe (who
it seems is constable of Holmfirth); and that Blythe had
declared, that as soon as York Assizes were over, he would
have him (Schofield) taken up, and sent to York Castle,
and that he should remain imprisoned there for six months, if
he got nothing else, The witness said he had not told
Mr. Blythe (and he tells you this was a fact), but that he had
told a Mr. Keeling, and several other persons, whose names he
mentioned. Schofield, tº on this, said it was a very bad job, if
he lad told them about the paper, that is, the paper which
you will recollect he had pulled out, containing the Oath.
The witness said that he had told, and then the prisoner said
he did not know which way it could be gotten over; he
said his life was in the witness's hands, and that it would not
be amiss to tell a lie, and swear it, to get him off. At that
time they parted. Ile saw nothing of him after this till the
22d, when he received the wound. He now speaks to the
person of the prisoner, partly from the observation he made of
his voice; the only opportunity he had of taking notice of his
person, was in consequence of the handkerchief being on
one side, and the whole of the face not being-covered.
He says, on his cross-examination.(and that certainly is so)
that he has not always given the same account as to his
knowledge of the persons. IIe says, that on the next day,
when he was examined before the Magistrates, he was ill; he
WàS.
* It will be satisfactory to the well-disposed part of the
community, to be informed that this was mere gasconade, for
which there was no foundation whatever,
JOHN SCHOFIELD. 91
was so ill, as perhaps he might think he should die, and he
did think he was in danger of death. He was examined be-
fore two Magistrates, but could not recollect every thing;
and that is the reason, he tells you, why he did not then
mention every thing he has now mentioned respecting his
knowledge of either of the persons. He fancies that there
was the same in the examination then taken, that he has
Mr. Baron
Thomson's
Summing . ,
up.
said to-day, but that he has now related rather more, for
that at that time he did not recollect every thing. You will
consider, whether the injury he had received, had for a time
taken away his power of recollection, or not ; or whether he
was intimidated. He has not gone the length of saying that
he was intimidated. All that he says is, that he did not
recollect every thing. The account, he says, was taken
before Mr. Scott and Mr. Armytage; the first appeals to have
been taken before Mr. Scott, on the very day, and the second
afterwards, on that same day, before Mr. Scott and Mr. Army-
tage. He says he cannot tell how long these Magistrates were
with him; that they went to Blythe's house, where he was,
for the purpose of taking his examination; he was then in bed,
and the examination was written by Mr. Scott; it *was read
to him, and he signed it. It might be three weeks or a month
after the 22d, before he mentioned Schofield being one of the
persons. The fact is, that the Magistrates never heard him
mention his knowledge of Schofield being one of the persons,
till the time that the prisoner was examined after he had been
apprehended and brought back, which was on the 31st of
August; and he says, that before that time he certainly told
every person that asked him, that he did not know the persons;
but he says now, that at the time he did know that Schofield
was one of them, but that when he was before the Magistrates,
his recollection and faculties were hot complete. N.
Gentlemen, they then proceed (after some objection taken
in point of law to this indictment, and to the evidence in
support of it, which I was of opinion was not valid, and ac-
cordingly over-ruled) to call other witnesses. Thomas Hinch-
life stated, that he is a neighbour to John Hinchliffe the .
prosecutor, and lives, as the other had described, under the
Same roof; that he heard a noise; that at first he could make
nothing of it, he thinks there were two voices; he knew
John Hinchliffe's voice, and heard him say “Witness to any
body,” and then he heard a fire-piece go off, and he heard him
say, “Tom, Tom, Tom, there is a man has shot my eye out.”
He got up as soon as he could, and unlocked the door, and
let him in. John Hinchliffe said, “My eye is bruised all to
bits,” and he bled hard. This, he says, according to his
time, by his clock, was half past eleven, or better. His º
\ N 2 lſº
92 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Barºn
Thomson's
Summing
ūp.
he looked at by moonlight. It seems it was a very light night,
being about the full of the moon.
Francis Freeman is an officer at the Whitechapel Office in
London. He says, in consequence of a hand-bill, which had
been made very general, offering a rewald for the discovery of
the offender in this transaction, on the 5th of August he went
on board an outward-bound American ship, The Independent,
of New York, and on board he found the prisoner Schofield.
The ship was in the London Docks. IIe asked him if his
name was John Schofield. He said it was. lie asked him
how long he had left the country; and he said about a ſortnight.
He asked him what part of Yorkshire he came from ; the pri-
soner said Nether Thong, near Huddersfield. So that the account
he gave of himself so far was a true account, admitting that he
was John Schofield, that he had lived in Nether Thong, and
that he had left that part of the country about a fortnight
before. Freeman asked him if he knew any person besides
himself, of the name of John Schofield; and he said, there was
nobody of that name but his father. Freeman asked him if he
knew John Hinchliffe, of that neighbourhood (and this is a
material fact for your attention); he said he did not, nor had
over heard of the name of John Hinchliffe. He then shewed
him the hand-bill. He said that was his name, and likewise the
place he had leſt; but he did not know the name of Hinchliffe.
He says he told him, that under the circumstances he must have
him before Sir Daniel Williams, the Magistrate; and he observed
his dress was exactly as described in the hand-bill, which he
shewed the prisoner. This amounts to proving that john
Schofield was the person taken up, and was the john Schofield
who came from Nether Thong. Ile describes his dress that he
had on, a blue coat and light-coloured jean pantaloons. IHe asked
him, in the way to the Magistrate, whether his family knew
the passage he was going to take to America. He said they did,
and that his wife’s uncle lived in America, and, in consequence of
some letters written to his father, wishing him to come over,
he was going; that his uncle was a grocer and farmer, and he
thought he could do better there than here; that there had
been a letter, about six months before, from his uncle in
America. This witness further says, that, in consequence of
sºme directions he received fom the country, he went on board
again to 'search for a light handkerchief; that he searched a
trunk, of which the prisoner had furnished him with the key ; the
prisoner did not go on board with him, but told him where the
irunk was, and told him to bring the apparel he found in its
There certainly was a very small quantity of clothes for a
voyage of that description, one handkerchief, one shirt, and two
pair of stockings. He kept possession of the handkerchief, º
| Ut
t
JOHN SCHOFIELD. , 93
iet Schofield have the other trifling things again. The prisoner, Mr. Baton
said he had purchased the pantaloons at shop rear the London Thomson's
Docks; but, after his examination, he said he should not know Summing
the shop again.
They then called a gentleman, who was clerk to Sir Daniel
Williams, one of the Magistrates at the Police Office White-
chapel, London, who proves the prisoner's examination taken
before the Magistrate, which is to this effect:—Iłe says, “My
name is John Schofield, I come from Nether Thong in York-
shire, I am a farmer; I worked with my wife's father, Samuel
Jagger, who has a farm at Nethe, 'I hong, which place I left a
for tºniglit since to-morrow. I walked to Leicester, and came
up to London in a coach called the Nelson, which took me up
a little before I came to Leicester. I worked with my father
John Schofield, who is a cloth-weaver at Nether Thong. It is
about five years since I worked at that trade. Since that time
I worked as a farmer. I have a wife and one child, who are at
her father's at Nether Thong. I was going to New York, to a
relation of minie, an uncle, whose name is George Hirst, and
who keeps a shop there; his father is a farmer, and lives at
Greeth, in the township of Nether Thong. My uncle never
wrote me any letter inv a ng me to come to New York. He
wrote a letter a few months back to his father, desiring me to
come over to him. I brought about ten guineas, in paper
money, with me. I was to pay fifteen guineas for my passage
to New York. The other five I had from my relation,
Mr. Blackburn, woollen-draper, in Aldgate, where I have slept
since my arrival in London, which was last Monday week.
My chest is on ship-board; I have no objection to have, it
examined. I have no objection to go down to Yorkshire to
clear myself. I set off from Nether Thong on Thursday morn-
ing the 23d of July;” and it was certainly so from what the
father says, that he went away some time or other on that
morning, the 23d of July. Then he says, “ I do not know any
such person as John Hinchlifie, of Upper Thong. I did not
hear that he had been shot, before I left the country; I did not
know that he had been shot;” he repeats it. “I set off myself,
and came alone all the way to London. I brought up with me
two shirts and three pair of stockings; I did not mean to have
any more until I got to America. I bought the lead-coloured
pantaloons I have on, at some house near the London Docks.
I can shew any one where I gave eight shillings for them ; the
person gave me change for a one-pound note.” This is the
Substance of that information which has been taken.
, They then call Joseph Scott, Esq. a Magistrate of this
county, who states, That the prisoner was examined before
him, upon the 31st of August. Mr. Scott also states, on
being cross-examined, that he took the examination of the
w prosecutor
* !
94. THE KING AGAINST
lººp. Baron
"àksomson’s
Šumming
tºpe
prosecutor on the 23d of July : that he was sent for to the `
place where the prosecutor was lying, at Blythe's, the con-
stable of Holmfirth. Mr. Armytage accompanied him. Ile
says, he thinks they arrived there about half past eleven; that
the prosecutor was in bed, and appeared to be in a dangerous
state; that he entered into conversation with him ; he ap-
peared to be impressed with a considerable degree of fear (that
is the appearance which Mr. Scott thought be observed about
him) but he did not collect from him, that itswas the fear of
death in consequence of indisposition. He certainly appeared
to him, in perfect possession of his faculties. He took down
his examination in writing; the prosceutor assented to it; and,
he believes, signed it. Mr. Scott'says, that he ought to state,
that they warned the prosecutor of the awful situation in which
He was, and that death might ensue; but that he did not con-
ceive him to be under the apprehension of death from what had
happened.
This is the examination of the prisoner Schofield, which was
taken before Mr. Scott on the 31st August, when he was
committed, of course after he had been brought back from
London:—“For my part I was in bed at the very time when
John Hinchliffe charges me with being at his house. I
lodged with my father, I am a married man. I never had
any oath, nor do not know the meaning of it. I have not any
thing else to say at present. I am well acquainted with
John Hinchliffe of Wickens, in Upper Thong;” having, as you
will recollect, when the officer apprehended him on board
ship, denied all knowledge of John Hinchlifle. “I have been
with him many hundred times, singing; he taught me to sing 3.
the last time I saw him was on Tuesday morning; a part of
what Hinchliffe says, is true; the reason I went to him was,
I heard at Holmfirth, that he had been saying something to
Blythe about me.” He certainly, according to the prosecutor's
account, had been under apprehensions on that account, and
had been with him two days before, saying, that he had heard,
he had told Blythe what had passed about ten weeks before,
when the paper was produced, and the conversation took place
relating to the oath and the insurrections.
They then call Alexander IIoklingworth, who is a prisoner
for debt in this Castle, and who states, that in the month of
July last, he was a neighbour of Schoficia's father (the prisoner,
you recoilect, lodged with his father;) that he (the witness)
heard of Hinchliffe being shot, on the same morning on which
it had happened; that he set out for his work about six o'clock;
he lived near II inchliffe, and as he was going to work, he saw
the prisoner and his father mowing together; he called to
them out of the road, and said, “Here is a sad misfortune has
happened in our town.” The prisoner and his father º in
* QWQR
JOHN SCHOFIELD. , 95
sº
*
£ower Thong. The old gentleman asked what it was. The
witness said, “Somebody has shot at John Hinchliffe.” The
prisoner stood close behind his father; no answer, he says,
was made to him; no doubt they might not hear what was
said, but he does not doubt but they both heard. The Son
said nothing, one way or the other. He has known the young
man eighteen or nineteen years, and has never known any
thing but what is good of him. This is the case, Gentlemen,
laid before you on the part of the prosecution.
The prisoner, in his defence, does not deny the circumstance
of his having absconded at the time that has been mentioned,
that is, the 23d of July, the day after the transaction; but he
accounts for it in this way; that, hearing that Hinchliffe was
shot, and Hinchliffe and he having had some former conver-
sation, of which Hinchliffe had spoken, and Blythe having said
he would send him to York, he was afraid Blythe would put
his threat into execution, and that was the sole reason of his
leaving home, not having had any share in the fact of shoot-
ing Hinchliffe. That is the footing he puts it upon ; that it was
in consequence of the conversation he had had with Hinchliffe,
and which he understood Hinchliffe had revealed. It does
happen, certainly, that the absconding takes place on the very
day after the fact of the shooting.
Then, on the part of the prisoner, they put in, by leave of the
court, the prosecutor’s examinations, both of them taken on the
same day; the first of them before Mr. Scott, and the latter of
them before Mr. Scott and Mr. Armytage. In substance I think
they agree; there is no material difference between them. The
observation that arises from them is with respect to the
description, which, upon the 33d of July, the prosecutor gave
of the persons who had done him this injury; and that he them
said he could not distinguish the face of the man who fired the
shot, and that he did not know him; that he appeared to be
a decent-looking young man, dressed in a dark-coloured coat,
and light-coloured breeches; that he whose face was covered
(having described one as having his face covered) was dressed
in a light mixed coat, something like a shooting jacket, and
appeared to be about five feet ten inches high; that the man who
fired, had on a dark-coloured coat, and a pair of light-coloured
breeches, and spoke, as he thinks, in a feigned voice. Cer-
tainly be did not, upon his first examination, say that he knew
either of them; on the contrary, he mentioned the face of one of
them being covered, but did not say there was any part of the
face uncovered, so as to give him an opportunity of seeing any
part of the face. In the examination taken the same day
before two Magistrates, he Says expressly, that he does nôt
know either of them. He certainly did hot give any account
to the Magistrates, nor as it appears to anybody else, that he
*
*
Mr. Baron
Thomsºn's
Summin§
tip.
knew
96 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Patom
Thomson’s
Summing
tip-
knew either of these persons, till the final examination of the
prisoner on the 31st of August. Then, for the first time, he
gave any account of his knowledge of the prisoner. He has
now positively spoken to him from his voice, which, he says, he
had had an opportunity of hearing im Singing, and in conver-
sation. I {e had conversed with him ten weeks before, on the
subject of the intended insuri ections; and he had conversed
with him, you observe, two davs before this injury, on the
subject of the witness's having inade a discovery of what had
passed before them on the former occasion. The fact is (and
you are to judge of it) that he did not at that time state the
name of the prisoner, or any suspicion of the persons who had
committed this oftence; on the contrary, it appears, that he
told all enquirers, that he did not know them. Prudence
might suggest why he should say so to general enquirers, but
the same reason does not operate as it respects the Ma-
gistrates.
The evidence which follows, is given with a view to satisfy
you, that it is impossible the prisoner could, at the time of
night which has been mentioned, have been in company with
the man who fired the pistol. John Jagger says, he lives at
Nether Thong, and has known the prisoner ever since he was
born. He lives about 40 yards from the house of the prisoner's
father; and the prosecutor lives nearly two miles from the
witness. IHe remembers hearing of Hinchliſſe being shot; he
cannot recollect the day of the month ; but the night before
he (the witness) was at a methodist meeting, at the prisoner's
father's housc, at which it seems he officiated in some way or
other. It broke up, he thinks, about twenty minutes before
ten; he says, he looked at the clock when the meeting con-
cluded, but did not leave the house at the conclusion of the
meeting ; it was, he believes, about half past ten when he
went away. The prisoner was not in the room in which the
meeting was held; but be saw him after the meeting broke up.
He was in the house-part at the time when the meeting broke
up. The necting was in a little parlour. When the witness left
the parlour, he went into the house, and saw the prisoner sitting
there; his wife was with him ; they beth sat by the fire ;
"the witness sat down also. The prisoner, and his wife left the
house-part before he went away; and their leaving, according
to his account, was by going up stairs. The prisoner said to
his wife, “Betty, let us go to bed, and these people will have
our room.” The stairs opened into the house-part. They
went up, he believes, before ten, lie himself going away about
half past ten; and he saw no more of them aſ all that night;
and that was the night that Hinchliffe received his wound.
He never knew anything bad of him, all his life. Then, he
says, he is sure it is above a mile from the prisoner's father's,
to Hinchliffe's. We must take it, I think, to be about a mile,
3 º Oğ
jOHN SCHOFIELD. * 97
or a little above a mile ; no very great distance. This man
speaks to the prisoner's going up stairs a little before ten, ap-
parently with an intention, at least professed, of going to bed;
and his wife then going with him. It is impossible for him to
state what became of the prisoner afterwards. -
Charles Barker says, that he lives in the neighbourhood of
the prisoner; that upon the evening of the 22d of July, on the
night of which this misfortune happened, he saw the prisoner
at his own home, which was his father's 5 that he saw him at
half past nine o'clock, as nearly as he can tell, and the pri-
soner's wife also. The witness was at the Meeting. When he
came out of the parlour from the Meeting, the prisoner Sat in
a chair at the hearth-stone; his wife was there too; he had
Mr. Baron
Thomson’s
Summing
ups
his stockings down, and his waistcoat loose ; and he said, `
“Come, lass, we will go to bed;” and he and his wife went
up stairs. Barker says he remained in the house, after that,
better than half an hour; he cannot say exactly how long, but
it was after ten when he went out. He went home; his house
is about two hundred yards, or better, from the father's house.
Then he tells you, that he returned again to the prisoner's
father's house that same evening, to borrow some list. You
will observe his account of the prisoner would not have carried
him much further than the other account by Jagger, namely,
his going to bed at a little before ten, the witness leaving the
house at a little after ten, and not having seen him go out
during that time; but it seems he returned again to the house
that night, for the purpose of borrowing some list. The pri-
soner's father is of the same trade ; the list was wanting to
lay on a piece of cloth. When he got to the father's house again,
he says, it was within about five minutes of eleven; he then
saw the prisoner in bed, as he swears; and the reason of his
seeing him in bed was, as he swears, that having gone to hor-
row this list, while the prisoner's mother was weighing the list,
he went for some water, in consequence of the prisoner's child
being poorly; that the prisoner called to his mother, to fetch
him water, and the witness went for it instead of the mother,
while the mother weighed the listing, and that he went with
the water to the prisoner, who was in bed; and when he got
clown again, and got his listing, he returned to his own house,
That he has known the prisoner ever since he has known auy
thing; that he never heard any thing of his character, but
what was right ; that he is sure he saw both the wife and the
husband in bed at that time; that the mother was in the
ehamber alone, on the same floor with the bed-room; that he
did not look at the clock there when he came in, but it wanted
five minutes of eleven when he got home to his own house,
and he looked then at his own clock. He is asked, how it
happened that he had occasion to go out this particular night,
- - © of
*
98 THE KING A6AINST
*: Baroº of all others, at that hour, for list? he says he does not often
*...* go out for listing at that time of night; and that he never did
&
ūps so before at that time of night. Then he says that Jagger
had finished his discourse, the witness being one of the con-
gregation, about half past nine; that the witness looked then
at the clock; that the prisoner and his wife were not in thé
parlour; that after this meeting was over, Jagger and he had
pipes, and they went away a little aſter ten. A question was
put by the Counsel for the prosecution, to know how it hap-
pened that he went back again for this listing to finish this
work of his, and how he came not to borrow it before he went
away from the prisoner's father's His answer is, that he, did
not know that he should want it till he came home; that a
wonian, whom he calls Betty Buckley, should have done the
listing, but had not done it. He then adds, that when he
went, he found old Schofield was gone to bed, but the wife was
up; when the witness went away first, he left old Schofield
up; that his family consisted of a grandchild, that lives with
bim; an apprentice boy, whose age is about eighteen; the pri-
soner, and his wife and child, and his own wife. He says, thät
the list is spun ready for laying on, in the chamber where eld
Mrs. Schofield was; that it was half a pound of listing he
wanted, for which he went back again at that hour of the night;
that for any thing he knows, old Schofield was in bed, but he
‘did not see him; that the witness had got home to his own
house, and gone to bed just after eleven; that he cannot, tell
whether the grandchild was up or in bed, when the, Meeting
was over; that he saw the apprentice, who went up stairs
between nine and ten. IIe also says, that he left his brother
working at home when he went to the Meeting; and when he
"came back, he was short of listing; and he did not know...that
would be the case, and went back; but his brother had worked
out what he had ; he had reason to expect it would have been
done by Betty Buckley, but when he returned she had not done
the listing. This is his evidence. He speaks of seeing the
prisoner, according to his account, going up to bed, before ten
o'clock, and that returning a good while after he found him, in
bed, somewhere about eleven o'clock; that he returned to
his own home a second time, and it was a little after eleven
'when he returned, having ſeft him in bed. , , , , , i.
Then they have called Märy Woodhead, who iš to prºve his
being in bed later than this; for she says, she lives at Nºther
Thong, and is a neighbour of John Schofield, and sister ºf the
prisoner; that upon the 22d of July she had bºasion to gº to
John Schofield's house at night; she went à little afići; twelve,
ahe went to borrow a dose of Batemán's I}\ops; hér husband
was ill, he had been taken ill the day befºre indeed, but she
went at this time of Right, becaus; hº wāśiñº º .
| 1 ... i a * -\ a. ** & f
join schöffelp. 99
wbrse and worse ever after he went to bed; that he had been Mr. Baron
in bed nearly two hours, and he awakened her a little before gº §
iſ a º N tº m IIllll &
twelve; she got up and dressed herself, and went for the Bate- up."
man's drops; she went there, because she knew they had them
generally in the house. John Schofield too is in the practice
tof giving medicines. She asked for the mother; she came,
and the witness told her what she wanted; she did not see
'Mr. Schofield; the mother opened the door, and she (the
withess) went into the house-part with her; the mother re-
commended a way of giving the drops in sage tea, and in
ºrder to get this sage, she went with the mother into another
room, in which room she swears she saw the prisoner and his
wife in bed; and she went into that room almost directly after
coming into the house. ! w
. On her cross-examination, she says that the mother gave
her the drops below stairs, that the mother went up stairs for
the sage, and she went to hold the candle while the mother
looked for the sage. Being asked, why could not the mother
have gone up to this room for the sage herself? she says she
went to hold the candle while the mother looked for it.
* John Brooke is called, who says he is a clothier, and lives
at Upper Thong, half a quarter of a mile, or rather better,
from Hinchliffe's. He remembers Hinchliffe's receiving the
wound. He himself was from home till eleven that night, or
after; he went home a little after eleven, and he heard the
crack of a gun or pistol, as he was going home ; he was then
a quarter of a mile from the house. The next morning he saw
John. Hinchliffé stand at Thomas Hinchliffe's door; he does
not recollect that he had any conversation with him, but John
Hinchliffe said, in his hearing, he did not know the persons who
had done this.
º Eli Hobson is then called, with regard to the prisoner's
character. He describes himself to be a clothier; and says
he has known the prisoner from his, infancy, and has had a
great deal of acquaintance with him, and that he never heard
anything against his character, till this. sºr
*
Jonas Sykes has known him several years, and says he
always bore a good character since he knew him.
} John Schofield, the father, was then put up on the part of
the prisoner; but no question was put to him by the prisoner's
Counsel. The Counsel for the prosecution, however, put some
juestions to him; in answer to which he states, that he remem-
'bers hºwing in the field the morning after this had happened to
, Hinchliffe, and he renenbers Hollingworth (the witness en
the part of the prosecution) passing by to his work, and telling
him a sad, imisfortune had happened that morning at Upper
Thong; 'that John Hinchliffe was shot; that he asked whether
* * * Q 2. t he -
109 THE KENG AGAINST
º, Parº, he was dead, and Hollingworth said he was, not, but he could
§. not tell whether he would die or not; and he says, his son went .
tº Unming e *... * * - • -
t! F, away in about an hour after this had been said by Hollingworth.
He states that he has no relations in America, that he knows
of. It is stated in the prisoner's examination before the Ma-
gistrate, that he was going to some relations, in America; that
examination had called them his wife's relations.
l 3. , #
Upon this evidence, Gentlemen, you are to decide upon this
charge brought against the prisoner at the bar, which is in
substance this:—that he was present aiding and abetting the
other man who shot at the prosecutor John Hinchliffe. And
the, first thing you are to decide will be, whether the evidence
on the part of the prosecutor satisfies you, when compared with
the evidence given on the part of the prisoner, that the
prisoner was the person who came to the house of John
Hinchliffe, at the time of night that has been mentioned,
armed with a pistol; that he was one of the persons who took
him out of the house; and whether he came with a determined
design of supporting another in shooting him, or doing it
himself. The first question is, Is he that man Now that
rests upon the evidence which has been given to you by the
prosecutor Hinchliffe, who swears to his knowledge of his
voice. He had taught him singing, and so had had Óccasion
to hear his voice, and had had other opportunities of hearing
it, in singing at different times, and in coilversation with him
so lately as the Monday before. Ile speaks mot only to his
Yoice, but, to part of his countenarice; which he says now
was partly covered with a handkerchief, but that that did not
gover the whole of his face; and he now undertakes to. Speak
positively to the prisoner's being that person, who was so joined
with the other in the act which has been described. You will
also take into your consideration the abscending of the prisoner
upon the morning after this fact had happened. He went
away, by his own account, exactly that very morning after it
had happened; and he was then in a hurry, as it appears, pre-
paring to ship himself for America, saying that he was going
in , consequence of letters that had eome from relations in
Aumerica; which relations it seems he had not: certainly, in
that respect, giving a false account of himself, and stating
tº: both to the constable who went on board the ship, and
ikewise in his czamination before the Magistrate in London,
that he did not know John Hinchliffe. It seems he made no
scruple at all in acknowledging his own name,that he was
John Schofield, and telling his abode to be Nether Thong,
according to the description given in a hand-bill' which was
shewn him; but that he persisted that he did not know any
thing of John Hinchliffe. It is for your consideration what
weight is due to that circumstance, when it is proyed *
hä
, jøHIN SCHOFIELD. HO 1
\
had so great a knowledge of John Hinehliffe. You will, upon
the whole, determine whether you are satisfied that he was the
person present, when this violence was first offered to Hinchliffe,
and who ran away a very few moments before the firing
actually was done, and in the way stated, in consequence of the
alarm of the horse. He has in his defence denied that he had
any thing to do with this affair; and says, that having (as
Hinchliffe has in his evidence asserted) before this time made
him acquainted with the bad connexions which he (the prisoner)
had in what is called Luddisha, and having attempted to swear
him in to be one of that party, and having heard that Hinch-
liffe had given information to some gentlemen of this affair, he
had shortly before stated that it was all over with him if he
had given that information. And the colour which he now
gives to his absconding, is, not that it was on account of this
violence which had been offered to Hinchliffe, but from the
consciousness that he was in danger of being apprehended by
reason of the communication he had made to Hinchliffe on
these topics, which would have afforded reason enough for fear,
eertainly. But the fact is, that the morning after this affair
happened, he did abscond.
* } |
You will take into your consideration also, the evidence
which has been given on the part of the prisoner, with respect
to his being at another place than that where this fact hap-
pened, at the time when it happened. The precise time when
it happened, perhaps, it is not extremely easy to-ascertain. The
prosecutor, according to his account, had gone to bed between
ten and eleven, and was calles between eleven and twelve, as
he guesses it. His neighbour, Thomas Hinchliffe, to whose
house he ran, says, that when it was over, and he had opened
the door, and was going in, he looked at his clock, and it was
half past eleven. The evidence that has been laid before you,
to prove what is called an alibi, would fix him with going to
bed somewhat before ten o'clock, and being seen in bed by two
persons after ten. The witness, Barker, tells you, that he had
been at the house, and went back again, and saw him in bed at
very nearly eleven o'clock; for he says (if he speaks truly,
and if his clock went right) that when he went home with the
list, it was past eleven at night. There is then the sister of
the prisoner, who went at twelve o'clock at night (if she speaks
accurately also) to the house of her father and mother, in order
to get some medical drops to relieve her husband, who was
very ill; she speaks to seeing him at twelve o'clock in bed,
leaving him there when she went out.
. . It will therefore he for you first to consider, whether the prisoner
was the person who was present when this offence was committed;
because; if the evidence does not satisfy your minds that he was
ene, of the persons there, it is immaterial to consider what'share
$. that
Mr. Baron
Thomson's
Summing
tip.
162 THE RIN& AGAINST
Mr. Barott
"Thomsön's
Summing
Wip.
*
that person, who was there, took in the transaction. If it was net
the prisoner at the bar, he is not answerable for what that person
did. You will, when making up your minds upon this point, con-
sider that the prosecutor had never spoken (even to the Magis-
trate) to his knowledge of the person of either of the two men,
or even to his suspicion that one of them was the prisoner, till
the 31st of August. If you are satisfied that the prisoner was
that person, and then only, it will be material for you to con-
sider, whether the share he took in the transaction does or
does not implicate him in the crime imputed to him. Now, if
these two persons (whoever they were) came with a premedi-
tated design (and you should be of that opinion from the cir-
cumstances) either. to shoot, or do some great bodily harm to
the prosecutor, and if this calling him up was a mere con-
trivance to get him into their possession, that that purpose
might be executed, they will both be equally guilty. If the
prosecutor speaks truly, two persons laid hold of him, only with
his shirt on, that is, one of one arm, and one of the other,
saying, they wanted him to shew, them were a person lived,
not naming that man; and that then one of them ran awa
upon hearing the horse coming, and the other fired. If you
ean suppose they had come there really with a design only tº
get informed where the man lived, whose name they’did no
mention, and that that was not a mere pretence; and that thé
one man ran away, not having been privy to any design of
the other to shoot the prosecutor; then to be sure he would
riot be answerable for what the other did in his absence. ºff
he was privy to that, if they came with this joint design, and
his intention was to do this man a mischief, then, under the
circumstances stated, he will be, in my opinión; guilty; for
you will remember, both of them had brought pistols, and the
-
were both endeavouring to get the man out of the house. ..." .
The questions for your considerationi will be, first, whether
you are satisfied that the prisoner at the bar is that second
man who was so present. If you are not satisfied of thät
fact, the other enquiry will fall altogether to the ground.
If you are satisfied that he is the man, I mean; compating
the evidence which has been laid before you on the part, of
the prisoner, with that given on the part of the prosecutor,
which I repeat again, is evidence given as to his knowledge of
the party for the first time on the 31st of August; if you’are
satisfied, notwithstanding this evidence which has been giveſ,
not deciding upon conjecture only, but with certainty, that he
was the man; it will be for you to say, whether he went with
the other man with the criminal purpose imputed to him,
namely, the aiding and assisting the other in so shooting at
Hinchliffe. In deciding upon the evidence to prove the prisoner
could not be there, you will take into your consideration the
probable
t JGHN SCHOFIELE. loº
probable difference of clocks. You will likewise consider the Mr. Barº
character which has been given him. In doubtful circum- º
stances, certainly a man's character,is of consequence to him. up. *
Now, Gentlemen, you will consider of your verdict, and will
give that which will satisfy your consciences, and which
will, I have no doubt, do justice between the country and the
prisoner. If a doubt remains, it ought always to preponderate
in favour of the prisoner. º *
The Jury retired at half past five, and returned in half an
hour, finding the prisoner - - - Not Guilty.
4
~-ºn-
“f f * * s -*- # *
"The Grand J ury having returned several Bills,
* Mr. Park observed, "The Gentlemen did not state whether
they had any more Bills. , F $.
. . . Mr. Lascelles.—We havé no more Bills before us. We dé
aot know whether there will be any more, or not.
... Mr. Park.-Will your Lordships permit me to say a few
words in answer to that question? There are some other cases,
that my learned Friends (whose assistance I have on the present.
§ccasion) and myself, have considered; but we find, on the
investigation of those cases, that many of the persons involved
in them have been under the influence and control of persons
already convicted; and therefore, exercising the judgment
which is confided to us by the Government, upon this subject,
ye think we can do no harm to the county, in the present
state ºf it, but on the contrary we hope we shall do much
gºod in respect of these deluded people, by abstaining at
present from presenting any bills against them. . Their Attor-
hey is in Court, and I trust he will communicate to them
this lenity shewn to them on the part of Government; ail
will give them to understand (as the fact undoubtedly is) that,
my forbearance at present does not exempt them from en-
saily at a future time, if their conduct should not entitle them
tº that forbearance. , $
Sºſru Justice Le Blanc.—The Gentlemen will not press at
*his moment to be discharged. * . . . . .33
, ºf f * $ * * * * & * * tº
." Mr. Lascelles.—By no means, my Lords, |
g * . . * * * f { , a * * 3 e
t
2
- * g t S
ºf . ,
. . Mr. Justice. LeBlanc.—It may be very much for the public
good, that you gentlenien ſhould not be discharged. . . . . .
"... Mr. Lascelles-We should not have stated any thing 're-
*ºtºgºther Bills, if we had not been asked. i -
' ( ; , ) ; , ' , " \ { \ * | * * * : * y
f \
!
ºf . ,"
Triday,
te; THE KING AGAINST
Friday, Sº january 1813.
BEFORE the sitting of the Court this day, George Mellor,
#Pilliam Thorpe, and Thomas Smith, who were on Wednesday
convicted of the murder of William Horsfall, were executed
it: pursuance of their sentence.
* *-* *-*— -1–*——º * * * *-*-* * i-º-º:
THE KING THE Prisoner was arraigned, and pleaded
against 3. Not Guilty, to an Indictment charging him
john Eadon (in the first count) with having administered .
~~. to Richard Howells an Oath, accordingly
taken by Howells, intended to bind him to be of an Association,
Society and Confederacy, formed to disturb the public peace;
stating it in the second count, to be an Oath intended to bind
Howells not to give evidence against any associate or con-
federate in such an association; and in other counts styling it
an Engagement, and not an Oath.
The Indictment was opened by Mr. Richardson.
Mr. Park.-May it please your Lordships; Gentlemen of
the Jury, We are , assembled here to-day to try a different
species of offence from those that have engaged the attention
of the Court for the last three days; but I am sorry to say
that the offence now before you is deeply connected with those
offences. The enormity of the crime, with which the prisoner
stands charged, must be obvious to every person who duly
considers it. It is, however, as it respects the prisoner, an
offence which does not affect his life; for the Statute, on which
he stands indicted, subjećts those who are convicted, only to
the sentence of transportation, or any sentence of that nature
the Court may think proper to give.
It has always struck my mind most forcibly, that much
of the mischief, which has affected this and other counties,
is owing to the crime with which the prisoner is charged.
The impropriety and profaneness of it must shock every reli-
gious mind. We have had instances, in which we have heard .
a great deal of religion, but it must be a false religion by
which mea can delude them)3Clves into the belieſ that it is
innocent to administer an oath, engaging those who take it to
call upon the Almighty to sauction such enormous crimes as
those to be concealed under the oath which you will hear. It
displays a degree of impiety one could hardly believe to have
dwelt in any human breast.
The Act of Parliament, upon which the prisoner stands in-
dicted, was passed about fourteen or fifteen years ago, in con-
sequence
sequence of some disturbances of this nature in a neighbouring
county; and the Act is so framed as to embrace every descrip-
tion of offence which can be committed in this way. The
Legislature wisely thought it was absolutely necessary to make
it so comprehensive in its terms, that it should be impossible
to evade the penalties of the law. I only mention as an
historical fact, that this crime having been carried of late in.
this āād some neighbouring counties to a great height, the
Legislature has wisely thought fit to inflict the punishment of
death upon this offence; but that does not reach the prisoner,
for his offence was committed before the latter Act passed.
The Act of 37. Geo. III. is in these terms, “That any person
“ or persons who shall in any manner or form whatsoever admi-
“nister or cause to be administered, or be aiding or assisting,
“ at, or present, at and consenting to, the administering or
“ taking of any oath or engagement purporting or intended.
‘to bind the person taking it, to engage in any mutinous or
* seditious purpose;” and so forth. Therefore any of these :
are offences, either actually administering an oath, or being
present consenting to its being administered, in whatever form
that oath may be conceived. And by subsequent words you
will find, it is not even necessary to go through any of the formal
ceremony used in the regular administration of oaths, of call-
ing upon God, by kissing his Gospels, to attest what is sale;
it is no matter whetherit is by taking of hands, or in what way.
it is taken, if it purports to bind in the nature of an engage-
ment. And the purposes which reſider taking the oath penal,
are very extensive: for if it be for any mutinous or seditious
purpose whatsoever, if it be an engagement to disturbº the
public peace, or to be of any society or confederacy formed for &
any such purpose, or to obey the orders or commands of any -
committee or body of men not lawfully constituted; or of anyº.
leaderkor commander or other person not having authority
for that purpose; or if it be not to inform or give evidence
against any associate, confederate, or other person; or not 'toº
reveal or discover any unlawful combination or confederacy,
or not to reveal or discover any illegal act done or to be done, ºw
or not to reveal or, discover any illegal oath which may have
been administered or tendered or taken; or the import of any's
such oath or engagement; it comes within this Act, and sub-is
jects the person sg offending to the punishment thereinstated, a
Thus, you See; Gehtlemen, the object of the Legislature: most ºf
wisely was to prevent in any the least degree so dangerous a ,
crimre as this; and well it might; because the unfortunate ciriº
cumstance; iºmany of these cases has been; that this: 6ath;º
though false, though improper, though it must be highly offen-St. ,
sive, as I humbly conceive, to such a Being as we'venerateiasº
$30d, that a man. should en ter-inta such an gengäg êm ention’so .
diabolical a purpose; systät somethow or othersso impressesº
- P s tus
&
&
º , ºt; º; t
s'. … §' * * *
lot, THE KING AGAINST
the consciences of these deluded men, and makes it next to
impossible to arrive at the discovery of the nefarious practices
of which they have been guilty. And ºtherefore it is of the
highest importance to society that this crime, whenever it is
detected, should be severely punished,
I will now tell, you in what way we propose to fix this
offence upon the prisoner at the bar. I do not know whether
any evidence will be attempted on the other side, in this case;
but if ever there was a case made out satisfactorily to the
mind, this 1 am convinced will be so. The person whose
name has been mentioned to you, Richard Howells, lived in the
house of the prisoner, in the parish of Barnsley, in this
county, in the month of May last. About the 20th or 21st
of that month, he asked the prosecutor, or at least the person
to whom the oath was administered (for the Crown is the
real prosecutor) to take a walk with him in the Old Engine
Field; when they were walking there, he said, “What do
you think on what we have talked about?” Howell said,
* I forget what you mean.” “Why that about the Luddites:
I wish you would be one; and if you will, I know a man that
can make you a Luddite.” And the prisoner not finding any
negative put upon this by the person with whom he was
conversing, shewed innmediately who the nuan alluded to was,
mamely, himself; for he immediately took out a book, which
the witness knew, from living with him, to be a Common Prayer
Book, and said, “Pray what is your christian name 2" and on
his telling him, said, “Say after me;” the witness did so, and
kissed the book. The prisoner upon that gave Howells the Oath
in his own hand-writing, and I shall prove it, and shall prove
by two witnesses that it is his hand-writing; and therefore
upon this case I conceive there can be no possible doubt.
The prisoner desired him to take care of it, and to get it off;
and when he had done so, he delivered it to the next witness,
whom I shall call, Thomas Broughton. Broughton delivered
it to a Serjeant in the South Devon Militia, of the name of
Prettyjohn, whom I shall call; and he delivered it to his
officer, Colonel Lang of that regiment. And here we have the
paper, traced immediately from the hand of the prisoner, and
proved to be his hand-writing by Richard Howells and Thomas
Bronghton.
-
Now, Gentlemen, let me read to you this most horrible
Oath ; I say most horrible; for if men are to endeavour to
bind the consciences of each other by any thing so shocking as
this, it seems to me civil society must be entirely at an end :
“ I, Richard Howells” (we will say in this case), “ of my
own free will and accord” (it is wrongly spelt) “do declare
and sºmnly swear, that I will never reveal to any person or
persons any thing that may lead to discovery of the º:
I €lthCT
JOHN EADO.N. 107
t
either in or by word sign or action as may lead to any disco-
very, under the penalty of being sent out of this world by the
first brother that may meet me. Furthermore I do swear,
that I will punish by death” (so that even assassination or
murder is to be in their judgment acceptable in the sight of
God) “any traitor” (that is, traitor to themselves) “any
traitor or traitors, shall there any arise up amongst us. I will
pursue with uniceasing vengeance, should he fly to the verge of
statute” (I suppose it should be verge of mature). “I will be
just, true, sober and faithful in all my dealings with all my
brothers. So help God to keep this my oath inviolated.
Amen.”
Gentlemen, I shall trouble you with no further observa-
tions. It is impossible for me to do it. I cannot express
to you in this place exactly the feelings of my own mind
upon the subject; but it is one' of those cases, that if it is
brought home by satisfactory evidence to the prisoner, it must
delight every good man that such persons are brought to
Justice.
Howells having, in his evidence, said that he was not quite
in earnest when he took the Oath, the prisoner's Counsel, when
he was called on for his Defence, took objection . to the
£vidence. w
Mr. Williams-I beg to submit to your Lordships, that no
one count is made out in proof. Every count in this indict-
meat states, that the person already named, to whom the oath
purports to have been administered, actually took the same;
that the prisoner “ did administer the oath then and there
accordingly taken by the said Richard Howells.” I do not
mean to contend, for one moment, that it was at all necessary
So to state ; I apprehend the offence was perfect and complete,
supposing the palty intended to bind the man to whom it was
administered. But I shall not waste your Lordships' time by
arguing what might be stated - or might be omitted, but the
question is, attending to the allegations as they stand, whether
they are made out, supposing them to be material allegations.
Without troubling your Lordships further, I take leave to
refer to the general principle laid down in Williamson v. Al-
lison, which is in 2 East, 446; where the rule is stated to be
this, 'That wherever an allegation material to be proved, is laid
with a particularity farther than is requisite, with which par-
ticularity it need not have been laid at all, and the whole is not
so proved; where an allegation is incumbered with superfluous
platter, but matter which cannot be rejected; if that allegation
is not made ºut with the partieularity with which it is stated,
the indictment fails. Every count in this indictment only
makes a variation as to this being an Oath or an Engagement,
£ 2 and
Legal Ob-
Jection to
the Indict,
inellt.
£egal Ob-
jection to
the Indict- .
Jºelkä,
$
*
t
ro8 THE KING AGAINST
and by stating different purposes; and alleges, that the pri-
soner did administer the oath to the said Richard Howells,
so then and there taking the same ; which I apprehend is to be
undel stood as we understand it in common language., For if
there be no other reason, or no paramount rule of law to the
contrary, I take it to be clear, that every indictment, and Act
of Parliament, and other instrument, is to be construed ac-
cording to ordinary acceptation in common parlance. Then
what is the evidence in the case? Why, that this man did not
take the oath in earnest, he said he considered it to be in joke;
that is, that he did not take it in the ordinary acceptation
of the term, with a view to bind himself or his conscience.
What, therefore, I humbly submit to your Lordships is, that in
point of fact, the allegation made in each of the counts is not
made out in point of proof; although, I. fully admit that the
offence would have been complete without stating that Howells
took the oath, and that it would have been sufficient to say, that
the prisoner administered it, without more.
Mr. Justice Le Blanc.—My learned Brother and myself
have no doubt upon this subject. The offence charged against
the prisoner is, the administering. The objection is, not that
the prisoner administered it in a joke, but that the man took
it in a joke. The words of the indictment are, that the
prisoner administered the oath so taken by him. Did he take
it? He certainly took it, whether he took it in joke or in earnest;
the oath was taken, the oath was repeated by him, the book
was touched, and the book was kissed: And therefore, whe-
ther it was necessary to put the allegation into the indictment
or not, the allegation, as put into the indictment, is proved.
The prisoner administered the oath without any mental re-
servation. Suppose Howells had been a person, who for the .
purpose of detecting the prisoner, and knowing he was in the
habit of administering these oaths, had put himself in his way,
and had intended the very next day to go before a Magistrate,
and give information what the man had dene; he would have
been a person answering the designation in the indictment, as
a person who took it, though he never meant to bind himself
or his conscience, or to take any obligatory oath. It appears
to me, therefore, that the allegation as stated in the ladictment
is supported by the evidence that has been given.
Mr. Baron Thomson. —I am very clearly of that opinion.
After one witness had been called by the prisoner,
Mr. Justice LE BLANc summed up the whole Evidence as
follows: -
Mr.
JOHN EADO.N. #69
Mr. Justice LE BLANC.
Gentlemen of the Jury,
THE prisoner at the Bar, John Eadon, is charged by this
Indictment with a simple felony; I say a simple felony, for it
is not one affecting his life; but it charges him with adminis-
tering, and causing to be administered, to one Richard Howells,
a certain Oath, then and there accordingly taker, which was
intended to bind him not to inform or give evidence against any
associate, confederate, or other person belonging to an asso-
ciation’society or confederacy of persons, being an association
society or confederacy formed to disturb the public peace. The
nature of this society is differently charged in the several
counts of the indictment. In one count it is charged to be a
society to disturb the public peace, and in another count, not to
reveal or discover any act done by any person belonging to
such society; and the other counts in the indictment charge it
to be an engagement.
The question upon the present occasion is, whether the evi-
dence which has been produced, and which I will detail to you,
proves to your satisfaction or not, that the prisoner Eadon did
administer such oath so taken by Richard Howells. The
administering any oath whatever, innocent or unlawful, by any
person not duly authorized by law to give an oath, was at all
times, in the common law of this couritry, illegal, and a mis-
demeanour. But the particular Act which is alluded to was
passed in the year 1797, in consequence of the practice of
administering oaths of this sort, which ai e illegal, and tend to
operate on the consciences of ignorant men, to induce them to
believe they have entered into some engagement, and that they
would be criminal if they revealed any of those circumstances
which might come to their knowledge in consequence either of
being of such society, or entering into such an engagement.
That, which always before was a crine and misdemeanour, the
administering even an idle oath by a person not having autho-
rity to administer an oath, was, by that Act, made more penal;
and where it is intended to bind the party to disturb the
public peace, or to be mischievous to society, it is made a.
felony; and it is with that felony the present prisoner is charged.
•Arſd te be sure, after the enquiry in which you have been
engaged at this time, one cannot want any arguments to shew
the bad effect of such oaths being administered. That, how-
ever, can have no effect upon the case of the prisoner at the bar,
unless you should be satisfied that he did in fact administen this
oath, as charged by the indictment.
The account given by Howells is this: he says that he him-
self was employed in the business of a weaver, and worked with
the prisoner, at a place he calls the Old Engine : that he
* worked
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc’s
Summing
Jup-
$ 1.6 THE RING AGAINST
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc’s
Summing
up.
worked with him in the month of May ; that he lodged in his
house, and first went to live and lodge with him, and to
work in his busixess, on the 18th or 19th of May, he will
not be sure which. He says that just after he went there, on
a Tuesday, the prisoner began to be talking to him about the
Luddites, and then told him ile would make any body a Luddite;
and that he had made a man in the shop believe that he could
, make any man a Luddite. IIe afterwards says, that man in the
shop was a man of the name of Swift, who lodged there. He
says that about two or three days after this conversation took
place, on the 20th or 21st of May, the prisoner asked the wit-
ness Howells to walk out with him into the fields, and they
accordingly went and took a walk out together; and when they
were so out in the fields (which he describes to have been in the
evening) he asked him what he thought of what they had been
talking about before. Howells said at first he did not recollect
what they had been talking about. The prisoner then said,
concerning the Luddites, and then asked him if he would be one.
He said he would be one ; and upon that, he says, the prisoner
Eadon pulled out of his pocket a book, which he the witness
knew to be the Common Prayer Book, put it into the witness's
right hand, and then asked the witness his Christian mame, for
the purpose of lepeating the words of the oath, for the witness
to follow him in the repetition, beginning with his Christian
and surname. He says that after he had given him his Christian
name, the prisoner then began to say, “I Richard Howells,”
desiring the witness to repeat after him; and he then repeated .
by healt, and correctly, with the omission, I think, only of an
expression (or two, the form of what is called the Oath, which
is set forth on the paper afterwards produced. l Ie says that
the prisoner first of all repeated it or spoke it by heart, and
that he (IHowells) repeated it after him, and that the form
of its was— .
“I A M I of my own free will and A Coard do declare
“ and solemly sware that I will never reveal to kney to aney
“Person on Persons aney thing that may lead to discovery of
“ the same Either in or by word sign or action as may lead
“ to aney Discovery under the Penelty of being sent out of
“ this World by the first Brother that May Meet me
“ further more I do sware that I will Punish by death aney
“trater or trators should theie aney arise up amongst us
“ I will persue with unseaceing vengence, should he fly to
“ the verge of Statude. I will be gust true sober and faithful
“ in all my deailings with all my Brothers So help GoD to
“keep this my Oath invoilated Amen.”
This, he says, was what the prisoner repeated, calling upon
Howells to repeat after him, which he did ; and holding at the
same time the prayer-book, which he says he had put into his
hand, and which he afterwards kissed. He says, after he had
A. $6)
/
JOHN EADO.N. 1 + 1
so repeated it, he gave him the paper, and told him to get the
paper off as fast as possible; that he might be able himself to
repeat it; and then, when he had got it off, he told hjm to
destroy the paper. This witness, Howells, says, he did ac-
cordingly put the paper into his pocket, and get it, it seems,
pretty accurately; and that then he delivered the paper to
Thomas Broughton. That he continued working and lodging in
the prisoner's house, from the time that he first went to live
with him, for two months; and that in the course of that time
he frequently saw him write, so as to be acquainted with his
manner of hand-writing; and that that paper which the
prisoner so gave him, and which has been traced through
different hands, is in the prisoner's hand-writing. He says
that he saw him write three of the same description of papers
as that which he gave to him, and which he bade him get off.
He is then particularly asked, as to when he quitted Yorkshire,
after this. He says he continued in Yorkshire till the month
of September; and then he went' away from this county,
together with Thomas Broughton, to whom he had delivered
the paper. He was asked, if he took away his clothes with
him ; and he says he went without packing up his clothes.
It seems, upon enquiry, he had been before the Magistrate, and
that the Magistrate sent him away in a hurry into another
county, fearing he might be put out of the way, or something
might happen; that it was not a running away of his own
accord, but was the act of the Magistrate, for his safety : and
he says, that at the time he and Broughton heard of some
being taken to York, Castle, they left the county, and went to
Shrewsbury, and from thence to Ludlow. He was particularly
examined as to the time he went to live and lodge with the
prisoner, which is not now material, as there is no clashing of
evidence upon that subject. He says that the time he gave
him this paper in the field, was in the evening or night; that
the prisoner had the paper in his pocket, and did not read the
oath from the paper, but repeated the oath to him, aſter
having asked his Christian name, and then bade the witness
take it, and get it by heart, and then destroy it; that he read
the words himself the next morning from the paper, and then
recollected they were the same words which the man had
repeated over to him the night before ; that he should not have
recollected them without. He is then particularly asked as to
'his knowledge, whether taking this oath was wrong He says,
“I knew it was wrong, but I did not much know what we
were to do afterwards. I cannot tell whether it was in joke,
or not ; I was not in earnest quite, I was not serious when
I took it I thought the prisoner was joking with me at the
time; and I spoke to him, and said I thought you were
joking with me;' but he said, ‘No, I am serious." ' .
- - This
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
1 12 " . THF, KING AGAINST -
Mir. Justice
Le Blanc’s
Summing
up.
This is the evidence of the fact of the oath being admi-
nistered, given by the witness Howells, who is the person
charged in the indictment to have had it administered to him.
The account given by Howells is, that he thought the prisoner.
might be in joke, and that he put the question to him, and that
the prisoner himself said, No, he was serious. Andrit would be
very difficult to conceive it, otherwise, when he afterwards
pulled the paper out of his pocket, and gave it to Höwells to
get it by heart, that he might be capable of administering it to
others; with an instruction afterwards to destroy it. The
circumstances seem to shew that it could not be intended as
a joke, but that he must be serious. That is the account given
by Howells; and I think, according to his own account, he
himself was doing something more than an idle thing, because
it was criminal in any body to consent to take such an oath.
But you will see, from the whole evidence, whether that is a
correct and true account, which he has given. It does not rest
entirely on his statement of the matter, for the very paper
put into his hand (änd which he says he knows to be the
prisoner's writing) has been preserved, and is traced aud laid
before you. He says he gave it to the witness of the name of
Broughton. -
Broughton's account is, that he, being a weaver, knew
Howells; that he went to see him, and he put into his hand
that paper, which has been traced to the hands of Colonel
Lang, and is now produced in evidence. He says that it was
on the 12th of June Howells gave him the paper. According
to Howells' account, he bad received the paper from the pri-.
soner on the 20th or 21st of May ; so that he had kept it
between three weeks and a month. He says that Howells
asked him (Broughton) to walk with him, and that the next
day, which was the 12th, Howells put that paper into his
hand; that he had seen the prisoner write at Salters Brook
once, and the occasion of his writing was, putting the names
and the numbers of persons called delegates into a book, and,
making some memorandumsin that book of the transactions that
happened; and from that, as far as he can judge, he thinks
this paper to be the prisoner's hand-writing. He says that
the paper continued in his possession from Friday, the 12th
of June, when Howells gave it him, till Monday; so that it
continued three days. On the Sunday he went to the house of
the prisoner Eadom, and asked him (having that paper with
him) what it meant; and then he gives you an account of the
answer the prisoner gave to him. The prisoner, he says, said
it was to form a regular organization in the country, to over-
turn the tyraanical system of Government. IIe asked him for
the particular signs and inotions, that these who were of that.
associatiºn might know one another by ; and he says the pri-
I. - - - SQI) ºr
JOHN EADO.N. - 113
soner made a motion, by which they were to know one another. Mr. Justice
He says that after this had passed with the prisoner, he went #. Blanc's
to Serjeant Prettyjohn, a serjeant of the South Devon militia, ...”
and gave him that paper, which he had before shewn to the “”
prisoner, and the meaning of which the prisoner had explained
to him to be, that it was to form a regular organization of the
country, to overturn the tyrannical system of Government, as
he expressed it. Broughton says, that at that time he lived
about a quarter of a mile from the prisoner; that he did not
know any thing of what had passed between the prisoner
Eadon and Howells, till Friday the 12th of June, which was
the day when Howells gave him that paper. He says that he
himself, though not a good writer, can write better than the
person who wrote this paper. The paper certainly is not very
good writing, but it is such as very well to designate the par-
ticular mode of hand-writing,
The next witness was Serjeant Prettyjohn, of the South
Devon militia, who says the paper was given to him by Thomas
Broughton, on the 14th of June last, and that he kept it in his
possession from the 14th of June till the month of September,
when he delivered, it to his Lieutenant Colonel, Lieutenant
Colonel Lang of the South Devon militia. • *
Lieutenant Colonel Lang was then called as a witness; and
he produced the paper, which he says he received from Ser-
jeant Prettyjohn, in September; he does not exactly know
the day; that on the 29th of December he delivered it to
Mr. Brown, who is an agent at Sheffield, employed by the
persons acting for Government. -
Mr. Brown is then called, and he identifies the paper, and
shews it to be the same which he received from Colonel Lang:
So that this paper, produced before you, is, by a regular chain
of evidence, proved to be the same paper, which Howells, the
first witness, says he received from the hands of the prisoner,
on the 20th or 21st of May, when he states on his oath, that
the prisoner administered the Oath to him, and afterwards gave
him this paper to get by heart, and afterwards to destroy it.
Therefore, in this case, you see the precise form of the Oath.
That, Gentlemen, is the whole of the case,
With respect to the witness called on the part of the pri-
soner, as far as he goes, he confirms the account given by
the witness on the part of the Crown, Howells, as to the
time when he went to lodge and to work in the house of the
prisoner. - - }
The first and the material circumstance for you to consider,
is, does this evidence satisfy you that the prisoner at the bar
administered this oath to Howells. It must be administered
by the party charged to have administered it, he intending that
Q ič .
114. , THE KING AGAINST
$fr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
it should be taken by the party to whom he gives, it as air
obligatory oath, and meaning to bind him. Whether the man.
who took it meant to be bound by it, is not material to the
chârge against the prisoner, if he who gave it intended, it
should be considered as obligatory. That is what is charged
by the indictment; and, to be sure, every circumstance attend-
ing it, besides the expression of the man himself, goes to con-
firm that; because, when he put a paper containing the same
oath into his hands, telling him to get" it by heart, it could be
only that he might administer it to others. The next question
is, whether this form of Oath, which you have before you in
writing, and proved to be in the prisoner's hand-writing (which
was acknowledged by the prisoner to Broughton, to be intended
to form an association in the country to overturn the tyrannical
system of Government, as he called it) is an oath within the
meaning of the Act of Parliament, intended to bind the person
to whom it was administered not to inform or give evidence
against any person belonging to a society or confederacy formed
to disturb, the public peace? I am ashamed to state that
as a question to you, after the comment proved by the witness
to have been given by the man himself; and if it had not been
so given, the very wording of it imports that it is for that
purpose, and not to reveal particular persons who should be
members of that confederacy. If you are satisfied that the
prisoner at the bar did administer it to this man as stated, he
is guilty of the offence imputed to him. If you have a doubt
whether he did so administer it, you will find him not guilty.
The Jury immediately pronounced the prisoner - - Guilty.
*
... ſ
i lºi * ſ or
THE KIx& ^
against FOR administering an unlawful Oath .
John Eadon and to Thomas Broughton.
Craven Cookson. * *
- The prisoners were arraigned, and pleaded Not Guilty.
Mr. Park.-Gentlemen of the Jury; I do not trouble the
Officer of the Court, or my learned Friend, to state this indict-
ment, because I do not mean to give any evidence upon it; for
this reason, that, Eadon is already convicted, by your verdict,
6f a similar offence to that with which he now stands charged;
and Cookson, in my judgment, and that of my learned Friends,
whose assistance f have upon this, occasion, appears,to have
been a much less guilty man than Eadon. The consequence of
which is, that as we are sent here not at all with any purpose
of seeking for convictions against our own judgment, but :
the ,
T}AINTS, AND OTHERS. 1 15
2
the sake of restoring peace to the country, we think that,
consistently with our duty, we may refrain from giving any
evidence against Cookson. We trust this lenity, iſ he is con-
scious of being guilty, will induce him to return to the course
of honest industry; and not endeavour, by entering into associa-
£ions of this kind, to assist in the disturbance of the public
peace, which has brought so much distress upon the country.
Mr. Justice LE BLAN.c.—Gentlemen, you will find both the
prisoners Not Guilty. The one is convicted upon a for mer
indictment, which renders it unnecessary to proceed against
him upon the second; and as to the other, there is no evidence
brought against him. !
The Jury immediately pronounced the prisoners Not Guilty.
*
sº
sº
THE Prisoners were arraigned, THE KING
and severally pleaded Not Guilty, agaivist
to an Indictment, which charged john Baines the elder,
john Baines senior with- admini-) Charles liſhes,
stering an unlawful Oath to John's john Baines, the younger,
Macdonald, and the other prisoners || || illiam Blakeborough,
with being present aiding and assist-| George Duckworth, &
ing theyat, on the 8th of July last. (Zachariah Baines.
*
The Indictment was opened by Mr. Richardson.
Mr. Park.-May it please your Lordships; Gentlemen of
the Jury, On the trial of a former prisoner (John Fadon)
you heard the Law upon the subject of the Act of Par-
liament, on which this indictment is glounded, so accurately
stated to you by the learned Judge who tied that prisoner,
that it would be great impertinence in me to trouble
you...with any further, 6bservations upon it, since you are
most fully apprized of all its bearings. The six prisoners
at the bar stand indicted for a similar offence to his. Fortu-
nately for them, it took place previously to the passing of the
latter Statute to which I alluded ; consequently it will not
stbject them to a capital punishment. There are, how ever,
eireumstances in this case greatly differing from those of the
former, and it will therefore be my duty to state what those
circumstances are; and I do it in the outset, because I think it
does honour to those who set that conduct on foot.
You, Gentlemen, know yourselves, fiom the state of the
country, the scenes that were taking place. It was know I that
p Q 2. these
116 'i'HE KING AGAINST y
these oaths were administering in this county, and it was seen
that unless there was a detection of them, it was impossible the
country should subsist ; and therefore it was deemed wise, by
those who have a considerable discretion to exercise with
respect to the plan of Government, to send from a neighbour-
ing county into this, persons on purpose. My learned Friends,
who defend the prisoners, will have all the benefit of that fact,
that the witnesses, i shall call to you, came on purpose to
detect these persons, or such others as might be engaged in
these practices, and they were wisely sent. Some absurd
visionaries have been of opinion, and have so declared, that
it is highly criminal to send men in this way to get at the
commission of crimes. It is a subject, you will suppose, I have
well considered, and I have considered it in every bearing as
a moral question. If a man goes to incite another to commit
a crime which he had no intention to commit, if he seduces
his neighbour from the paths of innocence to those of guilt,
he is, without exception, one of the most infamous of man-
kind. But if you get at information that certain practices are
carrying on by, individuals, most destructive to the State, and
to the individuals composing the country, and you can arrive
at the conviction of those who are so engaged, by no other
means so well as by employing some one to see whether
they are persons of that description or not; it is most highly
laudable to bring such offenders to justice. It is of the
highest importance to every peaceable subject, that they should
be discovered and detected. I am very glad that the prisóner
John Baines the elder, who appears to be a little deaf, hears
what I say ; I hope he, and all within the sound of my voice,
hear it; for perhaps the preservation of the country has been
effected by such means having been resorted to. The wit-
nesses I shall call before you, are persons who have been so
sent. If that be an offence, which ought to prevent their
being heard in a Court of Justice, let it be so said, and there
is an end of this prosecution; but I know the wisdom that
presides here, and I know that thät will not be said. They
are to stand or fall, like, all other witnesses, by the evidence
they shall give, and by the eonſirmation which that evidence
shall receive; and you are to decide, upon your solemn oaths,
the credit to which they are entitled.'" }
John Mºonald is the witness I mean to call. I will iell
you who he is ; for it is totally indifferent to me what is done
ºith this, or that prisoner. If they can deliver themselves,
i rejoice sinoſ rely in it. Šball call, besides him, a man of
the name of Gossiing. M. Donald, the principal witness, and
to whotii the oath was administered, is an assistant constable
of Miºchester, under the direction of the Magistrates and of
tº cºnstables of that town, in the month of June, infor-
• Imation
*
BAINES, AND OTHERS. 117
mation was conveyed to the Government, that in the neigh-
bourhood of Ilalifax, from which these prisoners all come,
things had got to a most dreadful pass; upon which M*Donald
and Gossling were sent to Halifax.
Before I siate the facts, I will tell you who the prisoners
are. John Baines the elder is connected with the hat-making
trade, in that town ; John Baines the younger, is a nephew of
the elder Baines; Charles Milnes is a card-maker. I know of
no relationship between them, but a great intimacy, as you
will hear. William Blakeborough is a shoemaker, and a
companion of the other persons; and so is Duckworth. The
little Boy, who, I understand, is of the age of fifteen, is
the son of the old man, and a cousin of John Baines the
younger.
When M*Donald arrived at Halifax, he went to a public
house, and was very soon met there by some of the prisoners.
y”
You have heard already, upon the present Commission, how
astonishingly soon men of this description got to talk together,
how ready they were to enter into conversation, upon these
subjects. And accordingly very soon after Milnes came in.
he got very well acquainted with M*Donald, and they talked
, about Luddism, and things of that sort. He was asked, who-
ther he had been sworn a Luddite; for it seems the Oath which
you heard read upon the former occasion, is almost in terms
the same as was administered in this and other cases; it is
called the Luddite Oath. M*Donald was told he must be sworn
in, before they could talk much to him, and that old Baines
would do it. There was a good deal of conversation about
this; and at last Mº Donald said that he had no ob-
jection to be twisted in. Here we get to the point that you
have already heard discussed by Mr. Williams, for I have no
difficulty in avowing that M*Donald did not mean to bind
himself, by this oath; and it is not at all necessary that he
should. The question is, whether the person administering
the oath, meant to bind the conscience of the person to whom
he administered it, M*Donald said he should have no great
objection to take the oath. Milnes said, “I will take you to
a man who has been in the business nearly twenty years, and
he will do it for you to-night.” They, M*Donald and Milnes,
then went to old Baines's house, and Milnes said to Baines, “I
have brought a friend here; he is a stranger, but he is a very
good fellow, and he wishes to be a brother. ' Baines replied,
“Then we must be handy, for we shall have the watch and
ward here soon; some of my peighbours have laid an infor-
mation, and they are often searching my house.” At this time,
besides Milnes and Baines the elder, there were present, Joln
Baines the younger, George Duckworth, William Blakeborough,
find the boy Zachariah, They all then sat down, and had son e
£()} | Vel's ºt! Cis
1 13 THE KING AGAINST
conversation. After this, old Baines, who had before-mentioned
the watch and ward, repeated it; and M*Donald said, “I will
go as soon as I have done." Old Baines then got a bºok about
the size of a small Testament, and desired them all to stand
up. It may at first view be distressing, to see a youth at that
extremely early period of life tried at that bar, and especially
when he is tried with his father at the other end of that bar;
but you will find (and the humanity of the Law of England,
every man is acquainted with) that, malice supplies age,
2nalitia supplet attatem, You must see what part this youth
took, and if there be truth in the evidence here, it seemed to
us it would be improper, young as he is, to leave him out of the
indictment. Their Lordships and you will deal with him as
you think, proper, and the punishment is in very merciſui
hands. But this youth was in the room, and took a most
active part, upon the subject. What the law looks to, is know-
ledge, Is...there a distinction in the mind of the culprit, ‘be.
tween right and wrong? The question is, if the crime be of
that nature, that he knew he could commit it, whether he knew
he was committing it? Secresy was necessary on account of
the watch and ward; this youth, therefore, when they were
all ordered to stand up, and M*Donald to take the book in his
hand, was ordered to place himself against the door; and he
did so during the time the ceremony was going forward. Then
old Baines said, “ Take the book;" M‘Donald did so. Then
says he, “Now for your name * “My name,” says he (now
my learned Friend will say, he was not serious). “My name is
John Smith.” Then, says Baines, “John Smith, say after me;”
and he did so. In the last case, the witness had the oath in
writing; that cannot be supplied here, nor is it necessary.
The witness cannot tell you all the wolds of the oath, and it
is hardly to be expected, except in such a case as the last,
where the man was ordered to get it by heart. But he will teli
you the purport of it; that he must not reveal any thing that
might lead to a discovery, either in or by word, sign or action,
under the penalty of being sent out of this world by the first
brother that might meet him; and that he would punish, by
- death any traitor; and should any arise up amongst them, he
was to be pursued by vengeance to death, And then he took
the book, and called upon the Aknighty to assist him, that he
might keep that oath inviolate. And so the ceremony endel,
There was no great talk after that; but the witness, in order
to carry on, what I will call in respect of him, a perfect mental
reservation, proposed to give them some drink; but did Baines
objected to that, on account of the watch and ward., Some
of them, however, went out and drank. It is not necessary
i should go through the whole of that transaction, but i shall
prove to you that Gossling, whom I shall call as a witness, in a
r
+ & * * * e <! *
# CGI) Wei'sation
*
dº
. . . . . . BANES, AND OTHERS. 119
tonversation with Baines the elder, and several of the other
prisoners, enquired, in the hearing of M*Donald, whether it was
true that he had been twisted in; and without the least difficulty
it was said that he had, but that there must be a good deal of
caution, used that it should not be mentioned, lest it should be
discovered. I shall prove to you that this old man said, and it
is * melancholy consideration if it be true, but I shall prove it
to have come from his own mouth, that his eyes had been opened
for three and twenty years, and now he understood the thing
well. So that the evidence will prove to you in what system it
was, that this old man thought fit to bring up his nephew ºnd his
son, and which he considered such an illumination of the sight.
I shall prove these facts to you; and if these men tell you the
story, which I believe they will (and I tell you beforehand, that
they went on purpose to procure evidence against these persons,
or any others concerned in these illegal transactions); and if
you believe that their stóry is true (and I can see no reason to
dóubt that story being true); it will be your duty to find the
prisoners guilty.
z
The whole of the Evidence, as well on the part of the Crown
as of the several prisoners, is fully stated by the learned Judge,
in his summing up.
Mr. Baron THoMson,
Gentlemen of the Jury, i *
"THIS Indictment is framed against six persons now at the
bar, John Baines the elder, Charles Milnes, John Baines the
younger, Iſilliam Blakeborough, George Duckworth, and
Aachariah Baines, on the same Act of Parliament as that
Indictment which you have lately tried. That Indictment was
against one prisoner only, and charged him with a similar
offence to that which is contained in this indictment; namely,
administering an "unlawful oath, intended by the person
administering it, to bind the person taking it, not to give
evidence against any one belonging to a society or confederacy
of persons formed to disturb the public peace. This indictment
contains various counts, all framed upon different clauses in
that wholesome Act of Parliament, and charging the admi-
histering of the eath to be with different intents; some of
them to engage the person to whom it was administered, to
become one of a society formed for the disturbance of the
Public peace; and others, to bind him to secresy in regard to
the affairs of such an association so formed. The present
indictment differs however from the last, in this respect, that
the last contains a charge against one person only for admi-
, nistering aft unlawful oath; whereas this contains a similar
charge against John Baines the elder, for administering an
unlawful oath to one John M*Donald, and against the other
five
*
Mr. Bases
Thomson's
Summing
up.
12O TIE RING AGAINST
#r. Bárðn
Thomson's
five prisoners, including the young lad of the name of
Zachariah Baines, for being present at and aiding and assisting
and consenting to the administration and taking of such oath.
For the provisions of this Act of Parliament do not stop with
providing punishment for those who administer or who take
an unlawful oath, but the Act very wisely goes farther, and
makes all persons aiding and assisting at it, though they do
not actually themselves administer, the oath, or being present
at and consenting to such an administration of the oath, prin-
cipals, as much as the person who actually administers it.
Now this being the charge against the several prisoners at the
bar:*namely, against the first prisoner Baines the elder, for
administering the oath to John M*Donald with the tendency
which has been stated, and against the others for being present
at aid consenting to or aiding and assisting in the administer-
c }
ing that oath, you will attend to the evidence which has
been given in support of the charge. - -
John M*Donald appears: from his own statement. to have.
been a person who was employed, and I say properly
employed, in order to detect persons in that part of the
country, who were guilty of the offence which is prohibited by
this Act of Parliament; and he certainly went for that very
purpose. These are expedients, which are necessarily resorted
to very frequently in order to detect offences of this nature ;
and not only of this nature, but of other natures, which, but
for what may be called a fair stratagen, would remain
unpunished. Nothing is more frequent, than for persons to go
to those, who are suspected of unlawfully dealing in such
articles as counterfeit bank notes, for the very purpose of
buying those notes of the persons so suspected, in order to
give evidence against them. And there really never can be any
injustice done in such a case to an innocent man, for if the
person applied to (as in this instance) is not one of that
description, that is, in the habit of administering these
unlawful Oaths and binding persons to the wicked purposes of
such associations, it is impossible that he should in any way
be trepanned into any such unlawful act. The question for
your consideration on the whole of this case will be, whether
this charge is sufficiently made out to your satisfaction against
all or any of the prisoners at the Bar. ' ' . . . .
John M*Donald has stated to you, that he lives at Manchester,
where he is an assistant to the Police Officers; that in J uly last
he went from Manchester to Halifax, accompanied. by John
Gossling, and arrived there on the 8th (he fixes, you will observe,
the day, the 8th), about noon. They went to the first public
house, he thinks the sign of the Crispin, and in the course of
the day he met at that house with Charles Milnes, one of the
prisoners at the bar. Having dined, he and Gossling went qut
t()
\
BAINES, AND OTHERS. 121
to look for lodgings. In about an hour or two they returned to
the public house, and when they returned they found Charles
Mikes there. This is the first time of their falling into company
with the prisoner Milnes. IIe says that they entered into con-
versation with him, that they had been together half an hour in
the room, and after having had some conversation with him,
Milnes said that,he had taken a good many cartridges from
some soldiers, that they had made a search for him, and
he got away, and went to a shepherd's at Dean Common, and
stayed there three weeks. M*Donald says, that he told him he
was very glad that he had had the good fortune not to be taken;
that there was then some talk about Mr. Cartwright's mill,
and of two men having been killed there, whom Milnes
said he knew very well; and Milnes told M*Donald of another
person who had been acting as an officer on that occasion.
Now M*Donald began his operations. You see the conversation,
which they had had, procured him the confidence of Milnes,
for Milles opens himself very amply to him upon the subject of
the disturbances then going on in the country, and particularly
of Mr. Cartwright's mill. The witness says, that he then said
he would be as active as any of them, if he was sworn in.
Mi/nes said there was an old man lived near there that would
swear him in, having been in that way nearly twenty years.
M“Donald says that he said he was willing. They remained
together there the afternoon, till it was getting dark, and then
liilités and he went out together. Gossling was not there,
when they went out. Milnes took him to the house of the
old man, John Baines the elder, in Halifax; it was nearly ten
at night when they got there; and he swears that all the other
prisoners at the bar were then in the house, and points them
all out. Milnes introduced him, and said he was a stranger, . . .
Mr. Baron
Thomson's
Summing
tºp.
but a good fellow, and that he wished to be a brother, The old
man said they must be handy, for he expected the watch and
ward. He got a paper, and a book about the size of a Testa-
ment, and gave the book into the witness's hand, and Baines
first asked him what was his name, and he said “John Smith.”
Baines looked at the paper he produced, and appeared to the wit-
ness to be reading from that paper, and told the ºwitness that he
must say after him, which he did, repeating, “I John Smith.”
lection, but he states he knew it better at the time; what he
now recollects is, that he must never reveal any brother's
secrets, neither by signs nor words, and that any traitors that
arose, he was to pursue, them and put them to death ; and he
says there was also a great deal more, which at this time he
cannot recollect. "That is the purport of what he states: he was
He speaks imperfectly to the whole of this Oath from his recol-
sworn to do, not to reveal any brother's secrets, neither by .
signs nor words, and that any traitors that arose he was to
pursue and put to death. That was part only of the oath, but
R. it
122 THESKING AGAINST
fºr. Baron,
Thomson's
Sumuling
up.
it is the only part of which he remembers correctly the pur-
port. As to the very words of the oath, it is not at all requi-
site that they should be given in evidence, or charged in the
indictment, only enough to shew its purport, and that the in-
, tention was to effectuate the bad purposes of such associations.
M“Donald says, that having so repeated the oath, the prisoner
Baines bid him kiss the book, and he did so ; that the others
were all sitting down when he began to administer the oath,
that they all stood up at the time of administering it; and that
even that boy, Zachariah Baines, appeared to take some share
in this business, for at that time he stood at the door with
his back, keeping it (as he expressed it). The witness says he
was afraid himself, lest the watch and ward should eome in.
He ther got up, and said he would pay for something to drink
for them; but the old man was not willing, for he said he ex-
pected the watch and ward, and they had better be going, for
that one of the neighbours had repºrted to the magistrates what
sort of a house he kept, and they generally eame every right.
He then tells you that he left the house, and that Charles
Mihićs, John Baines the younger, Blakeborough and Duckworth,
went out together with him, being all but the old man and the
boy. They all walked together to the door of the Crispin,
which was the house that M*Donald had come from. There
Dilekeorgh left them, according to his account, and the other
three went in with him. They either found Gossling (that is
the friend of M*Donald) theie, or he came in directly after,
and they continued drinking together for some time. He says
that he told Gossling, in the hearing of the three, that he had
got twisted in; and that the three (which three are Charles
Milnes, John Baines the younger, and Blakeborough) all of
...them said that he had ; aud. Charles Milties Said that it was
he that introduced him, confirming, in this respect, the evi-
dence of M-bonald, who had said that this business was per-
formed by the introduction of him to the old man and the rest,
at the old man's house, by Charles Mihies; that they parted
about twelve or one, and they all accompañied Gossling and
M“Donald to the door of their lºdgings. The witness-then
says, that Gossling and he remained in Halifax some time; that
Gossling and he and Milnes and Blakeborough, a day or two
afterwards, went to Baines the elder's shop, which was a hatter's,
and found him there at work, that they invited him toge with
them to take some ale, and -they weißt to a publić house hear
Baines's workshop, which is supposed, to be the George; the
party consisted of himself, Gossling, the Old, Man, Millies and
Blakeborough , that there was also another hatter that worked
in the same shop with old. Baines, whom old Baines said he
could trust; that they were in a room by themselves, and he
(the witness) said to Gossling, “ This is the Old Man that
tw.ited me in,’ pointing at the elder Baines, and Raines said he
t BAINES, AND OTHERs. i23
had done it, but he put up his hands and said, he must always
be cautious where he'said this. The witness said he knew the
company, and he was not afraid. Baines then began a good
deal of conversation with Gossling. He remarked, in conver-,
sation, that his eyes had been opened a great while, a matter
of three and twenty years. The witness sº w old Baines again.
Mr. Baron
Thompson's .
Sumni ig
up.
in a day or two afterwards, he met him in the street, Gossling.
was then with him; and old Baines told him they must be.
very careful, for he was informed there were two Bow; street
officers in the town. -
On his cross-examination, he says he is an Irishman, and
is employed chiefly at the Police Office at Manchester, and
was once a weaver. He admits that he has been tried and
convicted for an assault at Manchester; the circumstances of
it we could not minutely inquire into, but the fact is, that he
has been in prison for that assault, and is brought here by a
Habeas Corpus to give this evidence. He says he might be
two or three hours in Halifax, before he saw Milnes; that he
entered into conversation with him in a few minutes after he
saw him, and had talked about other things before he men-
tioned the cartridges; it might be about, half an hour. The
witness says he promised; that if he was twisted in, he would
be as active as any of them. He had never seen old Baines
before Milnes took him there, nor had he seen Duckworth,
nor young, Baines, nor the boy, to his knowledge. At the
Crispin, after the swearing, there were present Blakeborough,
Milnes, and John Baines the younger. When in a day
or two afterwards he went to Baines's hat shop, there were
two or three men, but he took notice only of an old man who
came with him, whom old Baines said he could trust. Hè
took notice at the public house (the George) of no other but
the persons composing their company, except the woman whö
brought in the drink. On the night they went from Baines's
to the Crispin, they sat in the kitchen; they were on one side,
and the landlord, the mistress, and her or his sister, on the
other. A part of the time he was at the Crispin, he said, he
was looking for work, and the other part of the time, he said
that he was a hawker of handkerchiefs; and he says that he
gave these accounts to prevent his being discovered. Blake-
borough was with them at the George, and he was many times
afterwards with Blakeborough and Milites, and Milnes and he
slept together one night. . .
John Gossling is called in confirmation of M*Donald's
evidence, and states that he is a fastian-cutter at Manchester;
...that he accompanied M*Donald in July to Halifax; that they
arrived the 8th July about noon (they both agree as to the
day of the month), and went to the Crispin; that he saw
Milnes there; after he had been out-from thence and had re-
“, R. 2 * turned ,
t
J.
134 THE KING AGAINST
*Mr. Báron
'Thomson’s
Summing
tº.).
turned; that M*Donald and he entered into eonversation with
Milnes; that probably they had been half an hour in conver-
sation, before any thing was said relating to cartridges; that
he believes the first of the discourse was about the badness of
the times; that when Milnes found, after the discourse about
the times, that he could put a little confidence in them, he
stated that he himself had taken about sixty rounds of ball.
cartridge from one of the Cumberland militia, that they had
searched for him, and that he had been brought before some
person, but had run away and got to Dean Moor; that
...Milnes and M. Donald had some particular discourse, but of
what it consisted he did not know, as he went out leaving
them together; that when he returned, after being absent about
a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes, he thinks it was near
hand upon eleven o'clock, and then he found there M*Donald
and Milnes, Béakeborough, and John Baines the younger,
These were three of the prisoners at the bar, whom M*}}onald
had brought with him to the Crispin from old Baines's, Duck-
worth having come to the door, but not gone into the house.
He says he joined their company; that M*Donald, in their
hearing, told him that he had been up into a house not far
from there, and had got twisted in. Milnes replied, that he
was the person that had introduced him. He says he asked
the others whether it was true, and all the three answered it
was true... Milnes said they were brothers then, and he hoped
they would continue to be so. They continued sitting drinking
together for some time after. He says that in a day or two
afterwards he went to old Baines's shop with M*Donald,
Milnes, and Blakeborough ; that they found old Baines there,
and went with him to a house which he proposed, the Upper
George ; and another man, who was working in Baines's hat
shop, went with them; old Baines said that man was a man
he coºld trust. They went into a room by themselves, and
M‘Donald said, in the hearing of the rest, “This is the old
man that twisted me in.” Baines appeared to be rather
alarmed. The witness asked old Baines, was it, so old Baines
said it was ; but he desired M.Donald to be very careful of
the company he talked in, for he himself was not in the habit
of having any thing to do with any people, but what were
acquainted with the two words Aristocracy and Democracy,
and he asked M*Donald did he know the meaning of those
words? M*Donald told him he did. Old Baines endeavoured
to give them some idea of the words, and asked the witness,
whether he knew any thing of them. He says that he endea-
voured to give him his little opinion (as he calls it) of those
terms, and that then old Baines explained them himself, and
said it was twenty-three years since his eyes were opened;
that in a day or two afterwards they met old Baines in the
street, when he asked MºDonald how he was 2 and desired him
tô
BAINES, AND OTHERS. I 25
to be careful, because he had heard there were two Bow-street
officers in the town. -
Upon his cross-examination, he says he did not see Duck-
worth upon the 8th of July. You will recollect, that accord-
‘ing to the account of M*Donald, Duckworth went no further
that night than to the door of the Crispin, and did not go in
with the rest. He says, that at the Crispin, the first night
they were in the kitchen, there were there, besides Milnes,
Blakeborough, M*Donald, and young John Baines, a few
soldiers on one side of the kitchen, and the mistress and
master, and mistress's sister; young Baines, and the persons
with him, sat on a kind of sofa, and two other persons on the
other side of the room. At the George he saw no persons but
Mr. Baron
Thomson's
Summing
uP.
the party he has mentioned, and the woman who brought the
beer into the room; and there he heard Baines call M*Donald
by the name of Smith. That is a confirmation of that part of
the account of M*Donald, that he called himself by the name
of Smith in the taking of the oath. He (the witness) went by
the name of Downes, instead of his right name. He says that
Milnes said he had stolen the cartridges, and said something
about a soldier coming and searching for cartridges, and finding
one; but he told the witness. that the soldier had brought it
with him.
Joseph Nadin, who is deputy constable of Manchester, is
then called, and he says that he knows M*Donald and Gossling;
that they were employed by him to go to Halifax, and two
other places, for the purpose which (as it is supposed) M*Donald
afterwards executed, of pretending to be a friend to these
men, and so having the Oath administered to him.
This being the case which has been laid before you on the
part of the prosecution, and in support of this indictment,
'charging old Baines with having administered this unlawful
oath to the witness M*Donald, and the other prisoners with
being present at and consenting to the administration of such
oath, the prisoners have entered upon their defence ; and I
think the case of all of them (as it is attempted to be supported
by their evidence) goes to establish the fact, that all M*Donald
has said is a falsehood, because not one of these prisoners was
at the time and place that M“Donald has mentioned.
With regard to old Baines, it is stated, that though he was
at home during the period in which this transaction is sup-
posed to have taken place, and for a great while before and
after, yet he was at that time in company only with a son-in-law,
who has been called; and with regard to the boy, that he
spent the former part of the evening with his father, and
, that the latter part of it he was gone to bed. And as to the
º an attempt is made to shew that they all were absent
t the time this offence is supposed to have been committed,
- : - that
126 | THE RING AGAINST
*}r. Baron
Thomson's
Summing
up.
ſ
that is, that they were severally engaged at some other places
at the very same time, so that it should be impossible that
any of then could have been at Baines's, and consequently that
no such trailsaction rôuld have passed. M' Donald is likely to
be certain of the day, and you cannot suppose it was any
mistake on his part to state one day for another. IIowever,
it happens that the prisoners have all given some evidence to
induce you to believe that at the time he ºxes on they were
not there, and therefore that they cannot bave committed this
offence. .
In the first place they have called John Thomas, to speak
to the absence of John Baines the younger; and he states him-
self to be a master shoemaker, living at Luddinden in Midgley;
about four miles from Halifax, and says that he has known
John Baines the younger for about three years; that B -'nes is
a shoemaker, and the witness has employed him for that
time; he speaks to his being a hardworking industrious man,
and says that his character is that of a sober man. He then
states, that upon the 8th of July John Baines came to him
with thee pair of shoes, which he had worked for him ; as
Inearly as he can tell it was about seven in the morning of
that day, when Bitines eame; he detained him that day,
during which he employed him in repairing two pair of shoes,
and set him a pair of new ones to make, and Baines con-
tinued in the witness's shop till about ten at night, and then
they gave up work, the prisoner not having finished that pair
of shoes; that they them went into the house, and got them a
little beer (as he expresses it) and went to bed at the place
he mentions, which he represents to be about four miles from
Halifax; that Thomas Cockcroft was working in the shop
the same time; and that John Baiacs" the younger slept all
that night in the witness's house, with a little boy, and he
saw him the next morning before he left the house: Ile says
that Basines in general works at his own house, but when they
are very busy, and Baines brings in his work, they sometimes
stop him to work there, and that he stopped that day and
many other days at his house, perhaps once in a week or once
in a fortnight. Then being asked how he reniembers the day,
he answers, that having received a letter to come to York, he
looked at the book, and saw that this was the 8th of July, and
that he looked at his bill to refresh his memory. 'This letter it
seems, told him he was to be subpoenaed, if he would not come
‘without, He returned the letter to the wife of Jöhn Baines,
the prisoner. He cannot tell when this letter was brought to
hith, but as nearly as he ean tell it was about six weeks ago.
''The prisoner was apprehended, I believe, some time in the
inónth of September. He says that he is sure the time to
which he speeks, was Wednesday the 8th of July. ". . f *
.* r *. lº
BAINES, AND OTHERS. 127
\
Then Thomas Cockcroft, to whom John Thomas had Mr. Baroa.
alluded, states, that he is a shoemaker; that he knows the """
. . - k - .….I.;.... . . . Sumtains
last witness; that upon the 8th of July he was working all ups
day for the last witness, at his shop, and that he remained
there till between eight and nine in the evening; that he saw
the prisoner all that day at work there, and till he left that
house between nine and ten at night; that he left the prisoner
at that place behind him. He says that he himself lives at
Midgley. Then being asked as to his memory of the par-
ticular-time, he says that it is about two months since he was .
tasked about this, and that was by Baines's wife. He is asked,
how does he know this was on the 8th day of July? (for this
detention of the prisoner at Midgley, during the whole day
and night, is a fact which may have happened, and yet not
upon the 8th of July); and he gives this account, that John
Baines and he were talking in the shop about what sort of a
fair he had had, and be says he replied, it was just a fortnight
since, and that he knew it to be so, for that the fair was the
24th. To be sure, a little observation does arise upon this,
for your consideration; which is, What had the question,
which this witness Cockcroft put to Baines, to do with the
answer Baines returned? What sort of occasion there was for
him to refresh the witness's memory, as to the time when the
fair bappened, does seem a little extraordinary. However,
that is the circumstance which, this witness says, refreshed his
memory, as to the time when john Baines the younger was
detained at the house of the witness Thomas to so late an
hour as nine or ten o'clock. Ite says that the prisoner
Baines the younger was then in the employment of Thomas,
and had worked for him two or three years, and continued, to
, work for him till he was taken up; that he was in the constant
habit of bringing his work from Halifax to Midgley ; and he
knows that his master set down his work in a book, which
book is always in the shop. And being further asked as to the
fair, he admits that there are three, fair, days, Wednesday,
Thursday and Friday; but Wednesday is the day on which he
speaks of this having happened. , . . . . . -
As to Duckworth, who is supposed, not to have been at
Baines's at the time M. Donald has spoken of William Long-
bottom states, that he is a shoemaker, and lives at Out Lane,
six inites from. Halifax, where he kept the tollgate; that he
went to Halifax on the 7th July; on his way to Mr. Watkin-
son's at Ovenden, which is two miles from Halifax, to receive
'some money; that when at Halifax he went to William Duck-
worth's, the prisoner George Duckworth's father, for whom he
occasionally worked; that when he had been there about
half an hour, he met, the son of Watkinson, and received in-
formation, frºm that son, of his father not being at home, and
w
} w - - so
I 28 - THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Baron so that he might save himself the trouble of going; that upon
. “this he’.went back to William Duckworth's, and continued
: wns there the whole of the might of the 7th ; and the next day;
- namely: the 8th, he went to Watkinson's at Ovenden, and the
- prisoner George Duckworth went with him, and they returned
together to Halifax, and dined at Halifax together; ſhat after
"...dinner he began to work with George Duckworth at the father's;
...that they continued so at work stalk perhaps about eight, and
then they took a walk together, and were out about two hours
in the whole, and returned to old Duckworth's together; that
, it was, then turned of 10,0'clock, but very little; that they
supped, and slept at old Duckworth's together; that the prisoner
, Duckworth was out of his company on the 8th of July, from
about eleven till near twelve in the morning, but was in his
company the whole of the rest of the day; that he has known
him thirteen years, and never knew any thing amiss of him.
J3éing, then asked as to the charācter of Milnes, he says he
has known him five or six years, and never heard anything
amiss of him. , , , * - is
:, . On his cross-examination he is asked, how he came to leave
his turnpike in this way for several days together? He says she
kept the turnpike from the 2d, when he entered upon it, till
, the 7th, when his father came, and he left his father in the
A care of the turnpike, and went to Halifax upon the errand he
has stated. He says that he slept both the 7th and the 8th
at the prisoner Duckworth's father's house; and he tells you
(being asked how he came to know the time of the night, âûd
soon) that he looked at liis watch after he had been ifi the
house a few minutes, on his return from the walk on the 8th,
so, as to know that it was about ten o'clock he so returned, ſh;
prisoner Duckworth, and he having been (according to his
account) together, during the time they had so, walked ºut
together, from about 8 o'clock, till they returned abºit, tº:
that they looked at the clock when they went out, and af the
watch when they came in ; and he perfectly reménibers the
circumstance, though at this 'distance of time. # ". º
. They have, also called for the prisoner Duckworth, his
father, William Duckworth, who states that he himself is a
shoemaker; that he knows the last yitness, Lºngbottom, very|
well; that he remembers, his, eoming to his house on the,
7th of July last, and remaining all night at his house; that the
son and, Longbottom, were walking out on the fºrenoon of the .
8th of July, he cannot tell how lóng they cºfitiuéd ºut toº.

§
* * ~ *
gether, but they, came back s tº digé, sºngwlie fe ºffer twelvé,
apd began work after dinner ; ſhèy- gayº over workin gºth the
evening, he cannot exactly say the time, if Inight be eight, and
then they went out ; when they gamº, in his wife aid "he Wel#.
a. * * * y - ſº a 3 x * * id A....", alſº:#, *%fºśī; * †
siſting by the fiftige, and wéietalkigºi gºing tº *ś
v is e -* , . . . $ ‘. . . . . . J. R. **, Sº * ... ? * ! . . ; , sº * ..
y
*
BAINES, AND OTHERS. 129
q.
\
asked them if they would have supper, and they supped to- Mr. Baron
gether, and went to bed, it might be about half-past ten or Thomson's
thereabouts, and they slept together. He says that he recol- immins
lects a particular circumstance, that he had settled a note “”
with the last witness, Longbottom, and that he knows it from
that circumstance. He says he knows all the prisoners at
the bar very well, and that he never heard of any charge against
his son, till he was taken up in the month of September.
Thomas Hellwell is then called, with respect to John Baines
the elder, and he says that he is a soldier in the 33d regiment,
and is a son of Baines's wife; that he was in Baines's house the
8th of July, he went there at eight o'clock in the evening, and
continued in the house till the clock struck twelve, compre-
hending, you see, the period which M*Donald speaks to ; for
he went long before that time, and continued two hours after
that time; he says that he then left it, and old John Baines
let him out, bade him good night, and locked the door. He
says that the boy, Zachariah Baines, went to bed about eleven,
and during the time he was there, the boy and his father
were with him, and no other persons were there during the
whole time. Being asked how he comes to remember that this
was the 8th of July, he says that he was subsisted up to that
day, and that he drew his pay on the 9th in the morning.
On his cross-examination, he says that he was with a recruit-
ing party, and he had gone to this house of his father-in-law,
to ask a question about his mother; that his father never was
out of his presence from eight to twelve, nor was the boy
Zachariah from eight to eleven, and that nobody whatsoever
came to the house the whole of that time, and that no other
persons were in the house. Having said he never had been
with his father to this late hour before, he is asked how he
came to be there so late on this particular day, what it was
that engaged him there so long; and he says that he had been
in the East Indies, and he started upon his travels (as he
ealls them), and it was the discourse that was started that kept
them. Being asked whether, he had never told his adventures
before, he says that he had on various occasions before re-
lated to his father his travels in India, which he had ended
nine years ago. And he swears, that during all the time he sat
thus with his father in the house, there was no beer ar all drunk.
Then they take up the case of William Blakeborough, and
for him they have called a young woman of the name of
Hannah Crowther, who describes herself as living at Gibbet
Lane, in Halifax. She says that she knows Blakeborough,
and saw him in July last on the 5th, and the 7th, and the 8th,
which is the material day; that the 5th was Sunday, that
she had on that day proposed that she would go to Saddlewórth
on the 8th, with the prisoner, whose brother lived at Saddle-
i. S worth,
| 36 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Baron
Tºmsoil's
Summing
*
up.
e'
worth, and asked her to come on a visit there. It appears
afterwards that that invitation was given at the Christmas
preceding, half a year before the visit being fixed on the 5th,
for the 8th. . She tells you she went with the prisoner
Błakeborough, that they set off between six and seven in the
morning of the 8th, and went together to Saddleworth; that
they got there at nearly twelve, walking all the way, being a
distance of between thirteen and fourteen miles; that they
never stopped, having taken with them some refreshment to be
used on the way; that she stayed at Saddleworth, at the
brother's house, from the 8th to the 18th, ten days; that the
prisoner stopped there the whole time in his brother's house,
and he was not above an hour out of her sight, she thinks, the
whole of those ten days. She is asked, how she came to go
there with this prisoner, she being a single woman, which she
says she is ; and she is asked, how they all slept there. She
says that they all went to bed at one time; she used to see,
him go into his bed-room up stairs, and she herself slept
down stairs, and he always went up stairs the first. She isſ'
asked her way of life, . she says she lives with her father
and mother, , and she, has been intimately acquainted many
years with the prisoner Blakeborough's brother, who is a
weaver. She is asked, how the prisoner employed himself
during these ten days absence, from the 8th to the 18th ; and
she says the brother had two pair of looms, and that the prisoner
wove; that he can weave, though he is a shoemaker; that
journeymen shoemakers at Halifax were at that time out of
work. We did not learn that account from the évidence of the
shoemakers first produced, with respect to the other prisoners.
She says that Blakeborough's brother has a wife and one child.
She is asked how she was maintained there, and she says
she was no expense to them (here is a considérable difference
as to the footing she was on, between her account and the
aecount the brother has given), for that she took sufficient
with her to pay for her board. She is asked, how much
and she says at once, that she paid him (perhaps she might.
mean that she had paid his wife, but her expression was, that
she paid him) nine-pence a day, and that she paid him this
when she left. She was asked immediately by the Counsel;
for the prosecution, “How much did you pay him f° She
said, nearly twelve shillings, having fixed the rate of her pay-
ment to be nine-pence për day; she then says, it was not quite,
twelve shillings, but near it, eleven shillings and sixpence,
and was paid, in silver. Now, nine-penca a day for ten days.
weuld come to just seven shillings, and sixpence, This,
she says, she paid him on the 18th. Then the prisoner,
Bakeborough and she, according to her account, set, out,
together from the brother's house, and arrived at Midgley.
that night between six and seveh. She says that her employ-
- *. * Inent
r
I
BAKNES, AND OTHERS. £31
Brent was burling cloth; that she had finished up her work Mr. Baron
on the 7th, and so they set out upon the 8th. This is the Thomson's
account that this woman has given of her having accompanied Summing
the prisoner Blakeborough to the brother's house, thirteen or "P"
fourteen miles off, endeavouring to account for him during
every hour of the time of their visit; for she states that
there was not an hour when he could have been absent -
without her knowledge,
John Blakeborough, the brother, states that he lives in
Saddleworth; that upon the 8th of July last his brother came
to his house with a, young woman, this Hannah, whom he
had invited to come with him; that they got to his house
about twelve, and stayed till the Saturday week after, which
was the 18th, and that they both went away together;
that they both lived at his house during that time, and that
his brother was never absent from his house above an hour or
an hour and a half at a time during that period; that he slept
there alſ the time; that they went away on the 18th, between
twelve and one. He is asked, when was this invitation to
this young woman given to accompany the brother to his
House F. And he says that he had given an invitation, which
it seems was a general invitation, when he was at Halifax.
the Christmas before; that he invited hér as a visitor to his'
wife; that she employed herself working at her needle, but,
he understood, for herself; that this young woman is no
relation of their's. He says that the brother slept with him
in an upper room, aid the witness's wife slept with this Hannah
in a bed in a lower foom. Then, being asked upon what
terms they were with regard to her being dieted there, he
says, “She bºught money with her, I believe, and supported
herself.” I do not exactly understand what that meant ; but,
you will see what he afterwards says, that she paid him:
nothing for her board. I questioned him a little more about:
the eircumstances of her paying for this board, and he says >
she did nºt pay him any money at all in silver, and he does'
not know that she paid his wife; when she came, she said. '
she would pay something for her meat, but he does not know
that she paid any thing; and he says that he buys himself alk
the provisions for the family. • ,
This, Gentlemen, is the evidence which is given on the part of
these several defenſdants, and the effect of which, if full credit is
to be given to it, goes to establish the fact, that none of them could
bé guilty of this offence, which is imputed to them, because the
evidence tends to shew that four of them were absent at other
places at the time when the witness M*Donald has stated;
this to have passed; and as to the other two, namely, Baines -
the elder, and the boy, Zºehariah Baines, that though they
wers in the house in which M'Đonald has laid the scene to
a * s 2 * have
~
, , , 132 THE KING AGAINST
i
Mr. Baron have passed, yet what he relates cannot have passed, becauss.
º the son-in-law of Baines the elder was with Baines and Zacha-
* riah Baines from eight till past twelve that night, and that
P. no other persons came to the house. \ ,
Gentlemen, it is upon this evidence you are to decide,
whether you are satisfied that M. Dona d has spoken truly
upon this occasion, whether you believe the account which he
has given confirmed by the evidence of Gossling. You see
Gossling has confirmed him in some part of the case, by proving
several of the prisoners to have been that night at the Crispin,
and stating the conversation that passed at that meeting. At
that meeting, you observe, Baines the elder was not present,
nor was Duckworth ; but according to his account they werit
to the George in a day on two afterwards, by the invitation of
old Baines, whom they had seen at his workshop. There
were Gossling himself, M“Donald, old Baines, Milnes, and
Blakeborough. At that meeting at the George, Duckworth was
not present, nor was he present at the meeting at the Crispin.
With regard to Duckworth, therefore, personally, it rests ipoſ
the evidence of M*Donald only ; but it will be for you to say,
if you believe M*Donald as to the rest, whether you will not
credit him as to Duckworth also. It is extremely difficult to
say that M*Donald or Gossling can be mistaken as to their
persons, speaking to them in the way they have done; and it
is very difficult to suppose that they can have fixed by any
accident on a wrong day. You will consider, whether there
Amay not be a possibility of the witnesses for the prisoners
having mistaken the day, in which case, this defence set up by
the several prisoners, of an alibi, might be perfectly true,
except as to the time; but it is extremely difficult to suppose
any mistake of that kind to have happened with regard to
-M*Donald and Gossling, for if the evidence on the part of the
prisoners be true, it must be a mistake with regard to one of
the prisoners, Blakeborough, of ten days, or it is impossible
that he could be there. Therefore, if M'Donald is mistaken,
it is not merely a mistake of the 8th, 9th or 10th, but a
mistake, provided his defence is tuue, of the whole of those
ten days, from the 8th to the 18th, unless it was a day
previous to that proved. -
t *
. The matter rests, Gentleſhen, for your consideration. If
you believe the account which M*Donald has given, and think
, that he has neither wilfully nor by mistake misrepresented
any thing as to the day of this transaction, and believe it im-
plicitly, then it will be for you to say whether you are satisfied
, that the prisoners, at the bar have done that ačt which this
indictment inputes to them; namely, with regard to Baines
, the elder, that he has administered an oath, which oath was
intended to bind the person taking, it either not to give evidence
a l against
l
t
BAINES, AND OTHERS. r35
i.
against any, persons, belonging to an association formed to
disturb the public peace, or for some seditious purpose, or to
bind himself to become a member of some such SQciety. You
will take into your consideration, when you are judging of the
intention, the nature of the Oath, and the terms of it, im-
perfectly indeed as the withess remembers it. He does not
remember the whole of those terms, but those he does remem-
ber are, that he must never reveal any brother's secrets, either
by signs or words; and that if any traitors arose, he was to
pursue them and put them to death. You will consider upon
what occasion it was that this Qath was so administered;
whether it was not under the impression of their having found,
as they thought, a person of their own description; to which
notion the witness M*Donald had deceived them, when talking
of the disturbances in the country, and the attack upon Mr. Cart-
wright's mill, by saying he would be as active as any of them,
provided he was only sworn in, on which account, he says,
. Milnes took him to the house of old Baines. It will be for you
to say, whether Baines the elder, in administering that Oath, had
not the intention imputed to him by this indictment, and whether
the other persons were not aiding and assisting. According
to M*Donald's account, all the other prisoners were there; the
purpose for which he was brought there by Milnes was publicly
declared to the persons there assembled; there was no seeret
made of it. The Oath was administered by the old man
Baines, and you will consider whetherit is not established that
they were all assembled there for that purpose. M*Donald
states that the others were sitting down, but they stood up at
‘the administration of the Oath, and then several of them went
away with him, and they drank all together. * : -
t | z
. There is the boy, whom one is sorry to see there; I do not
mean to say that there is any impropriety in the prosecutors’hav-
ing brought him there; he is of an age to be tried for this offenee;
but it is for you to say, whether he was cognizant of its
being an unlawful act. The evidence against him is, that he
stood with his back against the door, which, in the apprehen-
sion of the witness, was to keep the door fast; but that is in his
judgment only. If you think the case is made out against any
of the prisoners, or all of them, according to this evidence of
, the witnesses, it will be your duty to find those guilty against
whom you think it so proved. But the great and most material
part of your consideration will be, how far your are satisfied
with the defence which has been set up on the part of these
respective prisoners, whether you give full credit to it. If you do
give full credit to it, then to be sure they are placed in situations,
in which it cannot be true that they did on the 8th of July
concur in this unlawful act imputed to them. It depends
upon this, whether you give entire credit to what has been
swoºn,
\
Mr. Baros.
Thomson’s.’
Summiag
up-
f34 "THE KING AGAINST.
ſfe. Baron
Thomsoft's
Suaiming
tip.
sworn on the part of the several prisoners, or, not. ff.you dº
not give eredit to it, it will be for your consideration; how fif
all, or any of thern, are involved in the guilt of this indietment.
iſ you feet no doubt, it wiłł be for you to find theme guilty.
H you believe the accounts, which their witnesses have given;"
it will be your duty-to aequit them. You!; wiłł consider of:
ygur verdict, - * . . . . i . . .
The Jury retired at a quarter past eight o' slock, and returned,
in five minutes, finding . , * . . . . " *
John Baines the elder - • - Guilty. . . .
fºr Charles Milkes - - - - - Guilty., " .
" John Bºnes the younger . Guitty. . . ;
Wilham Blakeborough Guilty. . • "
... George Duckworth - - , '- Guilty. p '.
Zachariah Baines - - - - Not Guilty. '
t
r ! ...,'
** f * w * * - -
! ----. *... - * •r * Z *
*** * * -*- Al- -1. 1– * –4– *
*
<! Saturday, g” January 1813. *
- "fºre l'ING
against
fames Flaigh,
fºr fanathan Dean,
Jºhn ()gden,
fames. Brook,
', john Brook,
s Thomas Brook,
jahn Walker, &
john Hårst.
* *
". * \- - d •
‘Whe prisoners having been arraighed, and severally pleaded
Mºst Guilty, the Indictment was opened by Mr. Richardsen. . .a.
THE eight prisoners (together with
George Méllor, William Thorpe, "and".
| Thomas Smith, who were executed:
‘yesterday) were indicted, for that they,
together with others unknown, were
‘qū the 11th of April last’tumultuously-
| assembled, and being so assembledº
did begin to demolish a certain aſſilſ of
William Cartwright, at Liversedge, in
the county of York. , , . . . ;
Mr. Park—May it please your Lordships; Gentlemen of .
the Jury, We are now asserabled to try a different species of
effence, from either that of yesterday, or those of the pre-.
cºding days. Gentlemen, this case is one of those, tº which’,
allusiºn has been made; it is cºntiected with the system that
has been prevailing in the country, and is one almºst of the
first of the desperate attacks that wate madeia this é Nº.
* , ; 1 * : * ~ & 6_. “ • * *** - #.
before that unfortunata event which depriſed"Mr. Horsfall ºff.
life. And you will findia the course of this, as indºº.
pearédºiſi º course of that, trial, that, théirit * ;º
in the minds of the uſiforfüää"#rsons whā’hánič suffered.
death for that offence, by what passed at Mr. Cartwrights
mill, prºbably led witHaſlamiable event. Théºdºr
# 3 : ; ** ſ , , , -
% £3 *, *. 3 * * *** *, *material




HAIGH, AND OTHERS. i 33
material for your consideration here, is Saturday the eleventh
of April 1812. * &
The Act of Parliament upon which the prisoners stand
indicted, I will first-state to you. It was one passed in the
gth year of His present Majesty's reign, cap. 29. intituled,
“An Aet for the more effectual punishment of such persons.
as shall demolish or pull down, burn, or otherwise destroy or
spoil any mill or mills.” I need not trouble you with any
further statement of the title of it. It goes on to enact,
“That if any person or persons, unlawfully riotously and
tumultuously assembled together, to the disturbance of the
public peace, shall unlawfully and with force demolish or pull
down or begin to demolish or pull down any wind-saw-mill or
other wind-mill, or any water-mill or other mill, which shall
have been or shall be erected, or any of the works thereto
respectively belonging, that then every such demolishing or
pulling down, or beginning to demolish or pull down, shall be
adjudged felony without benefit of clergy.” This is the law
upon which these men stand indicted.
It is well known, that in the manufacturing part of the
West Riding of this county, there have been various implements
of machinery introduced, and wisely introduced, for the pur-
pose of expediting our manufactures, and bringing them into
better use. The advantages to the labourers themselves, if
• they would have given themselves the patience to understand
the thing, would have convinced them of the great utility of
such machinery; but unfortunately they took a differentecourse,
and would not stay, to consider the great mischiefs they wºuld
bring on themselves, not only if punishment followed, but the
absolute poverty, misery and distress which the destruction of
thnse mills, where such machinery was used, must bring of all
the unfortunate persons who were occupied in them. If they
had so considered, I think that common prudence; indepeñ-,
dently of moral obligation, would have prevented their déjàg"
what has been done. For if only this devastation, which was
intended for Mr. Cartwright's mill, had been effected, a number;
of families must have been thereby thrown out of bread, ats
lcast for a considérable time, till he could erect new works.,
It must therefore have produced dreadful distress. But that.
argument did i. prevail with these misguided persons ; and
ſof, a considerāble period of time, these deluded, foolish,
iglioraht, and witkéd men, were going round, the country.
destroying all the obnoxious machinery, and stealing arms ; So, i.
that, jº, to the 11th qf April, they had collected ºf
consider §le, qi antity of gunpowder, guns, pistols and other,
wiłoś. . . . . . ." . . . . . . . . . . .
Mr. Castwright, whose mill,...sailed Rawfolds millº was
sostaskad on the 11th of April, had had previous *::::
at


136 "THE KING AGAINST
that among those people he had been denounced, on account of
his employing the most improved machinery. In consequence
of which notice, this gentleman slept in his mill for upwards of
six weeks before the 11th of April, deserting his family (for
his dwelling-house was elsewhere); and not only that, but he
had beds prepared for five military, and four of his own work-
men. He prepared for his defence, as every prudent man
should do ; and I have only to lament, that, the same spirit
Mr. Cartwright displayed, was not displayed by other gen-
tlemen, whose property was threatened. , Probably if that
spirit had been manifested, their Lordships and you would not
have been troubled on the present occasion. I will not go
through all that he did with his mill. It seemed almost im-
possible for any, but a most active military force, to destroy the
works he erected there. But there is one thing I must mention,
because it affords almost decisive evidence against one of the
unfortunate men now at the bar. It seems the different floors.
(I think there were three above the ground floor) were laid with
flags of a considerable size, in a row, which were raised ob-,
liquely, so as to make loop-holes; so that if any man should
attack the lower windows of the manufactory with hatchets
and hammers, those within might fire down upon them; and,
Mr. Cartwright furnished himself with muskets and gunpowder
, for that purpose. y }
On the 11th of April (for I will now state the facts,
applying them afterwards to the ſhen at the bar) Mr. Cart-
wright will state, that he had retired to bed soon after twelve,
haying previously ascertained that his watchmen were on their
posts; two of whom were set on the outside, to give notice of
the approach of an enemy; but, like many more of our watch-
men, they were surprised, and were actually seized, before any'
alarm could be given by them. About twenty-five minutes
before one, as well as he could ascertain the time, a large dog,
which was chained on the ground floor, began to bark furiously.
This gentleman, whose feelings were all alive, lº;
jumped out of bed, and flew to the stairs; but while he was
doing so, being still in his shirt, he was astonished by an
immediate heavy fire of musketry poured into his 'upper
windows, and violent hammering at the door next to the road;
for you will find by the description, that this mill had a pond
on one side, so that it was to a certain degree protected.
Mr. Cartwright, and his men had piled their arms the night
before; he immediately rushed towards them, and met his
own men and the soldiers, without àny covering, but their
shirts, having just jumped out of bed. By his orders they
commenced a heavy firing from within the mill, and this they
eontinued, aswill be proved to 'you, upwards' of twenty
minutes. ' The mob, during that timeſképt åp their fire also i 3.
*...* an
HAIGH, ASD, OTHERS: 137
aſid you will find that its consisted of more than an iundred:
fiersons. They broke all the windows, many of the windºw
frames, and one of the doors, calling out; with the Iñost
horrible in precations, (which I shall not repeat) “Bang up,'
lads!--Are you within, lads?—Damn them; keep close." '
Mr. Cartwright had placed an alarm-bell at the top of his
building; this was rung with considerable force, till the bell- .
rope broke. The mob, upon hearing it ring, called out, “Damn
it, silence that bell.” But two of Cartwright's nien went up, and
rang the bell, by turns firing and ringing. At length, the firing
still continuing from within, and probably the ammunition of
the mob running short, the assailants began to slacken fire;
and at last it entirely ceased, except that one man fired a
single shot at the close, Mr. Cartwright heard the people go
off towards Huddersfield, and, when their clamour subsided, was
able to hear the groans of some who were left behind wounded;
but he was afraid of going out, lest it should be said that he ,
had, murdered them. It was so dark that nothing could be
distinguished by sight. But when assistance came, Mr. Cart-
wright and his men went out, and found a great number of
malls, hammers, muskets and so on, left on the road to Hud-
dersfield. They also found two men, who were too badly
wounded to escape, and who afterwards unfortunately died,
upon whom the Coroner's Jury sat, and found a verdict (as
they were bound to do) of justifiable homicide.
...Now,' Gentlemen, the way in which I propose to fix the . .
prisohers at the bar, or some of them, is this. You will observe
what extreme difficulty there must be in such a case as the
present. Here is an attack made, at which no persons can
of course be present, that are not themselves criminal, except
the gentleman who is the object of attack; and he, from his
situation, could not know any single individual who was present.
I shall call before you no less than three of the persons who
were at that attack; two of those three persons have already <&
gone through the ordeal of an examination here; they have :
beeh; examined, and with strict and prºper strictness cross--
examined by my learned Friends, who were of Counsel for those
prisoners against whom they were called, I shall call before
you also a person, who has likewise been examined before, .
not; an accomplice; though not free from blame, because *
he did not communicate facts within his knowledge; a person "
of the name -of, Sowden. The general circumstances, toº
which Mr. Cartwright' will speak; will be fully confirmed,
, or ºrather he will, fully confirm. ... the accomplices. I shall
call-before: you, this Sowden'...to confirm these men, who will
pfayet:that a person of the name of Dickinson, who is not -
chârged; for he has not been fourid, came to the manufactory of .
Mr AWood. Mr. Wood's name has 'unfortunately been too often.
mentiºned, and whether he knew anorestbandhas been discovered;&
7 ºr, T God
~!
138 THE RING AGAINST.
God and his own conscience only know ; but at Mr. Wood's
house it seems wonderful that all these transactions should:
be going on, and the master of these men know nothing about
them. But Sowden will prove, that, on the morning of the
11th of April, , Dickinson came to. Mr. Wood's, and that at
that time there was a great deal of conversation. He will tell
you also that there was before that a great deal of conversation
with John Walker and Jonathan Dean, two of the prisoners at
the bar, about commencing the system of framé-breaking,'
in the same way that the breaking of stocking and lace-frames
had been carried on at Nottingham.; when it was proposed,
that those who would-not join them, should be turned out of
work; and that he was asked by Mellor and Dean to join
them, but that he never did.” He appears to me to be one of.
those fabatical enthusiasts one has seen about the country;' but
when he was before examined, I saw nothing in his-manner to
entitle, any one to say, he was, not deserving of the credit he.
demands. This witness has also heard Dean mention, that he:
was one of the party. He will prove also that Dickinson:
distributed ammunition, when, he came to the manufactory on
the morning of the day that this attack took place; and it will:
be proved to you, that it was settled at that time where they
were to meet; that they were to meet at about eleven o'clock-
at night, in a field belonging to Sir George Armytage, near,
what is called the dumb Steeple, by which is meant an obelisk *
In Sir George's grounds. It will be proved to you that there
they went. That fact the accomplices of course will prove, for .
nobody else can. There they assembled; and one of the unfor-
tunate persons now no more, George Mellor, seems to have
been one of the most active leaders of the body. He appears
to ; have acted as a kind of commander in chief. They were
placed in military array; they were formed into companies,
and marched in platoons, thirteen in front. How many
rows there were, the witness cannot tell, from the darkness of .
the night. The men who had muskets, marched first; the
pistókmen, next; and the club-men and staff-men, and those
without fire-arms, parched in the:third division; the musket-
company eommanded by Mellor:; the pistol company by
Thorpe; and by whom the third.company was commanded, .
does not appear. They nyarched in this body to the mill, and
they there made the attack, which I have already mentioned
to you, and which I shall not repeat; and,they went off in the
way I have already told you. & -- . . . .
\ , ; '
!
$
-d • * : , f
sº
Now I'must apply the rule of Law which is additted, and which
thé learned Judges have stated to you, upon the subject of acº,
complices. The common cases of accomplices have been those,
in which a crime has been committed by perhaps two or three
** four men at the utmost, and where Á, B, wishing, “... J
* Munsoli,
! • *, * <sº
HAIGH, AND OTHERS. #39;
himself, might-be suspected of endeavouring to throw the guilt.
on an innocent man. But in this particular case, which,
I thank God is, and I, trust will be, the last instance of the
#ind, the body being extremely large, it is impossible to sup4
pose that A. B. can fix on one, two, three, or even six; from: ,
such a motive, because that would not answer “his purpose,”
assin the common case of a crime committed by a few, The
rule of Law laid down by one of their Lordships; the other
day, was that which every lawyer heard with entire satis-
faction, and to which I have no doubt every lawyer will
accede. It has been usual to confirin the accomplice in some
of the transactions to which he speaks; he cannot be con-
firmed in the main transaction, because, if he was, we should
not call him as a witness, but should put him upon his trial.
What is expected; is, that we should confirm him in some of
the minute particulars. It is not necessary, where an accom-
plice is called against a greater or a less number of persons,
that he should be confirmed in the facts respecting every pri-
soner. Mr. Baron Thomson, in his charge to a Jury on
Tuesday, sitting in your place, stated the law most accurately.
I have the Report", and I perfectly recollect it. “It is not
necessary that an accomplice should be confirmed in every.
circumstance he details iu evidence. That would be almost.
a matter of impossibility ; that is certainly too much to be
expected, and never is required. It is quité sufficient to see,
that, in some material facts, the witness, who shall have been
an accomplice, is confirmed to the satisfaction of a jury;
and that confirmation need not be of circumstances, which go.
to prove that he speaks 'truth with respect to all the prisoners,
and with respect to the share they have each taken in the
transaction; for if the jury are satisfied that he speaks truth
in, those parts, sin. which they see unimpeachable evidence.
brought to confirm him, that is a ground for them to believe
that he speaks also truly with regard to the other prisoners,
as to whom there may be no confirmation.” His credit is to go.
to you; his credit stands or falls, not by the circumstance
of his being confirmed as to all the men, to whom he is
speaking; but if he is confirmed as to some of the “men,
and you find him speaking the truth as to some, and in some of
the particulars, it is a fair ground for you to believe that he
speaks truth as to others; > . . . . . .
The accomplices will speak to all the prisoners now.standing
at your bar. Now, therefore, taking that for granted, I will
endeavour to shew you how I can confirm these accomplices
as to soule of them; for I state at once in the outset, that
* • . . . . . * * r , I cannot
*—a *** * -*-
—H·ſ−
Seft abóšē, P.17.
T 2
*
{ * ( x. * * > "y -*
*:
146 THE KING AGAINST
I cannot confirm them, as to circumstances concerning all:
But I have been extremely careful; as far as my judgment.
would enable me to go, and I hop: thät that care wiłł, not
be made use of in any way against the conduct which has
heen pursued. ". Altliough I did not doubt about some of the
other persons, who were to have been named in the indict-
ment, I have not allowed any to be included, against whom
all the accomplices did not speak, unless where there existed
other circumstances of confirmation. ~ *-* T : . . . . .
. I will endeavour to go, through the names of the prisoners
in the indictment, excluding the three, first, who are not here
to answer for this offence. The case of James,Haigh is one,
respecting which I think, there can be no doubt. I told you
beforé, in the Hafrātion of the circunistances, that there was a
firing. The next morning after this: affair happened, James
Häfgh applied tº country'súrgeºn, for a cure for a wound in
the shºulder.ºsurgéºn asked him his name. He would
. . . . it . . . . '3' rºls... i2. - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " • *
not tell him. The sºrgeon asked him; hºw he came by that
hurt?' and he said, he had received it by having fallen in
jumping down a quarry.” Now i apprehend that it had no ap-
pearance of being a wound such as a man would sustain by
falling into a quarry, for it went in a slanting direction, and
some of the timen ºf the shirt was carried into the wound.
The surgeon dréssed ‘it’ as well as he could, he sewed it up,
and he gave the piºisoner Some salve to dressit; and Haigh went
away. You will find ºtliát he never" appeared at his work
again, but slipped away in the night, with his master, a man of
the name, of Ardron (whom he can call, if he chooses) to the
house of a person of the name of Culpán, thirteen miles off;
they arrived at Cúlpan's in the dead of night, and knocked up
Culpan and his, wife between three and four in the morning.
Calpan has, but, one room, and one beſi, for himself and his
wife; and;Ardron told him, “This is a poor imân, a friend of
mine, he wants to rest a bit, he has had an āccident with his
shoulder, I wish you would let him sit here.” ‘’ The poër man
said, it was very, awkward, they had but one bºd; however
be and his yife got up, and gave that, bed to Haigh. The
:Prisoner afterwards, went from place. topia;& for many days,
and did not gººgh to his work ; and when he was apprehended,
the shirt he had an was taken off, and the magistrate kept the
shirt, which will be produced to you; and, I inderstand, from
the bºlº, it will, appear, most m anifestly that the wound was
received in the yayi have stated. . . . . . . . . . .
* - ſº ºf
g J .
~ \ . . . . •' . . .
with réspétºtó, the next prisoner; Jonáthán Dean, I shall
rhye to yoti t fat he was wounded in the hand; and I shall
fall '86 wień, who wiłł prove that Dean was one of the persons
who declared at Wood's shop, when talking about shear-
breakiiig, that he who would not join; should be turned º:
* - ... W0rk #
- $º . . . º
HAIGH, AND OTHERS. 141
work-; and that he has heard Dean admit that he was at
Cartwright's attack, and received the wound in his hand
through the door, while he was in the act of striking it .
a batchet. The accomplices will prove that he was wounded
in the hand, and here is an admission by the man that he
received that wound there; and I think it will be proved to
you, independently of this, that Dean was continúally using
persuasions to others to induce them to become of the same
party. But in order to put that, of which we have had too
much experience under the present Commission, entirely out
of the question, I shall read to you the examination of Dean
himself, which I apprehend will be quite decisive, and that it
will be your duty to find him guilty. **
The next person named in the indictment is John Ogden.
With respéct to him, the confirmation, as far as I recollect,
is not very considerable, but it will stand, as I before stated to
you, upon the manner in which the witnesses shall tell their
story. They will swear that Ogden had a sword (I believe it
was the only one in the company) and that he broke it in the
scabbard, and part of the scabbard will be produced. He
returned from the attack with Drake and Ben Walker, through
Clifton, I shall rely upon their evidence, if they give it in
such a manner as to entitle themselves to any degree of credit,
confirming them in other circumstances respecting other pii-
soners, and leaving it to you that there is every reason to be-
lieve that they speak truth as to these.
James Brook is the next. . I have the evidence of only two
as to him. I told you I had selected the cases to which all
the three accomplices spoke; I believe only two of the accom-
plices will speak to this prisoner, but I have better evidence
to supply the place of that third accomplice in this instance;
and the very circumstance of their not all speaking to the same
men, is certainly a confirmation of their testimony, for it
shews it is not a made-up story. I have the evidence of a
woman, who lived next door to James Brook, who had the
curiosity natural to women; and her attention being excited
by the outrages committed at that time in that neighbourhood,
and every body being in a state of alarne; this woman, the
morning after the attack on this mili, listened to what was
said upon the subject, and she heard James Bröck say, that he
had never seen any thing so dreadful as it was, I will tead
the very words, which I understand she will repeat, without
saying that they were applied to Rawfolds milſ. It will be
for you to consider to what they apply; I do not say you must
necessarily draw the conclusion I do. “Before I will be en-
gaged in any thing of this sort again, I will suffer myself to
be clammed to death; it was one of the most dreadful things
I ever saw, and one might, hear them...screaming for half is
** * mile,”
\
$$º . *HE KENG AGAINST
mile.” I shall prove by Mr. Cartwright that lie heard the,
streams and groans of the, nob for a considerable time, in
consequence of the very proper conduct of the people within
the mili. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
• The next person in the indictment is John Brook, This
rtian has, independently of the fact that will be sworn to, of
his being there, admitted in conversation that he was there,
and said to another person, whom I shah call, while a search
for arms was making at Wood's shop, that the fire-arms were
removed, that he remoxed them, and that no one knew where:
they were, but himself and the persons who received them,
With respect to Thomas Brook, there is a very remarkable
circumstance I shall establish as to him. It will appear to
yon, by the evidence 6f Mr. Cartwright himself,' and of one
of his men, if it be heeessary to call any of his men to, con-
firin him, (and F must call a man to speak as to this fact
perhaps) that in the pond at the back of the inili, amongst
other things, there was found a hat.” This hat, wiłł be pro-
duced to you. It belonged to Thomas Brook; at least we say
so, the accomplićes wifsay so, and I shall confirm them by
proving, that in their way home-after the attack upon this.
mill, when they were driven off, they stopped at the house of
a saan of the name of Naylor, and borrowed a hat of his wife;
she was asked, whether her husband was at home?...to which
she answered, he was not; as he was not. I shall call her,
Whether she will prove this factor irot, I am not sure, for she
will not speak out; but that hat was, as I shall prove, after-
wards sent home to Naylor's house., Pt is my duty, therefore,
tº impress these facts on your consideration; you...will always.
judge of the circumstances. . . . “ . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
'Fhe next prisoner is John Walker. In addition to the
testimony of the accomplices. I have the evidence of Joseph,
Sowden, who will tell, you that John Walker took the active
part which I haye, stated, in coming to Wood's fijääufactory,
and speaking to them about the system of shear-breaking; and
solicited the witness, with Pean, to join the party. Sowder willº
tell you of his positive refusal; he will also further tell you,
that he heard, John Walker admit that he was āt the attack
inpon . Mr. Cartwright's mill, and that whilst he was looking
in at the window, during the attack, a ball struck the edge of
his hat; that he had noticed the flash of the masket within,
and that he thereupon thºust his band and pistol through the
,-
broken window, taking the best aim he could, and that he
was determined toº do it; if his, hand had been shot off, and
both hand and pistol had fallen into the mill.’ I do not state
this to be true, but that Walker made this statement after the
attack, whether boasting bf$iis own prowess, H care not; but
he confirms the accomplice.*, this wºn thut he was *:::::
• * , , , , . *. ' . . . . .” - ..., . . .x is . . . . . . . . . . . . . attack #

t
HAIGH, AND OTHERS. #43
attack; and Sowden will go on to say, that both before and
after that attack, he theatened him, and did every thing he
could to persuade him to join them in these outrages.
Gentlemen, H.hope you and my Lerds will not think I have
trespassed too long in this, narration; I am nearly at the
end of it. On the part of Hirst I have an express admission,
saying, “We were ordered to meet at the obelisk in Sir George
Armytage's fields. When we got there we found a great many
men, who said, that if we did not go with them they would
shoot us.” Very likely threats were used with respect to them.
“...So we went to Rawfolds, and we saw soune firing, to be stire.
I came horne as far as Hartslread with William Hall.” Hati
will prove his coming home with this man, and that he was
there at the time of the attack. - • * - • *
. This is the case I have to lay before you. From my expe-
rience here on these trials, I know 'I am to expect some
defence, I am to expect a defence, probably as to character.
But permit me to say, the defence as to character, hitherto, has
not been at all applicable to the subject. It has been proved
that the prisoners are honest, industrious, hard-working men.
What has that to do with their allegiance and submission tº
Bawful authority, and government It has no bearing on it.
And I am sorry to say, that these deluded persons, and others
in their situation (I say this publicly and loudly, for the purpose.
of its being made known) have got it into their heads (where
such an erroneous idea both in law, morals, and religion, can be:
found, I do not know) that it is no harm to destroy this pro-
perty, if they do not steal, and do not commit murder. "This is
the doctrine, I am told, that these people hold out among thern-
selves. ... If they put such ail unction to their own souls, they
will find, when it is too. late, that they have flattered theni-
selves in vain. If any persons have insposed upon them, it is is
dreadful responsibility: , ºf persons in higher life have helit
caut to them, such doctrines, their guilt is most enormous, and
they may have to coasider whether they are not answerable for
the crimes of these, unfortunate men. The delicacy of the
English Bar. has introduced a sort of custom, not to put ques-
tions on cross-examination, to witnesses called to character;
; that course, we have generally pursued... We have also
had the defence of alibi; and I would remark; that alibis are:
“generally true in substance... I know persons, unaecustódied tº
thes; matters, are often induced to say, 'How can people make
§ . a train of circumstanges?: Why, the citcuthstääces;s
Gentleman, are generally true; only give another date, and
then the story is all,true...tº And theirimºximis), as, it stasisaid:
yśrday, that it is no harm to tellatiélietto save a brother: :
* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sw- sº is . . a sºciºgº 2: 3: " : º Aºſ
whº you have heard tièevºnº, joiwiłłąy your hands"
J.'s. . . . ii., - -
se upon
144 THE KENG-AGAft|ST
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
upon your hearts, and, upon the consideration of the whbie bf
the circumstances that may be proved, will give a just verdict.
The Evidence for the Crown, and for the Prisoners, with
be found fully stated in the following Summing up:
Mr. Justice LE BLAsc. -
Gentlemen of the jury. y
THIS charge, the inquiry into which has occupied the
whole of your day, is a charge brought against the several
prisoners at the bar, of the names of jagues Haigh, jonathan
Dean, john Ogden, james Brook, john Brook, Thomas Brook,:
john Walker, and john Hirst, eight in number; who stand
indicted, with three other persons, who are not now at the
bar, having been convicted on a former indictment of a
heinous offence. The Indictment charges that they, with a
number of other evil-disposed persons, assembled together
at Liversedge on the 11th of April, unlawfully, riotously,
tumultuously and feloniously, to the disturbance of the public
peace; and that, being so assenbled, they with force.
unlawfully and feloniously did begin to demolish and pull
down a certain mill of one William Cartwright, there standing
and being, against the King's peace: So that the substance of
the charge is, that these persons, with a great number of
others, assembled in a riotous manner, did not demolish, but
began to demolish and pull down the mill of this Mr. Cart-
wright. And it is founded upon the positive law of the
country. A former Act, which may be better known by the
name of the Riot Act, had, for the purpose of preventing the
ill consequences of a number of evil-disposed persons meeting
riotously and tumultuously and dºing mischief, made it penal
(in the same manner as this Act now does with respect to
mills) for persons so assembled either to set fire to or
demolish or pull down any houses, barns, or a variety of other
things which are there enumerated. In process of time, as '
mills became frequently the object of the vengeance of persons
tumultuously assembled, 2 is particular Act, which was
passed in the 9th year of the present King, wäs made to
include mills of all descriptions, because it uses the expres-
sions “wind-saw-mill or other wind-mill, or any water-mill or
other mill;” so that there is no doubt it includes all mills by
which a power is used for the purpose of working machinery,’
just in the same manner as it does mills either for grinding
flour, or for performing the operation of sawing timber; and
that it makes it in the same manner penal to demolish of
begin to demolish or pull down mills of any description, as
the former Act had made it to begin to demolish dweſting-
houses. Therefore the only question will be, whether these
persons, or any of them, did asserable in a tumultuºus
* * * * , w . . . ... -- Hyannery
f
>
HAIGI1,-AND 63'IHERS. 145
manner, and whether they began to demolish this mill. It Mr. Juside
was not, in fact, demolished, in consequence of the spirit ; Blanc's
discovered by the owner of it, and which one wishes the ."
possessor of every holise, and of every description of property
in this country; that "may happen to be attacked, would
discover; and that each would collect what force he could,
and stand forward in the defence and protection of his own
property, receiving such assistance as ‘the Government and
the Laws of his country would afford'him. It would prove the
most effectual and the best way of suppressing all tumults
and riots of this description, if at the first moment every
person would manfully stand forward in the manner this
gentleman did, in the defence of his property. And it appears
thät by making the best defence he and the persons in this
mill with-him could; they in fact succeeded in driving the
assailánts off, before they had demolished the mill; but you
will coisider, whether they had not begun to do it, looking to
the instruments they brought with them, and the progress
they made in that which they appear to have gone there with
an intention of doing. **.
\
. The first witness called is Mr. William Cartwright, the
possessor of this mill, situate at Rawfolds, in the township of
Tiversedge, which he held under a lease, and which was used
for the purpose of finishing cloth. He says; that a short time
before the 1 fth of April he had entertained apprehensions that
an attack was meditated, and was in the contemplation of some
of those persons who were actuated by that very mischievous
spirit, which was then afloat in the country, and that it would
be made tipoti this mill of his at Rawfolds; that he had slept
in the mill himself for six weeks before, and had armcd some
of his work-people, who slept in the mill with him; and iu
consequence of the indisposition or illness of some of his work-
men, had got the assistance of a few military also to sleep with
Him in the mill; that he hād altogether ten, five military, and
five not military. That on the Saturday, which was the 11th
of April, the night when this affair happened, they themselves
had gone to rest soon after twelve o'clock at night; that a
quarter of an hour after he had retired to rest he was alarmed
by the barking of a large dog, chained within the building for
the purposé Öf giving the alarm ; that he immediately got out of
bed, and on opening the door of a small apartment in which he
slept, he heard a violent breaking of the windows on the ground
floor; and at the same time-a-dischargé of musketry of fire-arms
at the windows of the größnd and upper floors, and he heard
likewise, a violent hammering at, one of the doors of his mill,
ālid the voices of a number of persºns àt thé others; that on
one side of this building of his there is a pool of water, which,
†suppose, works the wháels that set the machinery in motion;
... • * U that
*
146 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justice that upon hearing this, they all flew to their arms; that he had
Le Blanc's placed a bell upon the top of his building, for the purpose of
iºning giving an alarm, in concert with the military stationed at no
P. great distance ; and he and his people set that bell ringing,
and discharged their muskets through the loop-holes of the
mill, in an oblique direction with respect to the situation where
sc was standing ; and that the fire was kept up by the people
without, and they in return fired from within. They heard
the cries of the persons on the outside, encouraging their
companions who were engaged in this attack, and then he
repeats the language which he heard them utter at that time,
“Bang up, my lads—In with you—Are you in, my lads?—
Keep close-In with you, lads—Damn them, kill them every
one.” And then, “Damn that bell, get it,” referring to the
bell which he was ringing in order to give the alarm. All this'
shews that there were a considerable number of persons, and
that they were encouraging each other in doing that which
they were then about, namely, breaking into this mill for the
purpose of destroying it. He says that the number of the
assailants seemed to be very considerable, but it was in the
night, and he was in the building, so that he cannot form a
judgment as to their number ; that, judging from the number
of cartridges they had fired from within, this attack must have
Jasted as long as twenty minutes; and that when the fire from
the people without slackened, he heard the cries of persons who
appeared to be wounded from the fire which he had kept up
from within, and an attempt made by the people to carry off
some of them who had been wounded. He says that they
immediately slackened their fire within, as the others slackened
their fire without; and upon that the people without appeared
to separate themselves, and take different routes, but both routes
leading back to Huddersfield. He says a person of the name of
Cockell came up, before he himself had opened the door so as
to be able to see what was without; and upon this person com-
ing up, probably hearing the alarm of the bell and what was
doing, they opened their doors and went out; and he gives an
account of what they found on the outside of the house when
they went out, that they found two men lying there who had
been wounded, and whom the party had not carried off; that
these persons were taken to a public-house, to be taken care of.
That when daylight came in the morning they examined more
particularly the state of the mill, and they found that all the
frames and the glass of all the windows on the ground-floor of
the mill were broken to pieces, except about nine panes of glass
out of three hundred; that the door of the mill had been
chopped with a hatchet, and had received, many blows with
what they call malls, by which the pannels of the door were
broken and chopped to pieces in holes, so that men might
isearly put their heads through them; that part of the janib-
. . f . t $t OT eS
HAIGH, AND OTHERS. 147
have prevented the whole from being demolished. gr.
stones of the door were likewise broken out by means of the
instruments with which they had been hammering and forcing
the doors; and the frames of many of the upper windows were
broken, and many équares of glass. IHe describes his building
as a stone building; the windows were put into framework, as
Hunderstand, in stone; the frames were broken as well as the
squares of glass, in some instances the whole window, glass,
frame and all, was entirely forced in and broken; there was not
one frame, upon the whole of the ground-floor, that was not
rendered wholly useless, so as to require it to be made quite
anew. So that I collect from his account, that these frames
fixed into the stonework were in some instances, entirely
destroyed and smashed in, and the doors broken in the same
way, and the stone jambs in two instances broken off. - This is
the only evidence given of the injury to the mill; and the ques-
tion is, whether there was not a beginning to demolish some
part of that which formed the fabric of the mill; not the
breaking of glass windows (for that would not be a beginning
to demolish) but here was a breaking of the frames of the
windows; and you will judge of their intent from the number
that came, and the manner in which they attacked...the raill,
which was such, that nothing but a vigorous resistance would
*
James Sandys, who was one of Mr. Cartwright's men, says
that the next morning he found some of the malls and
hatchets, which have been produced and laid upon the table;
that he found one of the hammers, and a hammer-head, and
that he saw other of the weapons, laid upon the table, brought
in by the persons who had picked them up on the outside.
That is the account of the instruments, as far as they can be
given in evidence, which appear to have been used by any of
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Sumrung
up.
the persons who composed the party making this attack, and .
you have had an opportunity of seeing the sorts of instru-
ments: some of them appear to be sledge-hammers, and an
adze, and another, what they call a mall, all which are instru-
ments of that force and description as to be capable of breaking
a door, and of breaking through the windows. The only other
article spoken to by one of Mr. Cartwright's servants, is one,
which is brought forward at this time, for the purpose of
applying it afterwards to evidence produced by others, to fix
upon one of the prisoners the having been there, James
Wilkinson says, the next morning he found a hat, which he
produced, in the water of the mill-dam. So that there was a
hat, which had been left there. You will find, when you come
to hear the evidence, that particularly applies to the case of one
of the prisoners, that one of those, who had attacked this mill,
had lost his hat, . . . . . . . . . . . . . º * . .
fe - '." º X . **- ' ' ' . i’, º : * . . . ) - * *
These facts having been laid before you, to prove, the body of
* : U Q the
148 'I'ſ. IE, KING AGAINST
Mr. Justicë
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
the offence committed, as charged in the indictment, when one
considers the number of persons tumultuously and riotously
assembled, the time of night at which they came, the language
used, and the manner in which the attack was conducted;
it is impossible to doubt that this was a most riotous and
tumultuous assembly of ill disposed persons, and that they
cane there for the purpose of disturbing the public peace: and
you will say, whether they did not begin to demolish and pull
down this mill.
The next question will be, whether any of the prisoners
now at the bar, were parties engaged in this assembly. In
enquiries of this description, in order to constitute the guilt of
a person charged, either with the pulling down a house, if the
house be entirely demolished, or the beginning to demolish and
pull down the house, where the assailants are prevented from
carrying their purpose fully into effect, it is not necessary to
fix upon the persons who actually fired any of the pieces that
did the mischief, or whose hands actually directed any of the
malls or hammers which broke the windows or the doors;
but every person who mixes and engages with a tumultuous
assembly of this sort, who is present assisting the rest by his
countenance and by his voice and encouragement while the
fact is committed, is equally guilty, either of actually demo-
lishing or of beginning to demolish (as the case may be) with
the man whose hand actually broke the door or began to .
pull down the building. And therefore it does not become
necessary to enquire particularly what each individual prisoner
did, but whether he made part of this riotous mob or assembly
at Mr. Cartwright’s mill at Rawſolds.
In order to shew that the prisoners were of the party, they
have called on the part of the prosecution, first, a man of the
same of William Hall, who is in that branch of the woollen
business, called a cropper, and who works at the shop of one
John Wood, at Longroyd Bridge near Huddersfield. He says
that the other persons, whom he names, one of the name of
Sowden, another of the name of Benjamin Walker, another of
the name of Varley, and others, worked at this shop ; and he
proceeds to give an account of the preparations which were
made for this attack. He says that one Joshua Dickinson,
who was a journeyman cropper, came to their shop on,
Saturday the 11th of April, and brought some powder and
ball. It does not appear that any of these men now at the
bar, were then working at the shop. Hall says that Dickinson
brought near a pint of powder, and a little bag of balls, and
two or three cartridges, not more ; that in consequence of
the directions which were given, he (William Hall) among the
rest, went that night into Sir George Armytage's fields, which
appear to have been the place of meeting;, that he (Hall)
•, Went
*- •
- HAIGH, AND OTHERS. 14.9
went with Smith and Dyson; that as they went along they
overtook George Brook, of Lockwood ; that when they got
to Sir George Armytage's fields, it was about ten o'clock
at night; that they found there about two or three score
people assembled together; that they stayed there good part
of an hour, that by that time the number of people who
had been got together amounted to a good deal above a
hundred, and that they then began to be called over and
mustered, not by names (names might have been dangerous,
for every body would hear them) but by numbers, each
man having a particular number appropriated, to which he
was to answer; that he himself was No. 7. and answered
to that number; that there were different companies, a musket
company, a pistol company, and a hatchet company ; that
Mellor and Thorpe (who were convicted upon a former indict-
ment, and who appear to have been the leaders) formed the
men into a line; that the company of musket-men were formed
in line, two deep ; and then they ordered the witness Hall, and
a man of the name of George Rigge, to go last, that is in the
rear of all the persons, and to drive the people up, arid to see
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc’s
Sunning
up. .
that none of them went back. That they accordingly marched
from the fields of Sir George Armytage towards the mill of
Mr. Cartwright, at Rawfolds, over a moor called Hartshead
Moor, the mill of Mr. Cartwright being about three miles from
these fields of Sir George Armytage; and he describes this par-
ticular spot in the fields of Sir George Armytage as being a
place where there was what they called a dumb steeple (an
obelisk, or something of that kind); he further says that
these other people, who had neither muskets nor pistols, had
Some of them malls, and some of them hatchets, and some had
nothing at all; that as they went along, many of them got
sticks or stakes, by way of arming themselves; that they were
stopped before they got to the mill, and were formed into lines
thirteen abreast; that Mellor formed his company of musket-
men, and he thinks Thorpe belonged to the next company,
the pistol-men. Then he gives an account of the names of
those persons whom he recollects to have seen while they
were in the fields of Sir George Armytage, and before they
marched to Hartshead Moor, near the mill of Mr. Cartwright.
He says that he there saw James Haigh, one of the prisoners,
Jonathan Dean the prisoner, standing next to him; John Ogden,
James Brook, and John Brook; but that he did not see Thomas :
Brook there. He says that he saw John Walker there, and
he saw John Hirst there; but John Hirst he did not after-
wards see at the mill. Then he proceeds to state, that
when they had been formed into a line, they went on to
the mill; that there was a deal of firing, and knocking with
their malls and hatchets at the mill; and that at one time
Mellor, who appears to have been their leader, cried out, that
w the
150 THE KING AGAINST
Nīkrustice the door was opened; and some of them cried out, “Fire at
Le Blanc's the bell,” for the purpose of shooting away the bell (or, more
Summing
up.
/
likely, the rope to the bell); that he heard one of them say
that there was a man shot; that he himself fired twice into
the mill, and that there was firing from the mill and into the
mill, and that that firing continued nearly twenty minutes. Ile
says the door in front was cut through, but it was never opened.
You recollect the account Mr. Cartwright gave, was, that the
door was never burst open, though the pannels were broken so
.4s to admit a man's head. He further says that they all after-
wards got away as fast as they could, in all directions; that
he himself went through the beck or stream from the mill-
pond, and made for Iligh Town, and that the reason he went
to High Town was, that he met with the prisoner Hirst, whom
he had seen at the fields of Sir George Armytage before they
went to the moor, and whom he saw afterwards when they
were forming near the mill, and that he went homewards with
him towards High Town, where Hirst was going; that he did
not himself go home that night, but went back to Sir George
Armytage’s fields. He then states, that about a fortnight after
this business had taken place, Thomas Brook brought a hat to
the shop of John Wood, and told the witness to get it to where
it belonged if he could, and that Mellor would know to whom
it belonged. This will not be intelligible, without attending
in the first place to what was proved by the people belonging
to Mr. Cartwright's mill; that there was a hat found in the
pool of the mill, so that some one person who was there had
lost a hat. You will find in the course of the evidence, that
a person in going home, called to borrow a hat, and had a hat
lent to him; and that a fortnight after, a hat was brought to
this shop of Mr. Wood, where the people worked, and that
Hall was desired to get it to the place where it belonged, to
return that hat, which they had found a woman kind enough
to lend them in their return from the mill. He also says that
Mellor, when Thomas Brook gave him that direction, referred
him to the house of Samuel Naylor, where the man had called
and borrowed the hat in his return. On his cross-examination,
Hall says that that night at ten o'clock he could see tolerably
well, that it was not very dark, not so dark but he could know
a man when he was néar him, and that he saw the men when
they were 'standing about in that field; that they occupied a
véry large space, a larger space than this court. This is the
evidence of William Hall, who (it is not necessary to observe
to you)" was as much implicated in this mischief, as any one of
the persons standing at the bar. He is not therefore a person
standing in that upright situation; that you can receive his
evidence without"considerablé distrust and eaution; and there-
fore you wilſ examife and see; whether, from the othér facts”
proved in the cause; and the téstimony of other" wº
the SC
HAIGH, ANE) OTHERS. 15.1
these facts or any of them are proved by other-evidence, so as Mr. Just .
to convince you that, bad as he is, yet in this respect he speaks Le Blanc.
the truth. His evidence is to be left to your consideration, Bººk.
, but, from the account of his being engaged in this transaction, *
he does not shew himself in that light, that you ean look at his
evidence without caution. You will see how the other evi-
dence in the cause falls in with his, and if you believe that he is
telling the truth to you upon this transaction, he is a witness
upón whose testimony you will rely.
The next witness called is Joseph Drake, who is a cloth-
dresser, and worked at John Drake's. He says, that he likewise
was at Mr. Cartwright's mill on Saturday night the 11th of
April, and that he went there with the prisoners John Walker
and jonathan Dean; that they went together from Dean's
house; that he had known them both some time; that they
set out at ten o'clock at night to go to Sir George Armytage's
fields, which was the place they were appointed to meet at ;
that, as they were going, they overtook several people who
were going, the same way, but none of the prisoners were
among those, whom they overtook; that when they were all
assembled together in the fields of Sir George Armytage, the
number might amount from 130 to 150 persons; that in these
fields of Sir George Armytage they were mustered into com-
... panies by numbers, and were placed two by two; that the
company to which he (Drake) belonged, was the pistol com-
pany, a company where the men's arms were pistols; how '
many companies there were he does not know, but there were
companies both of muskets and of pistols, and a company of
men they called hatchet, men; that they proceeded, two by
two, to Cartwright's mill; that sixty yards before they arrived
at the mill they halted, and he did not go nearer than about
sixty yards from the mill; that there were a good many
stopped behind the main body, which proceeded on to the mill;
that he gave his pistol up before he, halted; (he does not tell
us what he did there, or for what purpose they halted there);
that a good many of them, proceeded on to the mill; that he
heard a loud firing, and that it continued from a quarter of
an hour to twenty minutes; that he remained within the
distance of sixty yards of the mill during the whole time this
was going on; that a good many had proceeded to the mill,
he cannot say how many. Then he gives an account of those
persons among the prisoners at the bar, whom he knows to have
been there. He says jonathan Dean was there, and had a ham-
mer with him; john Walker was there, and he had a pistol,
and a smock-frock on. He says that he does not know james
Haigh; that he was solicited to go there by, Walker ; that he
himself did not go to Walker after the attack, but that he
saw the prisoner Thomas Brook somewhere near High §:
.* which
‘ī;2 THE RING AGAINST
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Summing
up,
which was the place to which many of them went in their way
home after the attack; that at that time he did not know him,
and that that night was the first time he had seen him; that
when he saw him néar High Town, he was without has hat, and
his clothes were very wet, and he thinks he said the had been in
the dam ; that Mellor was with Thomas Brook at that time;
that at High Town they stopped at the house of one Samuel
Naylor; where a hat was borrowed, by George Mellory of a
woman, for Thomas Brook; that Thomas Brook went home in
that hat. This is the evidence I alluded to, when I stated to
you, that evidence would afterwards be given, confirmatory of
the circumstance of the hat having been found; so that it should
appear that Thomas Brook was the person who had been in the
water; and had lost his hat; and that he called with Mellor
and this witness, and borrowed a hat, with which , he went
home; and-it was to this house that Mellor afterwards-desired
the former witness to contrive the means, of getting this hat
back again. He then describes them as calling at another
place," called Clifton, and that 'Mellor-and- Brook called for
something to eat; it was a private house; and they asked for
some muffin and water, which were given to them by a woman
out of a wiridow. Afterwards, you will recollect, that, both
the woman, at whose house they called at High Town, to
borrow the hat, and the woman at whose house they called at
Clifton, to get some bread and some water, are called to prove
that persons whom they did not know called, and that they sup-
plied them, the one with a hat, and the other with some muffin-
bread and some water, out of the window. This witness says
that he met with john Ogden at High Town after the attack
was over; that he then had a pistol with him, and said he
had been at the attack of Mr. Cartwright's mill; that they
went together to a place which he calls Cawcliff, where they
parted; and that he knows him well, and has seen him often
between that time and this. . * 3.' . .
They next call a man of the name of Benjamin Walker,
who says that he was one of the party that went to Rawfolds
mill on the night of the attack, with Thomas Smith and Thorpe ;
that he saw none of the prisoners in Sir George Armytage's
fields, nor fill he got to the mill, when they were called over,
and he answered to Nº. 13; that they were formed, in Sir
George Armytage's fields; that they then went into a close a
little way before they got to the mill; that he himself had a
gun, and was in the first company, which Mellor led; that
that company was chiefly armed with guns; that in the
place where they halted just before they got to the mill, he
saw the prisoner jonathan Dean, and hectook particular notice
of him; because he gave him a sip of rum before they halted,
after they had left Sir George Armytage's-fields, and just before
:- - ; f they
IIAHGH, AND OTHERS. 153
they came up to the mill; that he does not know whether Mr.
Justice
Bcan had a hammer or not; that after having so halted, they i.e. Biaº's
‘went up to the mill; that when they got up to the mill, there Summing
was firing on both sides; that he fired; what he saw a man uP.
of the name of Booth there, wounded, who is since dead;
that when he got home he went into Jonathan Dean's house.
that Dean was then in bed, and his hands were bleeding, and
he said he had got sadly hurt, and that he had been shot in his
finger. He says the persons, with whom he went bome from
the mill that night were, George Mellor, Joseph Drake, Tho-.
has Brook, and another chap from Cawcliff, whose name he
did not know (this answers Drake's account of Ogden;) that
they stopped a little while as they went along, and got a hat
for Thomas Brook (this accords with the account likewise
given by the former witness;) that Thomas Brook told them
that he had lost.his own in the mill-goit, that he had fallen
into the mill goit, and his clothes were very wet. The fact
that somebody's hat was in the mill-goit is clear by the evi-
dence of the servants of Mr. Cartwright; and this man as well
as the other, speaks to Thomas Brook afterwards having his
clothes wet, and calling at the house of Naylor for the pur-
pose of getting a hat for him. This witness further says, that
in going from Sir George Armytage's fields to the place where
they halted before they got up to the mill, he saw another of
the prisoners, John Walker, who had then a pistol with him,
but he never saw him afterwards; that while they were in Sir
George Armytage's fields, he saw also the prisoner James Haigh
there, and he thinks he was armed with a mall; that he never
saw Haigh any part of the time but that ; (but, from the
evidence which was given afterwards, it appears as if there
was no doubt of his being somewhere else, as well as in these
fields;) he says they stopped at Clifton, and got some bread
and sº me water, it was what they called muffin-bread, which
was given them by a woman out of a window; that he himself
had both a gun and a pistol, and he gave the gun to a man
of the name of Varley; that he had on a mask, and some of
the others had-masks on, which they were directed to burn
when the attack was over.
This is the evidence of these three persons, who may be
considered as all engaged in the very same tumult, riot and
felony as the prisoners, and who have given this account
of seeing the prisoners there.
The next person called was a man of the name of Sowden, .
who was another workman in the shop of Mr. Wood, but was
not with the pārty at the mill. He says that he himself was
not at the attack of the mill; that he knows Janathan Dean,
John Walker, and the three Brooks. That in the beginning of
the following-week after this attack upon Rawfolds, which
w • * X happened
a"
3.
154. THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justice
Te $lanc’s
Summing
up.
happened on Saturday night, he heard John Walker say is
Mr. Wood's shop, that he had a horse pistólin his hand at the
time of the attack, and that while looking in at Mr. Cart-
wright's window, there came a ball and struck the corner of.
his hat, and that he put his hand through the window with his
pistol, and aimed it as well as he could to the point from which
the flash of the pistol, the ball from which had hit the corner
of his hat, came, and he thought that if his hand went with
it, it should go: So that this was at-least the boast which
john Walker made the beginning of the week after in this
shop, where so many of the persons, who had joined in this
business were. This witness also says, that folin Walker and
fonathan Dean, were the first persons that brought any inti-
mation to the shop, where these people worked, that frame-
breaking was going ºn; that they came tº them at their shop
(that is the shop where Sowden worked) to request him and
his shopſnates to meet, and consider and adopt plans fºr the
destruction of machinery, on the same principle as had been
done at Nottingham. , , , ,

On his cross-examination, he says that he himself never
approved of the plan of frame-breaking, that he detested it,
that he did not join in any of it; that he did not at that time
imagine it would be brought to such a pass as it was aſter-
wards, brought to; that he did not discover any of the cir-
cumstances he has related to-day, until he was asked, and he
gives as a reason, because he was of a timid disposition, and
was afraid of the consequences to himself; but that the first
time he, was ever questioned about it (which, was the 24th of
Qctober) he told every thing he had heard upon the subject,
he never having engaged in these transactions, but having
heard what had been said in the shops. That is the account
given by Sowden, He himself cannot fix upon any one of
these persons as having been there, not having been there
himself, according to his own account. He only speaks as
to john Walker having boasted, the beginning of the next
week, of the part he had taken, * , •
f The next witness is Mary Brook, who is to substantiate the
account which the witnesses have given with respect to her
having delivered them the muſlin’ and the water out of the
window at Clifton. She says, that on the night of this stir
(as it is called) at Rawfolds, after she was in bed, some people
came to her door, and asked to buy some bread of her, and
that she gave them some muffin-bread and a pitcher of water
through the window, and they gave her threepenge for it. It
is stated by the accomplices that they stopped, and had these
articles in this way. * - . . Tº-,
2. Then Sarah Naylor, who livesin High Town, through which
*Oºpe of these men went in their way home, -states, that she
: . - • r- remembers
* }
HAIGH, AND OTHERS. i55
remembers the night of Mr. Cartwright's mill being attacked; Mr. Justige
that in the course of that night, some persons, whom she did ;: Blanc's
not know, called at her house, and asked, her to lend them a iºns
man's hat, that she saw only one person that asked for it, and *
she lent it; and that not long after, she cannot particularly
speak to the time, it was brought back again.' ' -, * x
**
Richard Tatterson, and, the two or three next withesses,
are called to prove circumstances with respect to the prisoner
Haigh, for the purpose of shewing that Haigh was at Cart-
wright's, and that he was one of the persons who were wounded,
there and carried off. Tatterson says that he practises sur: , ,
gery a little, and lives at Lepton, nearly, four miles and a half
from Huddersfield. 'That on Sunday the 12th of April, which
was the day after the attack on this mill, a person, came to .
his house, whom at that time he did not know, but whom he,
since knows; from what he saw of him on a subsequent day,
to be the prisoner Haigh. That he came to him on the Sun-
day, and was with him again on the Tuesday, and that he
dressed his wound; that he saw him again when he was at
Mr. Radcliffe the Magistrate's, and that he then knew him to
be Haigh; that the time at which he came to him on the
Sunday was four o'clock in the afternoon, that he said he'
. woundiáressed; that the wound was at the back
of the right shoulder; that he examined it, it was'an inch and
a half deep; it was an open wound, from the upper part of the
arm, as he described it, down to the lower part of the arm, cut
open the whole way; that there was nothing driven into it or
out of it, as he saw, either way, but there was a little bit of
lint at the upper edge, and it was driven sideway; it was more
wide than it was deep, it was a largish wound both in depth
and width; that Haigh told him he came from Dalton, and
that he had done it against astone. The witness says that he
said nothing to Haigh, but only dressed the wound; that it
appeared to him to be a bruise, as if it had been done by a fall
ainst a stone; it was fresh and bleeding, and the artà was
bloody; that he sewed it up at each end and in the middle, and
gave him some salve to dress it with, and, he saw him again
on the Tuesday; and that is all that he knows about it. . . .
Joseph Cúlpan,'who'lives at a lone house at a place called
Pénistön'Green; at the distañbe of fourteen' miles from Hud-
dersfield (Tatterson's being fötir miles and a half) says, that
Dárton may be twelve files distant from Penistön'Green;
that a mäster clothèdrésér, a relation of his, of the name ºf
Ardfön; whö'lives tri-Balté, came with antither persoh to
this löhe hôuse whérè the witness Culpan lives, at Penistón
Green, on the 15th April, four days after the hight of the
attack; at twelvet brºofien o'cločk at night; that he asked
them what tº custon rº Ardron'said; toº smoke a
2

* rl = r. º. f. *A* r \, ºn tº
* tº . A : f : . J 3
1.56 THE KING AGAINST .
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc’s
Summing
up,
pipe; that his wife knew Ardron's voice, and therefore desired
him to open the door, which he did, and let them in ; that he
had no fire at that time; that Ardron asked him to let them
stay there till daylight, and said the man that had come with
him had got a hurt; that he did not then know Ardron's com-
panion, but he now knows it is the prisoner Haigh, who ap-
peared to be lame about the shoulder; that they had but one
bed in the house; that after Ardron and his companion had
been in a little while, the witness and his wife got up, and gave
them the preference of lying down in their bed, and they them-
selves stayed up till next morning; that they then all break-
fasted together, and then the witness Culpan and Ardron went
out together, leaving Haigh at this lone house at Peniston with
Culpan’s wife, togtop there till Ardron came back; that Ardron
and the witness went together to a place called Unshelf, and
from that to Ardron's mother's at Willey Bridge, and after-
wards they came back again; that Haigh went from their house
to the house of Ardron's mother, at Willey Bridge, the after-
noon of the same day; that Haigh was a man who worked
with Ardron, Ardron being his master. The witness then de-
scribes the distance from his house to Ardron's mother's house
to be about a mile, and from his house to Ardron’s twelve
miles. So that according to the account he gives, and parti-
cularly when you come to compare it with the evidence of the
constable afterwards, it appears that Haigh came the very
next day to Tatterson's house to have this wound dressed, and
that afterwards he was brought to Peniston, and taken from
place to place, evidently for the purpose of concealment; for
no account is given by evidence of what other could be the
reason of his master carrying him in this way to,a lone house
on Peniston Green, getting him put to bed there, and then
arranging for him to go to his mother's in another place.
Mr. Thomas Atkinson, who acted as a constable on this
occasion, says that, having a warrant to apprehend the prisoner
Haigh on the 23d of April, he went on that day to his house
at Dalton, but did not find him there; that he was not there
himself, nor his wife; that he found they had been brewing,
and that the beer was in the brewing vessels, just in the way
in which it had been left, without ever having been turned at
the time when, in the regular order and process, it should have
been turned. He pursued him from thence to Tatterson's,
where he had got scent of this man having been to be dressed;
not finding him there, he then went to Peniston Green; and
not finding him there, he then went to Mrs. Ardron's at Willey
Bridge, and thence to Wragby, and thence to Methley, where
at last, he found him on the evening of the 23d; that was
twelve days after the night when the attack had been made;
that this is altogether a distance, by the shortest road, of
nineteel:
HAIGH, AND OTHERS. #57
nineteen miles from Dalton; but going round in the way in
which Haigh is proved to have gone, it is much farther than
that; and that at the time he found him at his brother-in-law's,
he was wounded in the shoulder. So that the first object of
this evidence is to shew, that in the situation in which Haigh
was, with a wound in his shoulder, which had made him lame,
he had gone away from his own house, taking this long circuit,
and moving about from place to place; when, for a man who
wanted rest for the sake of his wound, it would have been
more convenient to stay at his own house, if there was not a
strong reason against it, namely, the apprehension of his being
detected. The witness says that they took Haigh before a
Imagistrate, and he was there examined, on the 24th ; that the
arm was examined; that something was said about the shirt,
upon which the shirt he then had on was taken off (and that
shirt you, Gentlemen, have seen) and that another was given
him. He adds, that the shirt was examined by a military
gentleman who was present, Major Gordon, and that he in the
prisoner's presence said it was a musket-ball that had made
that hole in the prisoner's shirt, and that the prisoner made
no observation upon it. That was, however, mere opinion,
and it was evidence only because it was stated in the presence
of the prisoner, and which he might have answered by ex-
plaining how it was that it had been occasioned.
Michael Bentley says, that he lives at Methley; that he
saw the prisoner Haigh at his house the day before he was
taken up, when he came to be shaved; that when he saw him
there and shaved him, he was lame in the shoulder, he thinks
it was the left shoulder. This is clearly a mistake, for there
is no doubt that the wound was in the right shoulder.
Fanny Milnes is called, to speak respecting the prisoner
james Brook. She says she lived next door to him at Lock-
wood, and that the Sunday after this attack, she saw a great
deal of whispering at his house; that on that morning she
saw Jancs Brook, who, according to her account, from the
motion of his hand, appeared to be telling some sorrowful tale;
that she did not hear what he said; that there were plenty of
men, who belonged to the cloth-dressers, were coming to his
house, and that she, living next door, heard James Brook say,
that of all the dismal dins any body ever heard, that was the
most dismallest, and that you might hear it half a mile, and he
had rather be clammed to death than be in such a stir again.
What he, was alluding to, she does not know; this was all that
she overheard, and she says it was between ten and eleven
o'clock. Upon her cross-examination, she says that her hus-
band had taken up this fames Brook upon some former occasion,
and had taken him before a magistrate without a warrant; that
Brook was detained during the night and then discharged; and
^ that
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc’s
Summing
up.
I58 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
that Brook then brought an action against him for that assaul
and false imprisonment, and that he recovered against her
husband a verdict with some considerahle damages. Then she
is asked, whether she ever said that on that account she would
be even with liim, or with the family of the Brooks, or any
thing of that kind; and she denies ever having used those
expressions. Her evidence only shews that her husband, at
least, had something as a matter of complaint against Brook,
and from her-evidence it appeared that she thought that Brook
had recovered a verdict for damages against her husband
which he ought not, and therefore she might not owe him
any very good will.
$g-
The last piece of evidence produced on the part of the
prosecution, is the examination of the prisoner of the name of
Hirst before Mr. Scott, on the 2d of November last. When
this charge was made against him, and he was asked what he
had to say, he said, “We were ordered to meet at the obelisk
in Sir George Armytage's fields; when we got there, we found
a great many men, who said that if we did not go with them
they would shoot us; so we went to Rawfolds, and we saw
some firing, to be sure. I came home as far as Hartshead
with William Hall.” That is the only account he gives; he
does not deny his meeting in Sir George Armytage's fields.
with the rest, and his going on, but he attributes his going
on from Sir George Armytage's, to their threatening that they
would shoot him if he did not ; but he does not state any
reaſon why he met the rest at Sir George Armytage's, before
they proceeded to the attack of this mill. r
This is all the evidence on the part of the prosecution, and
it shortly consists of this; of the evidence of those persons
who stood in the situation of accompliees, who were there
themselves, and who speak of the prisoners at the bar being
there also in different parts of the transaction, and likewise
give an account of the different circumstances which took place
in going to this mill, while there, and during the time when
they were going home; and of the testimony of different wit-
Hesses from various places, as to these separate and distinct
circamstances, to confirm the accomplices in those parts of the
case to which they have alluded. They have likewise called
to you that witness of the name of Sowden, who was himself
no party in any of these transactions, but was working in the
same shop where the others worked, and who speaks of course
to nothing that took place that night, he not having been with
any one of them, but gives evidence as to one of the prisoners,
Walker, having, the beginning of the week after, boasted of
the part he had taken in the attack of this mill. With respect
to Haigh, theré is all that evidénce, none of which is at all
6xplained on his part, of his having, on the very next :
--> * ^. , beer,
*
/
HAIGH, AND OTHERS 159 4
been dressed Ior a wound in the shoulder; the account that Mºustice
lie gave, being, that it was cut by a stone in consequence of 5. º
a fall which he had had ; and then as to the manner in which º D&
he was treated, by being carried about from place to place,
till he was apprehended where the constable afterwards found
him. And then you have, as to particular prisoners, that which
has been proved, and the admission, in the examination of
Hirst himself, that he was there, and that he went from the
mill as far as Heartshead with William Hall; and so far by
his own acknowledgment he confirms the account, which
William Hall, who was one of the accomplices examined
before you, gave, that this man Hirst was one of the persons
who went home in company with him. "
On the part of the prisoners, they have gone into a consi-
derable length of evidence, which, as there were so many dif-
ferent prisoners, it was of course to be expected they should
go into. The first evidence gone into, was with respect to
some of the prisoners at the bar, to shew that this account, as
far as it respects them, must be false or incorrect, because
they were not there at the time. You observe, according to
the evidence on the part of the Crown, that, on the evening
when this attack was made, they were appointed to meet at
ten o'clock at night, in Sir George Armytage's fields; that they
stayed there some time, and afterwards marched up ; and,
according to the account given by Mr. Cartwright as to the
time when it happened, it must have been a quarter, or there-
abouts, after twelve, when the attack on the mill began, be-
cause he fixes the time when he went to bed to be soon after
twelve, and says that in a quarter of an hour the attack began
by their firing their pieces at the mill, and by knocking at the
windows. The evidence goes to prove that three of these
prisoners were elsewhere.
The first that they begin with, is James Brook. For him
there is called a man of the name of Thomas Ellis, who says
that he is a wool-stapler, that he lives at Lockwood; that he
knows the prisoner James Brook, who lived with his father
at Lockwood; and that on the Saturday when Mr.Cartwright's
mill was attacked, he (Thomas Ellis) had stayed at Hudders-
field till about nine o'clock, in the evening; that after that
he had stopped at Spring Gardens Coffee-house, in his way
home to Lockwood, till half past ten; that he then went
towards home about a quarter of a mile; that in going home .
he saw James Brook opposite his house, going the same way
that he (Ellis) was going, and that it was then a quarter be-
fore twelve at night: So that he would make it a quarter
before twelve at night, that he, having spent the evening as
late as past nine at Huddersfield, and afterwards at Spring
§ardens, overtook James Bröök near his own house at
Lockwood.
160 Til E. KING AGAINST
º
Mr. Justice
Ile Blanc’s
Samming
#pe
Lockwood. It is perfectly clear, from the distance and the
time, that if James Brook was at Lockwood at a quarter before
twelve that night, he could not have been at Mr. Cartwright's
mill. He says there were several other people on the road
at the time that he saw him. He is then asked as to charac-
ter; and he says he believes there is not a man in Lockwood,
nor all round, bears a better character than all the Brooks
do. There are two other, Brooks as well as James Brook,
prisoners upon this occasion.
The next witness upon the same facts is George Armitage,
who lives at Lockwood. He says that on that same evening
he was at Huddersfield, and returned home at nearly twelve
o'clock at night, and that he saw the last witness, Thomas
Ellis, and afterwards went from Thomas Ellis's in conse-
quence of something Thomas Ellis had said to him, to James
Brook’s father's house, and that he there found James Brook
the prisoner sitting by the fire, and that the father called to
them while they were talking by the fire; that the next morn-
ing he heard what had been done at Rawfolds mill. Upon his
cross-examination, he says that he is a blacksmith; that he
was a witness upon the former case of George Mellor; that
he saw the clock at the time he was at Ellis's, and that it was
somewhere near five minutes after twelve; that he never was
applied to upon this subject, to recollect the transaction, or
to speak to it, till he was subpoenaed. The same enquiry has
been made of several of the witnesses, who speak to a parti-
cular hour on that night, when they saw particular persons.
And they ail of them state, that the next day they heard what
had happened at Cartwright's mill; but still the next day
there was no charge made against any of these prisoners, as
having been engaged in any thing at Cartwright’s mill, and
therefore they were not asked at the time, whether they
recollected this or that man being at home. It does not
appear that any of them, except Haigh, were charged with
this offence till long afterwards; and it is an observation
made with regard to the accuracy with which they speak to
having seen particular persons on that evening, that they may
have been in the habit of seeing them other evenings.
Hannah Tweddle is then called, for the purpose of taking
off the effect of (what had not perhaps a great deal) the evi-
dence of the last witness called on the part of the prosecution.
fanny Milnes, who spoke to having heard a declamation made
by James Brook, who lived next déor to her, where she first saw
by his action that he was telling a dismal story, and afterwards
heard him say that it was one of the dismallest dins he ever
had heard in his life. Hannah Tweddle is called to prove some
ill will on the part of Fanny Milnes towards Brook. She says
that she lived next door to Brook; that she knows Fanny
Milngs;
HAIGH, AND OTHERS. 161
Milnes; that she heard her say one day, that she was deter-
mined to see some of the Brooks distressed before they came
from this place, and that she hoped to do it. She was falling
out at that time with a young man at her door, and in the course
of the altercation with this young man, she made use of these
expressions. She says that this might be a few weeks back,
and that she said, some of them must b : hanged before they
left this place. That merely applies to the question, what
• reliance may be fairly placed upon the account Fanny Milnes
has given. -
The next witnesses, they called were with respect to the
prisoner Thomas Brook, in order to shew that he could uot have
been at the mill that night. John Ellis, a cloth-dresser at
Lockwood, says that he is acquainted with Thomas Brook,
that he worked for Brook, that he did so on the day of the
attack on Rawfolds mill; that they were very busy at work
en the evening of that day, and that he and Thomas Elam
and Jonathan Vickerman were working together; that Thomas
Brook did not work at the shear-board where they were work-
ing ; that he saw Thomas Brook come in that evening; that
they had worked till he came to them to ask them whether
they knew what time in the evening it was they were working
to, and that he told them it was near twelve o'clock; that
upon that they immediately laid away, and went into the
house, and drew their wages; that there was no scarcity of
work; that he cannot remember the names of the persons
eoming in during the time they were at work, but that they
were at work till near twelve that night; that they all received
their wages, namely, Elam, Vickerman, and himself, from
Thomas Brook that night, soon after twelve o'clock, after he
had called them from their work, asking them, if they knew
how late it was, and that he gave each of them a pound note.
Then he is asked, what passed when this money was paid; in
what particular part of the room it was paid, and at what table:
and describes particularly that it was on the burling table, that
Stands near the door as you go in on the left-hand side, and
that Brook put a pound note into each man's hand at the time
they heard, the clock strike twelve. At first he said the
children were in the room, and then that he did not see the
children; that one of them, which he says was badly, was on
the wife's lap, and the others were in bed; that after he had
so received this money, they went a little way together; that
they and lie then turned diſſerent ways. He is asked whether
he could remember the time when first his mester was taken
up. He says he cannot. He says too, that, i.ey were wok-
ing upon plain cloth, finishing it; he cannot specify the
colour. He is asked this, which is material, whether Elain and
Vickerman are here, and he says they are both here: but they
głę not called. Now, to be sure, when he speaks to a trans-
& actios
Mr. J. ustice
Lé Bhanc's
Summing
ūPs
16? THE RING AGAINST
Mr. Justice action of this sort, proving Thomas Brook in his house, and’
§e Blanc's refers himself for confirmation to two other workmen, who
Summing must have seen every thing that he saw, and who, if in
up. - sº * *
speaking to these particulars be has spoken truth, would agree.
with him in these particulars; it is obvious to remark, that.
unless it is pretty well known that they would not speak to
those particulars, there appears no reason why they should
not be called. t
The next witness is as to John Walker. Richald Lee is
called to prove him elsewhere; he says that he knows John
!?'alker of Longreyd very well, that he has lived with him
nearly six years at bed and board at his house; that on this
Saturday night of the attack on the mill, he himself was at ”
home at John Walker's house; that he went home there at
eight or nine in the evening, and stayed at home the whole of
the night, after ; that Walker was not at home when first the
witness went home, but that he came in between ten and eleven
o'clock; that after he came in, he went out for a little time
with Joseph Walker, to fetch two barrows of coals from Hannah
Blakey's, and that at eleven o’clock, or soon afterwards, John
Walker shaved Joseph Walker, aud then Joseph Walker went
to his own home, and he saw no more of him. He says that
John Walker slept in the house that night; that the witness
slept in the room over him ; that John Walker always slept in.
the room below with his wife, and that he is sure he did not
go out after that time, for that he heard him in bed. If his-
account was a true one, it is not material to enquire whether
he went out afterwards, for it is impossible he should have been,
at Rawfolds after that period: the question is, whether his
account is a true one. He says that after 11 o'clock he shaved
this Joseph Walker, and that afterwards Joseph went away, and
the prisoner John Walker went to bed with his wife, and he,
(Lee) up stairs; that Joseph Walker had been waiting for John
#Walker's coming in ; that Joseph Walker had come in at ten,
and had stayed till John B'alker came in, and that nobody, but
he and Joseph Walker came in ; that as soon as John Ił'alker.
same in, his wife told him they wanted coals, and that John
Walker asked Joseph to go and help him fetch them, and that
they accordingly went, and nothing was said about money to
pay for them. He also says, that he never heard of John:
1 Walker being taken up, till October. t
Then Joseph Walker is called. IP3 is the brother-in-law of
John Hºalker, having married the wife's sister. Iſe says that he
was at the prisoner's house on the night of the attack on Cart-
wright's mill; that he went there, to be shaved, about ten
o'clock; and that when he arrived, John Walker was at home.
The other witness, Lee, had said that Joseph Walker had come
in, and waited with him, and with foºn iſ alker's wiſe, till John,
--- Carſte ,
HAIGH, AND OTHERS. 163
\
same home. Joseph Walker says, that he himself went to Mr. Justice
john Walker's house, to be shaved, about ten o'clock, and that
when he got there, John Walker was at home; that he asked
him to assist him in getting a few coals; that they fetched
two barrows from Hannah Blakey's; that after they had fetched
them, the prisoner shaved him, and that then he left his house
at twenty minutes before twelve, and went back to Huddersfield;
that he heard the town clock strike just before he got home, just
as he entered the town; that Lee, the last witness, was in the
house when he came in. He is particularly asked, how john
Walker was engaged when he went in; and he says john
IWalker was sitting in his chair, honing his razors at the time
he went in, at ten o'clock at night. *To be sure, he differs ma-.
terially in his recollection from Lee, for Lee says that Joseph
Walker had come in and had waited for john Walker's coming
in, for that 7ohn Walker was not at home; whereas, according
to Joseph Walker's account, he found john IWalker sitting in a
chair, honing or whetting his razors, when he got in.
Hannah Blakey, the next witness, says that she deals in
coals; that she knows john Walker; that she remembers the
affair at Rawfolds; that on that evening the prisoner came
about eleven in the evening; that she knows it was the night
, Mr. Cartwright's mill was attacked, because they came so late,
from having heard early the next morning what had happened.
Why she should know it from having heard the next morning what
had happened, unless this prisoner was connected with what had
happened, one does not know ; for there was no charge against this
man at that time, as having been at the attack on the mill. She
says he did not pay for the coals, and she put them down upon
a slate ; that she has always kept it in her recolle&tion that it
was this night. She was asked, what was the other time before
that time, that the prisoner had been supplicd with coals; and
she says, he might be supplied every week, but it depended,
upon the season or the time of the year, but she cannot recol-
lect any other time that he had been supplied, baving kept no
other night in her recollection but this particular night, which
she kept in consequence of having head of the attack on Cart-
wright's mill the next morning.
..That is all the evidence given by the witnesses for the
prisoners, for the purpose of shewing, that the account of the
witnesses for the prosecution could not be true, because they
were either at home or anywhere else; and it is applicable.
to james Brook, Thomas Brook, and john Walker.
They then call a number of witnesses as to the character of
the different prisoners, Y.
They call first, as to the character of james Haigh, the
man who had the wound in the shoulder, Mr. Mills a cloth-
dresser, who speaks to his having been apprentice with him,
and that he has known him ever since, and he has always
maintained a good character.
º Y 2 Joshua
Le Blanc's
Summing
. 164 THE KING AGAINST
#: ...Jºshua Wood, a clºh manufacturer, states, that he has
#. .* known him a good while, and he has maintained a good cha-
*& i......... a ... all......... n.221. 1... ..., *3- ~~~~~~~ is ----
i." racter. As to Thomas Brook, he speaks to his character being
good,
As to jonathân Dean, they have called J oseph Brook, whe
states, that he has known him four years and upwards, that.
he has worked with him, that he is a cloth-finisher, and that
his general character, since he has knowir him, has been a
very good one. -
James Garside, says, that he is a cloth-dresser; that he has
known the prisoner Dean six or seven years, and that his
character at Longroyd Bridge, and in that neighbourhood,
has been that of an honest industrious man.
Joshua Priestley has known. Dean a dozen years, and
during that time his general character has been that of a
peaceable industrious man.
Joseph Riley, a tailor, has known Dean ever since he was
a boy, and his general character has been very good. Then
he speaks of a circumstance, which seems to have nothing to
do with this case; that when he was a little boy he had met
with a wound in his head from the unkindness of his step-
father, and that he had fits. But it cannot be pursued so as to
Šhew that he was not in a situation to know what he did, and
to discern right from wrong, and therefore it appears to have
nothing to do with the present enquiry.
'Richard Beaumont says, that he is a clothier; that, he
knows the prisoner Ogden, who has worked for him two years
fast July ; that he has known him five years, and that he
always maintained an honest, industrious and peaceable,
character. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Abel Armitage, who is a clothier, says, that he has known
Ogden five or six years, that he was always a very steady
hard-working man, that he seemed very industrious, and that
- • * * 4. - ' ' ' |
&
he has a wife and two children. : . -
William Haigh speaks as to all the Brooks. He says he has
known the three Brooks from their youth, and that they have
horne a good honest character; that they are as honest people
as any in the neighbourhood. . . . . .
James Garside also says, that he knows the three Brooks
very well, and has known them seven or eight years, and that
during that time, they have borne a very good character as
honest industrious men. . . . . . .
Joshua Wood states, that he has known Thomas Brook for
many years, and he gives him a g60d character. "
... As to john Walker, William Haigh states, that he has
known him for some years back, and that his general character.
; . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . - . hai.
f HAIGH, AND OTHER3. 165
has been that of a laborious honest man, for anything he
knows. • *
Then as to the last prisoner, Hirst, there are two witnesses,
ene of the name of Holdfield, and one of the name of Shipley;
they have known him, one of them ten or twelve years, and the
other during the whole of his life; and they speak of his having
borne a good character during the whole of his life. *
This is the evidence which has been given as to character.
And with respect to the effect of character, the proper and the
only proper influence it can have in enquiries into the truth or
falsehood of a charge brought against prisoners, is this; that if the
evidence leaves it a matter of fair and reasonable doubt whe-
ther a party is guilty or not, in common cases, if you prove that
a prisoner up to that time has always maintained a good
character, it will apply and balance in his favour; but if the
evidence of guilt is Satisfactory to the minds of a jury,
evidence of previous good character cannot and ought not to
have any avail. - -
The question in the present case will be, how far you are
satisfied that the evidence which has been laid before you upon
the part of the prosecution, has made out that, which they are.
bound for the prosecution to make out, that these several
prisoners at the bar, or any of them, have been guilty of that
prime. which is laid to their charge; namely, beginning to
flemolish or pull down this mill of Mr. Cartwright's at the
time stated in the indictment. I stated to you in the outset,
how far all were implicated, who joined in that riotous meet-
ing with that intent; and the question is, whether the prisoners
at the bar are satisfactorily proved to have been of that num-
ber. To prove that they were so, there is the evidence of
three persons standing in the situation of accomplices, standa
ing therefore in the situation of persons, whose evidence you
will receive with caution, with a degree of scrupulousness, and
whom you will expect to be confirmed by persons, whose
testimony is less suspicious, before you give credit to the
account they lay before you. You will judge how far they
have or have not been supported by the other witnesses who
have been called. It is not necessary, that in the whole of the
account they give, they should be supported by other testi-
mony; but if you find, from the support they receive from other
witnesses, that they are telling truth in some particulars, you
will of course be justified in believing that they are telling you
truth in the whole of their narration. On the contrary, if you
find that they are speaking falsely in some particulars, you will
then distrust their testimony in the whole. Now the present
case certainly does not rest upon the testimony of one, nor
indeed of all taken together, but the facts which they have
spoken to are in many instances, which I have detailed to you,
* . ~~ f - and
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's.
Summing .
uP.
166 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Sºnming
*}}. ‘’.
--
and which I have observed upon as I went along, supported
and confirmed by different persons unconnected with 'them,
and who have been drawn from different parts and different
places. In addition to that, you have some circumstances ap-
plicable to some particular prisoners, which do not depend at
all upon that sort of testimony, I mean partienlarly the situation
of the prisoner Haigh the very next day, applying to have a
wound in his shoulder dressed, and the way in which he was
carried about till the time of his apprehension. With respect
to the circumstance of the hat being found in the mill-stream,
it is not proved whose hat it was by any of the people who
found it; but it appears, not only by the testimony of the ac-
complice, who said he went home with Thomas Brook, that he
was wet, and was without a hat, but also from the testimony of
Naylor, that that same night several people called and bor-
rowed a hat, which hat was afterwards returned. You will
ut all these circumstances together, and after the attention
you have paid to this case, it will be for you to say, whether or
not you are satisfied that these prisoners were of that party
who began to demolish this mill; and if you are satisfied that
the evidence fixes this crime upon any of the prisoners, as with
respect to such against whom you think it defective, you will
acquit them; as to the others, you will convict them; and i
you think it does not apply to any of them, you will-acquit
them all. If you find the account of the accomplices con-
firmed as to all, which is mere indéed than can be expected,
they must all bear the fate of the same verdict. You will
consider the case, and form any discrimination which in your
i
judgment you think the case deserves.
. The Jury retired at'six o'clock, and returned at seven, i
$ºding 3. * * | . .
James Haigh - - Guilty.
Jonathan Dean - Guilty. . .
John Ogden - - - - - Guilty. . ...
*
-
James Brook - - - - - Not Guilty. . .';
John Brook - - - - - Not Guilty.
Thomas Broek - - - - Guilty. . º
John Palker - - - - - Guilty. . . . . . .
Jºhn Hirst - - - - - Not G uilty.' º
f f • *
* t
} ** * 2 .” A f *
, , ;
* * *
Monday,"
JOSEPH BROOK.
*
6
*
Monday, 11” january 1813.
THE prisoner was arraigned, and THE KINs.
pleaded Not Guilty, to an Indictment } against
for Burglary, at the house of Benjamin josoph Braok.
Strickland, at Kirk Heaton, on the 4th of October.
The Indictment was opened by Mr. Richardson.
Mr. Park.-May it please your Lordships; Gentlemen ot
the Jury, This indictment is for an offence, which, unfortunately,
is not an unfrequent subject of trial at the ordinary Assizes;
I mean the crime of Burglary. But it is in this instance one
ef those crimes which has been committed with similar cir- -
cumstances of outrage and violence, as some you have heard
during the present Session. The 4th of October was the day .
on which this robbery was committed. The nominal pro-
secutor, Benjamin, Strickland, is a farmer at Kirk Heaton in
this county. The prisoner is a tailor living at Raistrick, also
in this county, about four miles from Strickland. It does not
appear that he had any knowledge of the prosecutor long be-
fore; but there is a fact which may probably account for this
autrage at the house of Strickland, that a few days previous, a
nephew of Strickland's, of the name of William Armitage, met .
the prisoner and a person of the name of Holmes. This Holmes .
was an acquaintance of Armitage's and of Strickland's; and .
in the presence of Brook he said to Armitage, “Ilave you
begun for yourself yet?” “Yes,” says he, “I have.” “Why
then your uncle Strickland must give you some money.” The
young man replied, “I do not believe my uncle has any to
spare.” “Oh,” says Holmes, “he has plenty to spare, if he
will only bring, it out.” The prisoner was present at that
conversation, and made seme foolish enquiries about nutting in
a wood, and so on, to turn it off; and there they parted.
On the fourth of October three persons attacked this house:
admittance was demanded with a very loud voice : Strickland
got up, and asked what was wanted: Some person without
galled, “Where is Enoch " What that team exactly means
I cannot state to you ; but I understand that one of those
large blacksmith's hammers or malls, which some of you saw
on Saturday, bears among the Luddites the name of El och. '
The man who carried it, began beating at the door, upon
which Strickland opened it, and a tall man in a top coat, an-
swering the deseription of the prisoner, said, “We are come
for your gun.” Strickland, said he had not any, for that it
was in the guard-room. “Then,” said the robber, “We must..
have your money.” Strickland said, “I cannot find it without
* - a light;"
•
168 THE KING AGAINST
a light;” and he endeavoured to strike a light. The man who
had entered, said, “We are to have a fight soon, and will
endeavour to let you have your money, after it is over.”
Great imprecations were used to make the old man give up
his money. He said, “I really cannot find it without a light;"
and he dropped the key of his desk, which was picked up by
zome of the robbers. After some time he was taken into the
room, where this desk was, and some person stood over him,
and insisted on his finding the money; and for that purpose
gave him back the key of the desk. It will appear that two
men were standing over him at this time, but we have found
only the prisoner on whom suspicion fell. They took out
thirty or forty shillings, and then they asked him for his gold.
He said he had none. They asked him for his watch, and took
his silver watch away from him.
While this was passing, Ann Armitage, the niece of the
prosecutor, and the sister of William Armitage, who was
sleeping in the house-part, with a view to give an alarm, called
out “Jem ;” upon which one of the robbers; who was in tha
same room, in order to intimidate her, struck his sword against
the stones, which produced a very vivid flash of light, by
which she immediately saw the face of the man. The proº
secutor, I believe, cannot speak at all to the person of Brook;
but this young woman I shall call before you, and she will
swear positively to all the circumstances I have mentioned;
besides which, she will swear that the person she saw strike
that light was the prisoner Brook, speaking both from what
she saw of his face, and from his voice, which she attended to
particularly before the Magistrate. And, Gentlemen; I have
ańother piece of evidence, which will appear, I think, to you
and to their Lordships, very material. I shall call before you
a person of the name of John Naylor, a waggoner, who will
state that on Monday the fifth of October (this robbery being
committed on the night between the fourth and fifth) as he was
going to Kirk-Heaton Woods, with his waggon, he met betweel.
‘Bradley Lane Bar and Coln Bridge, two men running. - Now
the prosecutor and his niece will speak to hearing several other
voices, though they could discern the features of only one
person, and will tell you that during the time the men were in
the house, a voice, which is supposed to have been that of
T}rook, called out, “Is the guard at the door?” and an answer
was made from without, that there was a guard there. This
waggoner will tell you, that first of all he saw two men run-
ning, and that they crossed over the road, as they came near
him, so as to interpose the waggon between them, and him.
It was then becoming daylight, so that he could see them, but
he did not speak to them. He had not proceeded two hundred
yards, when he met the prisoner Brook, in a dark-coloured top
.* d - COat,
joSEPH BROOK. - 169.
boat. He will fix him therefore to have been upon that road
at the time. Brook was running along the road, as if to overtake
the men that had gone before, and when he saw the witness with
his waggon, he halted and walked past. The witness said,
“Good morrow to you, master.” Brook made no reply, but
turned his face from him, and hung down his head; and having
walked past, the waggoner, he set off running again towards
Raistrick, which was in the opposite direction to Kirk-Heaton.
TNaylor, I understand, will swear that he has no doubt of Brook
being the man. This is the sort of evidence I have to lay
before you. It will be for you, under their Lordships' direction,
to, weigh the evidence. What will be the defence, I do not
know.' I suppose it will be a good deal like the sort of evidence
we have had in other cases; but you will have to appreciate
the weight that is due to that also:
The Evidence for the Crown was then given, and the
prisoner éntered into Evidence, the whole of which was fully
stated by . . . - - . . . .
Mr. Baron Thomsos, - -
Gentlemen of the Jury, ; , .
THIS indictment charges the prisoner at the bar, Joseph
Brook, with breaking and entering the dwelling-house of
Benjamin Stricklands in the night-time, between the hours of
two and three, on the 4th of October, and stealing a watch and
several pieces of money, the property of Strickland; and also
Stealing there a pocket-book, and other money to the amount of
about fifteen-shillings, the property of Ann Armitage his niece,
who lived with him. - . . . . .
Benjamin Strickland has given this account of the matter;
that he is a farmer and clothiérat Kirk-Heatoti, that his family
Consisted of himself, his niece Ann Armitage, altá an apprentice
lad of about the age of sixteen ; that tipon theright of this 4th
of October they went to bed between ten ange. vén, and that
in the night he, was awakened by the voices o. a number of
people on the outside of the doors and the cry of “Open the
door, opéil the door;”—he said, “Who is there? What do you
Want?” he thinks this was between two and three o'clock in the
morning; it was the dark of the moon; it was star-light. That
he then heard the cry, “Come, come, open the door, open thé
door;” and there appeared by the noise to be a number at the
door; that he asked if it was some soldiers that wanted quar-
ters (for it appears that soldiers were about that time quartered
in private houses); it was answered, “Come, come, bpen the
door;” that he got up and went to the door, and after he had
Mr. Baron
Thomson's
Sum ming
up.
got to the door he wanted them to give some account of them.
selves, and said, “You ought to give some accºunt of your-
' ' " . . . .” - - - - - - , -Z is "-" , - * - * . 'selves,
Y7e THE RING AGAINST
#Mr. Baron
Thomson's
8amming
up.
selves, before I open the door;” that one of them then called
out “Enoch,” and they struck a very heavy blow at the door,
and by the stroke it appeared to him to have been done with
an iron hammer, and the mark upon the door confirmed him in
that opinion. He says he had heard of the term Enoch
before, and (as he expressed himself) in the present day he
understands it to mean 'a hammer; it is a new term for a
hammer. He then opened the door, for fear they should break
it to pieces; and upon its being opened, there entered a large
man, a stouter man than himself, with a top coat on, who
said, “We are come for your gun.” Two other men entered as
he said this. The witness told them he had not a gun. The
other said, they must see. The witness said, “I assure you I
have not a gun, my gun is at the guard-house;” which he says
was the case, for that it had been delivered up to the soldiers.
-The man said, “Well, then we must have your money.” The
witness told him that he had not much money by him, and that
what he had he could not find without a light, Then one of
them said “We are going to have a fight, you shall have it
again when the battle is over.” He says be began to rake up
the fire, to see if he could get a light, but the fire would not
blaze; and one of the men said “Why don't you raise alight?”
or something to that effect. He said he could not raise a
Hight, but he gave them leave to do it, and one of them tried,
but could not succeed; and they said, “Come, find us your
keys.” He went to find the keys in his breeches pocket, he
went into the bed-room, and was followed by two of them from
the house-part; when he got hold of his breeches the key
dropped upon the floor, and ome of them took it up. While he
was going for the key, the stout man called out, “Is the house
properly guarded?” He did not hear any answer. Thé same man
called out, “Nº 13 come in and plunder the house.” The
key was returned to him, and he then felt something like fire-arms
at his breast, but not pointed at him; and the man said, “Open
your desk, and find the money.” Upon this he opened the desk,
which was near his bed, and two persons were in the room with
bim, and stood beside him. He took nothing hiſmself out of
the desk, but the men took out something. The witness told
them, the money he had was in a little drawer in his desk, and
they would find it there; and he says there was in that drawer
somewhere under a pound in silver and copper. Ann Armitage
Jhad money in an outer drawer in that desk, and he saw them
take that out. After they had taken the money out of the outer
drawer, one of them said, “ Damn you, where is your gold?”
He said, “I have no gold.” They said, “We know you
have.” He cannot tell which of them said that, but it was one
of the two that came in after the first man entered the house.
The stout man at this time was walking about the house-part.
The two men said, “If you do not find your gold, you .:
2. Y.
\
JOSEPH BROOK. 171
*
dead man;” and there was something of fire-arms, which he
warded off with his hands. At that time his niece called out
with a loud voice “Jem,” which was the name of the appreh-
tice boy. His niece slept in the house-part in which the big
man was walking about. A light was struck there, which
appeared to be struck with a sword upon the floor. He saw it
‘shine. This was done when the niece called Jem. The man
said, “We will have no Jem here,” and he called to the lad
Jem not to come down. They continued threatening him for
gold, and said “Damn you, where is your watch?” he said,
“My watch is here.” It was hung by the side of the clock-face,
and he took it down and delivered it up. After this, the big
man called out a second time, “Is the house-part properly
guarded?” They remained a short time after. The light
Which he saw was a flash from the striking of the floor, and he
saw that flash at two different times. So that you see all the
account he gives of this transactionis, his being obliged to open
the door in consequence of the attack that was made upon the
house; the men coming in, and proceeding to the plunder of
that house, in the way which is described; the observing the
flash of light twice, as if from some striking of the floor in the
house-part, not where the witness was, but where the stout
man was. You observe he does not attempt himself to speak
either positively, or to his belief, as to who those persons were
who so robbed his house; but he proves that the prisoner
lived at Raistrick,
Ann Armitage has told you that she is a niece of Strickland;
and on the night of the 4th of October, between two and three
in the morning, she was in bed in the house-part; that she
heard a number of men at the door, who knocked at the door,
and called out to open it; that her uncle got up, and opened
the door, and three men came in ; that she saw them in the
house-part where she slept; that her uncle was in the house-
part, and the men first demanded his gun, and he said he had
none, for that his gun was at the guard-house; that then the
men said they must have his money, and her uncle answered
that he had not much money; but they demanded what he had,
and they went into the room where the uncle slept, first all three
of them, afterwards one of them came back into the house-
part where she was; that the house was dark, and he came to
her bed-feet; that before he came, she called out “Jem,” and
the man came to her bed-feet, and struck a light, which she
describes to have been done by striking upon the stone floor with
something like a sword, probably to intimidate her, and it
produced a flash.; that it gave a light, by which she could see
his face. It must have been but a very short period, in which
she had an opportunity of seeing his face, for it could be only
from the transient opportunity afforded her by a flash being
Z 2 struck
Mr. Baroa
Thomson's
Summing
up.
172 THE KING AGAINST
Mír. Baron
Thomson’s
Summing
up.
struck upon the floor; the light which was so occasioned must
have been momentary. She says that this flash was near his
face; that his forehead and his cheeks were blacked over in
streaks, but yet she says she saw what kind of face he had,
and what kind of a dress, and she describes him as having a
great dark-coloured top coat on, and a dark-coloured handker-
chief, and that she could see he was a big man when he struck
\the light. She says too, that he swore, when she called Jem,
that if Jem came he would blow his brains out. He struck a
light only once at her bed-feet; he struck it another time, but
- that was a good way off in the same room, and she did not see
that flash as fair as she did the other one, and she did not then
see his person or features; so that the only opportunity she
had of seeing either his person, or his dress, or his countenance,
was from that single flash given while he was at her bed-feet, at
which time she undertakes to say, she saw enough of his face,
though blacked upon the forehead and the cheeks, to know him
again. She says also, that during the time he was in the
house she heard him speak many times; but she does not say
that it was a voice she was at all acquainted with before that
time. Then she mentions that money of hers was taken that
same night, and she describes it to have been, as the uncle had
done, in a drawer in the room where the uncle slept; she had
there in silver and copper, 15 shillings, the silver was all in
shillings; she had 3s. 6d. in copper, and 1 1s. 6d. in silver;
which silver was in a pocket book, She then says that the
person, whom she had seen by the flash, she saw again before
Mr. Radcliffe the Magistrate, a week and a piece after this, and
that she believed him to be the same person that she had seen
that night, and the prisoner is the person whom she saw before
the Magistrate. She believed him then to be the same person,
and she believes it now, but further than that, she does not carry
her evidence. She says that she heard him speak that night
several times, and she heard him speak before the Magistrate
several times, and that by his voice, and also judging from his
appearance, she believes him to have been the same person.
On her eross-examination she admits, what you may sup-
pose to have been the case, that she was very much frightened
all this time; and she states that she had never (that she
knows of) Seen that person before. f
They then called John Naylor, who is waggoner to
Mr. Clerk, of North Owram. He states, that he was going
with his master's waggon on the morning of Monday the fifth
of October (and he fixes it to be the fifth of October by
saying, that he heard that day of Strickland's robbery) for
bark into Heaton Hall Wood, which is in Kirk-Heaton ; and
about four o'clock in the morning he met some persons. He
inct two of them just at the bottom of Bradley Lane, near
Colº
JOSEPH BROOK. 173
Coln Bridge; they were coming in a direction towards him,
from Kirk-Heaton, but that road leads to more places than
kirk-Heaton; they were running, they did not come up to him,
but crossed the road, and went on the other side of his horses.
It was a starlight morning, and the day was just breaking,
and he says there was light enough for him to see the men.
He afterwards met another person, about two hundred yards
Mr. Baron
Thomson’s
Sumining
up.
farther on, coming in a direction, as from Kirk-Heaton; he
was also running, he had a dark-coloured great coat on ; he
was a stout clever fellow (as he expresses it). He says that
he did not at that time know the man. The man stopped
a little before he came to the witness, and walked past him.
The witness spoke to him, and said, “Good morning to you,
master;” he made no answer, but turned his head quite from
him, and set off running. The three men were going in a
direction which would lead towards Raistrick. He afterwards
saw the prisoner before Mr. Radcliffe, but he says he will not
swear that the prisoner is the man whom he so met running
in this direction. The road he met him upon goes to many
places. A question was put to him, how he came to know
the time of morning, that it was four o'clock, as he had
mentioned; and he says, that he had asked at the toll-bar, a
short time before he met the men, and he learnt that it was four
'o'clock. Whether they had a clock at the turnpike-house does
not appear, but he speaks to the time only from the information
he received at the toll-bar, -
William Armitage is called, who is nephew to Strickland,
and lives about half a mile from his uncle's. ' He says that
he remembers the time that his uncle was robbed; that the
Sunday night before the robbery he overtook one Holmes,
as he was going to church in the afternoon; that Holmes
had a person with him, whom he did not know at that
time, but that he took sufficie at 'notice of him to know that
person again, and that the prisoner is the man who was
so with Holmes. Holmes lives at Raistrick, about four
miles from Kirk-Heaton. IIe had a conversation with
Holmes, in the prisoner's presence, for near a quarter of an
hour. Holmes asked him where he lived, and the witness told
him he lived with his sister; Holmes asked him how it liked
that he did not live with his uncle; the witness told him he did
not know, and Holmes told him his uncle should give him
Some money, now he was out of his apprenticeship ; the witness
told Holmes that he thought he had little enough for himself at
resent; Holmes said he had plenty, but be would not bring it
out ; and this he says the prisoner must have heard; that is
his conclusion. Brook asked the witness whether there were
any nuts in those woods (they being between two woods, about
a qugtter of a mile from his uncle's), and whether there was
any
174 THE RING AGAINST
§§r. Saron
"fºnson’s
$ºusing
tºº.
any watch kept over the woods; the witness said there was ;
Brook asked where the watch lived; the witness told him they
Hived in Kirk-Heaton ; he observed it would be easy to rob the
woods (that is of nuts) if the watch lived so far off; the pri-
soner (as he swears it was) then asked him, whether he knew
the road to Bill Jubb's, who keeps, a public-house about a mile
from his uncle's house; the witness shewed him the road to it, and
then left him with Holmes. That is the whole of his evidence.
He says on cross examination that he was with his sister at a
public house in Huddersfield, before they went to Mr. Radcliffe's
about this charge; that the prisoner came in after them;
that he knew him to be the same man whom he had met in
company with Holmes the Sunday week before, and never had
any doubt that the prisoner was the man.
The Prisoner's defence is, that he never was at Strickland's,
and never saw the people in his life. He has called three
witnesses in his defence, by way of convincing you that he
could not be either of those persons who so entered the pro-
secutor's house, and committed the robbery which he has
stated.
In the first place, John Kaye has stated that he is an engi-
reer at Littletown ; that in October he lived at Thornhill
Bridge, which is about two miles from Raistrick; that on
Sunday night the 4th of October he went to the prisoner's
house exactly at twelve o'clock; that he went courting to the
prisoner's daughter Hannah; that she let him in, and that he
stayed there till between five and six in the morning; that the
prisoner slept in a parlour adjoining to the house part; that,
upon the door being opened by the daughter, Joseph Brook
cried “ Is n’t it time to go to bed ” that no answer was made
him, but the daughter and he went to the hearth-stone by
the fire; that afterwards the child, which was in bed with the
father, set up a scream; he does not know what was the
matter with the child; that the prisoner got up, and came out
into the house-part, and brought out a candle with him, which
he lighted at the fire, and looked at the clock, and said, “It is
time for bed, it is between two and three o’clock;” that he put
the candle upon the floor, and took his hat off the nail, and
put it upon his head, and went out of doors; that in about a
guarter of an hour he came in again, and brought with him
Jonathan Barber; that the prisoner took up the candle off the
table, and went with J3arber into the parlour; that having
stopped a quarter of an hour, as nearly as he ean tell, Barber
Reft Joseph Brook in the bed-room, and went home, and the
witness remained in the house-part till between five and six
o'clock in the morning. On cross examination he says that
it was twelve when he went in, that the chock was in the niche
by the fire-side, and he looked at it, and heard it strike, when
- - • * hg
**
&
*
JOSEPH BROOK. 175
he was at the door; he had gone to Brook's once a week for
a year and a half, so that it seems this courtship had been
of a considerable continuance; whether Hannah was out of bed
when he knocked, he cannot tell; he never asked her, whe-
ther she got up to let him in ; but he was at the door about four
minutes, and when she opened the door, she was dressed ; he
dares to say she expected him, as it was the appointed aight,
but he had not fixed any hour ; it was at Brook's house he made
the appointment with her the Sunday night before ; when he
got there, there was no candle, and when the prisoner came out,
he lighted the candle by the fire-side; he does not know
whether Brook knew that he courted his daughter; afterwards
he explains this by saying, that Brook knew he was a Sweetheart
of hers: and it is impossible he should suppose otherwise, if he
was in the habit of coming for a year and a half before, and at
all times, as it seems. . The hearthstone was about five yards
from the parlour, where Joseph Brook's bed was, and he men-
tions the door being open between the parlour and the house-
part, where he and the daughter were. He repeats, that when
the prisoner came out of the parlour, he looked at the clock
with the candle, and said “Is n’t it time to go to bed it is
between two and three o'clock”; and he says that was all that
passed. He (the witness), went away between five and six in
the morning, and Hannah Brook shut the door after him.
They then call Jonathan Barber, who states that he fives
very near the prisoner; that he sometimes helps his neighbours
with a few herbs when they are out of health ; that one night
last October Joseph Brook called him up in consequense of the
child being taken ill; that it was Monday morning, the 5th of
October; that he went with him to his house ; he saw, whers
he came there, a young man in the house-part, sitting up with
the daughter; he went through into the parlour with Joseph
Brook, and talked to his little girl; she could scarcely speak
to him ; the disorder she had was called the croup; he gave
her some tea, that had before done her good; in a quarter of
an hour he came away, and left the prisoner in bed with his
wife and two children ; he came through the house-part
again, and saw the same young man and woman there as wineſ:
he went in ; he left the house, and went home, and left the
young man and woman in the house-part. He says that he
has known the prisoner ever since he was a child; that he is
a hard-working labouring man for his family; that he is a
distant relation of his; that he (the witness) is often called
up in the night; that he made some memorandum which is
not here; that he generally makes a memorandum as to the
time he is called; that he looked at Brook's clock when he
went in, and it was exactly half-past two; that the prisonºr
lives above twenty yards from him; that he was in a great
hurry.
Therg
Mr. Barga
Thomson's
Surauing
up.
176 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Baron
Thomson’s
Summing
tºP.
There were a great number of questions put to him by the
Counsel for the Prosecution, to all of which he answered in the
affirmative; that he went directly; that the child was very
bad; that he got some water at the fire to make tea. This is
not what he said of himself originally, nor was it any part of
the detail of the transaction; but he seemed to be inclined to
answer in the affirmative every question put to him; which
questions were put by way of trying his veracity, and to con-
trast his evidence with that which was given by the other
witnesses. He says he got some water at the fire to make the
tea, which he gave the child; that Hannah Brook got the
water boiled; he does not think it was more than ten minutes
in boiling. He is asked whether the young man did not afford
some help to make this tea or mend the fire; he says, yes,
the young man potted the fire a bit, and made it burn under
the kettle; them he says he brought the child from the bed to
the fire, and had it on his knee; he speaks of having made the
tea in a mess-pot that was upon the table just behind, he put
the ingredients in, and poured water upon them, and he had
syrup of poppy. Being asked this, like all the other, whether
he had not some syrup of poppy, and whether he did not cool the
tea with it, he said yes. He says the child was in the house-
part, by the fire, and that Hannah sometimes had the child,
and sometimes he had it; it did not cry much : he is asked.
whether the child made wry faces, and he says yes it did, an
Hannah composed it, and he carried it to her father and mother
in the bed-room; he just looked in at the parlour door, and saw
them there in bed. Certainly the young man, the sweatheart of
the daughter, had given no account at all of this having passed.
He had stated, that he was not present in the room where
Barber went with the father. He represented that Barber
went into the room, and doctored the child, and came out
again, in effect contradicting all, these transactions passing
there, which this old man stated in consequence of questions
put by the Counsel for the Prosecution, giving answers in the
very terms in which the questions were all put, which formed
no part of his original examination. He is asked as to the
distance from Coln Bridge to Raistrick, and he says, Coln Bridge
he thinks is about two miles from Raistrick, Coln Bridge being,
as you know, the place where Naylor met a man, whom he will
not swear was the prisoner. The witness does not precisely. .
know the situation of Strickland's house, but it is by the moor
side, and he says it is nearly as far from Coln Bridge as Coliſ
Bridge is from Raistrick, that is a distance of about two miles.
He states that Brook's wife never got up at all.
Hannah Brook states herself to be the daughter of the pri-
soner, and to be very well acquainted with John Kaye. She
leafºw him in the month of October; he was a sweethaart of
befs,
- JOSEPH BROOK. * 177
her's. She cannot tell exactly how long he had been so, he
had been so for many a month before that month of October.
She remembers her father being taken up; it was on a Wednes-
day. She had seen Kaye on the Sunday before that Wednesday,
in the night, a few minutes after twelve, at her father's. She
did not know rightly that he would come at that time; she
expected him to corne that Sunday, because he usually came
on a Sunday. She thinks she had seen him on the Satur-
day week before. He did not say any thing about it, but she
Mr. Baron
Thorn: Jn’s
Summing -
up.
looked for him as usual. IIe stated to-day that he had made an
appointment to come on that Sunday, but no hour was fixed.
She differs from him a little in that respect, but she agrees
that she expected him that Sunday. She says wheu he came, the
family were all in bed, except her sister and her, in the house-
part. The man had certainly said nothing about seeing a
sister. There was no question, I think, put to him upon that
subject; but he had not stated the sister being in the house,
in company with Hannah, when he came in. She says Kaye
... knocked at the door, and she let him in. When she let hing
in, the father said, “ Is n’t it time for bed ” . That was said
at the time of opening the door. Her father knew that she
was acquainted with lim. After she had let him im, they
stopped on the hearthstone, and there was a fire, which had
been raked up. . She sat with him, she swears, till between
five and six in the morning, the time that the other witness
had stated. She mentions that the child cried in bed, in a little
parlour with her father and mother; there were two children -
with them; it might be five minutes after her hearing the
child, that her father came out of the parlour-door, came
to the fire, lighted a candle, and went and looked what time
it was ; and she thinks he asked them if it was not time for
bed yet. I le set the candle down on the table, and went out
of the door; he might be ten minutes or a quarter of an hour
away, and then he brought with him Jonathan Barber. Barber
went into the room where the child was ; he took something
with him when he went in, but whether he did any thing to
1he child, she does not know ; the child was between four
and five. It was tea of some sort he gave the child; she does
not know where it was made, but she says that the tea was
not made in their house ; that he made the tea, as she sup-
poses, at home, and there was no water used in their house.
The first witness, the sweetheart, had not stated a word of
there having been any tea made in that house, but had spoken
of the doctor going into the room, and that whatever hº
did, was done in that room. You have heard what this doetor
said, inclined to answer every question in the affirmative,
which the Counsel, on cross-examination, put to hire, fan-
eying these things to have happened. The old man is silly
enough to say that they all passed, Whether he was not
* &\ a - inclined
178 THE KING AGAINST
Nºt, Baron
. I hottison's
Suºmiug
up.
inclined to babble, and to answer yes to every question put
to him upon cross-examination, you will cousider upon the
whole of the evidence, keeping in mind the circumstances in
which he differs from the other witnesses. She says that she
does not know what he used in giving this tea to the child, she
before.
was not in the place with him ; he might be a quarter of
an hour with the child, or ten minutes; and Kaye and she
were sitting on the hearthstone, while Barber did what he had
to do with the child, which was in the father's bed-room; the
father never came out afterwards; Barber went away, and
shut the house door after him, and she fastened it. She was
awake till Kaye went away, and her father never got up and
went out before Kaye went, and she is very sure that that was
between five and six o'clock. Her sister is between eighteen and
nineteen. She supposes she stopped about five minutes with
Kaye and her, and then she went to bed. The witness thought
the father was awakened by the sweetheart's coming in, and
called out through the chamber-door, which she says was
shut. There is a difference between this witness and the
sweetheart, for he speaks to the parlour-door being all the
time open. She says that whea her father called out, “ Is
it not time for bed " they made no answer, and that the
door was shut; and that when she heard the child scream, her
father opened the door when he came out. She says that the
ck)ck stands facing the door, not near the chimney. There is
some difference as to the situation of the clock; but it is not
pretended that there is not a clock of some kind or other,
and this woman is probably best acquainted with the situation
of it. She says the child was never brought into the house-
part, that she never saw the child at all, it was not
brought out of the father's room. Barber had given it stuff
many times before, that had done, it good; but she does
not know that Barber ever attended the child in the night
\ - - f
Gentlemen, you will consider, whether you are satisfied that
this case is clearly made out against the prisoner at the bar,
and whether it is established that he is one of the persons who
so attacked the prosecutor's house this night, and who so
robbed and plundered it. The prosecutor has given you an
account of what pasaed there, and according to his evidence he
was intimidated by the threat and tiproar of the people on the
outside of the house, by their banging at the door, and insisting
upon entrance, in consequenee of which he opened the door,
and let them in. These are such acts of violence, as compelled
him to open the door, and would be just the same as #f they
had burst, the door open without having prevaited upon him to
open it. He certainly has had his house plundered of his
watch, and of money partly his own and partly his pièce’s pre-
perty, and under circumstances that carried with them a great
* . \ degree
-
JOHN BROOK. - - 179
degree of terror. He himself does not undertake to swear to Mr. Baron
his belief, as to any of the persons from whom he received this Thomson's
injury. Ann Armitage, the niece, has told you all that she had imming -
an opportunity of seeing, which was from the striking of the
light by the rubbing the sword or other iron instrument against
the floor, which I have 'observed would produce a flash and no
more; and it was from that flash that all the observation she
could make was drawn. She has told you that the man's face
she saw, appeared to be blacked and streaked down the cheek,
aijd she undertakes to describe the colour of the coat, and to
say that she discovered enough of the man's countenance to
believe him to be the prisoner, for she will not go at all farther
or take upon herself to say that he was the man. Upon that
entirely rests the case against the prisoner, with the exception
of the evidence of John Naylor, and of Armitage the brother.
And it will be for you to say how far that evidence of belief of
the witness, which belief is drawn from the sources only that I
have mentioned, goes to satisfy you, taking into your consider-
ation the other evidence that has been given on the part of the
prosecution, that the prisoner at the bar is one of those per-
sons who robbed the house. Now what Naylor lias been
enabled to state is this, that upon that morning, about four
* o'clock, as he apprehends, he met at a place, which is about the
distañée of two miles from the prosecutor’s house, three-men,
two of them running by and passing him, and the third who was
also running, stopping a little, and walking past him: . He states
his having spoken to the third as he passed, but not to the two
first, but that he was coming, in a direction as from Kirk-
Heaton, there being (according to the map at least) several
intermediate places before Kirk-1 featon : He speaks only to
the colour of the coat that the man had on, which was dark,
and that his person was that of a stout clever man. When he
spoke to him, he received no answer, so that he had no oppor-
tunity of observing his voice, The witness says that he set off
running again, and he was going then in a direction towards
Raistlick; that the place where he saw him was about twe
iniles from Raistrick, and that he believes the prisoner to be
the man, but he will not swear to him. . . . . ' ' , , \
Armitage's evidence only goes to shew, that on the Sunday
before he met with one Holmes, in company with the prisoner
at the bar, and that Holmes, after some conversation, stated
that Strickland had plenty of money, but would not bring it
out; and Armitage, concludes that the prisoner must have
heard this; but it does not appear that the prisoner took any
part in the conversation, so as to assure the witness that he
d.d hear it. - . . . . v.
The evidence on the prisoner's behalf, if it is not altogether
falyicated, goes to skew that he was not at Strickland's at
A a 2 . . . - the
* 30 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Baron
Thomson’s
Sumn
up.
ming.
the time this housebreaking was committed; for if it is true
that he was at home at twelve o'clock at night, and continued
at home, with the interval only of that short space, when he
went to fetch this village doctor to his child, which was not
above a quarter of an hour, from twelve till between five and
six in the morning, he certainly cannot have been one of
the persons, who engaged in this robbery of the prosecutor’s
house. You have heard the account they have given, par-
ticularly the daughter, and Kaye her friend, to that effect.
By way of confirming them, they having related the going
out of the father for a short time to feteh Barber. The
Counsel for the prisoner have ealled him, and upon his
examination, on the part of the prisoner, he certainly did not
give any account, materially inconsistent in any circumstance
with the account, which the other man had given, and which
the daughter afterwards gave. He stated that he saw them in the
house together, when he came, and when he went away; that
he left them there, and so on. When cross-examined by the
Counsel for the prosecution, questions were put, to every
one of which this man answered yes; you will consider
whether he was babbling, and not reflecting what he was
about. The account he gave, in answer to those questions,
differs materially from the account the other two witnesses
have given; which difference, if it is so material, will shew,
that in point of fact, these parties were not there. However,
one part of your consideration will be the uncertainty, with
which the witnesses on the part of the prosecution are enabled
to swear; I should rather say, the witness, that is the niece,
who had no opportunity of observing his countenance, or his
dress, but the one single flash from the sword. She has stated,
in addition to that, that she had an opportunity of hearing his
voice while he was in the house, and that she heard it after-
wards at Mr. Radcliffe's, and that, from his voice, she thinks
she can undertake to say, she believes him to be the man.
Naylor, who met the three men running about four in
the morning, in a direction from Kirk-Heaton, does not
swear that it was the prisoner at the bar that was so running,
only that he believes him to be the prisoner; and then there is
only that other circumstance, related by Armitage, that about
a week before the prisoner was present in the road at a con-
versation that passed between Armitage and Holmes, about
this poor finan having money. This is the whoſe case for
your consideration. “,
It will be for you, Gentlemen, to say, whether the evidence
iven on the part of the prosecution, coupled with that laid
before you on the part of the prisoner, satisfies you of his
guilt. If you are satisfied by the evidence that he is guilty,
it will be your duty to find him so. If you find no reason.
to doubt the truth of this alibi, notwithstanding the babbling
~ * ... of
JOB HEY, AND OTHERS. * 181
of the old man, as to the circumstances he stated about the
making of the tea in the kitchen, and so on, which neither of
the other witnesses have spoken to, that will be a ground for
your acquitting him. If you are not satisfied that the case
proved originally made out sufficiently that the prisoner was
guilty, you will acquit him. You will consider the whole of
the evidence, and give that verdiet which you think the case
requires of you, and which will do justice between the prisoner
and the country. -
*
The Jury withdrew at a quarter before three, and returned
in about five minutes, finding the prisoner - - - Not Guilty.
They afterwards declared that they disbelieved the alibi.
*
*
THE Prisoners were indicted for a THE KING
Burglary, at the House of George Haigh, against
Job Hey,
John Hill, &c.
J IVilliam Hartley.
at Skircoat, on the 29th of August last,
and severally pleaded, Not Guilty.
The Indictment was opened by Mr. Richardson.
Mr. Park.-May it please your Lordships; Gentlemen of
the Jury, This case, I hope, will not occupy so much time as
the last did, for we have been employed three hours, I think,
very unnecessarily, in the latter part of that case. I have
asked, whether there are any witnesses to an alibi in this case,
and I find there are not ; the case then is a very short one.
Mr. Haigh, whose house has been broken oped, is a gentleman
residing near Copley Gate, at Skircoat near Halifax. On a
Saturday in the month of August last (but whether. Saturday
the 29th or Saturday the 22d, I am not prepared to state to
you) between eleven at night and one in the morning he heard
a violent knocking and noise at his front and back-doors;
he got out of bed, and went to the landing-place of his house,
and there he could hear distinctly what passed without-side
the door. He called out to know what was wanting, upon
which a man answered, “My master, General Ludd, has sent
me for your fire-arms:” He said he had mone. A voice said
“We know you have two guns and four pistols, and if you do
not immediately deliver your fire-arms, we will break in, and
take your fire-arms; quick, quick, quiek.”
was unwilling to deliver up his fire-arms, but a servants of the
name of 'Tillotson, advised his master not to resist, upon which
there was a gun given, and afterwards a pistol. He had several
* • pistols
The prosecutor.
TMr. Baron
Thomson'a
Summing
up.
182 THE RING AGAINST
pistols in the house, but he acknowledged having only one.
He gave it to Tillotson to deliyer, and it was delivered to the
gang. The pistol will be produced. . It has been traced, and
j will tell you presently where it was found. It is now in the .
pºssession of the witness, and, the prosecutor and Tillotsori.
will, swear that they verily believe it to be Haigh's pistol,
though not in the same state in which it was at the time it was
defivered. We shall produce to you also the stock of a guiti,
which was found on the outside of the door of the house. ºf
have told you that there was a great deal of knecking at the
#
door, before aduittance was granted. Whether there was...
actially firing on the outside I do not know, or whether it was
ºnly by that sort aſ thumping and violent blows, which the
witnesses on the inside, in their terror, might suppose to be
firing. { understand that the aecomplice I an about to call,
and the prisoners thernselves, say there was no firing." . E .
inderstand Mr. Haigh and his man will sly one piece was
fired, but whether there was or not, it does not signify. There
can be no earthly doubt upon this case, for all the prisoners at
the bar have admitted they were present. It will be proved
to you that the gun of otie of the men was broken, and it is
the stock of that, as we suppose, which was foºlid on the out:
side of the door, and the door remains marked with blows
from a gun-stock.
I shall call before you an accomplice, who wiſi tell you that
a considerable number of them net-àbout ten o'clock on the
evening in question, on purpose to commit several robberies on
that night, "and among others at the house of the prosecutor,
Mr. George Haigh, at Copley Gaº; that they put on no disguise,
ori setting out, that in the course of their prºceeding they took
a gun from a person; that William Hartley was the header
that night; that they knocked at Air. Haigh's front and back-
dºors; that they were pot angwered 30 soon as they wished;
that Job Hey struck the kitchen-door, by which he broke the
stºck of his gap, (and we shalf produce the stock of a firelock
which was knocked off); that they insisted on guns ºd pistols,
grid that they were given to them by the master and the sers
want; they will also prove taking a top-coat out of the kitchen,
arid that it was afterwards left at Copley Hall. Tiºbótsºn, wiłł
teſ; you that they took that top-coat, and that he got it back.
from Copley Hall. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ." .
{ shałł'then call Łieutenant Cooper to produce the pistol,
and shall prove where it was found, Hieutenant Cooper put
one of these priºrs (fiey), with a $erjeant of the name ºf
Clarke, and while he was at his house he had goºxgrsations -
with him. ‘ſhe prisoner (Hey) was asked, whether, he had
not some fire-anns' in his house, upon which he told ºn, he, ,
had a pistol concealed in his dwelling-house, between the chim-
I - t - { Ål {}f
JoB HEY, AND OTHERS. iss
hey and the roof. Serjeant Clarke went to his house on the
, 14th of Iłecember, and found in the very place pointed out by
him the pistol, which will be now produced, which he delivered
to his officer, which the officer has delivered to a constable,
and which the prosecutór Haigh and is man will swear that
they believe to be the same they lost.
I shall not enter into other matters, on which these prisoners
were examined, but I shall lay before you the voluntary coil-
fession of all the prisoners, and I am assured there was neither
intimidation or threats, or promises, or inducements held out
to make them confess, and that they were told, “if you say
any thing upon the subject, it will be used as evidence against
you :" notwithstanding which caution, Job Héy, who is one of
the prisoners, when interrogated oil this subject says “I was
there ;” John Hill says “I was there, but there was no gua
fired in the kitchen;” William Hartley says “I was there, but
I received no arms.” (that is prºbable enough) “nor did i
make any demand of any.” It is probable that he may not
have been the particular person to make the demand; but their
Lordships have had occasion to tell juries in your place, and
probably some of yourselves, that if all these persons werit
together for this illegal purpose, it does not signify which par-
ticular person did the particular act, but if they were all there
in that illegal transaction, they are all equally guilty of the
offence imputed to them. - ~ :
The Evidence was summed up by
Mr. Justice LE BLAN c.
Gentlemen of the Jury,
THE three prisoners now at the bar, Job Hey, John IIill,
and Ifilliam Harèſey, are indicted for a Burglary’; an offence
similar to some of those you have before tried; namely, the
... breaking and entering a dwelling-house in the night-time, with
intent to steal, and stealing certain property therein. The
property they are so charged to have stolen, consists of a guri,
a pistol, and a great coat. The material things, are the gun
and the pistol. w -
The evidence, that is produced in support of the prosecution,
is, first the evidence of George Haigh, whose house it is stated
they broke and entered. He says that he is a wool-stapler,
living at Copley Gate, in the township of Skircoat ; that on a
Saturday night in the month of August, he believes it was the
iast Saturday in August, but he is not certain, after they had
been in bed some time, they were alarmed, and he was awakened
by a loud rapping at both the front and back door of his
house; he supposed from the time that it must have been about
twelve o'clock at night; that upon that he got up and went
. . . - - . . . . . S `... . . down
Alr. 3 tistics
Jie J}lane's
Sumtising
tº Po
184. THE KING AGAINST *
#ſº. Justice
lie Blanc’s.
Summing.
tip.
6.
down to the landing of his staircase ; and he appears never to
have stirred from that staircase during the time of the robbery.
He says, that while he was there, he still heard this loud knock-,
ing at the door, with something that sounded as if it was a
łarge thing, the butt-end of a gun, or something that would
make a similar noise; that other people were knocking at the
front door; that he heard the voices of several people calling
out; that he heard them call out “Your arms;" he having said
“ Hallo, what do you want?” and that another voice said
“General Ludd, my master, has sent me for your arms;" he
answered that lie had none; the voice answered “You have.”
in a rough coarse-tone; he said “I have nothing of the kind,
for God's sake go home.” Upon that he says that he heard
a noise, but he could not tell whether it was a noise proceed. .
ing from the firing of any pieces, or whether it was from re-
peated strokes given against the door of his house, and then
somebody said, “You have two gulls and four pistols;” he said
to them, from within, “We have nothing of the kind, nor ever
Had,” he (Mr. Haigh) standing all the time upon the landing-
place of his house. Then he says that a man of his, of the
name of Tillotson, came up to him and said, “Master, you had
better give them the gun, for they will shoot us.” Upon that
'Pillotson immediately went down stairs with the gun, and pre-
sently returned to him again; and when he returned again, he
(Haigh) gave him a pistol, and then Tillotson went away. He
says that while he was standing there, he again heard their,
speaking below stairs, and the voices appeared to come from
the kitchen, “Your arms, your arms, be quick.” He being
upon the landing, could not positively himself say where it
came from. That is the account given by Mr. Haigh.
Then the man, Tillotson, who appears to have been in a
greater hurry to satisfy what these people demanded of them
than his master was, says, that being in bed, and having heard
this knocking at both the front and back door, on this Saturday
night, as he supposed a little after twelve o'clock, and having
heard the people use that language, which Mr. Haigh has
spoken to, and which he repeats, and having heard his master
tell them that they had no arms; he also heard the people from
without say, that they in the house had arms, and if they did,
not deliver them up immediately, they would break in, that
they knew of four pistols and two guns; he says that they con-
tinued stilk knocking at the door, and that he opened the door,
because his nistress told him he might get up and open
it, and give then the gun, they having said they would
break open the door if he did not give them the gun; that when
he opened the door, the men ran away from it, but they met
some others conning round from the front of the house, and
then they turned back again, and asked for the guns and for the
pistol; that he, standing within the house, gave to them, who
WCI &
Job HEY, AND OTHERS. 185
were without the house, a gun, none of them at that time com-
ing in ; that they had a conversation with him afterwards, and
asked him if it was fireable, and he told them it was fireable;
that they told him there was no ramrod, and that if he did not
immediately find it they would shoot him ; he told them that
he could not find the ramrod; and then they wanted another
gun, and four pistols; he told them that they had a pistol, and
that was all ; and he retired into the house to get the pistol,
when the men immediately followed him into the kitchen.
He says that he went up stairs and brought down a pistol
from his master, and gave it to them in the kitchen; that it
was his master's gun and his mastel's pistol that he so gave to
them; that the people, to whom he gave them, were armed,
some with guns, and some with pistols in their hands; and
that at the time he so gave the gun and pistol to them, some
of them held the pistols and guns they had in their hands close
to his person, and told him, if he would not deliver them the
guns and the pistols, they would shoot him. He says, that
after they had taken the pistol, they told him that if his master
did not sell his milk at home allong his neighbours, they would
visit him with immediate death, There was something of this
same sort mentioned by Mr. Haigh himself. Tillotson says,
that some of them took a top coat, which was hanging in the
passage going to the kitchen, that belonged to him ; that top
coat, however, was brought back by a farmer's man in the
neighbourhood, the next morning, and given back to him. He
says that the next day lie examined the doors, and that they
were thumped as if they had had stones against them, or as if
they had been marked by guns; and he speaks to finding palt
of a gun-stock the next day near one of the doors. He is
asked particularly as to the time; he says he thinks it was
twelve at night, and that it was quite dark.
According to the account given by him and by his master,
there was a very loud knocking at the back and the front doors,
and the voices of a number of people on the outside, calling out .
2 e
for them to deliver their arms, saying, they were come to
demand their arms, that they would break open their doors and
shoot them if they did not deliver their arms; a gun was deli-
vered to them, none of them having been in the hºuse; but
still persisting in having more arms delivered, and following
into the house, the servant, whom they had so terrified as to
make him open the door, they there received the other piece
of fire-arms, which the servant admitted they had in the house.
So that if you are satisfied that these people came with an
intention of robbing this house of the arms which the inha-
bitants had, and of compelling them by threats and violence
to open the doors, or otherwise of breaking open the doors
themselves, and then going in and receiving the articles in the
J3 S house,
Mr Justice
Le Blang's
Summing
up.
186 THE KENG AGAINST
Mr. Justice house, it is in contemplation of law a burglary; and according
Je Blanc's to this account, they knocked at the door, exclaiming on the
*# outside what they came for, and swearing they would shoot
ºp- the inhabitants if they did not deliver their arms; and then
afterwards a number of them came into the house, and there
received one of the articles; the other, the gun, having beets.
received by them outside the door.
They then eall a man of the name of Joseph Carter, who was
certainly one, according to his own account, of these persons so
assembled on this night, His account is, that he and the three
prisoners, and a number of other persons, in the whole nine or
ten, assembled in a field, by appointment, on a Saturday at
the end of August, early in the evening, that is, eight or nine
o'clock in the evening, arid that the purpose of their so assem-
bling was to go about and take arms and guns from different
people's houses; that they afterwards proceeded to different
houses, and among others went to the house of Mr. George
Haigh; that they got there somewhere near twelve; that he
himself and the three prisoners, Hey, Hill, and Hartley, were
*here ; that some of them went to the front door, and some to
the kitchen door, and knocked hard with guns and pistols, and
demanded arms; that they were told from within, that they
had none, and some of their party said they knew they had
got two guns and four pistols, and they would have them. He
describes the door as opened by Tillotson, the servant, and says,
'hat upon that some of the people went back, till they met
the greater part, who were coming round from the font door;
and that then having joined them, they went back to the
&itchen door, and told Tillotson that they demanded his arms;
that he brought one gun to them, and one of the party took it.
as it was handed out of the door, and that then they told hitn
he had more arms, and they would have them; that Tillotson
went back, and they all rushed into the house after him; that
Tillotson then went, and fetched a pistol, and gave to one of
whem; and that then they told him, that if his master did not
sell his milk annong his neighbours at two-pence a quart, they
would visit him again. This is the account given by the
accomplice Carter. And on reading over his account, and
comparing it with the account which you have just before
heard from Haigh, and from his man Tillotson, it agrees in
“very particular as to what the people said, the way in
which the different doors were beaten and knocked, and the
manner in which some of the robbers retreated, till they were
joined by their companions, and afterwards 1eceived the gun
from Tillotson, and then followed him into the kitchen, where
- ºne pistol was delivered to them. Carter likewise says, that
one of them took a top-coat from the passage of the house,
* and threw it over the arm of one of the prisoners, job *:::
- andº
JOB HEY, AND OTHERS. 187:
sº
and that he carried it from the house to a place called Copley
Hall; and then he began to enquire whose it was, whether it
belonged to any of the party that was there or not ; and finding
it did not belong to any of his companions, he said he would
not carry it any further, but leave it there, that not being the
object of their going to Haigh's. They seem to have gone to
His house with no other view, but to take the arms. But,
if they went with a view to break into the house, or to
compel the persons belonging to it to let them in, under the
fear that otherwise they would break into it, whether it was to
take arms or money, it is equally a burglary; because the
ewner of them is no more obliged to part with his arms, than
with his money, to these persons, who have no right to
require either of him. He then gives an account that that
great coat was left at Copley Hall, and given to one of the
farming men there, to be taken back. That the prisoner Hoy
took the gun, which had been so taken from this house of
Mr. Haigh's, and some one-else of the party took the pistol;
that the pistol was carried to Sowerby, and the gun to North
Dean; and he gives this further account, that the prisoner
Hey had a gun, which he broke the stock off, by knocking
against the kitchen door with it, and that part of the stock of
the gun, which he so broke by knocking against the door, was
feft behind them, when the party went away. He says no
arms were fired off, while they were at the house, but there
was the noise of striking the door, and some one of them,
after they got into the house, struck the table with a stºck
that he had in his hand pretty loud. He says the gun,
which was broken, was a gun they had taken from some other
place, in the course of that night. N.
On his cross-examination he says, he himself is a cotton-
spinner, living at Greetland: that he now comes from the
House of Correction at Wakefield, where he has been for the
purpose of Securing his being examined here; that he was
taken up for another offence in the month of December, and
then disclosed this offence together with others. You will look
at his evidence in the same way in which you, or gentlemen
sitting in your place, have had occasion to consider other
evidence of the same nature, namely, as suspicious; and see
whether or not, from the manner in which it tallies and agrees
with the evidence of others, it appears to you that the man is
telling truth, And to be sure, with respect to almost every
particular of what passed on the attack of this house, as given by
Haigh and by Tillotson, the account given by this accomplice
tallies with theirs, as to the expressions used, the noise made,
the manner in which the door was opened, the retreat of the
People at first, their afterwards going in, and what arms were
*elivered before they came in, what arins were discovered
| B b 2 afterwards,
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Sunming
tip,
188 THE KING AGAINST"
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc’s
Summing
up. "
afterwards, and the expressions repeated by the servant, that
if his master did not sell his milk among his neighbours they
would come again, which had nothing to do with their attack.
These people having assumed to themselves, in the first
instance, the privilege of coming to demand arms, the next
thing was, that they should dictate to the party, in what way
he should dispose of his property, whether of one sort or
another. f
The next witness is Thomas Clarke, a serjeant of the
Suffolk militia, quartered in that part of the country; and he
is called to speak to the fact of finding a pistol in the possession
of one of the prisoners, Hey. He says that he was quartered
at Elland; that their commanding officer was Lieutenant
Cooper; and that in the beginning of December he went with
the officer and a party of soldiers, to apprehend the prisoner
job Hey at his house at North Dean ; that in searching his
house they found a quantity of gunpowder; he weighed it, and
it was three pounds and a quarter; that the account Hey gave
of it was, that he had brought it from on ship-board sixteen
years before; but the Serjeant says, as far as he is a judge of
gunpowder, it did not appear like powder that had been kept
sixteen years; that it was in a paper wrapping in a hand-
kerchief, and it appeared to have a greater degree of freshness
than it would have if it had been kept so long. He also says that
job Hey continued in their custody for some time, and while he
was under his care he asked liim if he never had a gun, and Hey
, told him he never had a gun in his possession in his life. The
Serjeant afterwards asked him if he had not a pistol, and he
said yes, he had one, and that if the Serjeant went into his
chamber at his house, where he took him up, he would find the
pistol between the chimney and the roof, doubled up in one of
his (the prisoner's) boy's old jackets, The Serjeant says that
Jhe accordingly went and searched, and found the pistol doubled
Yip in the boy's old jacket between the chimney and the roof.
He returned with it to the prisoner, and shewed it to him, and
the prisoner said, yes, that was the pistol. The Serjeant kept
it in his possession till the next morning, when Lieutenant
Cooper came home, and he gave it to him. Lieutenant Cooper
gave it to Mr. Whitehead, the constable, in the presence of
the magistrate, Mr. Radcliffe; and Mr. Whitehead produces it,
saying he did so receive it, Lieutenant Cooper being present.
That pistol is then looked at by Mr. Haigh, by his son, and
by his servant John Tillotson, for the purpose of seeing whether
they can speak to it as being that pistol which was so taken
from Haigh's house on that night. It appears that the pistol
which was taken from Haigh's house was one, which the son
of Haigh had bought about six weeks before. He had fired
it, and the servant had fired it likewise, and they had it in their
possession six weeks; but, there being no particular mark put
upoll
t jQB HEY, AND OTHERS. 189
;
, upon it to distinguish it from any other, all they say is, that it Mr. Justice
is the same sort of pistol they had, but that when it was taken Le Bºnº's
from them it was a new pistol, and that now it has been iºns
scratched and had bad usage, so that they cannot take upon P.
themselves positively to swear that the pistol is the same that
was taken from them, but that it is a pistol of the same size
and description, there being no particular mark by which they
can swear to it. The result of which is, that this pistol so
found in the possession of the prisoner, and which he directed
the Serjeant so to find on being enquired for, is a pistol of the
same description as Mr. Haigh was robbed of on that night.
They then proceed to give you in evidence, on the part of the
prosecution, the examination of these three different prisoners,
when they were taken up in consequence probably of information
given by the accomplice before the magistrate. Mr. Lloyd,
who was present at the time, has given the account, that at
their examination they were told they might say any thing,
or not; that there were no promises held out to them to say
any thing, and that they were told what they said might pro-
bably be used against them ; and that they afterwards signed
the examinations which have been given in. Without going
through the other parts, which do not relate to the subject
under enquiry now, job Hey says, that “as to the robbery at
Mr. George Haigh's, he was there.” The prisoner Hill, on
his examination, being charged with a burglary at Mr. George
Haigh's of Skirceat Green, says, “I was there, but there was
never a gun fired in that kitchen.” According to the account
ef the people themselves, they do not say that a gun was fired
in the kitchen; they doubt whether a gun might not be fired
on the outside of the house, or whether it was the report of the
doors behg struck. The prisoner Hartley being charged with
felony at Mr. Flaigh's, says, “I was there, but I received no
arms, nor made any demand of any.” That is the account they
have each of them given. *
If a number of men meet together, for the purpose of going
to plunder houses of arms, it is perfectly immaterial, whether
the particukir persons brought before you, charged with being
principals in that robbery, are the individuals themselves who
sither asked for arms, or received arms, or fired off arms, or
even knocked a blow at the door; for every person who goes
and adds his countenance and his strength to the party, to
make it more munierous, and is present taking the part allotted,
either of appearing and making a noise at the door, or any
other part, is equally guilty of the burglary with the man who
actually demands or actually takes the arms. The only ques-
tion to be enquired into is, whether the evidence satisfies you
that the persons charged were part of that company, who
went together for that purpose, and whether it was in pur-
stance of that purpose that the fact was done among them.
\ 5 As
190 THE KING AGAINST
Yºr. Justice
J.e.Blanc's
$umming
tºp.
As to the particular persons being there in the present case,
you have the account given by the accomplice speaking
to the whole, and tallying exactly in all its circumstances-with
the account of the robbery as detailed by Mr. Haigh, and by
his servant; and as to the particular circumstance of a stock of
a gun, which one of the people had, having been broken, and
a part of it left behind, which is found next morning near one
of the doors. And in addition to this, besides confirmation of
the expressions used, you have evidence that these men, when
taken up, all of them admitted that they were there ; thoug|
one denies having taken any arms, and the other says that no
guns were fired off; but still they all admit that they were
there present at that time. If so, to be sure they are guilty.
On the part of the prisoners themselves, you have two
witnesses called to character, Mr. Bradbury and Mr. Holling-
worth. They speak to the character of the prisoner Hill,
whom both of them have known for two or three years.
They speak of him as an industrious, honest, sober man.
Mr. Bradbury also speaks to having known Job Hey nearly
three years, and that he ever, found his character very fair,
up to the present time. With respect to the third prisoner,
Hartley, he knew nothing himself about him, he knew no
harm of him, but he knew very little of him. With regard
to character, in enquiries into offences committed upon the
present occasion, general characters for sobriety or for honesty
up to the period, when these unfortunate tempels and dispost-
tions broke out, has less weight than perhaps in most enqui-
ries with respect to robberies which are brought before
juries; because, one is sorry to see that many, men, who
are good workmen, who are industrious, who are in other
respects homest, and who perhaps would not have broken into
any house in the outset of these disturbances, for the purpose
of stealing any thin, else, have thought themselves justified, by
the fever with which they were actuated, to break open
houses and steal arms. You will judge how far the evidence
brought before you, satisfies you that these three men went
to Haigh's for the purpose of violently demanding the arms
that were taken, threatened and knocked at the door, forced
the man to open it, when they had got the gun insisted upon
the pistol also, and received the pistol in the house If so,
in point of law, it was a breaking and entering the house, and
there stealing that pistol. If you are satisfied of that, you will
find them guilty. If you see any reason to doubt it, you ºf
tourse will acquit them. •
The Jury immediately-pronounced
Job Hey, - - - Guilty.
$º. John Hill, - - - Guilty.
William Hartley - €uilty. *
* - - Tuesday,
JAMES HEY, AND OTHERS. 394
Tuesday, 12th January 1813.
FOR robbery of James Brook, in his Trie, KIN &
Dwelling house at Huddersfield, and for against
stealing in the said Dwelling-house, & James IIey,
Brook being therein, and being put in A Joseph Crowther, &
fear, on the 29th of November. Nathan Hoyle.
The prisoner having pleaded Not Guilty, the Indictment
was opened by Mr. Richardson.
Mr. Park.-May it please your Lordships; Gentlemen of
the Jury, I am very sorry that the three prisoners at the Bar
have obliged me to bring down the depredations, of which we
complain, to so late a period in the last year, for this offence.
happened as far down as the 29th of November. We shall
proceed principally upon the second count opened to you by
my learned Friend, namely, the stealing from the dwelling-
house, and putting in fear; which their Lordships will tell you,
by an Act of Parliament in the reign of King William was
made a capital offence. The circumstances of the case are
extremely short in themselves, and I am Sorry to say as against
the prisoners at the bar (unless I am deceived by my instruc-
tions, of which I have not any ideo) are very clear.
The nominal prosecutor, James Brook, is a poor man, a coal-
miner, living near Far Town, about two miles from Hudders-
field. The prisoners at the bar are all, as you see by their ap-
pearance, men in an inferior station in life; one of them is a
woollen-spinner, another a cotton-Spinner, another a weaver;
and I cannot conceal it from their Lordships, or from you (as it
will be proved by all the witnesses, at least those who knew
any thing of their transactions, and by the confession of one
of the prisoners) they went out on the night in question to
commit various depredations, It seems that Hey took a very
considerable share in the business, and so did Crowther.
I shall have occasion to call before you a man of the name
ef Carter, who was examined last night, who was of that party
that were convicted last night, and who was also of this party.
He will go minutely through the history of the transaction;
he will prove to you, among other things, that they came to the
house where Brook lived, and (as Brook himself will fully state
to you), he was standing at his door, about eight o'clock in the
evening. They insisted upon entering his house, and did enter
it; they called upon him to deliver up fire-arms; he told
them for a considerable time he had none; they still insisted
upon having fire-arms, upon which he said, at last, “Well, I
2’ e Huys
*
# 92 THE KING AGAINST
have an old gun, but it is of no use;” he shewed it to thetii,
and upon examining it they found it was not a fireable piece
(to use an expression we heard yesterday); they then in-
sisted he should give them money; he said he had none; they
persisted that they would have a pound note; he insisted he
had not one; however they took him up stairs, frightened him.
very much, as you may suppose, and at last they forced open
the cupboard, and there they found a pound note and some silver,
which they took away from him; and you will find from the
evidence that will be laid before you, that that night they
divided fifteen pounds, apiece,
I shall have occasion to call before you a person of the name
of Edward Crowther (not a relation, I believe, of the prisoner
Joseph Crowther) who was in their confidence, though he does not
appear to have committed any of the felonies. On the day of
the robbery, a conversation took place between this Edward
Crowther, the prisoner Hoyle, and another man of the
name of Mitchell. They proposed to go that afternoon to
several places at Bradley Gate, which Hoyle, the prisoner,
pointed out to them, and they were to meet at a place ap-
pointed, about seven that evening. Edward Crowther and
Mitchell did not keep the appointment. The first time after
this that Edward Crowther saw Hoyle, was at his own house,
on the following day about noon, when the prisoner Hoyle
called upon him, and said, “Why did not you come 3" and cursed
him for not having kept his word, and told him they had done
exceedingly well, and that there was nothing like going into
a country they did not know. Whether the place selected
for this scene was a place in which they did not usually leside,
I know not, but that was his expression, that there was nothing
like going into a country they did not know. A
Besides that, I have the examination of the prisoner Crow-
ther, taken (as I am informed) without the least promise or
intimidation. Upon being examined before a Magistrate, on
the 16th of December, when various charges were made
against him, and amongst the rest the one in question, he
says, “ The prisoner saith he is guilty; James liey and
Joseph Carter wanted me to go with them; there were Natham
'Hoyle and others.” You will observe, Gentlemen, though the
prisoner Crowther's examination may be read against himself,
yet what he says of A. and B. you will totally put out of your
consideration, I cannot help reading it, for I cannot take the
words asunder, without destroying the sense. Therefore you
will not suppose I read these names to raise the slightest
prejudice in your minds against other prisoners; on the con-
trary, I earnestly entreat you to dismiss all prejudice. Then
it goes on, “There were only four of us there. I am speaking of
eng Sunday night, the last but two;” which is exactly the case,
13 I that
JAMES HEY, AND OTHERS. 193
that would make it Sunday the 29th of November. “They
came to another place, and Hey said, this is a likely place,
and it will pay the two men who should have met us.” Those
were Jonas Mitchell and Edward Crowther. “We went in
and demanded a gun first ; be said he had none, nor a pistol.
We then demanded a pound note, but he said he had not one.”
Brook will prove every tittle of this having passed. “He
shewed an old gun, but they would not have it, but insisted
upon having a one pound note. He then séāfched in a cup-
board, and found a pound note, or something, but I do not
know what, and some silver.” There is a great deal more,
but I will not read it, This appears to me, Gentlemen, to
be one of those cases upon which very little doubt can rest in
your minds. t
The Evidence was summed up by
Mr. Justice LE BLANc.
Gentlemen of the Jury,
THIS is an indictment, varying in the form of the charge, Mr. ſistics
from any which has yet becn brought before you. The others º Blanc's
& * -> gº g !” [1] Ill II) ºx -
have been either for breaking and entering a house in the night up. "
time, or other violence done to the house. This, charges
the three prisoners at the bar with putting James Brook
in fear, and taking from his person, and against his will.
several articles mentioned in the indictment; a watch, a pro-
räissory mote for the payment of money, and two pieces of silver
coin, that is to say, a shilling, and a silver token for three
shillings, his property : And there is likewise what we call
another count in the indictment, not stating this expressly to
have been a taking from the person, but a stealing of the property
in the dwelling-house of James Brook, he being in the dwell-
ing-house, and being put in fear. The charge is varied in the
- manner of laying it, to accommodate it to the circumstances
which may afterwards appear in proof. With respect to the
nature of the offence, it is the same ; for, whether the property
of the man is taken from his person, and while it is under his
Immediate protection, by ſorce and violence, or by putting him
in fear; or whether it is taken out of his dwelling-house at
the time he is in his dwelling-house, and put in tear, though the
property may not be immediately under the protection of his
person, vet still it is equally protected by the law, and it is
made a capital offence in the persons who so take the property.
The question for you to determine will be, whether the evidence
brings it within the change, either as taken immediately from
his person, so as to constitute what is more p. operly called a
robbery from the person, or as taken from his dwelling house,
he being in fear.
C c The
194 TIIE KſK G AGAINST . "
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
The evidence given by James Brook is, that he lives in the
parish of Huddersfield, near a place called Far Town; that on a
Sunday night, which was the 29th of November last, about
ten o'clock, he was on the outside of his house, near his door,
and that some persons, he cannot say how many, but he believes
four, came up to the door to him; and asked him whether he
had got a gun. He told them that he never had one. One of
them said, that they knew he had a pistol. He told them he
had one, but it was nothing good to, meaning that it was worth .
nothing, and of no use. They were all of them very near him,
they bade him walk forward into the house, and upon his doing
so, they followed him into the house; they had pistols in their
hands, and, according to his expression, challenged to shoot
him, meaning, I suppose, that they threatened. The witness
says, that they said they wanted a pound or a guinea, or else
his life they would take; that he thinks the man, whom he
calls fames Hey, who stands at the bar, was the man that
demanded the pistol ; that he told them he had none, and then
the same man, who he thinks was Hey, swore he would make
him find one, shoved him into a chair, and told him he must
took into the fire; that he accordingly did so, and that after-
wards the man, who he thinks was Hey, bade him go up stairs
and find them the pistol; and that he accordingly went up, and
two of the other persons went up stairswith him; that there was
a candle in his house, which was alight; that these men had
handkerchiefs over their faces; but he says, that that one man,
whom he thinks to be Hey, frequently pulled the corner of the
handkerchief away ; that he had an opportunity of seeing him
at those times, while he was in the house, and when occasionally
the corner of the handkerchieſ was pulled up, and that he saw
him afterwards before Mr. Radcliffe, the Magistrate. Then he
says, that when he went up stairs as they had bid him do, and
gave one of them his pistol, they had their pistols in their
hands: And then he mentions this circumstance, which is
mentioned by nobody but himself; that his children were in
bed up stairs, and that they were daunted by people coming
up, and cried out; and that one of them, who he thinks was
Hey, pulled back the curtain, and put his pistol towards the
children, saying, that he would blow them to pieces if they were
not quiet. They would not have his pistol, for it was good for
nothing, and bade him go down stairs; they also went down
stairs, and the same man, whom he calls Hey, ordered him to
not open a cupboard which was there. The witness would
open it, but he told his wife that she might open it, and she
accordingly opened it; but Hey had first told him that if he did
not open it, he would blow his head off, and the witness told
him he hoped be would not do it. When the cupboard was
unlocked, the same man bade him pull out the drawer; the
witness said he would not pull it out, but that if Hey chose º
might
JAMES HEY, AND OTHERS. 195
'might pull it out, and accordingly another of the men, he does
not know which, pulled out the drawer, and Hey took out a
pound note of some Bank or other, he does not know what Bank
it was, and a three-shilling piece, and one shilling. And then
Hey (that is the man who he thinks is Hey, for upon a subse-
quent part of his examination, however in former parts he may
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc’s ‘
Summing
up.
have spoken of him with more or less of certainty, the con- .
clusion which at last he comes to is this, that from what he
then saw of him, and what he saw afterwards, be believes it
was the prisoner Hey, but that he will 11ot undertake to speak
positively to his person) afterwards told him he had a good
mind to blow his head off, for telling such a confounded lie as
that he had no money. Being asked the reason why he bade
his wife open the cupboard, he says the reason of it was, that
they told him they would kill him if he would not open the
door. They told him to keep within the doors two hours, or
that he would certainly be shot. He then gives an account of
a watch of his, that was hanging at the face of the clock in his
house, when these people first came in. He did not see it
taken, but in about an hour and an half after they were gone he
found the watch was missing. He says, that he himself had
never seen, to his knowledge, either of the prisoners before ;
that he had never seen the prisoner Hey before that night, that
he thinks he was the man, but he would not wish to be certain;
so that the result of his evidence, as I have stated, is, that he
does not wish to be understood as speaking with certainty,
but only as expressing his opinion that he was the man.
This is the account of the commission of the offence, as
detailed by the prosecutor Brook; and according to these
circumstances there can be no doubt as to the Indictment
applying itself to this property of his, which was so taken.
Although he himself or his wife may have opened the door
of the cupboard, or the drawer, yet when his property was
taken by men coming with arms in their hands, in the manner
he describes these persons, to have come, at that time of
night, pointing their pistols at him, bidding him go into the
house, threatening him at different times, and asking him for
his arms and his money, it will be a question to be submitted
to you, but upon which, I, apprehend, there can be very little
doubt, that this property was not parted with willingly by
Brook, but that it was in consequence of fear inspired into
him by the number of persons who came that night, by the
arms they had, and the language they used. -And, if so, whether
the cupboard door was opened by himself or by his wife, or
whether the money was taken out of the drawer with his own
hand and given to them, it would be a taking in his house, he
being put in fear, and not a voluntary giving. Of this there
can be very little doubt under the circumstance she has stated;
.* C c 2 and
$º.
196 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justiee
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
and that will bring it to the question, which I apprehend is
the real question, how far the evidence in the case shall satisfy
you, that the three prisoners at the bar, or any, and which of
them, were the persons who were concerned in the robbery
which was committed. As to that, you have in the first
instance, by the evidence of the man himself whose property
was so taken, nothing said with respect to two of the prisoners;
but as to one of them, Hey, he describes the manner in which
he was partly concealed, having a handkerchief over his face,
and the opportunity, he had of occasionally seeing his face,
and his belief that he was the man, but nothing more than his
belief, as he wishes not to speak with certainty.
Then they call Joseph Carter, who states that he was one
of the four men who went to this house that night. He says,
that on a Sunday night, in the month of November, he met
the three prisoners at the bar, james Hey, joseph Crowther,
and Nathan Hoyle, at the top of a wood, called Bank House
Wood, near Skircoat; that they met by appointment, for the
purpose of going to take guns and money, at a place called
Far Town; that Hey and Crowther had been and looked out, and
fley told them of some places near there, and they went to
those places; that they first met that afternoon about three ;
that the place called Far Town might be four or five miles off;
that James' Brook's was one of the houses they went to ; that
it was after dark when they went to his house; he cannot say
what hour it was; but being asked whether it was before
twelve o’clock, he says, “Oh, yes, it was before twelve
o'clock.” Then he says that james Hey, joseph Crowther,
Nathan Hoyle and himself, were the four persons that were
there. He understood from the prisoners, Hey and Hoyle,
that they were to have been met by two other persons,
namely, Edward Crowther and one Mitchell, at the place
from which they started that night, namely, Bradley Lane,
but that Edward Crowther and Mitchell did not join them at
Bradley Lane; that upon not finding them there, he says
Crowther said, “As we are come so far, we must not lose
our labour, but we must try for ourselves;” and that they ac-
cordingly went without those two companions whom they
expected to have met there. He says as they were going up
a field, thcre was a man in a garden, and they asked him if
that was not a farm-house, and he said it was ; that upon
that james Hey demanded the man's gun; he said he had not
one, except an old piece without a lock, which would be of
no use to them. According to the account Brook himself
gives, the people asked, him whether he had a gun, , and he
he had not one, and he told them he had a pistol, but that it
was good for nothing. The account which Carter, gives is, that
they met this man, and asked him whether he had a gun, and .
$3.1
JAMES HEY, AND OTHERS. 197
eaid he had none, excepting an old piece without a lock, which Mr. Justics
would be of no use to them ; and that the prisoner Hey wished Le Blanc's
him to let them look at it. Carter then says, that the man "é
had gone into the house upon their first demanding his arms; "*
and he describes the 'other three men, who he says were the
prisoners at the bar and himself, as all armed with pistols;
that the man went up stairs; that the prisoner Hey and the
witness Carter followed him up stairs, and that the man
shewed a gun to the prisoner Hey, who said that it was nothing
good to, that is, it was good for nothing. According to the
account given by the prosecutor Brook, he shewed them
-a pistol; the one speaks of it as a gun, and the other as a
pistol. The witness Carter says, that tpon that they said
they would have money to buy one ; that the man turned
down stairs, and said he had got no money, and that they
began to search, and found a note in a small drawer, near the
door in the house-part; he thinks it was in a cupboard, but he
is not certain whether the drawer was in a cupboard, or let
into the wall; that they took from thence a pound note and
a few shillings in silver. He thinks that the prisoner joseph
Crowther was the man that first found them, and then gave
them to the prisoner Hey, and that Hey took them. After
they had done this, they told the man of the house a guard
would be set round the house for two-hours, and that if he stirred
out within that time, he would be shot. That is the account
of the transaction as given by Carter, who was an accomplice,
who says he was one of the persons who were there; and though
you will observe that it agrees in some of the particulars with
the account given of the robbery, as to the things taken away,
and the arms demanded (except that one talks of a gun and
the other of a pistol) with the account given by James Brook,
yet in some of the particulars it varies, and Carter either was
not witness to, or he does not at all speak to some of the ex-
pressions and some of the circumstances which are spoken to
by Brook himself, and particularly with respect to the children,
not a word of which is mentioned by Carter in his account.
Then Carter saws, that after they had gone from the house, the
prisoner Crow/her said that he had taken a watch from thence;
'that that was the first time that they knew the watch had
been taken. James Brook, the man who was robbed, says
there was a watch hanging up ; that he did not see it taken;
and that it was not asked for, but that he found it was missing,
Carter says that they none of them knew the watch had been
taken till they had gone away, and then the prisoner Crowther told
them he had taken a watch fom that house, as well as another
watch from another place; and he says, that watch, which
Crowther so said he had taken, was given to the prisoner
Nathan Hoyle, as part of his share of the plunder of that
might; that they shared the plunder they had takea that *
&#1
1g3 THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc’s
Summing
up,
*
and that his (Carter's) share came to fifteen pounds; and that
altogether there were four of them went into this house. He
describes himself as having been concealed, in a certain degree,
by a handkerchief tied over the lower part of his face. He
says that James Brook was in the house-part when they
searched, and he (Carter) was in the room with him; they
were all searching, and he himself was searching among the
rest; that there was a candle (which Brook says also) but he
does not believe that that candle was very near where they took
the note and the money from ; that he himself did not see the
-note found by Hey, but Hey told him Crowther found it; that he
was near at the time; that they did not stay in the house above
a few minutes, and that there was a fire in the house as well as
a candle. He describes Hey the prisoner as having a hand-
kerchief over his face, not tied in the way his own was over the
lower part of his face and his mouth, but in the way that
women sometimes tie handkerchiefs over their heads, as a
cap or something of that kind; and he says that Hey's hand-
kerchief was never removed while he was in the house, that he
saw ; that there was not a corner down his face, but there was
a whole handkerchief, of which a little came down over his face.
He then says that he himself was taken upon suspicion, and
then he thought he would tell all about it, having some little
hopes (which was his expression), meaning that he had some
little hopes of saving himself; and he admits that he did not
tell it till then. This is the account given by Carter, who is
in every sense an accomplice; and the question with respect to
him is, how far that account tallies with the narrative of the
transaction as given by the other witnesses, so that you can
be satisfied that in the main of his account he tells you the
truth. \
They next call two other persons, who were not concerned
in the robbery, and had no share in it; the two persons alluded
to by Carter, as the men who were to have met them at the
place from whence they started, to go upon this marauding
expedition that night, but who inever came to their appoint-
ment, never were at the place, and never partook of any of the
booty. The first of them is Edward Crowther. He says he
lives at Skircoat Green; that the prisoner Joseph Crowther is
no relation; that he has known the prisoners. James Hey and
Nathan Hoyle within a late while, that is of late; that the
prisoner Hey asked him and Jonas Mitchell, who is a mechanic,
to go out with them that night; and that the object of his
asking him to go out was, to receive or get some property to
better their circumstances, by going into people's houses,
and plundering them. Such he says was the application that
Hey made to him and Mitchell to meet them that night, and
it does not appear that he then made any great difficulty, or
had any scruples in consenting at the time to be of the *:::
, - * OT
#
f
JAMES HEY, AND OTHERs. 199
For he says that he told him he would meet them. He
says, that on a week-day, before the Sunday when this was
done, Hey had told him they had run over their country, that
is, the country in the neighbourhood just whereabout they
lived, and he thought there was a very nice place near Fell
Grieve, that is, it was a lonely place; that he understood the
place they pointed at, and said it was a pity to go there; it
was a widow woman's house who was getting her livelihood,
and it was a pity to go and deprive her of her property, and
he pointed out to them some other place ; he does not say
what. He further says, that on the Sunday, in the evening of
which this act was committed, he (Edwald Crowther), the
prisoner Hey, and the prisoner Nathan Hoyle, together with
Jonas Mitchell, were taking a walk soon after dinner, having
dined at about twelve; thav the prisoner Hey told him he
must be sure to attend at Bradley Lane, at seven that evening,
to go and plunder those houses they had been talking of before.
He says, that no mention was at that time made of any par-
ticular house they were to go to, but a house of Mr. Waller's ;
that after this conversation, he and Jonas Mitchell separated,
and returned home, aud they did not go that night to Bradley
Lane, to keep the appointment; they did not meet them there,
but they went part of the way with a brother of one of them
and a child, to take a walk. He adds, that the next day, at
his own house, he saw James Hey, when Hey told him they had
run to a many places, and cursed him hard for not coming to
Bradley Lane; and then he says he (the witness) threeped it
down, that Mitchell and he had been at the place appointed;
that is, that when Hey came to upbraid him for not having
kept the appointment, he threeped it down, or insisted,’ that
they had gone, but had missed of meeting them. He says
that, in fact, they had gone with his brother and a little child
part of the way, but they had not gone to Bradley Lane end.
He says, that Hey told him they had found better places in
the dark; than they had set out to look for in the light, and
that they had got a deal of money. In a few days after that he
saw the prisoner Nathan Hoyle, who then observed to the witness,
that they (himself and Mitchell) had not been there, but that he
had, and that they had made great blunders (by which the
witness understood that they had tumbled about) in going
through so many places in the dark. He is then asked par-
ticularly, whether he had been of those different parties tra-
welling about in the dark. Ije says he had not; that he did
not like to venture to take other people's property, and that he
did not tell of this before he was taken up, because he had
threats held out to him ; though he knew, according to his
account, what was going on, and had had conversation before-
hand, as to the houses they meant to go to, and so on, he says
he had never joined them. He says he himself was taken up
- {}R
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
200 | THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justice
Le Blanc's
Summing
up.
on suspieion of this transaction, and that when he came before
Mr. Radcliffe, he told the whole to him, at once; and he posi-
tively says, upon his oath, that he never had been concerned
in committing any of these offences, and never was present at
the commission of any of them. º-
The next witness is Jonas Mitchell, the person referred to
as having made the appointment with Crowther to meet them.
He says the same as Crowther stated, that in the end of
TNovember, on a Sunday after dinner, Nathan Hoyle, james
Bey, Edward Crowther, and he, were together; that He
proposed, that they should meet that evening at Bradley Lane,
at seven o'clock, to go and plunder houses, but he does not
recollect mention being made of any particular houses, they
were to go to ; that he and Edward Crowther did not go, but
they went a part of the way with a brother, and then turned
off; and that he saw nothing of any of the prisoners that night;
that sometime in the next day, whilst he was at work at
Copley Mill, Hey came to him, and said they had had a rare
good do the night before, but he never told him what he had got ;
he only asked the witness, why he had not met him, and the
answer he made was, that they had been there, but had missed
them. He says that he understood the officers had come to his
house, to take him up, and that he went himself to them; and
when he came before the Magistrate, he told all that he knew
about it. He is asked, as to the time, and he says he thinks
they were taken up a piece of a week after the Sunday when
this was talked of, but he is not quite certain whether that
was the time or not.
The next evidence is that of Mr. Allison, who acted aş
clerk to Mr. Radcliffe, for the purpose of taking the account of
ywhat the prisoners themselves said, before Mr. Radcliffe ; and
this applies to the examination of the prisoner Crowther.
Mr. Allison says that he was present when the prisoner joseph
Crowther was examined before Mr. Radcliffe, and he produces
bis examination taken in writing, which he says was taken
from the account he gave, as read over to him after it was
taken down, was signed by Crowther himself willingly, without
any promises or threats being used, and then signed by
Mr. Radcliffe; so that it is an account voluntarily given by
him.
The part, which it is material to state to you, of the exami-
mation of the prisoner Crowther, is this: “When we had done
there we went to another place. As we came to it, James Hey
said, this is a likely place, and it will pay the two men who
should have met us. We went in, and demanded a gun first;
he said he had none, nor a pistol; we then demanded a pound
note, he said he had not one; he shewed an old-gun, but they
would not have it, but insisted upon having a pound note à he
then
JAMES HEY, AND OTHERS. 2O R.
then searched in a cupboard, and ſound a pound note or some-
thing, but l do not know what, and some silver;”—then after-
wards he says –“ when we were at james Hey's he turned out
all he had, and we divided it; we had about thirteen pounds
apiece.” This is read, you see, for the purpose of giving an
account of what the prisoner Crowther himself said, and that
you may see it tallies with the account of the man who was
robbed, and the account given by Joseph Carter, who professes
himself to have been an accomplice, and to have been present
at the time. So far as Crowther may mention the name of
any other prisoners as being there, any confession of liis cannot
affect them; it can only affect himself, shewing he had been
there; and with respect to himself, what a man says when he
is supposed not to be talking idly, and when he is before a
Magistrate, and is aware that what he says may be used against
him, is strong evidence against himself; but what he says charg-
ing any other persons, ought not to be used as evidence against
those other persons, because it is no admission on their part.
He says not only that he was present at this house, the robbing
of which he gives an account of, but he speaks to their
having demanded a gun filst, which the man denied having, or
a pistol; then their demanding a pound note, and his saying
that he had none; his shewing them an old gun which they
would not take, and their insisting upon having money; and
then taking a pound noté and some silver out of a cupboard,
and that afterwards they divid, d the plunder, and he had
about thirteen pounds for his share. This is the evidence,
Gentlemen, on the part of the prosecution.
Two witnesses have been called to speak particularly to the
character of the prisoner Hey; the one is Mr. Robert Thomas
Bradbury, who lives at Copley Mill, which has been mentioned to
you as the place where one of the persons was working. He says
that he has known the prisoner Hey, for three years; he knew
his father and his family long before, that the father is a re-
putable man as any in the county; that he does not know so
much of the son, but that he never heard any thingamiss of the
son till these transactions took place.
Then Stephen Broadbent, a woollen manufacturer, in whose
employ the prisoner Hey was) is called. He appeals to have
known much more of the father than of the son. He says he
has known him from a child, and that he never knew any
thing bad of him till these unhappy times. That is the ac-
count which has been given of this man Hey. As to the others,
they say that whoever they had that could have spoken to
their characters, are gone away.
It is upon this evidence you are to decide. You will com-
pare the account, given by the man himself who was robbed,
$f the transactions which took place that night, keeping in
D d you?
f
Mr. Justice
I,e Blanc's
Sunºmiag
up.
*
202 | THE KING AGAINST
Mr. Justice your mind, that he speaks only to four persons being there,
He ſºlºne's not being able to speak at all to the person of any one of
* them, except that of Hey the prisoner. IIe has given you an
ſº account of what part of Hey's countenance he had an opportunity
of seeing during the time he was there, and of his belief upon
the subject from what he observed, but he wishes not to ex-
press himself with certainty. Then you have the account of
Joseph Carter, who was, strictly speaking, an accomplice in
this fact, who professes to be one of the four, and who has re-
lated the circumstances which passed that night, which you
have had an opportunity of comparing with the account given by
the man who was robbed, and of judging from that comparison,
whether the account he has given in other particulars is a true
account, so as to be induced to believe that he is speaking the
truth in other circumstances, and to rely upon him when
he states who were his companions. The next species of
evidence is that of Edward Crowther and of Mitchell, who
were not partakers in this robbery. According to their account,
they were not present at it, and could not have been included
in this indictment. They had been solicited to meet that
night, not for the purpose of going to any particular place, or
of committing any particular felony, but for the purpose of
setting off from thence upon a plundering expedition; for it
seems as if they were going into a particular part of the coun-
try, but had not marked out the particular houses they were
going to. They failed in keeping that appointment; whether
their hearts failed them before they came there, or what it was
that diverted then from it, we do not distinctly know ; but they
say they had been solicited by Hey and Hoyle, with whom they
had taken a walk that same Sunday, and had consented, yet
they never went. They speak to Hey and Hoyle as the persoils
who had agreed to meet them that night at Bradley Lane end,
and they further add the account which the same persons gave
them the nex day or the day, after. One of them speaks to
Hey having called upon him on Monday, and accused him for
not having joined them the night before, and giving him an
account that they had had good luck, and that they had found
better places in the dark than they had set out to go to in the
light. And Edward Crowther speaks also to Nathan Hoyle,
the other prisoner, in a few days afterwards coming and telling
him that he had been there, and that they had blundered in
going about annong these houses in the dark. Mitchell speaks
in the same manner of having seen them the day before, when
they made the appointment to go together; he says they never
met, though they set out to go there, for, that they went to
Edward Crowther's instead of going;' and he says that the
next day, Monday, Hey came to him at the mill where he
worked, and told him they had had a rare good do, but never
& totd
MooRHOUSE AND ANOTHER. 203
told him what they had got. He does not speak to any con- Mr.Justice
versation either with Hoyle or with Crowther. $.”
You, Gentlemen, will consider this evidence, and will see up.
how far you are satisfied that it sufficiently applies to fix either.
of the three,prisoners as being three of the four who are spoken
of as having committed this robbery at Brook's house ; for that
it was a robbery, under the circumstances falling under one or
both counts of the indictment, there is no doubt. The only
question is, who were the persons who committed it. If you
dre satisfied that all the prisoners were guilty, you will find
them all guilty. If you are satisfied as to sonie, and not
others, you will draw the distinction. p -
The Jury retired at twenty minutes after twelve, and returned
in five minutes, finding
- James Hey - - - Guilty.
Joseph Crowther - - Guilty
Nathan Hoyle - - Guilty. 3.
\
lº —w--------
THE Prisoners were arraigned, and
pleaded Not Guilty, to an Indićtment THE RING
charging them with Burglary in the against
Dwelling House of William Savage, at ( David Moorhouse &
Kirk-Burton, on the 11th of June, and John Smith.
stealing divers articles therein.
Mr. Park.--May it please your Lordships; Gentlemen of
the Jury, I do not give my learned friend, Mr. Richardson, the
trouble of repeating the summary of this indićtment to you.
This is the last indictment before their Lordships and you for a
felony, upon which I mean to proceed. But I do not mean to
give any evidence upon it. And I have reserved this to the last,
that not one word I state to you might be supposed to influence
the conduct of yourselves or any other jury, upon the trial of
any other felony. I have been extremely anxious not to put
any person upon his trial for so serious an offence as felony,
without at least believing, from the documents laid before me,
that there was a probable ground of conviction. With respect
to the men at the bar, although I think there was a strong
ground of suspicion against them, the result of my fair and
honest judgment is, that probably, after a considerable length
of time consumed in their trial, the termination, in , their
Lordships" judgment and in yours, would be a verdićt of
acquittal.
*
Gentlemen, I have no more cases of felony to bring before
you. In the name of the Country, I thank you for your attend-
ance; it has been a moſt painful one, undoubtedly: But I hope
2 and
2O4. THE KING, AGAINST
and trust what has been done here will restore peace and comfort,
to this deluded county; and that those within these walls, and
all, in every part of the kingdom, to whom the account of what
has passed here may come, will be induced to abstain from the
commission of the like offences; and will be-satisfied, that lives
of honest industry'ale far preferable (€onsidered even in a tem-
poral view) to lives of rapine, violence, and outrage against
their neighbours, and to the assassination of honest and inno-
cent individuals. - - - * •
Mr. Justice Le Blanc.—Gentlemen, no evidence being offered
against the prisoners, you will find them. Not Guilty. `
The Jury immediately acquitted the prisoners, \
z ... ." . . . -- " -- - - " '
THIS Prisoner being indicted for a Mis-
y demeanor, in haying incited two persons,
on the 5th of Séptember, to blow up" the
. Mill of William Gartwright at Liversedge,
traversed the indictment, and was discharged on bail to try his
träverse at the next assizes." " " ' 1 * : *
THE KING
a gainst
James Starkey.
* *
s
Mr. Park—My Lords; There are still remaining in your
Calendar, seventeen prisoners, who stand capitally indicted foil
different offences. ' Upon looking through a list of their cases
with all the accuracy, in my power, assisted: by my learned:
Friends, I discover that three of the ringleaders, ii, all those
offences have already suffered the penalty of the law; and,
two others of those, who are involved in , some of these,
indictments, have also been capitally, convicted; I,’ will
not state their names, because I' wish to create 'no' prejudice.
I further observe, that two others of those persons were ac-
quitted upon a former trial"on Saturday night, but I do not
£ilink that that circumstaice ought tº influence my judgment
Epon the present occasion, so as td’rendër it my duty to put them
upon their trial again. But, inasmuch as I consider that
, those whose cases emain, including the two' who were ac-
º on Saturday, have been 'toº cºnsiderable degree the,
upes of designing persons, and 'hāve been led oil, hy, the five.
persons to whom, I have, alluded, I am in hopes that ºf shall
not be doing wrong in permitting them to be discharged Ol)
#. ball to appear at any time, when called, on by the,
}rown. And I do assure yºur Lordships, that if they will
tonduct themselvés' às'hôňest and, industrious subjects, they,
never shall be called upon. I trust that we shall very mate-
rially benefit this county by the course we, have taken, and
that this lenity, and fołbegränge on the part of the Grown (for
& F. . . . . S{}
JAMES WARLEY, &c. &c. &c. 305
so the prisoners must consider it) will have a powerful effect
on their minds. 3.
Mr. Baron Thomson.—Tt must be entered as done by ap-
plication on the part of the Crown, and the consent of the
prisoner's Counsel, naming the Gounsel, and of the prisoners
themselves.
THESE Prisoners, together f
with George Mellor, #. Th; º
Smith, William Thorpe, Jonathan Samuel B *
Dean, and John Walker, i: amuel Booth,
indicted for having on the 23d of | }. O'ºl, ſº
February last at Lindley, broke }. sºº
Ševen Shearing-frames, twenty- [. shua Schofield.
four pairs of Shears, and one Shear-board, of John Hirst, being
tools used in the making of woollen goods, contrary to the
Statute 22 Geo. III. c. 40. " . ," t
George Brook of Dalton,
3.
The same nine persons, except Samuel Booth, were also indicted
for a similar offence against the tools of James, Balderstone at
Linthwaite, on the same day. ' ' ' '
7- THE KING
º "against
THESE Prisoners, together james Varley,
with George Mellor,were indicted joseph Thornton, ,
for "burglariously breaking the §: Brookes,
Dwelling-house of William New- éorge Beaumont,
ton at Foolstone, on the i8th of Abraham Armitage,
May, and stealing three Guns and, Samuel Haigh,
one Bayonet, his property. || Benjamin Hinchliffe,
* john Taylor, &
p ~& U. Robert Fitton.
THESE Prisoners were in- r . Tºº"
dicted for burglariously breaking james Va#. S
the Dwelling-house of Joshua y R __. se
Brook at Wooldale, on the 1st | º,
of Māy, and stealing one Gun john Brook &
and one Pistol. UGeorgeBrook of Lockwood.
\
THE above named seventeen Prisoners, being set to the
bar, respectively, entered into recognizance, each with two
sureties, conditioned that, they should appear and answer to
the indictments found against them, at the next Session of
Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery for the County.
of York, after they should be thereunto required by the cº,
d all

206 . . .”stsTENCE Upon THE
Mr. Baron
Thomson
passes
Sentence of
Trans-
f portation.
Aº’
and in the mean time should keep the peace, and be of good
behaviour. f
*
*
& + -F-
Foreman of the Jury.—My Lords, the Jury wish to know
whether their services are dispensed with ? *
Mr. Justice Le Blanc.—The Court will be able to dismiss
you, Gentlemen, from your attendance now ; but it will not be
in the power of the Court to discharge you. If any circum-
stances, during the time limited in our Commission, should
render it mecessary to call you together again (which will not
be done, unless there is something creating an immediate
pressure) you will have notice. You cannot be absolutely
discharged; but we trust there will be no further occasion for
tºp exercise of those duties which you have so well discharged.
*p,
*.
THE Court then procecded to pass Sentence upon the
pºisoners convicted; beginning with the minor offences,
Mr. Baron TIIoMSoN : . * *
“john Eadon, john Baines the elder, Charles Mihies,
john Baines the younger, Wm. Blakeborough, and George
Duckworth, you, the several prisoners at the bar, have been
convicted of an offence, which the wisdóm of the Legislature
has made a felony: You, john Eadon, and john Baines the
elder, are convicted of having administered to different persons
an unlawful oath, an oath tending to bind the persons taking
it (and intended by you that it should so bind them) to join in
a society of persons to disturb the public peace, to observe
secresy in that association, and never to declare what they
should know respecting that confederacy. You, the other four
prisoners at the bar, have been convicted of being present,
aiding and consenting to the administering of that unlawful oath
by the prisoner john Baines the elder; and your offence is of
the same degree as that of the man who actually administered
that oath. t.
“ In the course of the very serious investigations, about
which we have been so long emphoyed in this place, it has
but too plainly appeared what have been the dreadful
effects of such oaths so taken. They certainly have been
the means of inducing many unwary persons to enter into
these illegal associations, and to continue in them; the effect
6f which associations and of which engagements in support of
them, has been such as we have unfortunately witnessed in
the evidence laid before us in the course of these enquiries;
they have tended to the disturbance of the public peace it; the
most populous manufacturing part of this county; they have
induced large bodies of men to engagé in the most tumultuous
r | + 1 . proceedings,
CONVICTED PRISONERS. 207
proceedings, to attack the houses, plunder the property, begin
to demolish the mills, and to destroy the machinery employed
in those mills; nay, they have had the effect of going much
further, and have even induced persons to proceed to the
horrid crime of murder. Strictly speaking, the administering
of these oaths does not make you, in law accessaries to those
offences; but still they must be heavy upon your consciences,
if you have any sense of right or wrong left. - … Y
“You, John Eadun, seem to have been long practised in
so administering these oaths: To the person to whom you
administered it, you gave instructions to get that oath by heart,
that he might qualify himself to be the administrator of it;
and to a person who called upon you shortly after you had so
administered that oath, you fully explained to what it, was
intended to bind the parties, not scrupling to admit, that the
intention of it was to overturn the very Government of this
* Country. . . - º +
“You, John Baines the elder, have made it your boast that
your eyes have been opened for three and twenty years; and
you also declared your seutiments with respect to Government,
and with respect to no Government, plainly, according to what
we have collected from the evidence, preferring anarchy and
- confusion to order and subordination in Society. . ... "
“Such is the offence of which you, the prisoners at the
bar, stand convicted; and the punishment which the Legis-
lature has provided for that offence is certainly not a severe
one, if we consider only what a profanātion of religion it is to
make such a daring appeal to the Almighty to witness your
desperate engagements, and what are the horrid consequences
that follow from it. If the offence committed by one of you,
that is, by John Baines the elder, of administering this oath.
had been committed only two days later than it was, the
administering of that oath would have amounted to a capital
felony ; for the Legislature, seeing that the punishment was
shardly sufficient for oftences of such magnitude, have enacted,
that to administer any such oath, whereby a person is held
bound to commit any murder or other capital, felony, shall
itself amount to a capital offence. That Act of Parliament,
however, did not take place till a day after you had committed
this offence. . • , :
“ Under all these circumstances, we feel it our duty to pro-
.nounce that judgment upon you which the Law has provided,
and in the, extreme in which it is provided. The judgment
of the Court upon you, the prisoners at the bar, is, That you
ºbe severally transported beyond the seas for the term of seven
years.” --- *
2
THE
ioš stNTENCE Upon the
Mr. Baron
Thomson
passes
Sentence of
Peath,
THE prisoners capitally convicted being next put to the bar,
and asked what they had to say, why Sentence of Death should
not be passed upon them, prayed that their lives might be
spared:
Mr. Baron Thomson :
“john Swallow, john Batley, joseph Fisher, john Lumb,
job Hey, john Hill, William Hartley, james Hey, joseph
Crowther, Nathan Hoyle, james Haigh, jonathan Dean, john
Ogden, Thomas Brook, john Walker, you, unhappy prisoners at
the bar, stand convicted of various offences, for which your
lives are justly forfeited to the injured laws of your Country.
You have follmed a part of that desperate association of men,
who, for a great length of time, have disturbed the peace and
tranquillity of the West Riding of this county. You have formed
yourselves into bodies; you have proceeded to the most serious
extremities against the property of many individuals. The cause
of your so associating appears to have been a strange delusion,
which you entertained, that the use of machinery in the woollen
manufacture was a detriment to the hands that were employed
in another way in it; a grosser delusion never could be enter-
tained, proceeding probably from the misrepresentations of
artful and designing men, who have turned it to the very worst
purposes which riot and sedition could produce. You have
proeeeded to great extremities. The first object, perhaps,
seems to have been that of your procuring arms, in order to
carry on your nefarious deſigns. With that view, it seems that
some of you went about inquiring' for such arms at different
houses, and getting them wherever you could find them.
“But not stopping there, and not contenting yourselves with
getting what arms you could lay your hands upon, you pro-
ceeded to plunder the habitations with a great degree of force,
and took from them property of every description, which yoa
could find in those houses. An offence of that nature is brought
home, and sufficiently established against you the prisoners
John Swallow, john Batley, joseph Fisher, john Lumb, job
Hey, john Hill, William Hartley, james Hey, joseph Crowther,
and Nathan Hoyle.
“You the prisoners, Job Hey, john Hill, and Willian
Hartley, did upon the occasión, when you went to the house
of your prosecutor, carry away certainly nothing but arms,
but you carried them away with great terror, and under
circumstances which were sufficient unquestionably to make
him deliver what he had. The other prisoners, whose names
I have last recited, have been concerned in breaking a dwelling-
house in the night time, some of them getting notes, moſſey,
and other things; and the last prisoners, james Hey, josepā
Crowther,
CONWICTED PRISONERS. 209
Crowther, and Nathan, Hoyle, for robbing a person in his dwell-
ing-house. *
“The evidence, that has been given against you all, was
too clear to admit of any doubt; and you have all been
convicted of these offences upon the most satisfactory evi-
dence. \ *.
“You, the other prisoners, james Haigh, jonathan Dean,
john Ogden, Thomas Brook, and john Walker, have been
guilty of one of the greatest outrages that ever was committed
in a civilized country. You had been long armed and or-
ganized, you had assembled upon this night, when the mill
of Mr. Cartwright was attacked; you had assembled at the
dead hour of night in great numbers; you had formed your-
selves into companies under the command of different leaders;
you were armed with different instruments of offence, with guns,
with pistols, with axes, and with other weapons; you marched
in military order and array to the mill, which was afterwards
in part pulled down; you began there your attack with fire-
arms, discharged into that mill, and kept up a most dreadful
fire, and at the same time applied the instruments, which you
had brought there, of a description calculated to do the worst of
mischief, in beginning to demolish the mill, intending, as it
is obvious, te do also mischief to and to demolish the machinery
which that mill contained. The cries and exclamations that
proceeded from this riotous tumultuous mob thus assembled,
of which you formed a very powerful part, were such as were
enough to alarm a man of less firmness than that man pos-
sessed, who was the owner of the mill so attacked. Your
cry was, “Get in, get in, kill them all;” and there is but little
doubt, it is to be feared, that if you had made good your
entry into that mill, these threats would have been put into
execution, and that the mischief done would hardly have
been confined to the machinery which, was there. The
courage and resolution, however, which that individual dis-
played, had the effect of making you desist at that time from
the attack, and two of your wretched companions paid the
forfeit of their lives on that occasion.
“It is but too manifest that it was the defeat of you and
your other wicked confederates, that afterwards occasioned
that fatal attack upon the person of another gentleman, by
which he was assassinated and murdered. It was upon that
occasion that the plan of that assassination was laid, and too
fatally put into execution. The persons immediately con-
cerned in that murder have suffered the punishment which the
Law inflicts, and a similar fate is about to await you, prisoners
at the bar. * • -
“There is one of you, john Lumb, who have received a recom-
mendation from the Jury in your favour. A discriminating Jury
t - E e thought
w
$ 8 & SENTENCE,
thought that they have seen circumstances in your ease, which
distinguished it from the case of the rest of your fellows in
that indictment; and they have, in their wisdom, recommended
you to mercy. It is possible that that mercy may be shewn
to you, upon a representation elsewhere, and it is possible
that your life may be spared. Whatever becomes of you after
that, it is to be hoped and trusted, if that mercy should be
extended to you, that you will make a proper use of it.
“For the rest of you, prisoners, I wish I could discover any
circumstances in your cases, that would at all warrant us in
raising an expectation that the sentence which is about to be
pronounced can be mitigated. It is of infinite importance,
however, that no mercy should be shewn to any of you, the other
prisoners. It is of importance also, that the sentence of the
iaw for such evil works should be very speedily executed; and
it is but right to tell you, that you have but a very short time
to remain in this world. It is to be hoped that the forfeit of
your lives, which you are about to pay, may operate as an
example to all who have witnessed your trial and your con-
demnation, and to all without these walls, to whom the tidings
of your fate may come, to be cautious how they engage in any
such illegal confederacies, as you have unfortunately entered
into. For they may rest assured, that it never will be in their
power to say (and they will learn that from your sad example)
. “Hitherto will I go, and fió."farther.” They cannot stop in
that career, in which they shall have once engaged, till death
shall overtake them, in the shape of punishment.
“In the awful situation in which you, prisoners, stand, let me
seriously exhort you to set about the great work of repentance,
and to speñd the very short time that you must be allowed to
remain in this world, in endeavouring to make your peace with
your God, and to reconcile him by deep repentance. A full
confession of your crime is the only atonement you can make
for that which you have committed. Give yourselves up to
the pious admonitions of the reverend Clergymān, whose office
it will be to prepare you for your awful change; and God
grant, that, worthily lamenting your sins, and acknowledging
your wretchedness, you may obtain of the God of all mercy
perfect remission and forgiveness.
“Hear the sentence which the Laws of man pronounce upon
your crimes. The sentence of the Law is, and this Court doth
adjudge, That you, the several Prisoners at the bar, be taken
from hence to the place from whence you came, and from
thence to the place of execution, where you shall be severally
hanged by the neck until you are dead. The Lord have mercy
upon your souls.”
Joshua
PRISONERS DISCHARGED, &c. 27, 1
|
foshua Haigh, john Shore, William Whitehead, Cornelius
Hobson, Benjamin Siswick, Thomas Green, William Anson,
Mark Hill, George Rigge, Charles Cockcroft, john Walker of
Salford, james Dyson, and Samuel Harling, against whom there
were no indictments, for the reason stated by Mr. Park on
Thursday last, together with the two accomplices Bonjamin
Walker and joseph Carter, who were admitted evidence for the
Crown, were discharged by Proclamation.
Saturday, 16** January 1813.
THE several Prisoners, who received sentence of death on
Tuesday, with the exception of john Lumb, were executed in
pursuance of their sentence. . }
Lumb received His Majesty's pardon, upon condition of being
transported for life. * …”
*
!
IN continuance of the System, which was pursued through-
out these Prosecutions, of tempering justice with mercy, the
Gover NMENT, as soon as the capital convićts had suffered the
punishment justly due to their crimes, issued a Proclamation
on the 18th of January; which was succeeded, after a short
interval, by another, on the 1st of February; both of which,
being immediately connected with the preceding Trials, are
subjoined. * , *. A
\
* See p. 1 os.
BY
Prisoners
discharged
by Procla-
mation.
\
#y His Royal Highness The PRINCE of WALES,
REGENT of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,
in the Name and on the Behalf of HIS MAJESTY.
\
A PR O C L A M A TI O N.---
G E O R G E P. R.
FH E R EAS it hath been represented unto Us, That divers
unfortunate and misguided Persons, who have been induced
by the Artifices of wicked and designing Men to take some Oath
or Engagement, contrary to the Acts of Parliament in that
behalf made in the 37th and 52d Yeº of His Majesty's Reign,
or one of those Acts, or to steal Ammunition, Fire Arms, and
other offensive Weapons, for the Purpose of committing Acts of
Violence and Outrage against the Persons and Property of His
Majesty's peaceable and faithful Subjects, and who are not, yet
charged with such their ºffences, may be willing and desirous to
make a Disclosure or Confession of such their Offences, and to
take the Oath of Allegiance to His Majesty, upon receiving an f
Assurance of His Majesty's most gracious Pa, don for such their
Offences; WE, therefore, acting an the Name and on the
Behalf of His Majesty, being willing to give such Assurance
wpon such Conditions as are hereinafter mentioned, and earnestly
hoping that the Erumple of the just and necessary Punishments
which have been inflicted in the Counties of Lancaster, Chester,
and Yolk, upon certain Offenders lately tried und convicted
in those Countus, may have the salutary Effect of deterring all
Persons from following the Ewample of their Crimes by a Renewa.
of the like Atrocities, HAVE thought fit, by and with the Advice
of His Majesty's Privy Council, TO ISSUE THIS PRO-
CLAMATION ; and as an Encouragement and Inducement to
His Majesty's misguided Subjects to relinquish all disorderly
Practices, and return to their due and faithful Allegiance to
His Majesty, We do hereby, acting in the Namé and on the
Behalf of His Majesty, promise and aeclare, that every Person
770f
( 213 )
not having been charged with any of the Offences hereinbefore
mentioned, who shall, previous to the first Day of March next
ensuing, appear before some Justice of the Peace or Magistrate,
and declare his Offence, and the Oath or Engagement by him
taken, and when and where the same was taken, and in what
Manner, or the Ammunition, Fire Arms, or other offensive
Weapons by him stolen, and when, where, and from whom the
same were stolen, and the Place where the same were deposited,
and also, according to the best of his Knowledge and Belief, the
Place where the same may be found, and who shall at the same
Time tuke before such Justice of the Peace or Magistrate the
Oath of Allegance to His Majesty, SHALL RECEIVE HIS
MAJESTY'S MOST GRACIOUS PARDON for the said
Offence; and that no Confession so made by any such Person
shall be given in Evidence against the Person making the same
in any Court or in any Case whatever.
}
Given at the Court at Carlton House, the 18th Day of
January 1813, in the 53d Year of His Majesty's Reign.
GOD Save The KING,
( 214 )
By His Royal Highness The PRINCE of WALEs,
REGENT of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,
in the Name and on the Behalf of HIS MAJESTY.
A PR oc. A M A TI O N.
G. E. O. R. G. E. P. R.
WHERE4S We have beheld, with the deepest Regret, the
daring Outrages committed in those Parts of England
wherein some of the most important Manufactures of the Realm
kave been for a long Time carried on : And being firmly persuaded
that such-Outrages have been, in a great Degree, occasioned by
the wicked Misrepresentations and Artifices of ill-designing
Persons, who have deluded the ignorant and unwary, through the
specious Pretext of procuring additional Employment and increased
Wages for the labouring Manufacturers, by the Destruction of
#he various Kinds of Machinery now most beneficially employed
in the Manufactures of this Kingdom, and have thus seduced
them to enter into unlawful Associations, and to bind their Con-
sciences by Oaths and Engagements not less injurious to their
own Welfare, than destructive of the good Order and Happiness
of Society; and seeing that the Eatent and Progress of the Trade
and Manufactures of this Country, which have been continually
advanced by the Invention and Improvement of Machinery,
afford the best practical Demonstration of the Falsehood of all
such Preteats; WE, therefore, acting in the Name and on the
Behalf of His Majesty, being amanous by every Mſcans in Our
Power to bring back His Majesty's misguided Subjects to a just
Sense of their own individual Interests, as well as of their Duty
to His Majesty, and of the Regard which they owe to the Welfare
of the Community, IIAVE thought fit, by the Advice of His
Majesty's Privy Council, to issue this lºr, clamation; and We do
hereby, in the Name and gn the Behalf of His Majesty, eahort
all His Majesty's loving Subjects strenuously to exert themselves
in their several Stations to prevent the Recurrence of those atro-
cious Combinations and Crimes, by which the public Peace has
been so long disturbed, and the Persons and Prope, ty of Inditi-
duals endangered and destroyed, and which have so justly drawn
down upon the Offenders the severest Penalties of the Law. AIVD
We do more especially warn those, who may be exposed to such
#eductions, against the Danger of binding themselves by '; l
g?
( 215 )
Gaths and Engagements to obey the Commands of secret Direc-
£ors, who, keeping themselves aloof, involve their deluded Asso-
ciates in all the Guilt and Peril of Violence, Robbery, and
Murder. AND We do further, in the Name and on the Behalf
of His Majesty, earnestly recommend and enjoin His Majcsty's
loving Subjects, whenever it shall be found necessary, to have
Recourse to the salutary Mcasures which the Wisdom of Parlia- -
ment has provided for the Protection of Persons and Property.
AND We do further eahort the Proprietors of Machinery, not
to be deterred from continuing the Use and Employment of the
same, but vigilantly and strenuously to exert themselves ºn the
Maintenance and Defence of their Property, and in the Prosecu-
tion of their lawful and meritorious Callings, in the full Persua-
sion that due Watchfulness and Resolution, exhibited in the first
Instance on their own Part, will, as has been proved by recent
Eaperience, most effectually prevent or repel such unlawful
Aggressions. AND We do, further, in the Name and on the
Behalf of His Majesty, charge and command all Sheriffs, Justices
of the Peace, Mayors, Bailiffs, Constables and other Civil
Officers, to continue their utmost Vigilance and Activity for
the Preservation of Peace and good Order, the Prevention of
Nightly and other unlawful Meetings of all-designing and wicked
Men, and for the Defence of His Majesty's peaceable and indus-
trious Subjects from the secret Mlaclanations and open Attacks
% the Violators of Private Property, and the Disturbers of the .
ublic Tranquillity : Trusting, as We do, that by the constant
and active Evertions ºf all well-disposed Men, the Misguided may
be reclaimed, and the Mischievous k, it in Awe, without the
Necessity of recurring to the Chastisch, "nts of the Law, which
it will be Our Duty, as Guardian of the general Peace and Pros-
perity of the Realm, strictly to enforce, if unhappily the Renewal
of such Atrocities, as We have lately had to deplore, should
again call for the Infliction of just and exemplary Punishment.
€iven at the Court at Carlton House, this First Day of
February 1813, in the 53d Year of His Majesty's Reign.
GOD Save The KING.
t * * l | \ \
, \ \ Luke H.ansard and Sonº,
wear Lincolº-ſan Fields, Londoa.