%** 
 
 vflfflAWflflfc 
 
 * Bf 9 
 
 > 
 
 so 
 
 s 
 
 * 
 
 
 \\\EUNIVERS//-
 
 
 
 
 * %, 
 
 ^folBKV-M 
 
 
 
 EWERS/A vvlOS-ANGHfj>
 
 
 THOMAS MUIR, ESQ. ADVOCATE, 
 
 YOUNGER Or HUNTERSH1LL, ETC. ETC.
 
 f 
 
 - . 
 
 " A NOBLER MAN 
 LIVES NOT THIS DAY WITHIN THE CITY WALLS. 1
 
 THE LIFE 
 
 THOMAS MUIR, ESQ. ADVOCATE, 
 
 YOUNGER OF HUNTERSHILL, NEAR GLASGOW; 
 
 MEMBER OF THE CONVENTION OF DELEGATES FOR REFORM IN 
 SCOTLAND, ETC. ETC. 
 
 % 
 WHO WAS 
 
 TRIED FOR SEDITION 
 
 BEFORE 
 
 THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICIARY IN SCOTLAND, 
 
 AND SENTENCED 
 
 TO TRANSPORTATION FOR FOURTEEN YEARS. 
 
 A FULL REPORT OF HIS TRIAL. 
 
 BY 
 
 PETER MACKENZIE. 
 
 GLASGOW: W. R. M'PHUN, TRONGATE; 
 
 SIMPKIN & MARSHALL, LONDON. 
 
 MUCCCXXXI.
 
 
 
 Edward Kliull, Printer, Glasgow.
 
 Stack 
 Annex 
 
 5 
 
 THE RIGHT HONOURABLE 
 
 FRANCIS JEFFREY, 
 
 LORD ADVOCATE OF SCOTLAND. 
 
 MY LORD, 
 
 THROUGHOUT these kingdoms, and even in 
 distant lands, your name has long been known as the eloquent 
 Advocate of Civil and Religious Liberty. 
 
 Elevated as your Lordship now is to one of the highest 
 judicial stations in Scotland, it affords unspeakable satisfaction 
 to your countless friends and admirers among whom let me 
 be reckoned one of the most humble, but not the less en- 
 thusiastic. It affords, I say, unspeakable satisfaction to one 
 and all of us, to find, that you have not forgotten for a mo- 
 ment, those great and noble PRINCIPLES, which formerly 
 guided your conduct, the PRINCIPLES of the immortal 
 CHARLES JAMES Fox ; but that you have now rather given 
 them a loftier tone, and will ensure for them, if possible, a 
 more commanding attention. 
 
 The circumstance, that, with the exception of your late 
 distinguished and ever-to-be-remembered friend, the Honour- 
 able HENRY ERSKINE, your Lordship is now the first RE- 
 FORMER who has filled the situation of Lord Advocate of 
 Scotland, is of itself enough to fix you completely in the hearts 
 of the PEOPLE. And I am sure I do not overcharge the 
 statement when I say, that your Lordship is at this moment 
 one of the most esteemed and popular men in Scotland. 

 
 VI 
 
 It is for these reasons and for another, to which I shall 
 presently allude, that I now presume to Dedicate to your Lord- 
 ship, in the first instance, the touching and extraordinary 
 History of a man not, I believe, altogether unknown to your 
 Lordship, since he was once a distinguished Member of the 
 Scottish Bar; but who, it is well known, was prosecuted 
 like one of the vilest criminals, at the instance of one of 
 your Lordship's predecessors in office, I mean the Right 
 Honourable ROBERT DUNDAS, " of blessed memory," because 
 he presumed to think for himself to act like an honest man 
 a Christian and a Patriot, in the worst of times ! 
 
 It is unnecessary for me to refer your Lordship more par- 
 ticularly to the iniquitous the disgraceful trials which took 
 place in Scotland in the year 1793 ; for no man is better 
 acquainted with the history of that frightful period than 
 yourself. I am much mistaken if your Lordship does not 
 share the feeling in regard to them, which was expressed by 
 Fox, by SHERIDAN, WHITBREAD, and ADAM, " in stronger 
 language (as it has been fitly said) than was ever uttered 
 within the walls of Parliament." 
 
 My Lord, If it be true that good and virtuous men were 
 persecuted and hunted to death in this country some 40 years 
 ago, for advocating the immutable principles of RIGHT and 
 REASON of TRUTH and JUSTICE the great comfort to their 
 surviving followers and friends now is, that their predictions 
 and principles have already been realized. " Were I to be led 
 this nwnient from the bar to the scaffold, I should feel the same 
 calmness and serenity which I now do. My mind tells me, (hut 
 I have acted agreeably to my conscience, and that I have en- 
 gaged in a good, a just, and a glorious cause, a cause which 
 sooner or later must and will prevail, and, by a timely Reform, 
 save this country from destruction" 
 
 These, my Lord, were the memorable words of THOMAS 
 MUIR, when he was placed at the Bar of the High Court of 
 Justiciary, surrounded by soldiers with drawn bayonets, on 
 the 31st of August, 1793. And can there be a doubt, that ere 
 the 31st of August, 1831, the Reform Bill, for which he paved 
 the way, will have been TRIUMPHANTLY curried into Law? The
 
 vii 
 
 sentiments the very words of THOMAS Mum have been 
 already echoed by your Lordship, and other great men, in 
 Parliament. But, I presume, no Ghost of any of the DUND- 
 ASSES has yet troubled you. 
 
 Be pleased, my Lord, to peruse these pages imperfectly 
 and hastily written. And my highest ambition will be grati- 
 fied, if the concluding appeal, I have taken the liberty feebly 
 to make, should meet with the approbation of your Lordship. 
 
 PEOPLE ! 
 
 OF ENGLAND, IRELAND, AND SCOTLAND, 
 
 I NOW present you with the history of one of the 
 most amiable Reformers that ever breathed, of one of your 
 first your best your bravest friends, who suffered more on 
 your account than tongue can tell. 
 
 Would that he was now among us to participate in our 
 feelings, and to enjoy the reward of his great exertions ! 
 But we entertain " the well-grounded hope," that he is now 
 in a better world, where Tyranny and Corruption cannot 
 exist. 
 
 Let us thank GOD, that we live under the mild and 
 paternal sway of one of the BEST and most PATRIOTIC 
 PRINCES that ever graced the THRONE of these REALMS. 
 
 Let us reflect, and be for ever grateful, that our GRA- 
 CIOUS KING whom God long preserve has turned his back 
 on our ENEMIES; and that he has called to his Councils, 
 the long-tried, firm, and faithful FRIENDS of FREEDOM ! 
 For when we turn our eyes to ENGLAND ! and behold, that 
 next to our KING, we have a GREY, a BROUGHAM, a DEN- 
 MAN, and a RUSSEL; When we turn them to IRELAND ! and 
 behold that we have an ANGLESEY, a PLUNKETT, and a 
 STANLEY ; To SCOTLAND ! and behold that we have a 
 JEFFREY, a COCKBURN, and a MURRAY; may we not feel 
 perfectly assured, that in such hands our RIGHTS and LIBER- 
 TIES are safe and sacred ?
 
 viii 
 
 Reformers ! Let us now only be true to ourselves. We 
 have otherwise nothing upon earth to fear. For who shall 
 dare to touch one hair of our heads? Therefore, with hearts 
 full of loyalty, let us, I say, REJOICE ! 
 I have the honour to be, 
 MY LOUD, 
 
 And FELLOW REFORMERS, 
 Your ever faithful and devoted humble Servant, 
 
 P. MACKENZIE. 
 
 28, Pon.Ti.AND STREW, LAURIESTON, 
 Glatijow, April 11, 1831.
 
 LIFE OF THOMAS MUIR, ESQ. 
 
 YOUNGER OF HUNTERSHILL. 
 
 MR. THOMAS MUIR was born in Glasgow, on the 24th of 
 August, 1765. His parents were highly respectable. Being 
 their only son, every care and attention, was naturally paid 
 to him. He was instructed in the elementary branches of 
 his education, by the late Mr. Daniel M'Arthur, one of the 
 masters of the Grammar School of Glasgow, under whose 
 able tuition, he had made such proficiency, that on the 10th 
 of October, 1775, when he was yet little more than ten years 
 of age, he was sent as a student to the University. For five 
 Sessions he attended regularly all the junior classes; but at 
 this time, it does not appear, that he gave token, of that 
 dauntless spirit of independence, and noble love of liberty, 
 which afterwards distinguished his short, but melancholy 
 career. His early habits, were rather of a reserved and 
 modest nature and as he paid great respect, to the pious 
 and exemplary conduct of his parents, it is believed that his 
 attention was at one time turned to the Church, with which 
 view he studied Divinity, for a couple of years. His amiable 
 and kind-hearted disposition, certainly harmonized with that 
 profession ; and for his own sake, as well as for the peace and 
 happiness of his more immediate relatives it is perhaps to 
 be regretted that he did not follow it. He finally resolved to 
 go to the Bar, and the comfortable circumstances of his father 
 easily enabled him, to carry that resolution into effect. He 
 purchased many rare and valuable books made himself 
 master of several foreign languages and in short sedulously 
 devoted himself, not merely to the science of the law, but to 
 the acquisition of every kind of useful knowledge. 
 
 He latterly studied a course of Civil Law, for two years, 
 under the immediate direction of the late Professor John 
 Millar, of Glasgow, who was probably one of the best Jurists 
 that this country ever produced. His works are now known 
 throughout Europe, and every lover of liberty reveres his 
 memory. Mr. Muir was particularly attached to this good 
 and eminent man, and it was while under his tuition that an 
 event occurred which created much noise at the time in
 
 Glasgow, which roused the feelings of the Students, and led 
 them to adopt a line of action not more honourable to them- 
 selves, than it has proved instructive and beneficial to their 
 successors. 
 
 During the session 1783-84, one of the learned Profes- 
 sors,* in consequence of some dispute with his colleagues, was 
 suspended by them from his office as a member of the Juris- 
 dictio Ordinaria. Whether this proceeding was right, or 
 wrong, it excited the indignation of a number of the Students, 
 who were attached to the Professor, by his abilities, engaging 
 manners, and venerable age. They therefore determined, if 
 possible, to procure him redress. At that time the celebrated 
 EDMUND BURKE, was Lord Rector of the University. This 
 high office, is in the gift of the Students. It is conferred by 
 their free suffrages, on such individual as they think fit, and 
 though the election takes place annually, the Lord Rector 
 for the time is generally continued in office, for two years suc- 
 cessively. Mr. Burke was applied to, by the Students, to exert 
 his influence in behalf of their favourite Professor but he 
 either treated the application with indifference, or refused to 
 interfere. This conduct naturally provoked the Students, 
 and they resolved to strip Mr. Burke of the office of Lord 
 Rector at the next election and to confer it on the late 
 Robert Graham, Esq. of Gartmore, a genuine Whig, and one 
 of the first commoners in Scotland. The majority of Pro- 
 fessors were greatly offended at this threatened proceeding 
 towards Mr. Burke. They did every thing they could to 
 prevent it; and in consequence of the powerful influence 
 which they then exerted, by threats, intimidation, and other- 
 wise, they were able for a short time to frustrate the inten- 
 tions of the Students. Mr. Burke was re-elected in 1784. 
 
 It is in vain to repress the warm feelings of youth and 
 accordingly this conduct of the Professors, just determined 
 .the Students, to persist more clamorously, for the attainment 
 of their object. They now took higher ground, and threat- 
 ened a petition to His Majesty, to appoint Commissioners to 
 inquire into, and redress, the above, and other grievances of 
 which they complained. The majority of Professors, by this 
 time, had attempted to take the election of Rector into their 
 own hands, and to deprive the students of this their only 
 popular privilege. But the attempt was manfully and suc- 
 
 The late John Anderson, Professor of Natural Philosophy, and the 
 distinguished founder of the Andersonian Institution, to whom the citizens 
 of Glasgow, and the friends of science throughout the world, are so much 
 indebted.
 
 cessfully resisted. Mr. Graham was triumphantly elected 
 Lord Rector in the session of 1785.* And it is worthy of 
 remark, that from that day to the present, the Students of 
 the University of Glasgow, to their honour be it spoken, 
 have been peculiarly tenacious of their privileges, and with 
 only one or two exceptions, have never since failed to choose 
 as their Lord Rectors, men, the most distinguished in the 
 land, as advocates for popular rights, and for civil and reli- 
 gious liberty. We need only mention, in this short but 
 splendid array, the living names of Francis Jeffrey Sir 
 James Macintosh Henry Brougham Thomas Campbell 
 and the Marquis of Lansdowne. 
 
 Mr. Muir participated warmly in the feelings of his fellow 
 Students on the above occasions. He now threw off his wonted 
 habits of reserve, and became one of their most enthusiastic 
 and admired leaders. With others, his companions, it was 
 alleged, that he had written some smart offensive squibs 
 against certain of the Professors a practice which is fre- 
 quently resorted to, in the heat of political debate, and is 
 sometimes amusing and harmless enough. But this was a 
 sin that could not be tolerated, in the present instance, and 
 accordingly, early in the next session, a circular letter was 
 despatched from the Faculty Hall, to all the Professors, 
 enjoining them not to admit within their classes Mr. Thomas 
 Muir and twelve other young gentlemen named in it. This 
 step, whether it was harsh or proper, justifiable or unjustifi- 
 able, created a good deal of sensation within and without 
 the walls of the College. Mr. Muir was earnestly urged to 
 make an humble, and humiliating apology, to the offended 
 Professors, as the means of restoring him to favour ; but he 
 pointedly refused to do any thing of the kind, and turned his 
 heel on the University of Glasgow with feelings of indignation 
 and disgust. He remained, however, on terms of personal 
 intimacy and friendship with Professors Anderson and Millar 
 to the last. 
 
 He now went to Edinburgh, where he studied for two 
 years longer, the different branches of Law, &c. in that Uni- 
 
 * We find Mr. Graham founded, in perpetuity, a prize, being a gold 
 medal, of the value of at least five pounds, to be presented annually to 
 the Student who should write the best Discourse on Political Liberty ; the 
 medal to contain this motto, beneath a figure of Liberty presenting a wreath 
 of laurel, " Liberlate extincta nulla virtus." We mention this in order 
 that the Students, now, may take the hint, and see whether the Professors 
 have religiously adhered to the special intention of the donor, by awarding 
 this Gold Medal to the author of the best discourse on Political Liberty.
 
 versity; and in the year 1787 he was admitted a Member of 
 the Faculty of Advocates. 
 
 Deeply versed in the erudition necessary for a lawyer, and 
 enriched with a store of general knowledge, he set out as an 
 advocate, without any thing to hope for from the favour of 
 the great, or from an extended circle of influential friends. 
 His talents were soon admired, and he obtained considerable 
 practice and reputation at the bar, much earlier than is gene- 
 rally the case, or than he himself could have anticipated. He 
 was a fluent, and eloquent speaker, and always evinced uncom- 
 mon zeal and anxiety, for the interests of his clients qualities 
 which were of course greatly in his favour. But amidst the 
 fatiguing routine of business, and the seductive amusements 
 of a great city, he did not abandon those early habits of 
 piety and devotion, which he imbibed under his father's roof, 
 nor was he ever lukewarm in the cause of religion.* As an 
 Elder of the parish church of Cadder he frequently, as in 
 other places, extended his charity most liberally to the poor. 
 He has often been known to plead the cause of the injured 
 and oppressed, sometimes successfully, before the Courts, 
 without fee or reward. And frequently, in the General 
 Assembly of the Church of Scotland, has he exerted his 
 talents, in behalf of its venerable tenets. 
 
 This amiable man, for such surely we may call him, had 
 now been about five years at the Bar, and was advancing 
 rapidly, to the head of his profession, when the malignity of 
 party spirit broke out against him, and speedily accomplished 
 his destruction. 
 
 It is well known that the French Revolution of 1793, created 
 a prodigious sensation in this country, the effects of which are 
 not yet eradicated, if they ever will. Violent political parties 
 arose, who approved, and condemned it. A mind cultivated, 
 and sanguine, like Mr. Muir's, could not behold with indif- 
 ference, the dawning and progress, of that great event. The 
 blow aimed at priestcraft the abolition of hereditary offices 
 and honours the recognition by a great people, of the first 
 principles of freedom, and just government the obstacles 
 which opposed it and the numerous advantages which it 
 promised to the world, and to posterity, all conspired to 
 interest in its behalf the intelligent of all nations, and to 
 attract their attention to the causes which produced it. 
 
 About this time, or rather before the French Revolution 
 
 * Vide Correspondence between him and the Rev. Mr. Dunn, inserted in 
 the Appendix.
 
 actually broke out, an Association had been formed in London 
 under the name of the " Friends of the People," for the purpose 
 of procuring a Reform in Parliament. To preserve, or rather 
 to restore, the purity, of the British Constitution ; to keep 
 within proper bounds, the already overgrown influence of the 
 Crown ; to secure the independence of the House of Com- 
 mons ; to render its members, what they have always pre- 
 tended to be, the " representatives of the people ;" to con- 
 solidate their interest with that of the nation ; to check cor- 
 ruption and prodigality; and to avert the horrors of a 
 Revolution among ourselves, were the important objects, 
 which this Association held up to view. They published an 
 Address, which, without containing any specific plan of 
 Reform, was calculated in the first instance, to rouse the 
 attention of the Nation to the subject. This Address came 
 forth under powerful auspices, for its immediate promoters 
 were men, of the first character in the realm, either as sena- 
 tors or philosophers. And there can be no doubt that a 
 majority of the people, instantly, and cordially, responded to it. 
 
 Meanwhile the French Revolution was making rapid 
 strides and a strong desire began to be manifested by the 
 people of this country, for political information, on that, and 
 other subjects, more nearly concerning themselves. This 
 information, when obtained, only enabled them to see more 
 clearly the nature of their own rights, while it laid open the 
 errors and defects, which had unfortunately crept into our 
 own government, and consequently augmented the desire for 
 Reform. 
 
 At this ticklish period, Mr. Muir stepped forward, to aid, 
 and assist, the cause of the people. On the 16th October, 
 1792, a public meeting was held within the Star Inn, Glas- 
 gow, at which his friend, the late Colonel Dalrymple of For- 
 del, presided. Mr. Muir, and many of the respectable 
 inhabitants of Glasgow, attended that meeting, and formed 
 themselves into an Association, under the title " Friends of 
 the Constitution, and of the People" the object of which was, to 
 co-operate with the Friends of the People in London in pro- 
 curing a Reform of the House of Commons. Citizens of 
 every description, were invited to attend the meeting, and 
 behold the purity of its proceedings. Before any person 
 could be admitted as a member of the Association, it was 
 incumbent on him to subscribe a declaration, expressing his 
 adherence to the government of Great Britain, as established 
 by King, Lords, and Commons ; and it was strongly recom- 
 mended to the office-bearers of the Association to pay par-
 
 ticular attention to the moral character of those who applied 
 for admission. We find, that at this early period, the Glasgow 
 Association, transmitted a vote of thanks to the present Pre- 
 mier, then the Honourable Charles Grey, for his exertions in 
 the cause of Reform. His answer to it was that " to deserve 
 well of my country has always been the height of my 
 ambition" 
 
 On the above principles, and having the single object of 
 Reform in view, numerous Associations, or Societies, were 
 formed at that time in towns, and parishes, throughout Scot- 
 land, composed principally of persons belonging to the middle 
 ranks of life, who have always been regarded, as the most 
 intelligent, independent, and valuable part of the nation. 
 
 Mr. Muir enjoyed great presence of mind, which never 
 forsook him on any occasion, and that good quality, coupled 
 with his ready tact, and fluency of language, eminently fitted 
 him to shine, in public discussions. Accordingly, in these 
 Societies, as elsewhere, his honourable profession, and envi- 
 able talents, soon made him the object of general attention. 
 He became a popular member of the Society in Glasgow, 
 Kirkintilloch, and other places in Scotland, to which he was 
 invited ; and when he attended these Societies, or any other 
 Society, having for its object the cause of Reform, he always 
 spoke in its behalf with energy, propriety, and effect. He 
 conjured the people, to adhere steadily, to the great principles 
 of the Constitution. He put them on their guard, against 
 the villanous seduction of hired spies, who then unhappily 
 had begun to brood in the land ; and, above all, he pointed 
 out to them, the dangerous consequences, of the least tumult 
 or insurrection, among themselves, which would be fatal to the 
 object of their Association, and highly criminal. 
 
 The Right Honourable William Pitt was Prime Minister 
 of this country in those days. Our attention must now for 
 a moment, be directed to him and certainly nothing can be 
 more instructive, and withal more humiliating, than to mark 
 the flagrant political apostasy, of great public men. 
 
 Jn the year 1782, (before he was captivated with the, 
 charms of office) it is notorious that Mr. Pitt (in conjunction 
 with the then Duke of Richmond) was a bold, and deter- 
 mined advocate, in favour of Reform. He went the utmost 
 lengths to which that measure has ever been proposed to be 
 carried by its most violent partizans. He was, in truth, an 
 advocate for Annual Parliaments, and Universal Suffrage. 
 He declared " that the restoration of the House of Commons 
 to freedom and independency, by interposition of the great
 
 collective body of the nation, is essentially necessary to our 
 existence as a free people." He declared that " an equal 
 representation of the people, in the great council of the 
 nation, annual elections, and the universal right of suffrage, 
 appear so reasonable to the natural feelings of mankind, that 
 no sophistry can elude the force of the arguments which are 
 urged in their favour ; and they are rights of so transcendent 
 a nature, that in opposition to the claim of the people to their 
 enjoyment, the longest period of prescription is pleaded in 
 vain. They were substantially enjoyed in the times of the 
 immortal Alfred they were cherished by the wisest Princes 
 of the Norman line they formed the grand palladium of our 
 nation they ought not to be esteemed the grant of royal 
 favour nor were they at first extorted by violence, from the 
 hand of power. They are the birthright of Englishmen 
 their best inheritance, which, without the complicated crimes 
 of treason to their country, and injustice to their posterity, 
 they cannot alienate or resign. They form that triple cord 
 of strength, which alone, can be relied on, to hold, in times of 
 tempest, the vessel of the state" 
 
 Such is a small specimen of the language of a man, who 
 has often been called, by his warmest friends and admirers, 
 " the Pilot of the State." If the language had even been 
 somewhat more moderate, or subdued, the country would 
 have been grateful for it. But Mr. Pitt became Prime 
 Minister in 1784, and gave his former professions the lie ! 
 Ah ! it would have been well for the country, if he had 
 stopped here, and done nothing more. We are afraid we 
 shall be obliged to notice him again in no very flattering 
 terms. 
 
 The history of the British Constitution shows, that an ever 
 watchful jealousy, on the part of the people, is its animating 
 principle, to which it is mainly indebted for its excellence 
 and permanency. If this jealousy, sometimes wrong, but 
 oftener right, and always offensive to men in power, were 
 once tamed and suppressed if, instead of the people judg- 
 ing about the government, the government should presume 
 to judge, and control, the opinions of the people, thejorms 
 of the Constitution might remain, but its spirit and character 
 would be for ever gone. In such a crisis an honest and 
 impartial jury becomes our only safeguard. 
 
 These Reform Associations of 1793, by reason of their 
 prosperity, and accumulated moral strength, became highly 
 offensive to the Administration of Mr. Pitt. And, with a 
 view to divert the attention of the public from them for a
 
 8 
 
 li ttlf, it was whispered by some of the ministerial journals of 
 the day, that the Ministry itself, in Parliament, would bring 
 forward a plan of Reform calculated to meet the wishes of 
 the nation. This flattering prospect was hailed with trans- 
 port by many, who augured from it the preservation of peace 
 the diminution of public burdens the improvement of com- 
 merce and, in short, a long succession of happy days. But 
 the real and intelligent friends of Reform, after what they 
 had witnessed, could place no reliance on the professions of 
 the Pitt Administration,* or its hirelings, on this subject. 
 These friends, therefore, did not relax their labours for a 
 moment in the good cause. Mr. Muir was still the most 
 active among them. 
 
 Various public meetings, or " Convention of Delegates" 
 (as they were called), from all the different Reform Societies 
 in Scotland, were held in Edinburgh during the years 1792, 
 and 1793, at which Mr. Muir, and his friend, the Earl 
 of Selkirk (then Lord Daer), frequently presided. At one 
 of these meetings, (21st December, 1792,) Mr. Muir read the 
 celebrated Address from the Society of United Irishmen in 
 Dublin to the Reformers in Scotland, which we believe was 
 transmitted to him by his friend Mr. Archibald Hamil- 
 ton Rowan, who we understand still survives, and is one of 
 the most distinguished men and venerable patriots in Ireland. 
 This Address is couched in warm and glowing language. 
 What, for instance, can be more beautiful, or more gratifying 
 to the feelings of a Scotchman than the following lines, being 
 its first paragraph ? 
 
 " We take the liberty of addressing you in the spirit of 
 civic union, in the fellowship of a just and a common cause. 
 We greatly rejoice that the spirit of freedom moves over the 
 face of Scotland that light seems to break from the chaos of 
 her internal government ; and that a country so respectable 
 in her attainments in science, in arts, and in arms ; for men 
 of literary eminence ; for the intelligence and morality of her 
 people, now acts from a conviction of the union between 
 virtue, letters, and liberty ; and now rises to distinction, not 
 by a calm, contented, secret wish for a Reform in Parliament, 
 but by openly, actively, and urgently willing it, with the 
 unity and energy of an imbodied nation. We rejoice that 
 you do not consider yourselves as merged, and melted down, 
 into another country, but that, in this great national ques- 
 
 * How nobly have the present Ministry unlike that of Pitt redeemed 
 its promise to the country!
 
 9 
 
 tion, you are still Scotland the land where Buchanan wrote, 
 and Fletcher spoke, and Wallace fought !" 
 
 Yet this address, the whole tenour of which is highly 
 complimentary to the Scottish nation, and breathes a spirit of 
 patriotism and peace, rarely equalled, was actually denounced 
 in the year 1793, as a species of wicked and abominable 
 SEDITION ! Is it can itjbe a sin, for us, the youthful Reformers 
 of the present day, to step forward and attempt to rescue the 
 character of our generous neighbours, as well as our own fore- 
 fathers, from such an imputation ? In the year 1831, who shall 
 say, that this is sedition ? 
 
 The ministry of Pitt had now boldly set face against all 
 and every kind of Reform. The patrician policy, of ancient 
 Rome, seems to have been resorted to, and it has been alleged, 
 and there is strong reason to believe, that a war with 
 France was actually courted just to engross the public 
 attention to sink these societies for Reform altogether 
 and to arm that Ministry with a vast accession of influence 
 and military power. This, by the bye, looks something like 
 the game, which that poor silly old tyrant Charles the 10th 
 and his Polignac Ministry, thought they could play to advan- 
 tage last year in France, when they sent their armament to 
 Algiers. At any rate, there cannot be the smallest doubt, 
 that under the auspices of the Pitt Ministry, the principles of 
 the old French Revolution were industriously and shamefully 
 misrepresented, in order to fix odium on the friends of Reform 
 in this country, who, it was said, intended to imitate the 
 " bloody example" of the French. These friends of Reform 
 were called a set of traitors pillagers and cut-throats. Not 
 a word in the vocabulary was black enough for them. They 
 did not receive credit for one single good intention, no not 
 one. The very word "Equality" which had been adopted \ 
 by the French, to signify an equality of political rights, and pri- 
 vileges, was gravely explained by our clergy to mean, an equa- 
 lity of property. Hence the Reformers were called " levellers ."t 
 Sermons were preached, up and down the country, in favour of 
 passive obedience to rulers, alias the Divine right of Kings : 
 and because the Reformers could not swallow that doctrine, 
 they were called " Demagogues." The revolutionary excesses 
 in France, which every honest Reformer sincerely lamented, 
 were quaintly ascribed to the evil genius of " a democratical 
 system of government." And it cannot be forgotten that 
 Edmund Burke (not saying any thing of the thousands of small 
 fry who swarmed about the Treasury) received a goodly pen- 
 sion of some thousands a-year for traducing the French Revo-
 
 lution for calling his own countrymen (the Reformers) "a 
 Swinish multitude," and other bad names, which were continued 
 to be heaped upon them, down till the days of Sidmouth, Castle- 
 reagh, & Co. Better manners fortunately, have now <rot among 
 us yet by the above, and a thousand other artifices, the Min- 
 istry of Pitt, contrived to gull the country, and blazoned forth, 
 that the friends of Reform, were the deadly enemies of the 
 Constitution. 
 
 The alarm thus sounded, and too generally believed, was 
 dexterously improved by the Ministry. They played so well 
 on the fears, and feelings, of the Nation, that they thought 
 they might safely try their hand, and make a few STATE experi- 
 ments, on the persons, and feelings, of the Reformers. They 
 accordingly singled out some of the most active of these Re- 
 formers against whom the artillery of the law was ordered to be 
 directed with all its fury. Down came the Right Honourable 
 Henry Dundas, Lord Advocate, from London. He set the 
 machinery of the High Court of Justiciary in order; and 
 a better Advocate for a State prosecution, could not be found. 
 Not a single Reformer, that came through his hands, had the 
 least chance of escape one and all of them were found guilty 
 Of what ? The reader will see by and bye. 
 
 Mr. Muir was one of the first Reformers laid hold of in 
 Scotland. On the 2d day of January, 1793, he was apprehended 
 and carried for examination, before the Sheriffof Edinburgh, on 
 a charge of Sedition. Acting in conformity to the course which 
 he had uniformly at the Bar, recommended to others to observe, 
 he declined to give any answer to the special questions which 
 were put to him, because he considered that such examina- 
 tions, were incompatible with the rights of the subject. Accu- 
 sare nemo se debet nisi coram Deo. He was liberated, at this 
 preliminary stage of the business, on finding sufficient bail 
 for his appearance on some future occasion. 
 
 The situation of Mr. Muir now became extremely un- 
 pleasant. Not only was the cause he had espoused scandalously 
 traduced, but the friends of it, were wantonly persecuted. And 
 God knows, it must have been appalling enough, even to a 
 stout heart, to fall under the lash of the Lord Advocate of 
 Scotland in those days, in a political prosecution, projected by 
 the Ministry, and for the success of which they panted. Yet 
 Mr. Muir never flinched from, or belied, his political prin- 
 ciples one moment. Indeed, he has been often heard to 
 declare, that he would rather go to the scaffold than make 
 the least surrender of them. Truly it may be said of him 
 that he was
 
 11 
 
 A firm, unshaken, uncorrupted soul 
 Amid a sliding age. 
 
 One circumstance annoyed him greatly. He thought he 
 had secured many professional friends at the Bar, as well as 
 in other places, who would have stuck to him to the last. 
 They now, either knit their brows at him, or shunned his 
 society altogether, while others, in a more elevated station, 
 did not hesitate to treat him, with rude insolence. In doing 
 this they only imitated the example set them at head- 
 quarters.* 
 
 Mr. Muir now resolved to leave this country for a short 
 time, and visit France. Some of his friends have regretted 
 that he took that step, because it gave his enemies an addi- 
 tional reason to traduce and malign him. In fact, any man 
 in this country, who held the least communication with 
 France, at that period, was reckoned a traitor ; and accord- 
 ingly, it was stated, that Mr. Muir had gone to France as an 
 "Envoy or Ambassador from the Friends of the People," to aid 
 the Revolution in that country, and to lay the plan for kind- 
 ling it in his own. Nothing could be more false. The real 
 motive which induced Mr. Muir to visit France, was, that he 
 might shun the abominable treatment to which he was exposed 
 in this country, and have his feelings gratified, and his mind 
 instructed, by witnessing the astonishing change that had 
 taken place in the habits and sentiments of a great people. 
 
 Nor did Mr. Muir leave this country for France in a 
 sudden or clandestine manner. He openly avowed his inten- 
 tion of going thither; and he took care, to instruct his agent, 
 Mr. James Campbell, then a respectable Writer to the Signet, 
 in Edinburgh, and latterly, an eminent, and respectable Soli- 
 citor, in London, to apprize him, the moment that any crimi- 
 nal Libel or Indictment was raised against him, in order that 
 he might return home and meet it. 
 
 * Can it ever be forgotten, that Robert Burns the immortal Bard of 
 Scotland who to the disgrace of his country was placed in the miserable 
 situation of an Excise officer, from which he never was elevated, was actu- 
 ally on the eve of being turned out of that situation, because he presumed 
 to advocate the cause of Reform and Liberty. Poor Burns thus tells the 
 story himself, in a letter to Mr. Erskine of Mar, 13th April, 1793: " Indeed 
 (says he) but for the exertions of Mr. Graham of Fintry, who has ever 
 been my warm and generous friend, I had, without so much as a hearing, 
 or the slightest previous intimation, been turned adrift, with my helpless 
 family, to all the horrors of want." And in the same letter he states that 
 the Board of Excise had issued orders to him, " that his business was to 
 act, not to think ; and that whatever might be men, or measures, it was for 
 him to be silent and obedient" Such tyranny ! and to such a man ! !
 
 12 
 
 Mr. Muir arrived in Paris the evening before the execution 
 of Louis XVI : an event which he greatly deplored, for 
 whether or not, it was necessary, to satisfy the justice of the 
 French nation, he saw that it would exasperate the other 
 Crowned heads of Europe, who would likely lead their sub- 
 jects into a war, and thus retard the growth of freedom. He 
 judged rightly : Great Britain, already in an attitude of 
 menace, blew the first trumpet, and the Nations flew to arms. 
 
 The clash of bayonets, the fears of a foreign invasion, 
 the victories of Napoleon Bonaparte, &c. &c. kept down 
 for about twenty years the voice of the Reformers. The 
 cause itself lay dormant till the " Holy Alliance" gave it a 
 shake in 1814, which roused the spirit of the old Reformers, 
 and opened the eyes of the new. In 1817, thousands of Re- 
 formers transmitted petitions to Parliament, expressing their 
 regret, that the blood, and treasure, of the nation, had been so 
 long and lavishly squandered, upon the Continent ; and now 
 that peace was restored, they earnestly prayed, that Parlia- 
 ment would be pleased to turn its attention to the evil of its 
 own ways, and satisfy the country by effecting a wise and 
 practical Reform. We know how these petitions were treated. 
 The Administration of Lord Liverpool, the members of 
 which had been the apprentices of Mr. Pitt, set up the cry 
 that the Church and the Constitution were in danger ! This 
 answered the purpose most admirably for a little. The Re- 
 formers were again accused of entertaining most horrible 
 designs, and their petitions were scouted. They nevertheless 
 persevered: and if thousands of Reformers existed in 1817, 
 they increased to tens of thousands in 1819 and 1820. The 
 cry of the Ministry now, was, that " PLOTS AND CON- 
 SPIRACIES" existed in the country, and unfortunately the 
 rash conduct of a few weak men gave a handle to the 
 Ministry and their retainers, to run down the whole body of 
 Reformers. The result was, that we had a few executions 
 for High Treason, some Gagging bills, and a suspension of 
 the act of Habeas Corpus. 
 
 Enough for that period; but, judging from these examples, 
 we are persuaded, that if the question of Reform had been 
 fairly thrust on the attention of the Duke of Wellington and 
 his late Ministry, they, as a dernier resort, would have 
 appealed to these recent disgraceful burnings in England, 
 which every sensible man wonders at, and every good man 
 deplores. We have indeed heard it, somewhere quaintly 
 stated, that " the deceased Ministry left the troubles of the 
 country, a legacy to Earl Grey, who having taken out letters
 
 13 
 
 of Administration, is acting as executor to the Will, of the 
 Duke of Wellington."* 
 
 But thank God, the system of gaggery, and delusion, which 
 so long existed in this country, is happily at an end. If, 
 some few years ago, there was only a handful of Reformers in 
 this country how happens it that there are now millions of 
 them ? How happens it that the voice of the people is now 
 so united, all powerful, and commanding? And that the 
 question of Reform now lies at the heart, almost of every 
 man, and is on the eve of being triumphantly settled ? We 
 answer because we have a gracious King a liberal Ministry 
 and an enlightened People. The Boroughmongers of 
 England, are now driven to their last ditch. Every hour is 
 fast finishing them. The trade of a spy is out of repute. And 
 the doors of the Treasury are shut, we hope for ever, against 
 these, and all the other unprincipled men, of former times. 
 
 And now, as if to enable us, to expose the blind and 
 crooked policy of the Pitt Administration, and to mock at 
 the fears of the old alarmists, we, the inhabitants of Great 
 Britain and Ireland, have clapt our hands with joy at the 
 late glorious Revolution in France, and have openly and 
 cordially, addressed that heroic people, calling them our 
 friends, and brothers, in the cause of Freedom. 
 
 We beg pardon for this digression, which we hope will not 
 be considered impertinent, and recur to the narrative. 
 
 W T hile at Paris (where he remained for about six months), 
 Mr. Muir was introduced to Barras, Condorcet, La Fayette, 
 and many other noble and distinguished individuals, from 
 whom he experienced numerous acts of hospitality and 
 kindness. And on the 23d January, 1793, he thus writes from 
 France, to his agent, Mr. Campbell. 
 
 " I wrote you from Calais, and from Paris, and impatiently 
 expect your answer. Write me fully about my private 
 affairs, but about nothing else. Whenever you and my 
 friends, judge it expedient, or proper, I will immediately 
 return; but I cannot leave Paris without regret. I am 
 honoured by the notice, and friendship of an amiable and 
 distinguished circle ; and to a friend of humanity, it affords 
 much consolation to find, according feelings, in a foreign 
 land." 
 
 And shortly afterwards, he again writes to Mr. Campbell. 
 
 * Vide Examiner, 16th January, 1831.
 
 14 
 
 " Whenever you think it proper I shall return. At the same 
 time, honoured as I am, by the civilities, and attention, of 
 many amiable characters, it would be with reluctance, I could 
 quit Paris for a month or two." 
 
 During his absence, however, the dirty work of persecution 
 was keenly hatching against Mr. Muir in this country. Many 
 individuals, who enjoyed his confidence and friendship, were 
 now strictly examined, by official functionaries, as to the tenor 
 even of the private conversation which had passed between 
 them. Some, who had perhaps never thought seriously on 
 the subject, now began to look grave, to shake their head, 
 " And on the winking of authority 
 To understand a law." 
 
 Others, from a pitiful desire to " curry favour" with the men 
 in power, condescended to act like pettifoggers in procuring 
 evidence against him. And not a few who were once proud 
 to have called him their friend, seeing that his back was 
 turned, and that it was fashionable to run him down, basely 
 forsook all pretension to bis esteem, and joined the ranks of 
 his known enemies. As an example of all this, we are con- 
 strained by a sense of duty to point out one individual, a 
 reverend gentleman too, now no more, not for the purpose of 
 injuring his memory, for that cannot be done, since it is 
 already too well known, but because it is useful to see how 
 one of the ministers of religion, conducted himself, in apolttitfil 
 prosecution in this country and at our own doors in the 
 year 1793. 
 
 The reverend gentleman, to whom we refer, had known 
 Mr. Muir from his infancy. They were bosom friends, 
 
 " Coupled and link'd together 
 With all religious strength of sacred vows ;" 
 
 And after Mr. Muir had gone to the bar, and was rising to 
 eminence, this reverend friend not only kept up a corre- 
 spondence with him, but used frequently to sojourn, under 
 the hospitable roof of his parents, and to pour into their ears, 
 sweet words of praise, about their darling son. He thus 
 acquired their unbounded confidence. He applauded the 
 political tenets of Mr. Muir. Nay, he was himself a reformer 
 at least he pretended to be so, and actually recommended 
 some of the very books for which it will be seen Mr. Muir 
 was afterwards condemned for the having in his possession. 
 But the moment the ministers of the Crown denounced Mr. 
 Muir, that moment this minister of religion turned upon him
 
 15 
 
 like a serpent. His own sting would have been powerless, 
 because, for aught that appeared, Mr. Muir had never uttered 
 one syllable in his presence of a criminal or seditious nature ; 
 but, in order to supply that deficiency, he did not scruple 
 to fish for evidence against him in every quarter where he 
 thought he would be successful. He attended the initiatory 
 examination of some of the witnesses for the Crown before the 
 Sheriff, and " coaxed them to speak out." And so great 
 was his zeal for the prosecution, that when the Trial itself drew 
 nigh, he left his parish, and voluntarily journeyed to Edin- 
 burgh, a distance of forty miles, and, without being subpoened 
 he actually attempted to plant himself in the witnesses' box, as 
 an evidence for the Crown, in regard to facts which must now 
 rest with his own conscience. These things are not exagge- 
 rated. They were proved on the trial and other facts of a 
 more sickening description, were about to be unfolded by Mr. 
 Muir, when he was prudently stopped by the Lord Advocate, 
 who, with all his zeal for the prosecution, could not defend 
 such evidence. If the public now, should be anxious to know 
 the name of this reverend gentleman, we beg leave to refer 
 them to the Appendix, where they will find it. And we grieve 
 to add, that he was afterwards placed on the Pension List of 
 Scotland, for no other reason that we can learn, but as a 
 reward for his services at that period.* 
 
 We have high authority to back us, on these, and some 
 other sore points. See, for instance, what the Edinburgh Review 
 says, of April, 1810, No. 31 : " We speak not from hearsay, 
 or from fancy, but from distinct and personal recollection ; for 
 fifteen years have not passed over our heads, since every part of 
 the island, from the metropolis, to the meanest village, that 
 supports an attorney, or a curate, teemed with the wretched 
 vermin, whom we are in vain attempting to describe. We 
 speak, indeed, from notes that are still fresh and legible; for 
 turn which way we will, we now see almost all the places of 
 profit and trust in this island, filled with persons for whose 
 elevation we should find it hard to account, if we did not 
 look back to their apprenticeships in 1794 and 1795. We 
 speak from a feeling recollection ; for, where did this unut- 
 terable baseness this infinite misery this most humiliating 
 curse, fall so heavily, as in the very city where we now 
 write?" 
 
 If such be the character of the Witnesses against Mr. Muir, 
 
 * Look at the Pension list and see if there are any " Lapslies" on it 
 still !
 
 16 
 
 (though we gladly state, that there were a few most honour- 
 able exceptions among them,) the reader, we are afraid, will 
 not be prepossessed in favour of his Judges and Jury but 
 every person will, of course, candidly judge for himself, on a 
 review of the whole circumstances. 
 
 Mr. Muir was at last indicted before the High Court of 
 Justiciary for Sedition. It was impossible for him, by reason 
 of the war then raging, to return from France to meet his 
 trial in Edinburgh, on the day originally fixed for it by the 
 Crown, viz. llth, afterwards altered to 25th February, 
 1793, and he wrote and transmitted the following Address 
 " To the Friends of the People in Scotland :" 
 
 " Upon the evening of the 8th of this month I received 
 letters from my father, and from my agent Mr. Campbell, 
 informing me that an indictment was served against me in 
 my absence, and that the trial was fixed for Monday the 1 1 th 
 instant. The distance, and the shortness of the time, could 
 not permit me to reach Edinburgh by that day. War is 
 declared between England and France, and the formalities 
 requisite to be gone through, before I could procure my pass- 
 port, would at least have consumed three days. I will return 
 to Scotland without delay. To shrink from dangers would 
 be unbecoming my own character, and your confidence. I 
 dare challenge the most minute investigation of my public 
 and private conduct. Armed with innocency, I appeal to 
 justice; and I disdain to supplicate favours. I have hastened 
 to give you an account of my intention, and I am happy that 
 a private gentleman, who leaves Paris to-morrow, affords me 
 an opportunity for the communication. 
 
 " THOMAS MUIR.* 
 Paris, 13th February, 1793." 
 
 On the 25th February, 1793, a sentence of outlawry was 
 moved for, and obtained by the Crown, against Mr. Muir; 
 and in a few days afterwards, 6th March, 1793, his name, 
 for that reason, was erased from the roll of the Faculty of 
 Advocates; a circumstance however, which did not distress 
 him, because, if he had even been acquitted on his trial, he 
 intended immediately to have retired to the United States of 
 America, where, we have no doubt, he would have been 
 received with open arms. In truth, he would have been an 
 ornament to any country. 
 
 * The original of the above Address is in the possession of Allan Fullar- 
 ton, Esq. Glasgow.
 
 17 
 
 In July, 1793, he landed in Ireland, on his return from 
 France and after remaining in Ireland for a few days, he 
 crossed over to Portpatrick, in Scotland, anxious to reach 
 Edinburgh to meet his accusers. He had scarcely however been 
 an hour in Scotland, ere he was pounced on by the minions of 
 the law, and carried straightway to the Jail of Stranraer, 
 where he was kept for several days, till a communication was 
 made to the Crown Lawyers at Edinburgh, from whence a 
 messenger-at-arms was immediately despatched for him, and 
 in his custody, as a prisoner, Mr. Muir was taken to Edin- 
 burgh early in August 1793. 
 
 On the 30th of that month he was brought to the bar of 
 the High Court of Justiciary and after a lengthened trial of 
 eighteen hours, he was found guilty of SEDITION, and sen- 
 tenced to Transportation for fourteen years. 
 
 A trial more important never occurred in this country. 
 It created, at the time, uncommon interest. AH classes of 
 the community were affected by it. In Parliament, it gave 
 rise to an interesting and solemn debate. It even attracted 
 the attention of foreigners. And though forty years have 
 now nearly elapsed since the trial itself occurred ; and all the 
 chief actors in it are dead and gone, we are persuaded that 
 the short account, and exposition of it, which we have now 
 resolved to submit to the consideration of the public, cannot 
 be read, and especially by the lovers of rational Reform and 
 Freedom, at this particular period, without feelings of aston- 
 ishment, indignation^ and regret. 
 
 Any person will at once perceive that Mr. Muir was tried 
 and convicted, simply because he was a Reformer. This 
 truly was " the head and front of his offending." And now 
 we think it may be of importance to look for a little at the 
 character and constitution of the Court before which he was 
 tried. 
 
 We would first remark, though the fact is already well 
 known, that an appeal lies against almost every decision pro- 
 nounced by the Supreme Civil Court in Scotland whereas 
 no appeal lies against any of the decisions pronounced by the 
 Supreme Criminal Court; that is to say, a person can seek 
 j ustice in the House of Lords, if it is to affect his pounds, 
 shillings, or pence. But he cannot seek it if it is to affect 
 his life, liberty, or repute. We don't say that this is an 
 invidious distinction neither do we say that the law in this 
 respect is good or bad. We merely state the fact, with this 
 observation, that it has frequently happened that the most 
 grave and deliberate decisions of the Court of Session, even
 
 18 
 
 j.M.iunmccd unanimously by the whole Judges ^fifteen in 
 number) have, on appeal, been overturned or reversed on 
 sound and cogent reasons in the House of Lords. 
 
 Now, we ask, might not the same thing have happened in 
 a criminal case? For, if a judge goes wrong in the one case, 
 is he not just as likely to go wrong in the other ? Nay, is he 
 not more likely to go wrong in the case where he knows his 
 opinion (like the Pope's) cannot be reviewed or altered else- 
 where, than in the other, where he knows his opinion will be 
 sifted and reviewed by the highest tribunal ill the Empire ? 
 There are many other considerations which might be stated 
 here, all tending to show that, in criminal cases, and espe- 
 cially in political cases, where new, nice, and delicate point* 
 of law, sometimes occur, (and it is only to such cases that we 
 wish our observations to apply,) there ought to be a right of 
 appeal to the House of Lords or to some other Court of 
 review and we hope the time is not far distant when this 
 suggestion will be adopted by the country. 
 
 At the date of Mr. Muir's trial for a long time preceding 
 it and down till within the last very few years, the Judges 
 of the Court of Justiciary were armed with a fearful extent of 
 power in one most important particular, which we think is 
 utterly repugnant to the right administration of justice. Tin if 
 had the nomination of juries entirely in their own hand*. And 
 it was exercised in this manner : Whenever the trial of any 
 offender took place, the Clerk of Court (appointed by the 
 Court itself) handed to the presiding Judge, a list of the 
 names of forty-five Jurymen, who were all cited to attend on 
 the occasion. His Lordship then proceeded to pick out, or 
 select, from the list, beginning at the top, tail, or middle of 
 it, the names of any fifteen jurymen he pleased, being the num- 
 ber requisite to sit on the trial. And no objection could be 
 stated by the prisoner to the Jurymen thus selected, except, 
 on the limited and special grounds of personal malice mis- 
 nomer infamy 'minority deafness dumbness insanity, 
 or relationship to the prosecutor. All other objections, 
 however powerful, or of whatsoever nature, that might have 
 been urged by the prisoner, were entirely disregarded. These 
 were his Jurymen, and from them he could not fly. 
 
 Now there have been such things known, or heard of, in 
 this country, as the "packing" of a Jury. The term is quite 
 familiar. In the days of the tyrannical Stuarts, it is stated, 
 on the authority of Lord Hailes, who was himself one of the 
 Judges of Justiciary, that " the Prime Minister, in order to 
 obtain a sentence agreeable to the King, (in certain political
 
 19 
 
 cases, ) used to address the Judges, with promises, and threats, 
 TO PACK THE JURY, and then deal with them without scruple 
 or ceremony"* 
 
 We don't say, or even mean to insinuate, that such 
 things have happened in this country within the memory 
 of man. But we now beg to call the attention of the 
 reader to what actually occurred on the trial of Mr. Muir 
 in 1793. 
 
 After the Lord Justice Clerk, (who, be it known, was the 
 Right Honourable Robert M'Queen of Braxfield,) had 
 " selected" the names of the first two of Mr. Muir's Jury- 
 men, Mr. Muir rose and stated, that " he had no personal 
 knowledge of them that he believed, they were highly 
 respectable, but he nevertheless solemnly protested against 
 their sitting on his trial, because they belonged to an Asso- 
 ciation who had publicly condemned his principles, and who 
 had actually offered a reward, to discover any person who 
 had circulated any of the political publications of which 
 he was accused of circulating in the indictment ?" But the 
 
 * In 1821, Mr. Kennedy of Dunure, (son-in-law of the great Sir Samuel 
 Romilly) to his everlasting honour, introduced a Bill into Parliament to 
 put an end to " the Elements of the Art of Packing Juries," as Jeremy 
 Bentham most fitly called them. This Bill provided that the Jury should, 
 thereafter, be chosen by Ballot and that the prosecutor and the prisoner 
 should have right to challenge a certain number of them, without assigning 
 any reason. But, strange to say, the late Lord Advocate of Scotland, Sir 
 William Rae, took alarm at Mr. Kennedy's Bill, and actually wrote a cir- 
 cular letter (April 6th, 1821,) to all the Counties in Scotland, the plain 
 English of which was to get the Counties to come forward and smother the 
 Bill with opposition. And the Counties, with the exception of Lanark and 
 one or two others, most servilely, and shamefully, obeyed the call. Some 
 of them passed resolutions, in effect, declaring that it was contrary to the 
 Articles of the Treaty of Union to improve the Criminal Law of Scotland ! ! 
 While others had the decency to declare that Mr. Kennedy's Bill proceeded 
 " from a restless spirit of innovation," and they " most earnestly depre- 
 cated any rash alteration on so venerable a fabric, of which no stone 
 could be displaced without the risk of consequences, some of which perhaps 
 human wisdom could not foresee." Excellent language for Anti-Reformers ! 
 What better could they employ ? But it was all cant, hypocrisy, and 
 humbug. Sir Robert Peel, to his infinite honour, became the efficient 
 Reformer of the Scotch Courts in this respect, for he took up the Bill of 
 Mr. Kennedy and carried it successfully through the House of Commons. 
 And why ? Because it was founded on principles of truth and justice 
 congenial to the spirit of the age. Yet Sir Robert Peel now refuses to 
 reform the more glaring absurdities of the rotten Boroughs of England ! 
 Admirable consistency. We hope that, as this distinguished Baronet 
 changed his mind on the Catholic Question, he will again do so on the 
 Reform Question, though he happens to be a pro indivito proprietor of ;i 
 rotten Boroiisrh.
 
 20 
 
 Court unanimously repelled the objection. And we state it 
 as a matter of fact, that the whole of Mr. Muir's fifteen Jury- 
 men were members of that Association, who had already vir- 
 tually condemned him. And it turns out that the Foreman 
 of this Jury was one of the most active members of that Asso- 
 ciation and one of a Committee who had previously poured 
 out their anathemas on his very name ! 
 
 As soon as these Jurymen had been all selected and sworn 
 by the Court, Mr. Muir again rose, and solemnly stated, that 
 " he would never cease recalling to their attention the pecu- 
 liarity of their situation they had already determined his 
 fate they had already judged his cause and as they valued 
 their reputation, their own internal peace he entreated 
 
 Here he was " stopped by the Court, who concurred in opi- 
 nion, that his conduct was extremely improper in thus taking 
 up their time, as the objection had been repelled." 
 
 From that moment Mr. Muir saw that the scales of justice 
 were turned against him that his doom was fixed, and hence 
 throughout the whole subsequent trial, he seems to have 
 exerted himself with almost supernatural talent, in order that 
 posterity might judge of him, and know how he was treated. 
 His defence, so eloquent and convincing, forcibly reminds us 
 of the ancient orators of Greece and Rome, nor is it, we 
 think, eclipsed by any of the splendid orations of our own 
 immortal Erskine, who, like Muir, only shone the more bril- 
 liantly when his talents were exerted in the cause of liberty. 
 
 Yet this defence, though it penetrated the hearts of the 
 whole audience, in a crowded Court, even to the shedding of 
 tears, had no effect on any of his Judges. They alone stood 
 unmoved by it. This, to be sure, might all be well enough, 
 if we, of this generation, could shut our eyes to the extra- 
 ordinary tone and temper which seems to have been mani- 
 fested by these Judges at that particular period. 
 
 The Lord Justice-Clerk M'Queen, when pronouncing the 
 sentence of the Court against Mr. Muir, took occasion to say 
 that " the indecent applause which was given the pannel last 
 night, convinced him that a spirit of discontent still lurked 
 in the minds of the people, and that it would be danger- 
 ous to allow him to remain in this country. His Lordship 
 
 Said THIS CIRCUMSTANCE HAD NO LITTLE WEIGHT WITH 
 HIM WHEN CONSIDERING OF THE PUNISHMENT MR. MuiR 
 DESERVED ! !" 
 
 We have a few other extraordinary things to relate. On 
 the trial of Maurice Margarot another Reformer who was 
 tried before the same Court soon after Mr. Muir, the follow-
 
 21 
 
 ing scene occurred, which we confess fairly baffles every thing 
 that we have ever seen, heard, or read of, in judicial pro- 
 cedure. The Star Chamber is nothing to it. 
 
 Mr. Margarot. " Now, my Lord, comes a very delicate 
 matter indeed. I mean to call upon my Lord Justice Clerk, 
 and I hope that the questions, and the answers, will be given 
 in the most solemn manner. I have received a piece of infor- 
 mation, which I shall lay before the Court, in the course of 
 my questions : first, my Lord, Are you upon oath ?" 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. " State your questions, and I will tell 
 you, whether I will answer them or not ; if they are proper 
 questions I will answer them." 
 
 Q. " Did you dine at Mr. Rochead's, at Inverleith, in the 
 course of last week ?" 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. "And what have you to do with that, Sir?" 
 
 Q. " Did any conversation take place with regard to my 
 trial?" 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. " Go on, Sir !" 
 
 Q. " Did you use these words ? ' What should you think 
 of giving him an hundred lashes, together with Botany Bay ?' 
 or words to that purpose?" 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. " Go on ; put your questions, if you 
 have any more." 
 
 Q. " Did any person, did a lady say to you, that the people 
 would not allow you to whip him ? and, my Lord did you 
 not say r , that the mob would be the better for losing a little blood? 
 These are the questions, my Lord, that I wish to put to 
 you at present, in the presence of the Court : deny them, or 
 acknowledge them." - 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. " Do you think I should answer ques- 
 tions of that sort, my Lord Henderland ?" 
 
 Lord Henderland. w No, my Lord, they do not relate to 
 this trial." 
 
 The rest of the Judges concurred in this opinion and so 
 the questions, very properly, were not answered ! 
 
 But we earnestly entreat our readers to turn up to the list 
 of Mr. Muir's jurymen, and they will discover this astonishing 
 fact, that James Rochead, of Inverleith, in whose house the 
 Lord Justice Clerk of Scotland was alleged to have made use 
 of the above horrible language, was one of the Jurymen 
 selected by his Lordship, and one who actually sat on the 
 trial of Mr. Muir ! ! ! 
 
 The same thing occurred, but in a more direct and tangible 
 shape, in the case of Joseph Gerald, another Reformer, who 
 was also tried before the same Court, about the same period.
 
 March, When the Court met, Mr. Gerald rose and said, 
 1794. "My Lords, I feel myself under the painful neces- 
 sity of objecting to the Lord Justice Clerk sitting upon that 
 bench, upon this plea, that his Lordship has deviated from the 
 strict line of his duty, in prejudging that cause in which my 
 fortune and my fame, which is more precious to me than life, 
 is actually concerned. I beg, therefore, that this (holding 
 a paper in his hand) may be made a minute of this Court." 
 
 " In order to show that this objection was not made at 
 random, Joseph Gerald offered to prove that the Lord Justice 
 Clerk had prejudged the cause of every person who hail been 
 a member of that Assembly calling itself the British Coni-( ution . 
 inasmuch as he had asserted, in the house of James Rochead, 
 of Inverleith, * that the members of the British Convention 
 deserved transportation for fourteen years, and even public 
 whipping ;' and that when it was objected, by a person pre- 
 sent in company, that the people would not patiently endure 
 the inflicting of that punishment upon the members of the 
 British Convention, the said .Lord Justice Clerk replied, that 
 the mob would be die better for the spilling of a little blood. 
 I pray that this may be made a minute of the Court. I desire 
 to have the matters alleged, substantiated by evidence." 
 
 Lord Eskgrove. " My Lords, This objection which conies 
 before your Lordships, is a novelty in many respects ; and I 
 don't think this pannel, at this bar, is well advised in making 
 it : what could be his motive for it I cannot perceive. He 
 has the happiness of being tried before one of the ablest 
 Judges that ever sat in this Court ; but he is to do as he 
 thinks fit. I am sure he can obtain rw benefit if he gains the 
 end he has in view ; and therefore I cannot perceive his 
 motive, unless it is an inclination, as far as he can, to throw 
 an indignity upon this Court." And after some farther 
 remarks, his Lordship concluded by saying, " that he could 
 ascribe the objection to nothing hut malevolence and desperation." 
 
 Mr. Gerald. " My Lord, I come here not to be the object 
 of personal abuse, but to meet the justice of my country." 
 
 Lord Henderland. " I desire you will behave as becomes a 
 man before this High Court. I will not suffer this Court to 
 be insulted." 
 
 Mr. Gerald. " My Lord Far be it from me to insult this 
 Court." 
 
 Lord Henderland. " Be silent, Sir." 
 
 Mr. Gerald. " My Lord " 
 
 Lord Henderland. " I desire you will be silent Sir!" 
 
 Lord Swinfon. "My Lords An objection of this kind.
 
 m 
 
 coming from any other man, I should consider us a very high 
 insult upon the dignity of this Court; but coming from him 
 standing in the peculiar situation in which he now stands a I 
 the bar, charged with a crime of little less than treason, the 
 insolence of his objection is swallowed up in the atrocity of 
 his crime. It appears to me that there is not the smallest 
 relevancy in this objection." 
 
 Lord Dunsinan. " I think your Lordships ought to pay 
 no attention to it, either in one shape or another." 
 
 The objection was unanimously disregarded ! 
 
 On the trial of William Skirving, another Reformer, and 
 by all accounts, a most amiable man, 
 
 " The Lord Justice Clerk proceeded to nominate the first 
 five of the Jury and asked the pannel if he had any objec- 
 tion to them." 
 
 Mr. Skirving. " I object, in general, to all those who are mem- 
 bers of the Goldsmiths' Hall Association. And, in the second 
 place, I would object to all those who hold places under Go- 
 vernment, because this is a prosecution by Government against 
 me ; and, therefore, I apprehend they cannot with freedom of 
 mind judge in a case where they are materially parties." 
 
 Lord Eskgrove. "This gentleman's objection is, that his Jury 
 ought to consist of the Convention of the Friends of the People 
 that every person wishing to support Government, is inca- 
 pable of passing upon his Assize. And, by making thk 
 objection, the pannel is avowing, that it was their purpose to 
 overturn the Government." 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. " Does any of your Lordships think 
 otherwise ? I dare say not." 
 
 Objection repelled. 
 
 We had almost omitted to state, that in Margarot's trial 
 the Lord Justice Clerk, first of all, asked the pannel if he 
 had any objection to his Jurymen. 
 
 Mr. Margarot replied, " I have no personal objection ; but 
 I must beg to know by what law you have the picking of the 
 Jury, and that you alone have the picking of them ?" 
 
 Lord Abercrombie. " His Lordship is not picking but 
 naming the Jury, according to the established law, and the 
 established constitution of the country; and the gentleman 
 at the bar has no right to put such a question /" 
 
 The above, then, is a brief outline of the way in which the 
 whole of these Reformers the pannels were treated by the 
 Bench. And we shall now give a few examples of the way 
 in which some of the wititesses were treated, when it was found 
 they did not answer the purposes of the prosecution.
 
 24 
 
 Margaret's " James Colder sworn. 
 
 Trial, p. 89. Lord Henderland. What is your trade ? 
 
 " A. I have no trade. 
 
 " Lord Eskgrove. If you have no trade, how do you live ? 
 
 *' A. I am neither a placeman nor pensioner. 
 
 "Lord Justice Clerk, (turning himself to the Judges). 
 What do you think of that, my Lords ? 
 
 " Lord Henderland. What do you call yourself? 
 
 " A. A friend of the people. 
 
 " Q. You don't live by that you must have some occu- 
 pation ? 
 
 " A. I am maintained by my father, Donald Calder, mer- 
 chant in Cromarty. 
 
 " Lord Justice Clerk. Ho ! my Lords, he was sent up to 
 the British Convention. 
 
 " Witness. No,. my Lords, I was not. 
 
 " Lord Advocate. I understand he is a student at the Uni- 
 versity. 
 
 "A. Yes, lam." 
 Gerald's Trial, " Alexander Aitcheson, sworn. 
 
 p. 151. Lord Justice Clerk. You are not come here to 
 give dissertations either on the one side or the other. You 
 are to answer to facts according to the best of your recollection, 
 and, according to the great oath you have taken, answer the 
 facts that are asked of you. 
 
 " A. My Lord, I wish to pay all due respect to your Lord- 
 ship and this Court; but I consider myseli as in the presence 
 not only of your Lordship, but also as in the presence of the 
 King of kings and Lord of lords ; and, therefore, as bound by 
 my oath, to say every thing that I can consistently with truth, 
 to exculpate this pannel, who, I am sure, is an innocent man. 
 
 " Mr. Solicitor General. Many things you have now said, will, 
 in my opinion, tend to do more hurt than good to the pannel. 
 
 *' Witness. Of that, the gentlemen of the Jury will judge. 
 
 " Lord Justice Clerk. Mr. Solicitor General, it is needless 
 to put any more questions to this man. 
 
 " Solicitor General. I shall put no more, my Lord. 
 
 " Witness was ordered to withdraw. 
 
 *' Lord Justice Clerk. Put him out then. Put him out!" 
 Margaret's " Witness, Aitcheson. 
 
 Trial, p. 68. Q. Did you ever observe any thing of a seditious 
 or riotous appearance in the Convention ? 
 
 " A. Not in the least. 
 
 " Q. Did you ever hear any thing mentioned, or whispered in 
 the Convention, that might tend to overturn the Constitution?
 
 25 
 
 " A. Never. 
 
 " Q. Did you ever hear any thing mentioned there against 
 placemen and pensioners? 
 
 "A. Often. 
 
 "Mr. Margarot. That, I suppose, is the sedition that is 
 meant to be charged." 
 
 No further questions were put to this witness. 
 
 Page 80; John Wardlaw. 
 
 " Q. What is your profession ? 
 
 " A. A Writer. 
 
 " Q. Did you see Mr. Margarot sign it? (i. e> a Minute 
 of a Meeting of Delegates for Reform.) 
 
 " A. I don't recollect his signing it. I don't recollect 
 whether he wrote it or not. Mr. Margarot is a man of 
 courage, and a man of honour, and a man of virtue and a 
 man that would not deny his word by God. 
 
 " Lord Justice Clerk. What is that you say ? 
 
 " A. I said he would not deny his word. 
 
 " Lord Justice Clerk. But you said something else. 
 
 " A. I said, by God. 
 
 " Lord Justice Clerk. He is either drunk, or affecting to be 
 drunk. My own opinion is, that he is affecting to be drunk : 
 and, supposing he is not affecting drunkenness, he ought not 
 to get drunk, knowing that he was to be called here as a 
 witness. 
 
 " Lord Henderland. I move that he be committed to prison 
 for a month." 
 
 And he was committed ! 
 
 We hope we do not go too far when we express our belief, 
 that no Judge in this country, now-a-days, could venture to 
 imitate some of these examples of his predecessors, in these 
 political trials, without having his conduct instantly im- 
 peached; and we think the present Administration, with 
 the Lord Chancellor at its head, would not shield him with 
 their countenance or protection. It would be desirable, we 
 think, if all these obnoxious scenes could now be expunged 
 from the criminal annals of the country. Our comfort, how- 
 ever, is, that they can never be re-acted again. We are now 
 blessed with able, independent, liberal, and virtuous Judges, 
 in whom the country (alive to its own dignity,) justly reposes 
 the most unbounded confidence. 
 
 We think it right to mention, that the Reformers, to whom 
 we have alluded, viz. Skirving, Gerald, and Margarot, were 
 tried one after another, and all defended themselves with great 
 spirit and ability. The speech of Gerald, in particular, was
 
 admirable. We regret our limits will not enable us to 
 transcribe some eloquent and beautiful passages of it, t 
 cially as it was thus noticed by the Lord Justice Clerk, in his 
 charge to the Jury : 
 
 " Gentlemen, when you see Mr. Gerald taking a \ 
 active part, (t. e. in the cause of Reform,) and making speeches 
 such as you have heard to-day, / look upon him as u very 
 dangerous member of society; for, I dare say, he has eloquence 
 enough to persuade the people to rise in arms." Mr. Gerald. 
 " Oh, my Lord, my Lord, this is a very improper way of 
 addressing a Jury it is descending to personal abuse. Cod 
 forbid that my eloquence should ever be made use of, for 
 such a purpose." Lord Justice Clerk. " Mr. Gerald, I don't 
 say that you did so, but that you had abilities to do it." 
 
 It is almost unnecessary to add, that all these Reformers, 
 like their distinguished coadjutor, Mr. Muir, were found 
 guilty of sedition, and sentenced to fourteen years' transpor- 
 tation. We have made inquiry, and find that not one of 
 them now survives. 
 
 We cannot leave this part of the subject without stating, 
 and we do it with pride and gratitude, that the Hon. JOHN 
 CLERK, now Lord ELDIN, and the Hon. ADAM GILLIES, 
 now Lord GILLIES, who were then young and rising Counsel 
 at the Bar, almost of the same standing with Mr. Muir, ani- 
 mated by those principles of independence and justice which 
 have ever distinguished their long and valuable lives, nobly 
 stepped forward and endeavoured to arrest the dreadful 
 powers assumed by the Court. In the case of Gerald, Mr. 
 Gillies set out " directly and strongly maintaining, that other 
 views OUGHT to have guided their Lordships' judgment for- 
 merly, and that other views OUGHT to guide it now."* But 
 every effort in favour of a Reformer was utterly unavailing. 
 The Judges of the Court of Justiciary absolutely went the 
 length of declaring, that the conduct of these Reformers 
 " amounted almost to a species of high treason," and that " a 
 little more" would have made them "stand trial for their 
 lives !" 
 
 And, indeed, in the case of Mr. Muir, we think it would 
 have been humane and merciful if his life had been at once 
 taken from him; for who can road the following account of 
 the subsequent treatment he met with in this country without 
 horror and dismay, f "Edinburgh, Nov. 15, 1793: About 
 
 * Vide speech of Mr. Gillies, now Lord Gillies, in the Trial of Joseph 
 Gerald, p. 31. 
 f Scots Magazine, vol. IT. p. 617.
 
 eleven o'clock, forenoon, Mr. Thomas Muir, younger of 
 Huntershill, was taken from Edinburgh Tolbooth, and con- 
 veyed to Newhaven in a coach, where he was sent on board 
 the Royal George, Excise yacht, Captain Ogilvie, lying in 
 Leith Roads, for London. There were sent along with him, 
 John Grant, who was convicted of forgery at Inverness ; John 
 Stirling, for robbing Nellfield house; Bearhope, for 
 stealing watches; and James M'Kay, lately condemned to 
 death for street robbery, but who afterwards obtained a respite 
 during his Majesty's pleasure. Mr. Palmer was also sent to 
 London, in the same vessel, and on their arrival they were put 
 on board the Hulks at Woolwich." 
 
 "London, Dec. 1, 1793. Mr. Thomas Muir and the 
 Rev. T. F. Palmer arrived in the River, from Leith, on board 
 a revenue cutter. Orders were sent down for delivering 
 them to Duncan Campbell, the contractor for the Hulks at 
 Woolwich, the former in the Prudentia, and the latter in the 
 Stanislaus. They were in IRONS among the convicts, and were 
 ordered yesterday to assist them, in the common labour on the 
 banks of the River. Mr. Muir is associated with about 300 
 convicts, among whom he and Mr. Palmer slept after their 
 arrival. Mr. Muir is rather depressed in spirits, but Mr. 
 Palmer appears to sustain his misfortune with greater for- 
 titude."* 
 
 It affords some consolation, however, to the friends of hu- 
 manity, to know that the case of Mr. Muir did not escape the 
 notice of a few virtuous and patriotic men, at that time in Par- 
 liament. They, too, struggled for him, but in vain. On the 
 10th of March, 1794, our own distinguished countryman, 
 the Right Hon. WILLIAM ADAM now the venerable LORD 
 CHIEF COMMISSIONER of the Jury Court in Scotland made 
 a splendid speech, of three hours' duration, in the House of 
 Commons, in which he reprobated the whole of the proceed- 
 ings against Mr. Muir. And we have peculiar pleasure in 
 stating, that this is not the only occasion on which this amiable 
 and excellent Judge appears to have exerted himself in the 
 cause of the people. His Lordship at once took the direct 
 course of moving AN ADDRESS TO THE CROWN, on behalf of 
 Mr. Muir. 
 
 The motion was seconded by Mr. Fox. 
 
 It was opposed by the Lord Advocate, and by Mr. Pitt. 
 And if any one will take the trouble to peruse the debates in 
 Parliament at that period, he will find that stronger language 
 
 * Vide Annual Register, for 1793, p. 47.
 
 28 
 
 was used by the greatest statesmen of the age, (Fox and 
 Sheridan, especially,) condemnatory of these political Trials 
 in Scotland, than was ever uttered within the walls of Parlia- 
 ment, even during the days of the immortal Hampden. We 
 refer our readers to the Appendix for a short abridgment 
 of it. 
 
 On a division the numbers were 
 
 For the motion of Mr. Adam, . . 32 
 Against it, . . . . . .171 
 
 Majority against the motion, . 139 
 
 April 15, 1794. The Earl of Lauderdale, too, after a speech of 
 nearly four hours, introduced a similar motion in the House 
 of Lords, which was seconded by the late Earl of Stanhope, 
 but it met with a worse result, for it was negatived without a 
 division. 
 
 We beg our readers to remember, that all this took place 
 under the Administration of Mr. Pitt. " After he had once 
 forsworn the errors of his way, (i. e. his early zeal for Reform,) 
 and said to corruption, < thou art my brother,' and called 
 power, or rather place, his god, the sight of a Reformer became 
 a spectre to his eyes he detested it as the wicked do the 
 light as tyrants do the history of their own times, which 
 haunts their repose even after the conscience has ceased to 
 sting their souls. We must be pardoned for using this lan- 
 guage. We know of no epithet too harsh for him, who was 
 profligate enough to thirst for the blood of his former asso- 
 ciates in reform of the very men whom his own eloquence, 
 and the protection of his high station, had seduced into 
 popular courses; and not content with deserting them, to 
 use the power which he had mounted on their backs, for the 
 purpose of their destruction ! When the wars and the taxes, 
 which we owe to the lamentable policy of this rash statesman, 
 shall be forgotten, and the turmoils of this factious age shall 
 live only in historical record; when those venal crowds shall 
 be no more, who now subsist on the spoil of the myriads 
 whom he has undone the passage of this great orator's life 
 which will excite the most lively emotions, will be that where 
 his apostasies are enrolled where the case of the African 
 slave and of the Irish Catholic stand black in the sight; but most 
 of all will the heart shudder at his persecutions of the Reform- 
 ers, and at his attempt to naturalize, in England, a system 
 of proscription, which nothing but the trial by Jury, and by
 
 29 
 
 English Judges, could have prevented from sinking the whole 
 land in infamy and blood."* 
 
 Soon after the division in Parliament, the sentence against 
 Mr. Muir was carried into farther execution. He was shipped 
 off to Botany Bay. Yes, reader, we grieve to state, that a 
 man of his high talents, and refined feelings, was placed in 
 chains beside the most atrocious criminals, the refuse and 
 dregs of the human race ; and, in such company, he was sent 
 to eke out his existence on the desolate shores of the remote 
 Southern Ocean ! 
 
 And for what? We will not trust ourselves to say any 
 thing more on that point. Read his Defence. 
 
 It is impossible to form any adequate conception of the 
 state in which Mr. Muir's feelings must have been, when he 
 left England. The reader is left to fancy them if he can. 
 For it does not appear, at least we have not been able to 
 discover, that Mr. Muir committed to writing any observation, 
 or remonstrance either on the subject of his trial, or the 
 treatment to which he was latterly subjected. He seems to 
 have submitted to his fate with calm dignity. 
 
 " A Roman, with a Roman's heart, can suffer."t 
 
 His venerable parents were permitted to visit him before he 
 sailed from Leith Roads. But such a visit ! Their hearts 
 were " wrung and riven" not in consequence of any moral 
 turpitude, or disgrace which he had brought upon them, for 
 a worthier and more affectionate son never breathed. But 
 surely the bare idea, that he in whom all their earthly hopes cen- 
 tered was about to be torn from them, and sent to exile, for a 
 length of years, was of itself sufficient to fill their cup of afflic- 
 tion, without the above appalling fact that he was placed in 
 chains, and treated worse than the veriest slave, in the land, 
 too, where we have been exultingly told, no slave ever trod ! 
 " That man should thus encroach on fellow-man, 
 Abridge him of his just and native rights, 
 Eradicate him, tear him from his hold 
 Upon the endearments of domestic life 
 
 * Edinburgh Review, April, 1810, p. 120. 
 
 It will be observed, that Hardy, Tooke, and other Reformers, were 
 also tried in England, in 179394 ; and so anxious were the Ministry to 
 get a conviction against them, that the present Earl of Eldon, then Sir 
 John Scott, Attorney-General, spoke for upwards of eight hours against 
 Hardy. Lord Erskine dashed his sophistry to pieces by such a torrent 
 of manly eloquence, that the Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. 
 
 t Since writing thus far, we have discovered an affecting letter, written 
 by Mr. Muir to a friend at Cambridge, which is printed in the Appendix.
 
 30 
 
 And social, nip his fruitfulness and use 
 And doom him fur per/in j>s a heedless word, 
 To barrenness, and .solitude and tcar^, 
 Moves indignation makes the name of power 
 As dreadful as the Manichean God 
 Adored through fear strong only to destroy." 
 
 The Reformers of England through their corresponding 
 Society in London transmitted to Mr. Muir, and to Messrs. 
 Gerald, Palmer, Margarot, and Skirving, the following ani- 
 mated 
 
 ADDRESS: 
 
 " We behold in you, our beloved and respected friend and 
 fellow-citizen, a martyr to the glorious cause of Equal Re- 
 presentation, and we cannot permit you to leave this degraded 
 country, without expressing the infinite obligations the people 
 at large, and we in particular, owe to you, for your very spirited 
 exertions in that cause upon every occasion ; but upon none 
 more conspicuously than during the sitting of the BRITISH 
 CONVENTION of the PEOPLE at Edinburgh, and the con- 
 sequent proceeding (we will not call it trial) at the bar of the 
 Court of Justiciary. 
 
 " We know not what most deserves our admiration, the 
 splendid talents with which you are so eminently distinguished, 
 the exalted virtues by which they have been directed, the 
 perseverance and undaunted firmness which you so nobly 
 displayed in resisting the wrongs of your insulted and op- 
 pressed country, or, your present manly and philosophical 
 suffering under an arbitrary, and, till of late, unprecedented 
 sentence a sentence, one of the most vindictive and cruel 
 that has been pronounced since the days of that most infamous 
 and ever-to-be-detested Court of Star Chamber, the enormous 
 tyranny of which cost the first Charles his head. 
 
 " To you and to your associates we feel ourselves most 
 deeply indebted. For us it is, that you are suffering the sen- 
 tence of transportation with felons, the vilest outcasts of so- 
 ciety ! For us it is, that you are doomed to the inhospitable 
 shores of New Holland; where, however, we doubt not you 
 will experience considerable alleviation by the remembrance 
 of that virtuous conduct for which it is imposed on you, 
 and by the sincere regard and- esteem of your fellow 7 citizens. 
 
 " The equal laws of this country have, for ages past, been 
 the boast of its inhabitants: but, whither are they now fled? 
 We are animated by the same sentiments, are daily repeating 
 the same words, and committing the same actions for which 
 you are thus infamously sentenced; and we will repeat and 
 commit them until we have obtained ml rev. : y< t v.v art- un-
 
 31 
 
 punished ! Either therefore the law is unjust towards you, in 
 inflicting punishment on the exertions of virtue and talents, 
 or it ought not to deprive us of our share in the GLORY of the 
 martyrdom. 
 
 " We again, therefore, pledge ourselves to you and to our 
 country, never to cease demanding our rights from those who 
 have usurped them, until, having obtained an Equal Repre- 
 sentation of the People, we shall be enabled to hail yoji once 
 more with triumph to your native country. We wish you 
 health and happiness; and be assured we never, never shall 
 forget your name, your virtues, nor YOUR GREAT EXAMPLE. 
 " The London Corresponding Society. 
 
 " JOHN LOVETT, Chairman. 
 
 " THOMAS HARDY, Secretary. 
 " The Uth of April, 1794." 
 
 Considering the advanced age of Mr. Muir's parents, they 
 parted with him under the conviction that they could not sur- 
 vive the term of his sentence, or meet him again in this world. 
 Neither they did. But he anxiously endeavoured to soothe 
 their feelings, and to elevate their thoughts, by pointing, like 
 Anaxagoras, to the heavens. 
 
 This trying scene broke down the constitution of his father. 
 He was struck with a shock of palsy, from which he never 
 recovered. And his poor mother, so powerful was her affec- 
 tion for her devoted son, periled her own life, by making 
 frequent excursions to sea in an open boat in the winter of 1793, 
 in order that she might again catch a glimpse of him, and 
 give vent to her agonized feelings. 
 
 During the last of these excursions, but before she could 
 approach near enough to recognise him, the vessel in which 
 Mr. Muir was, got under weigh. And if the agony of mortals 
 could have any effect on the elements of nature, these very 
 elements at that time would have stood motionless on account 
 of Thomas Muir. 
 
 One of the last requests he made to his parents was, to fur- 
 nish him with a small pocket Bible ; and we mention that 
 circumstance, because it will be seen how highly he prized that 
 precious relic, and how miraculously it preserved his life under 
 the extraordinary vicissitudes that afterwards befell him. 
 
 There were 83 convicts on board the Surprise transport, 
 which carried him from England. His fellow-Reformers, 
 Palmer, Skirving, and Margarot, were among them. But 
 there was another individual of a very different description, 
 indeed, in whose society Mr. Muir at one time little thought
 
 32 
 
 he could sojourn for a single hour. This was a man of the 
 name of Henderson, belonging to Glasgow, who had been 
 tried there by the Circuit Court of Justiciary, about two ycnrs 
 before, for the Murder of his wife. And strange to tell, Mr. 
 Muir had been his counsel. He pled successfully for him, as 
 Henderson's Jury, instead of a verdict of Murder, brought in 
 a verdict of Culpable Homicide, which saved the culprit's 
 neck, and now he was going to expiate his crime under a like 
 sentence of transportation for fourteen years ! Oh tempora ! 
 O mores ! What a commentary on the different degrees of 
 punishment ! What a lesson to philanthropists on the classi- 
 fication of prisoners ! 
 
 After a tedious voyage, the Surprise arrived at Sydney on 
 the 25th Sept. 1794. It was alleged that symptoms of mutiny 
 had broken out during the voyage, on the part of some of the 
 convicts ; but nothing of the kind was imputed to Mr. Muir, 
 or to Palmer, Skirving, or Margaret, who conducted them- 
 selves with the utmost propriety. 
 
 When they reached Sydney, they were placed, like the 
 other convicts, under the surveillance, or at the disposal of 
 the Authorities in that Colony. But we have much pleasure 
 in stating, that every indulgence appears to have been shown 
 to Mr. Muir, compatible with the strict rules of the place. 
 In fact, the treatment Mr. Muir received at Sydney, was a 
 thousand times milder than the treatment he had received in 
 England. He was no longer yoked in chains, and set to hard 
 labour, like the brutes that perish. He was no longer despised 
 and upbraided for the political principles he professed. His 
 inoffensive and gentlemanly deportment commanded the 
 respect, even of hardened criminals and wild savages, which 
 is more than can be said of some of his civilized and enlight- 
 ened countrymen, then nearer home. 
 
 On the 13th Dec. 1794, about three months after his 
 arrival, Mr. Muir thus writes to one of his friends Mr. 
 Moffat, Solicitor, in London: 
 
 " I am pleased with my situation, as much as a man can be, 
 separated from all he loved and respected. Palmer, Skirving, 
 and myself, live in the utmost harmony. From our society 
 Maurice Margaret is expelled. Of our treatment here, I 
 cannot speak too highly. Gratitude will for ever bind me to 
 the officers, civil and military. I have been constantly occu- 
 pied in preparing the evidence and the defence of Palmer and 
 Skirving. I have a neat little house here, and another two 
 miles distant, at a farm across the water, which I purchased. 
 When any money is transmitted, cause a considerable part
 
 33 
 
 of it to be laid out at the Cape, or at Rio, in rum, tobacco, 
 and sugar, which are invaluable, and the only medium of 
 exchange." &c. &c. 
 
 At the date of Mr. Muir's sentence, the colony of New 
 South Wales (now of such vast consequence) was only in its 
 infancy, and hardly known, except to a few intrepid naviga- 
 tors. They first shipment of convicts to it, from this country, 
 was made in the year 1785. And when Mr. Muir reached it, 
 nine years afterwards, there were scarcely 1500 individuals in 
 it altogether. He laboured, with his own hands, to improve 
 and cultivate the land he had purchased, and which, till 
 then, was in a state of native wildness; and, in remembrance 
 of his patrimonial title and estate in Scotland, he called it 
 Huntershill, by which name we hope it is still known. 
 
 We select the following letter from the then Governor 
 of the Colony the late John Hunter, Esq. to one of his 
 friends in Leith, as it is highly creditable to all the parties 
 concerned : 
 
 " N. S. Wales, 16th Oct. 1795. 
 
 " The four gentlemen, whom the activity of the Magis- 
 trates of Edinburgh provided for our Colony, I have seen and 
 conversed with separately, since my arrival here. They seem 
 all of them gifted in the powers of conversation. Muir was the 
 first I saw. I thought him a sensible young man, of a very 
 retired turn, which, certainly, his situation in this country 
 will give him an opportunity of indulging. He said nothing 
 on the severity of his fate, but seemed to bear his circumstances 
 with a proper degree of fortitude and resignation. Skirving 
 was the next I saw ; he appeared to me to be a sensible, well- 
 informed man not young, perhaps 50. He is fond of farm- 
 ing, and has purchased a piece of ground, and makes good 
 use of it, which will, by and by, turn to his advantage. 
 Palmer paid me the next visit : he is said to be a turbulent, 
 restless kind of man. It may be so but I must do him the 
 justice to say, that I have seen nothing of that disposition in 
 him, since my arrival. Margaret seems to be a lively, face- 
 tious, talkative man complained heavily of the injustice of 
 his sentence, in which, however, he found I could not agree 
 with him. I chose to appoint a time for seeing each separ- 
 ately- and, on the whole, I have to say, that their general con- 
 duct is quiet, decent, and orderly. If it continues so, they 
 will not find me disposed to be harsh or distressing to them."* 
 
 Poor Gerald in the last stage of a consumption only 
 
 * Vide Edinburgh Advertiser, 1796. 
 C
 
 34 
 
 reached the colony three weaks after the above letter was 
 written. He scarcely survived three months; for we find he 
 died on the 16th March, 1796: and Skirving died three days 
 afterwards. 
 
 From all the information we have obtained and from the 
 best attention we have been able to give this subject, wo are 
 satisfied that Mr. Muir entertained no other idea than that 
 he would be obliged to implement the whole term of his sen- 
 tence at Sydney, unless death itself would cut it short. He 
 was, therefore, becoming gradually reconciled to his situa- 
 tion, dreary and degrading though it must have been, and 
 he employed every moment of his time to the best advan- 
 tage. He wrote Commentaries on the Trial of Palmer, 
 Skirving, &c. ; and he began to write a Treatise on the 
 " Libel Law of Scotland," a task for which he was well 
 qualified but we regret that none of these productions 
 appear to have found their way to this country, and it is 
 impossible for us to tell, whether any of them are now in 
 existence, anxious though we have been to ascertain the fact. 
 We know, however, positively, that his conduct at Sydney was 
 still marked by the distinguishing features of Christian faith 
 and charity, which led him devoutly to desire the welfare and 
 happiness of the whole human race. He acted on these 
 principles to the utmost extent of his now narrow means. 
 He took pleasure in improving the mental and corporeal con- 
 dition of the wretched and less favoured criminals who sur- 
 rounded him one proof of which, is the fact, that whereas 
 at that period, there was scarcely a Bible in the Colony, and 
 religious instruction had there very few friends, he used to 
 write, and sometimes to print, with his own hand, some of 
 the most instructive and sublime portions of his own favourite 
 Bible and to distribute them among such individuals as he 
 thought would really be benefited by them. This he did, 
 from the most exalted motives, devoid altogether of that vain 
 show of ostentation, and scandalous hypocrisy, which is too 
 often practised in this country, and makes religion the laugh- 
 ing-stock of its enemies. 
 
 We come now to an interesting part of Mr. Muir's history : 
 His trial in Scotland was reprinted and published in 
 the United States of America, where he was likewise re- 
 garded as a martyr in the cause of Freedom. The immortal 
 WASHINGTON became interested in his behalf. And some 
 generous men in that hemisphere, touched with sympathy 
 for his sufferings, (for they knew how he had been treated in 
 England,) formed the bold project of rescuing him from cap-
 
 35 
 
 tivity at all hazards. Unknown to Mr. Muir, and at their 
 own expense, an American ship, called the Otter, commanded 
 by Captain Dawes, was fitted out for the above purpose at New 
 York, and despatched for Sydney, towards the middle of the 
 year 1795. She anchored in the Cove at Sydney, on the 
 25th January, 1796. Captain Dawes, and a few of his crew, 
 who were now aware of the secret, landed almost at the very 
 spot where Mr. Muir was. They did so under the pretence 
 that they were proceeding on a voyage to China, and were in 
 want of fuel and fresh water. No suspicion was excited on 
 the part of the authorities. After reconnoitering, with breath- 
 less anxiety, for a few days, Captain Dawes discovered Mr. 
 Muir, and had a short conversation with him. It must have 
 been interesting and gratifying in the extreme to both par- 
 ties. Not a moment was now to be lost. Mr. Muir readily 
 embraced his generous benefactor and on the morning of the 
 1 1th February, 1796, he was safely taken on board the Otter 
 and that vessel instantly set sail and departed from Sydney. 
 
 Mr, Muir took nothing with him from thence, for indeed 
 he had almost nothing to take except a few articles of dress, 
 and his Bible. It is doubtful whether he had an opportunity 
 of conversing with his friends, Palmer and Skirving, &c. or 
 of making them acquainted with the unexpected means, which 
 had now offered for his escape, so as they also might have 
 gone with him. It is also doubtful whether he made any 
 disposal of the property he had there purchased. 
 
 In the month of March following, we find that Margaret 
 thus writes to his friend Mr. Thomas Hardy, of London:* 
 " Mr. Muir has found means to escape hence on board an 
 American vessel, which put in here under pretence of want- 
 ing wood and water. She is named the Otter, Captain 
 Dawes, from what port in America I know not. It is 
 reported she came in here for as many of us as chose to go." 
 
 It is here pleasant to add that Mr. Muir left a letter for 
 the Governor at Sydney, expressing his grateful thanks for the 
 kindness he had shown to him and intimating that he was 
 now on his way to the United States of America.f 
 
 Preparations were there making for receiving him as an 
 adopted Son and Citizen. And if Fate had permitted, we have 
 little doubt that Mr. Muir would have become one of the most 
 distinguished ornaments at the American bar. The very 
 sufferings he had endured in the cause of freedom, would 
 
 * Vide Edinburgh Advertiser, of 1799, p. 109. 
 
 f Vide Paterson's History of New South Wales, p. 230.
 
 36 
 
 have gained him friends in that free country, independent 
 altogether of his matchless talents. 
 
 But he now became the child of misfortune. After 
 being at sea about four months, the Otter was shipwrecked. 
 She struck a chain of sunken rocks near Nootka Sound, on 
 the west coast of North America and went to pieces. Every 
 soul on board perished except Mr. Muir and two sailors ! 
 They alone reached the shore, scarcely in life ; and after 
 wandering about for some days in a state of great bodily and 
 mental distress, they were captured by a tribe of Indians, at 
 whose hands they looked for nothing but cruelty and death. 
 Mr. Muir was soon separated from his unfortunate com- 
 panions, and never knew whether they survived, or what 
 became of them. Contrary to his own forebodings, the 
 Indians treated him with singular kindness. He must, we 
 imagine, have secured their regard, more by his personal 
 appearance and manners than any thing else, since he had 
 no presents to offer them, all that remained in his pos- 
 session being the clothes on his body a few dollars and his 
 pocket Bible, which last he was in use to carry about with 
 nim on all occasions. He prudently complied with the man- 
 ners of the Indians, by daubing his person with paints and 
 other embellishments, in which they delighted. And he 
 partook contentedly of the fare which they offered him, con- 
 sisting generally of the raw flesh and oil, &c. of the wild 
 animals of that region. 
 
 After living with these Indians for about three weeks, he 
 contrived to effect his escape from them. He had now no 
 human being to direct his course. The stars of heaven were 
 his only guides. And in this most abject and forlorn condi- 
 tion he travelled almost the whole of the western coast of 
 North America, a distance of upwards of 4000 miles, without 
 meeting with any interruption. When he laid himself down 
 to repose, by night or by day, in the open air, or under the 
 shade of some convenient place, he always recommended his 
 soul to the merciful protection of his Maker. And when he 
 was enabled to appease the cravings of hunger or to quench 
 his thirst, as to which he often endured great distress, 
 he did not forget the prayer that was due from him as a 
 Christian. 
 
 He at last reached the city of Panama, the first civilized 
 place he had seen since he left Sydney. It was then under 
 the jurisdiction of the Old Spaniards, who were extremely 
 jealous of the appearance of any stranger in their dominions. 
 Mr. Muir fortunately had acquired some knowledge of the
 
 37 
 
 Spanish language, and he found his way to the presence of 
 the Governor, who was struck with his dejected and miserable 
 appearance, for by this time Mr. Muir had scarcely a stitch 
 of clothes on his body, and his feet, as may well be supposed, 
 were sorely cut up. Influenced by the principles of probity 
 and honour, which he ever regarded, Mr. Muir at once ven- 
 tured to relate to the Governor a history of his misfortunes, 
 determined to abide by the consequences, whether good or 
 bad. He had the satisfaction to find that the Governor 
 listened to him with attention. And the result was, that an 
 order was instantly issued for supplying Mr. Muir with nour- 
 ishment and raiment. This hospitable conduct greatly com- 
 forted him, especially as the Governor gave further orders 
 that after resting in Panama for a few days he should be 
 escorted on his journey across the Isthmus of Darien, by 
 guides who were to be sent purposely with him. 
 
 After ci'ossing that singular tract of country Mr. Muir 
 directed his course to Vera Cruz, the grand sea-port of 
 Mexico, in the hope that he would find a vessel wherein 
 he might be carried to some port in the United States. On 
 reaching Vera Cruz, (a journey of upwards of one thousand 
 miles, and still performed on foot,) Mr. Muir also waited on 
 the Governor of that place, and made his situation known to 
 him. He even endeavoured to explain to the Governor the 
 reason why he had been transported from England. We 
 doubt whether this was prudent, and can only defend it on 
 the ground that if Mr. Muir had not given this true and 
 rational account of himself, he might have been seized as a 
 spy, and instantly strangled or shot. A true tale of misery 
 seldom misses the heart. And, accordingly, the Governor of 
 Vera Cruz, no vessel being there for America, generously 
 undertook to provide him with a passage in the first vessel 
 that sailed for the Havannah. Mr. Muir was now afflicted 
 with a severe attack of yellow fever, which soon levels the 
 stoutest constitution in that unhealthy quarter, but his life 
 was still spared to him for a little. And, though he was a 
 stranger and pennyless, every considerate and humane atten- 
 tion was paid to him by the Spaniards. On his recovery he 
 was taken on board one of their vessels for the Havannah, 
 where he was soon safely landed. But it seems the Governor 
 of Vera Cruz had transmitted a despatch to the Governor at 
 the Havannah, stating, that though he had shown every 
 civility to Mr. Muir, he considered that a man of his princi- 
 ples would be dangerous in the Spanish dominions, and there- 
 fore recommended that Mr. Muir should be sent home by the
 
 38 
 
 earliest opportunity to the mother country, in order that the 
 King of Spain might determine what should be done with 
 him. On this hint the Governor at the Havannah now acted. 
 Mr. Muir was transmitted to a prison, or castle, called La 
 Principe, on the north side of the Island of Cuba. He was 
 obliged to sleep in a damp and filthy bed, which brought 
 upon him acute rheumatic pains, and a loathsome disease, at 
 which the heart sickens. Some humane Spaniard sent him 
 a change of clean linen the greatest luxury he had enjoyed 
 for a long time. And though his confinement was not rigor- 
 ous, he was greatly vexed to find that there was no American 
 Consul, or Agent, at that time at the Havannah, to whom he 
 could have applied for relief his ardent wish still being to 
 reach the United States, if possible. 
 
 Having thus been detained at La Principe for about four 
 weeks, he was informed that he would now be transmitted to 
 Spain, in one of two Spanish frigates then receiving a rich 
 cargo of specie for the Government at home. During the 
 voyage, he wrought, and was treated like one of the com- 
 mon sailors. But now we come to his last sad disaster. 
 
 The Spaniards were congratulating themselves on the 
 approaching termination of a swift and prosperous voyage, 
 for they had now nearly reached the harbour of Cadiz, little 
 thinking that a British squadron, under the command of Sir 
 John Jervis, afterwards created Earl St. Vincent, was there 
 snugly lying ready to intercept them. On the morning 
 of the 26th April, 1797, two frigates, belonging to that 
 squadron, viz. the Emerald and Irresistible, got their eye 
 upon the Spaniards, and instantly gave chase. In a few 
 hours they approached each other within pistol-shot, and 
 anxiously prepared for action. No man can tell in what state 
 the feelings of Thomas Muir were at that awful period. To 
 fight against his own country under other circumstances 
 would have been rank treason, and we would without hesi- 
 tation have placed his name in the blackest catalogue of 
 traitors. But we are fortunately relieved from all anxiety on 
 this delicate and painful point, by the consideration that Mr. 
 Muir, de facto, did not take up arms against his own country 
 in the sense in which such an act could alone be held crimi- 
 nal. He was compelled, from the very nature of his situa- 
 tion, and from dire necessity, to act in his own defence in the 
 manner he appears to have done. And what man, under 
 these most especial circumstances, would hesitate for one 
 moment to defend his liberty and his life? 
 
 The action was fierce and bloody. It lasted for two hours
 
 39 
 
 and towards the close of it, Mr. Muir was struck with a 
 cannon ball, and lay prostrate with the dead. The Spaniards 
 were vanquished. The following is an interesting account 
 of the action, taken from the letter of a British officer to his 
 friends in Scotland, and published at the time in the news- 
 papers : 
 
 " His Majesty's Ship Irresistible, 
 At Anchor, off Cadiz, 28th April, 1797. 
 
 " On the 26th inst. lying off here, saw two strange ships 
 standing for the harbour, made sail after them with the 
 Emerald frigate in company ; and, after a chase of eight hours 
 they got an anchor in one of their own ports, in Canille 
 Bay. We brought them to action at two in the afternoon. 
 We anchored abreast of them one mile from the shore, and 
 continued a glorious action till four, when the Spanish colours 
 were struck on board, and on shore, and under their own 
 towns and harbours. Our opponents were two of the finest 
 frigates in the Spanish service, and two of the richest ships 
 taken during this war. A Viceroy and his suite, and a num- 
 ber of general officers, were on board of one of them. I am 
 sorry to say that after they struck, the finest frigate ran on 
 shore. We, however, got her off at 12 at night, but from the 
 shot she received she sunk at 3 in the morning, with all her 
 riches, which was a sore sight to me, especially as I had been 
 on board her. We arrived here with our other prize, and 
 are landing our prisoners. Among the sufferers on the Spanish 
 side is Mr. Thomas Muir., who made so wonderful an escape 
 from Botany Bay to the Havannah. He was one of five killed 
 on board the Nymph, by the last shot jired by us. The officer 
 at whose side he fell, is now at my hand, and says he behaved 
 with courage to the last."* 
 
 But see what follows : When the action was over some of 
 the officers and crew of the Irresistible boarded the frigate in 
 which Mr. Muir was, to take possession of her as their prize. 
 On looking at the dead and dying, one of our officers was 
 struck at the unusual position in which one of them lay. His 
 hands were clasped in an attitude of prayer, with a small book 
 enclosed in them. His face presented a horrid spectacle, as 
 one of his eyes was literally knocked out, and carried away, 
 with the bone and loner part of the cheek, and the blood 
 about him was deep. Some of the sailors believing him to be 
 
 * Vide Edinburgh Advertiser, June, 1797, p. 349-
 
 dead, were now in the act of lifting him up to throw him 
 overboard, when he uttered a deep sigh, and the book fell 
 from his hands. The officer to whom we have alluded 
 snatched it up, and on glancing at the first page of it, he 
 found it was the Bible, with the name of Thomas Muir 
 written upon it. He was struck with astonishment. Thomas 
 Muir was his early schoolfellow and companion ! He had 
 heard of some part of his subsequent history. But to find 
 him now in this deplorable situation was almost incredible 
 and heart-rending. 
 
 Without breathing his name, for that might have injured 
 or betrayed his unhappy friend and countryman, who might 
 yet perchance survive, the officer took out his handkerchief 
 and wiped the gore from the mangled face of Mr. Muir. 
 With another handkerchief he tied up his head, and after 
 performing these kind and Christian offices, he enjoined the 
 sailors to carry him gently on board a small skiff which was 
 then lying at the side of the frigate to receive such of the 
 Spaniards as had been wounded in the action, regarding 
 whom an order had previously been issued by the British 
 Commander, to send them ashore or land them on their 
 own territories, scarcely a mile distant. 
 
 After making this extraordinary and providential escape, 
 Mr. Muir was carried to the Hospital at Cadiz as a Spanish 
 sailor mortally wounded. In about two months suffering 
 all the while extreme agony, he was able to speak a little to 
 those around him. Through some means or other, his dis- 
 tressing situation was communicated to the French Directory 
 at Paris and so much did they feel interested about Mr. 
 Muir, (who, it will be recollected, was formerly in Paris,) 
 that they sent a special messenger to Cadiz with instructions 
 to see that every proper respect and attention was paid to 
 him. The French Directory also ordered their agent at 
 Cadiz to defray the whole expenses that might be incurred 
 by Mr. Muir, and to supply him with any money he 
 required. , 
 
 Some of our readers we are afraid will now be greatly 
 startled and displeased to learn that Mr. Muir now held 
 direct and personal communication with Thomas Paine, 
 whose works it is said created so much mischief. But we 
 entreat them to observe that Mr. Muir by no means approved 
 of the whole of Mr. Paine's works. Most certainly he never 
 approved of his religious works. And we may as soon con- 
 demn the wise and virtuous men of former times for corre- 
 sponding with Bolingbroke or Hume, as condemn Mr. Muir
 
 for corresponding with Paine. Moreover, Mr. Paine, if we 
 mistake not, was at that time a distinguished member of the 
 French National Convention, and might have been service- 
 able to Mr. Muir in many ways. At any rate, we have only 
 been able to discover one single letter between them, and 
 we hope we will be excused for republishing it in this 
 place when we explain that it simply describes the situation 
 of Mr. Muir, and the state of his feelings, at the time it was 
 written. 
 
 " Cadiz, Aug. 14, 1797. 
 
 "DEAR FRIEND, Since the memorable evening on which 
 
 I took leave of you at , my melancholy and agitated 
 
 life has been a continued series of extraordinary events. I 
 hope to meet you again in a few months. 
 
 " Contrary to my expectation, I am at last nearly cured of 
 my numerous wounds. The Directory have shown me great 
 kindness. Their solicitude for an unfortunate being who has 
 been so cruelly oppressed, is a balm of consolation which 
 revives my drooping spirits. The Spaniards detain me as a 
 prisoner because I am a Scotchman. But I have no doubt 
 that the intervention of the Directory of the Great Republic 
 will obtain my liberty. Remember me most affectionately to 
 all my friends, who are the friends of liberty and of mankind. 
 I remain, dear Sir, yours ever, 
 
 " THOS. MUIR."* 
 
 In September following, while he was still at Cadiz, Mr. 
 Muir had the honour to receive a communication, of rare 
 example, either in ancient or modern times, and of which we 
 think the greatest statesman, or warrior, that ever lived, might 
 justly be proud. This was no other than a communication 
 from the Government of France not only offering to confer 
 upon him the privileges of a free citizen, but urgently and 
 generously inviting him to spend the remainder of his days in 
 the bosom of the French nation. To an oppressed and per- 
 secuted individual driven from his own country and only 
 known for his exertions and sufferings in the cause of truth, 
 we will say of liberty ; such an invitation, coming as it did 
 from one of the first Nations of Europe, was gratifying in the 
 highest degree to Mr. Muir, and it is almost unnecessary to 
 add that he accepted it as the greatest compliment and reward 
 which could be paid to him in this world. 
 
 * Vide Edinburgh Advertiser, 1797.
 
 42 
 
 The French Directory instantly followed up their invitation, 
 by making a formal demand on the Government of Spain to 
 restore Mr. Muir to his freedom, and to afford him every 
 facility on his journey to France, which they readily did. On 
 the 16th of September, 1797, he became once more a free 
 man, the sentence of the High Court of Justiciary always 
 excepted. It never was recalled, but he was now beyond its 
 reach, and heartily despised it. 
 
 He arrived at Bourdeaux, the first town of consequence on 
 his entrance into France, early in December. The municipal 
 authorities, as well as the whole body of inhabitants, received 
 him with every demonstration of honour and kindness. They 
 invited him to a public dinner, at which the Mayor of Bour- 
 deaux presided, on the 4th of December, 1797. His health 
 was drank with acclamation by a company of upwards of 500 
 individuals, as the " Brave Scottish Advocate of Liberty 
 and now the adopted Citizen of France." And when he rose 
 to return thanks for he could speak French fluently, he 
 fainted in the arms of the American Consul, who did him 
 the honour to sit at his left hand a circumstance which told 
 the state of his feelings, and spoke more powerfully in his 
 behalf than the most animated and brilliant harangue he 
 could have made. 
 
 He reached Paris by slow and easy stages, on the 4th of 
 February, 1798; and on the 6th of that month he thus wrote 
 to the French Directory : 
 
 " CITIZEN DIRECTORS, I arrived two days ago at Paris, in 
 a very weak and sickly state. 
 
 " Permit me to express to you the entire devotion and gra- 
 titude of my heart. 
 
 " To you I owe my liberty. To you I also owe my life. 
 But there are other considerations of infinitely superior im- 
 portance, and which ought to make a forcible impression on 
 my mind. 
 
 " Your energetic conduct has saved the liberty, not 
 only of France, but also of my country, and of every other 
 nation in the world, at present groaning under oppres- 
 sion. 
 
 " It is unnecessary for me to make protestations of my love 
 and veneration for the Republic. To my last breath I will 
 remain faithful to my adopted country. 
 
 " I shall esteem, Citizen Directors, the day on which I shall 
 have the honour to be admitted to your presence, the most pre- 
 cious of my life ; and if I have passed through dangers and
 
 43 
 
 misfortunes, that moment will for ever efface their remem- 
 brance, and amply compensate them. 
 
 " I have the honour to be, 
 
 " CITIZEN DIRECTORS, 
 " With the most profound respect, 
 
 " Your grateful and devoted servant, 
 " THOMAS MUIR."* 
 
 A deputation from the French Government immediately 
 waited on Mr. Muir, to congratulate him on his arrival in 
 Paris. His company was now courted by the highest circles 
 in France ; and indeed he acquired the sympathy and esteem 
 of all classes in that great community. Nothing was wanting 
 on their part to make him happy and of this, the grateful 
 homage of his heart fully showed that he was deeply sensible. 
 But his constitution was fast sinking. The wounds he had 
 received were found to be incurable and shortly afterwards, 
 viz. on 27th of September 1798, he expired at Chantilly, near 
 Paris, and was interred there, by the Public Authorities, with 
 every possible respect. 
 
 His venerable parents, who had heard of his escape from 
 Sydney, and subsequent history, were, as may well be imagined, 
 greatly agitated by fresh hopes and fears on his account. 
 Many an anxious thought they must have had about him. They 
 received several letters from him, all breathing the most dutiful 
 and affectionate regard. On his deathbed he carefully sealed 
 up the Bible which they had given him on his departure from 
 Scotland, and which had been so miraculously preserved by 
 him, through all the difficulties and dangers he had encoun- 
 tered, leaving an injunction that it should be forwarded to his 
 parents by the first opportunity ; and it was so forwarded, and 
 received by them with mingled feelings of satisfaction and 
 grief. They only survived him about two years. 
 
 We believe the only direct relations of Mr. Muir now 
 living, are his niece, the amiable lady of the Rev. Laurence 
 Lockhart, minister of Inchinnan, and his highly respectable 
 nephews, David Blair, Esq. and Captain Thomas Blair, of the 
 H. E. I. C. service, who we understand both imbibe the noble 
 sentiments of their uncle. 
 
 * Vide Edinburgh Advertiser, 1798.
 
 44 
 
 READER ! You thus see, that at the early age of 33, an 
 amiable and accomplished man was cut off, who was rising to 
 eminence in his profession, and might have become one of the 
 ornaments of his country. 
 
 Peruse his Trial, we beseech you, and you will find that he 
 was PUNISHED, aye, most cruelly punished, because he pre- 
 sumed to advocate those liberal sentiments which are now 
 uttered throughout these kingdoms, and which are engrafted 
 on the hearts of every good and loyal subject. 
 
 His defence, powerful and eloquent as it is, and worthy of 
 all praise, did not satisfy the consciences of his Judges. We 
 hope it will satisfy yours. 
 
 But whether it does so or not, we think you will admit, that 
 his moral character stands out to view in the fairest and most 
 enviable form. Even the most rancorous of his political ene- 
 mies have not presumed to asperse it. 
 
 We are sensible that we have not been able to do any thing 
 like justice to his merits ; and indeed, the consciousness of our 
 own utter insignificance and inability, should perhaps have 
 deterred us from venturing upon such a task at all. But we 
 beg leave to state (with all humility), that we have been 
 prompted to undertake it from a pure loveofjustice. We have 
 nothing to hope, or fear from it. Stop ! we must qualify this 
 expression and should say, that since we have meddled with 
 a subject somewhat of a political nature, we shall possibly 
 be landed " in a sea of troubles." We were not born at 
 the date of these transactions. We are not acquainted with 
 a single relative of Mr. MuiVs all our information has been 
 derived from what we consider correct and authentic sources. 
 At the same time, we may be mistaken in regard to one or 
 two minor particulars. We know we have disclosed, both 
 here and in the Appendix, a few striking and melan- 
 choly truths, which must be disagreeable in certain quar- 
 ters, and especially to the stomachs of a few Old Tories 
 " the life and fortune men" of former times, whose ranks 
 have greatly thinned of late. But, independent of them, 
 we are much afraid that there is still too much bigotry, in- 
 tolerance, and prejudice in the land, to make us feel alto- 
 gether easy. Yet, nevertheless, though young and humble, 
 we will yield to no man for independent political principles ; 
 and if we are at all encouraged in this undertaking, we shall 
 perhaps be tempted to try our hand soon again on a few other 
 Political Trials, equally extraordinary, and interesting. De-
 
 45 
 
 pent! upon it we will not mince matters, or flinch from our 
 duty, in giving them a thorough exposition. 
 
 At present, our object is to do all that in us lies, to rescue 
 the memory of a good man from oblivion. 
 
 In the case of the ever-to-be-remembered Algernon Sydney, 
 we find, that the tyrannical sentence pronounced against 
 him, in the reign of Charles II. was afterwards Reversed, 
 by a special Act of Parliament, because, as the preamble of 
 the Act states, he was convicted " BY MEANS OF AN UNLAW- 
 FUL RETURN OF JURORS, AND BY DENIAL OF HIS LAWFUL 
 CHALLENGES." 
 
 Is it, then, too much for us to expect, that in this enlight- 
 ened age, the sentence against Thomas Muir will speedily be 
 Reversed, on precisely similar grounds ? 
 
 He made, you will find, a solemn and affecting Appeal to 
 Posterity ; and the time, we hope, has now arrived, when that 
 Appeal may safely be heard. 
 
 We see that MONUMENTS have been erected in " Modern 
 Athens," to commemorate the names of a DUNDAS and a 
 MELVILLE, because, we presume, they were the greatest 
 placemen and pensioners that this country could boast of. 
 But strange to say, no monument has yet been erected in 
 Scotland, to commemorate the name of one single Reformer, 
 or rather one single Advocate of Civil Liberty ! 
 
 Shall this glaring omission, this national reproach, 
 remain in our country much longer ? The victory of the Re- 
 formers is at hand. The great truths of civil and religious 
 liberty are everywhere triumphant. And shall THOMAS MUIR, 
 the firm and undaunted Patriot, the conscientious Martyr, to 
 PRINCIPLES now freely borne abroad, in the SENATE, in the 
 COURT, and in the FORUM shall he, we ask, be FORGOTTEN 
 by his countrymen, to whom he has left so touching, so noble 
 an example? No! We feel that the period approaches when 
 JUSTICE will indeed be done to this eminent high-minded 
 man, and his band of compatriots; and we confidently anticipate 
 that we shall soon see this his native city adorned with a MONU- 
 MENT to his memory. But if these, our fondest hopes, shall 
 not be realized if this our humble but earnest appeal in his 
 behalf, shall only be made in vain if no kindly heart shall 
 respond to our call if men shall merely cry Reform ! and 
 Liberty ! with their mouths, while their hearts are cold nar- 
 row and contracted; or utterly insensible to the loftier springs 
 of action : if they of this generation shall basely forget the 
 man who fought the first and bravest battle for them, we shall 
 indeed be greatly grieved but, thank God, we shall not be
 
 46 
 
 dismayed. We look to higher prospects. Yes, we have the 
 great satisfaction to think, that whatever the men of this world 
 may say or do, a day is fast approaching, when Thomas Muir 
 will again meet with his friends and his foes with his Judges 
 and his Jury face to face at a Bar where the hearts of all 
 men shall be laid open where Tyranny shall be deprived of its 
 iron rod and where white robed Justice shall sit OMNIPO- 
 TENT, to avenge the wrongs of the oppressed, and to bind 
 up the wounds of the broken-hearted !
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 No. I. 
 THE TRIAL 
 
 OF 
 
 THOMAS MUIR, ESQ. ADVOCATE, 
 
 YOUNGKR OP HUNTEI18HILL. 
 
 THE HIGH COURT of JUSTICIARY met at Edinburgh, on Friday, 
 the 30th August, 1793. 
 
 Judges present, 
 The LORD JUSTICE CLERK, M'QUEEN. 
 
 Lords HENDERLAND, 
 
 DuNSINNAN, 
 
 Lords SWINTON, 
 
 ABERCROMBY. 
 
 Mr. Muir appeared at the Bar, and the Clerk of Court was ordered 
 to read the following Indictment against him : 
 
 GEORGE the THIRD, &c. Whereas it is humbly meant and complained 
 to us by our right trusty ROBERT DUNDAS, Esq. of Arniston, our 
 Advocate for our interest, upon THOMAS MUIR, younger of Hunters- 
 hill, That, by the lawB of this and every other well governed realm, 
 the wickedly and feloniously exciting, by means of Seditious speeches 
 and harangues, a spirit of disloyalty and disaffection to the King and 
 the established Government, more especially, when such speeches 
 and harangues are addressed to meetings or convocations of persons 
 brought together by no lawful authority, and uttered by one who is 
 the chief instrument of calling together such meetings : As also, the 
 wickedly and feloniously advising and exhorting persons to purchase 
 and peruse seditious and wicked publications and writings, calculated 
 to produce a spirit of disloyalty and disaffection to the King and 
 Government : As also, the wickedly and feloniously distributing, or 
 circulating any seditious writing or publication, of the tendency afore- 
 said, or the causing distribute or circulate any such seditious writing 
 or publication : As also the wickedly and feloniously producing 
 and reading aloud in a public meeting or convocation of persons, a 
 seditious and inflammatory writing, tending to produce in the minds 
 of the people a spirit of insurrection and of opposition to the estab- 
 lished Government : And the publicly approving of, and recommend- 
 ing in said meeting, such seditious and inflammatory writing, are 
 all and each, or one or other of them, crimes of an heinous nature, 
 dangerous to the public peace, and severely punishable : Yet true it 
 is, and of verity, That the said Thomas Muir is guilty actor, or art 
 and part, of all and each, or one or other of the said crimes aggravated
 
 48 
 
 as aforesaid : In so far as, on the third day of November 1792, or 
 one or other of the days of that month, or of the month of October 
 immediately preceding, or of December immediately following, the 
 said Thomas Muir having been present at a meeting, in the town of 
 Kirkintilloch, parish of Kirkintilloch, and county of Dunbarton, de- 
 nominated " A Society for Reform," or bearing some such name ; and 
 also having, some time during the course of the said month of Novem- 
 ber aforesaid, been present at another meeting at Milltoun, parish of 
 Campsie, and county of Stirling, which meeting was also denominated, 
 *' A Society for Reform," or bore some such name, and both of which 
 societies above-mentioned, the said Thomas Muir was the chief means 
 of instituting and forming ; he did, at times and places foresaid, with a 
 wicked and seditious intention, address and harangue the said meetings; 
 in which speeches and harangues, the said Thomas Muir did seditiously 
 endeavour to represent the Government of this country as oppressive 
 and tyrannical, and the Legislative Body of the State as venal and 
 corrupt, particularly by instituting a comparison between the pretended 
 existing Government of France, and the Constitution of Great Britain, 
 with respect to the expenses necessary for carrying on the functions 
 of Government; he endeavoured to vilify the monarchial part of the 
 Constitution, and to represent it as useless, cumbersome, and expen- 
 sive : At least, the said Thomas Muir did use words and arguments 
 of the above seditious tendency and import. Further, the said Thomas 
 Muir did, sometime during the course of September, October, or No- 
 vember 1792. at Glasgow, Kirkintilloch, Milltoun, &c. and elsewhere, 
 wickedly and feloniously, exhort and advise several persons to purchase 
 and peruse various seditious pamphlets or writings ; particularly, the 
 said Thomas Muir did, some time in the months aforesaid, within 
 his father's house at Glasgow, aforesaid, or some other place to the 
 public prosecutor unknown, wickedly and feloniously advise John 
 Muir senior, late hatter in Glasgow, Thomas Wilson, barber there, 
 and John Barclay, residing in the parish of Calder, to read Paine's 
 Rights of Man, and to purchase the same ; which book or pamphlet 
 entituled, Paine's Rights of Man, is a most wicked and seditious pub- 
 lication, calculated to vilify the Constitution of this country, to produce 
 a spirit of insurrection among the people, and to stir them up to acts 
 of outrage and opposition to the established Government. Further, 
 the said Thomas Muir did, in the course of the months of September, 
 October, or November aforesaid, wickedly and feloniously distribute 
 and circulate, or cause to be distributed and circulated, in the towns 
 of Glasgow, Kirkintilloch, and Milltoun aforesaid, &c. a number of 
 seditious and inflammatory writings or pamphlets; particularly a book 
 or pamphlet, entitled, " The \Vorks of Thomas Paine, Esq." Also, 
 a writing or publication, entitled, " A Declaration of Rights, and an 
 Address to the People, approved of by a number of the Friends of Re- 
 form in Paisley ;" also, a paper or publication, entitled, " A Dialogue 
 betwixt the Governors and the Governed ;" also, a paper or publica- 
 tion, entitled, " The Patriot :" Particularly, the said Thomas Muir 
 did, some time in the month of October, or of November aforesaid,
 
 49 
 
 at Kirkintilloch aforesaid, or at some other place to the public prose- 
 cutor unknown, wickedly, and feloniously deliver and put into the 
 hands of Henry Freeland, weaver in Kirkintilloch, a seditious hook 
 or pamphlet, entitled, " The Works of Thomas Paine, Esq." (which 
 the said Henry Freeland carried away with him ;) which book or 
 pamphlet, along with the other wicked, seditious, and inflammatory 
 passages, contains inter alia the following : 
 From Paine s Works, 
 
 Part I. page 13. " Monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of the 
 sins of the Jews, for which a curse in reserve is denounced against 
 them." 
 
 P. 20 " Why is the Constitution of England sickly, but because 
 Monarchy hath poisoned the Republic? The Crown hath engrossed 
 the Commons. 
 
 " In England, a King hath little more to do than to make war, and 
 to give away places ; which, in plain terms, is to impoverish the nation, 
 and set it together by the ears." 
 
 P. 78 " What are the present governments in Europe, but a scene 
 of iniquity and oppression ? What is that of England ? Do not its own 
 inhabitants say it is a market where every man has his price, and where 
 corruption is common traffic ?" 
 
 P. 51. " The attention of the Government of England appears, 
 since its political connexion with Germany, to have b?en so completely 
 engrossed and absorbed by foreign affairs, and the means of raising 
 taxes, that it seems to exist for no other purposes. Domestic^concerns 
 are neglected ; and with respect to regular law, there is scarcely such 
 a thing." 
 
 And the said Thomas Muir did, some time in October or Novem- 
 ber aforesaid, within his own or his father's house at Huntershill, &c., 
 or at some other place to the Public Prosecutor unknown, wickedly 
 and feloniously put into the hands of William Muir, weaver in Kirkin- 
 tilloch, eleven numbers of a seditious book or pamphlet, entituled, 
 " The Patriot," which the said William Muir carried away with him, 
 and kept possession of ; and which book or pamphlet contained among 
 others the following seditious passages : 
 
 From the Patriot. 
 
 No. V. page 168 and 169. " They have lost the distinguishing 
 character between freemen and slaves ; they have lost the distinguish- 
 ing character of Englishmen J They have lost what the most tyrannical 
 Kings of England could never force fy oni them ! They have in a great 
 measure lost what their forefathers spent their blood and treasure to 
 defend the greatest jewel that any people can possess their consti- 
 tutional and natural liberty their birthright and inheritance derived 
 from GOD and Nature I They have lost the constitutional means of 
 redress for all their grievances ! What is it, indeed, they have not 
 lost by that hated septennial law, which has fettered down the elective 
 power of the people, like a dog to a manger, who is only suffered to 
 go abroad once in seven years for an airing I" 
 
 No. VI. pp. 184 and 185. " Rouse then ye Britons ! Awake from
 
 .50 
 
 the slumbering state of apathy in which you have so long suffered 
 yourselves ingloriously to remain ? Open your eyes to the injuries 
 which have been heaped on you ; and assert your right to have them 
 redressed. Evince to all the world that you are the true descendants 
 and sons of your once famed glorious ancestors; prove yourselves 
 worthy to inherit in its highest degree of perfection, that Constitution 
 which they raised by their valour and cemented by their blood. Raise 
 your voice The voice of the people and sound in the ears of tyrants 
 and their abettors, that you will be free, and you are so : That voice 
 is the noble, the mighty fiat, which none can, or dare to, attempt to 
 gainsay." 
 
 No. XI. p. 375. " And what would the Earl of Chatham have 
 thought, if he had lived to hear people now talk of a happy and glo- 
 rious Constitution, evidently built upon corruption, and supported by 
 peculation !" 
 
 P. 419 " We may easily trace the means by which our nobility 
 are at this moment not only in possession of one branch of the Legis- 
 lature by hereditary claim, but by which they have also monopolized, 
 with the addition of a few rich commoners, the majority of voices in 
 the House of Commons, which, shame to tell, is barefacedly called the 
 Representation of the People. This we pledge ourselves to prove to 
 the satisfaction of our readers in the course of this work." 
 
 And the said paper or publication, entituled, " A declaration of 
 Rights, and Address to the People, approved of by a number of the 
 Friends of Reform in Paisley," distributed and circulated as aforesaid, 
 contained the following passages : 
 
 P. 4. " 1. Being subject to the legislation of persons, whom other 
 men have placed over you, it is evident you are denied that which is 
 the right of every one, and without which none are free. For to be 
 enslaved, is to have no will of your own in the choice of those law 
 makers, which have power over your properties, your families, your 
 lives, and liberties. Those who have no votes for electing Represen- 
 tatives are not free, as the rights of nature, and the principles of our 
 Constitution, require, but are enslaved to the Representatives of those 
 who have votes." 
 
 P. 5. " 3. Should you not associate in your own cause and with 
 one voice ? the voice of united millions demand reform in the national 
 representation." 
 
 P. 15. " But the evils of long Parliaments are they not written 
 in tears and in blood ? And have they left us aught of liberty but the 
 name ? With the poor exception, then, of one year of freedom in 
 seven, and that in favour of not one-seventh part of the nation, it is 
 demonstrated that you are constantly taxed without being represented, 
 and compelled to obey laws to which you never gave assent. Are not 
 these the very definitions of slavery ? And, are you not thus degraded 
 to a level with the very cattle in the field, and the sheep in the fold ; 
 which are a property to those who rule over them, and have no power 
 to say, why are we bought and sold ? why are we yoked and laden 
 with heavy burdens ? why are we fleeced and led to the slaughter ?
 
 51 
 
 Demand then, with one voice, friends and countrymen, that share in 
 making your own laws to which, by the constitution and the laws of 
 nature, you are entitled ; call for the Bill which would restore your 
 lost constitution, and recover your stolen rights. Pursue the only 
 course which can ever effect any considerable reduction of debts and 
 taxes, or materially advance the interest of manufactures and commerce. 
 In short, be free, prosperous, and happy ; and give your posterity the 
 same cause to revere your memories, as you have to bless those pro- 
 genitors who left you an inheritance in a free constitution." 
 
 And the above writing or publication, entitled, " A Dialogue be- 
 tween the Governors and the Governed," distributed and circulated 
 as aforesaid, contained, among others, the following passage : 
 
 " Civil Governors. The law enacts that ye be submissive. 
 
 " People The law is the general will, a new order. 
 
 " Civil Governors You will be a rebellious people. 
 
 " People. Nations cannot revolt ; tyrants are the only rebels. 
 
 " Civil Governors. The King is with us, and he commands you 
 to submit. 
 
 " People The Kingly office originates in the people, who elect 
 one of themselves to execute it for the general good. Kings, there- 
 fore, are essentially indivisible from their nations. The King of ours, 
 then, cannot be with you ; you only possess his phantom. And the 
 Military Governors, stepping forward, said, " The people are timid ; 
 let us menace them ; they only obey force Soldiers, chastise this 
 insolent rabble." 
 
 " People. Soldiers, you are of our own blood ! Will you strike 
 your brothers ? If the people perish, who will maintain the army ? 
 And the soldiers, grounding their arms, said to their chiefs, We, also, 
 
 are the people, we are the enemies of ." " Whereupon the 
 
 Ecclesiastical Governors said " There is now but one resource left. 
 The people are superstitious ; we must frighten them with the name 
 of God and of Religion. Our dearly beloved brethren, our children ! 
 God has appointed us to govern you." 
 
 " People. Produce to us your heavenly powers. 
 
 " Priests. You must have faith. Reason will lead you astray. 
 
 " People. Do you govern, then, without reason? 
 
 " Priests. GOD ordains peace. Religion prescribes obedience. 
 
 " People. Peace presupposes justice. Obedience has a right to 
 know the law it bows to. 
 
 " Priests. Man is only born into this world to suffer. 
 
 " People. Do you, then, set us the example. 
 
 t( Priests. Will you live without God and without Kings ? 
 
 " People. We will live without tyrants, without impostors." 
 
 Further, the said Thomas Muir having, upon the llth, 12th, or 
 13th days of December, 1792, or one or other of the days of that 
 month, been present at a meeting calling itself ' The Convention of 
 Delegates of the Associated Friends of the People,' or assuming some 
 such name ; which meeting was held in a room commonly called 
 Laurie's room, in James's court, in the city of Edinburgh, he did then
 
 and there, with a wicked and seditious design, produce, and read 
 aloud to the said meeting, a writing or paper, entitled, " Address 
 from the Society of United Irishmen in Dublin to the Delegates for 
 promoting a Reform in Scotland."* Which writing or paper was of 
 a most inflammatory nature and seditious tendency, and the said 
 Thomas Muir did, immediately thereafter, wickedly and feloniously 
 propose that it should be received, and lie on the table of the said 
 meeting ; and did also move, that the thanks of the meeting, or some 
 acknowledgment, should be returned to those from whom the foresaid 
 paper or address came. And moreover, the said Thomas Muir did, 
 then and there, wickedly and feloniously express his approbation of 
 the sentiments contained in the said paper or address, or at least, did 
 declare, that it was altogether harmless ; or used words and expres- 
 sions of a similar import. And he having been brought before John 
 Pringle, Esq.-j- our Sheriff-depute of the county of Edinburgh, upon the 
 2d of January, 1793, did, in his presence, emit and sign a declaration ; 
 but immediately thereafter, the said Thomas Muir, conscious of his 
 guilt in the premises, did, in order to evade punishment, abscond and 
 leave the kingdom ; and was fugitate or outlawed. That having lately, 
 in a private and clandestine manner, come into this country, by way 
 of Ireland, be was discovered and apprehended, and at the same time, 
 sundry papers found in his possession were, together with his pocket- 
 book, sealed up in presence of William Ross, Esq. one of our Justices 
 of Peace for the shire of Wigton, and will be used in evidence against 
 him. The indictment then concludes as follows: At least, times and 
 places above-mentioned, the said seditious speeches and harangues 
 were uttered, the said seditious books or pamphlets recommended to 
 be purchased and perused, the said seditious books or pamphlets circu- 
 lated and distributed, as aforesaid, and the said wicked and inflam- 
 matory address produced, read, recommended, and approved of, in 
 manner above-mentioned; and the said Thomas Muir is guilty actor, 
 or art and part, of all and each, or one or other of the foresaid crimes. 
 All which, or part thereof, being found proven by the verdict of an 
 assize, before our Lords Commissioners of Justiciary, in a Court of 
 Justiciary to be holden by them within the Criminal Court-house of 
 Edinburgh, the said Thomas Muir ought to be punished with the 
 pains of law, to deter others from committing the like crimes in all 
 time coming. 
 
 To this INDICTMENT Mr. Muir pled NOT GUILTY. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. " Who is your Counsel ?" 
 
 Mr. Muir. " I am to be my own Counsel.''^ 
 
 * Vide extract from it, p. 8, of Life. 
 
 f Afterwards created a principal clerk of Session, and of King's Processes. 
 
 \ His friend the Honourable Henry Erskine, we believe, offered to conduct his 
 defence but for particular reasons Mr. Muir declined. Let it be known that even 
 Henry Erskine the man who shed such lustre on the Scottish 15ar, was actually 
 driven from his situation as Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, because he w;is a 
 Reformer, and had the audacity to remain "honest in the worst of times!! 
 After this, talk not of the servility of the Writers to the Signet. The servility of 
 the Faculty of Advocates, in those days, was many degrees worse. We have our 
 eye upon them, and if no one else does it, we shall publish their names, and slie\v 
 the Titles and Pensions that some of them received.
 
 53 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. <l Have you any thing to state just now in 
 your defence, or on the relevancy of the Libel ? ' 
 
 Mr. Muir. " I have nothing to state till the witnesses are examined, 
 when I shall have an opportunity of addressing the Jury. I consider 
 the Jury as judges both of the law and the fact. I have already stated 
 in writing the nature of the proof I mean to offer in exculpation." 
 
 (In point of form it is required in Scotland that the person accused 
 should communicate to the prosecutor through the Clerk of Court, on 
 the evening preceding the trial, the substance of his defence in writing, 
 accompanied with a list of the witnesses he intends to adduce in sup- 
 port of such defence. Mr. Muir had complied with this rule.) 
 
 The Clerk of Court therefore now read the following 
 DEFENCES for THOMAS MUIR. 
 
 " The Criminal Libel is false and injurious. 
 
 " So far from exciting the People to riot and insurrection, it can 
 easily be proved, by a numerous list of witnesses, that upon every oc- 
 casion, the Pannel exhorted them to pursue measures moderate legal 
 peaceable and constitutional. 
 
 " The charge of distributing seditious publications, and of advising 
 the people to read them, is equally false and calumnious. 
 
 " The Pannel admits that on the great national question, concerning 
 an equal Representation of the People in the House of Commons, he 
 exerted every effort to procure in that House, a full, fair, and equal 
 Representation of the People, as he considered it to be a measure (and 
 still does) the most salutary for the interest of his country. 
 
 " But the Pannel offers to prove, that, as he considered the informa- 
 tion of the people to be the chief thing requisite to accomplish this 
 great object, he uniformly advised them to read every publication, upon 
 either side, which the important question of Parliamentary Reform 
 had occasioned. (Signed) " THCKMAS MUIR." 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. " Have you any thing further to state in sup- 
 port of your defence ?" 
 
 Mr. Muir. '- My Lords, I have nothing further to state at present. 
 I reserve myself till I come before a Jury of my country. J, again 
 admit that I have done every thing in my power to promote Parlia- 
 mentary Reform. If that be sedition, I at once plead Guilty to the 
 charge. I also admit, that I advised the people to read books of all kinds, 
 not this book, nor that book, but books on either side, which would 
 tend to inform their minds, on the great and important national ques- 
 tion which gave rise to their Association, nor shall I hesitate to declare 
 my motives My Lords, I consider the ignorance of the people to be 
 the source from which despotism flows. I am also of opinion that 
 an ignorant people, impressed with a sense of grievances, and demand- 
 ing redress, are exposed to much misery, and perhaps to ultimate rain. 
 Reformation ought always to be preceded by knowledge ; and who 
 will say, that mankind should be precluded from that information, 
 which concerns them so materially ? 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. " Do you mean to rest your defence on what 
 is Btated in this paper ? If you have any other facts to prove, it will
 
 54 
 
 be necessary for you to state them now, before the Jury is impan- 
 nelled, as they will not be admitted afterwards." 
 
 Mr. Muir. " I offer to prove by thousands of witnesses, that so far 
 from recommending ' seditious practices,' I have uniformly advised 
 the people to follow none but peaceable, orderly, and constitutional 
 measures. And, finally, that I exhorted them to connect knowledge 
 with liberty, and both with morality. If these be crimes, then I am 
 Guilty." 
 
 Their Lordships now proceeded to give their opinions on the rele- 
 vancy of the Indictment. 
 
 Lord Henderland. The charge against the Pannel is for a crime of 
 the most dangerous tendency. The Pannel, too, is a person belong- 
 ing to the Faculty of Advocates, who, his Lordship presumed, must 
 have received such an education, as might have instructed him in the 
 laws and constitution of his country. It is most extraordinary that 
 such a person should wickedly, and feloniously, harangue ignorant 
 country people, and circulate seditious publications. These practices 
 could have no other tendency, than to excite a spirit of discontent 
 against the King and Government of this realm, and to introduce level- 
 ling principles, which the Pannel must have known, from the history 
 of his country, had occasioned so much blood more than a century 
 ago. Can the Pannel have turned his eyes to the melancholy state of 
 a neighbouring nation, to the scenes of blood and devastations in 
 France, where the grossest oppression existed under the pretended 
 name of liberty and equality? His Lordship sincerely hoped that the 
 gentleman would be able to exculpate himself, but we are obliged to 
 hold the Indictment true, and which, if proven, must infer every thing 
 short of capital punishment. 
 
 Lord Swinton. His Lordship did not believe, that in the memory 
 of man there had ever been a libel of a more dangerous tendency read 
 in that Court. There was hardly a line of it which, in his opinion, 
 did not amount to High Treason. 
 
 Lords Dunsinnan and Abercrombie coincided in opinion as to 
 the dangerous tendency of the crime charged ; and, if proven, the 
 highest punishment should be awarded against the Pannel. 
 
 The. Lord Justice Clerk. The crime charged is Sedition and 
 that crime is aggravated according to its tendency. The tendency 
 here is plainly to overturn our present happy Constitution the hap- 
 piest, the best, and the most noble Constitution in the world ; and I 
 do not believe it possible to make it better. The books which this 
 gentleman has circulated, have a tendency to make the people believe 
 that the Government of this country is venal and corrupt, and thereby 
 to excite a rebellion. His Lordship agreed to find the libel relevant 
 to infer the pains of law. 
 
 An Interlocutor to that effect was accordingly pronounced. 
 TJic Lord Justice Clerk now proceeded to name the Jury, and 
 called SIR JAMES FOWLIS, of Collington, and CAPTAIN JOHN 
 INDUS, of Auchlndiny. 
 
 Captain IngUs, on answering to his name, rose and stated, that
 
 55 
 
 being in his Majesty's service, be did not wisli to be on this Jury, as 
 he thought it unfair, in a case of this nature, to try Mr. Muir by 
 servants of the Crown. 
 
 The Court informed Captain Inglis, that there was no impropriety 
 in his being a Juryman, although belonging to the service of Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 The Lord Justice Clerk, after having selected the first 6ve Jury- 
 men, asked Mr. Muir if he had any objection to them ? 
 
 Mr. Muir. " My Lords, of these five gentlemen I have no personal 
 knowledge. I believe their situations in life are respectable ; and that 
 they are men of probity and honour. But my situation and theirs is 
 so peculiar, that I am obliged to object to their being upon this Jury. 
 My Lords, you know that the question of Parliamentary Reform has 
 agitated deeply the minds of men in this country ; different opinions 
 have been adopted, and different parties have been formed. The 
 gentlemen now selected by your Lordship, as my Jurymen, belonged, 
 at that moment, to an Association which assembled in Goldsmiths' 
 Hall, calling themselves the Friends of the Constitution, united to 
 support it against what they were pleased to call ' republicans and 
 levellers,' and expressing their zeal to suppress ' tumult and sedition.' 
 My Lords, I belong to the association of the ' Friends of the People.' 
 Viewing a reform in the representation, as a measure conducive to 
 the stability of the Constitution and to the felicity of the people, we 
 united our common exertions, by legal measures, to accomplish that 
 object. 
 
 " My Lords, to the Constitution, in its genuine principles, we, 
 the friends of the people, have solemnly pledged ourselves. Never 
 have we professed to be its enemies ; yet the Association in Goldsmiths' 
 Hall, by a deliberate and public act, have declared that we were the 
 enemies of the Constitution. Nay, that Association has denounced us 
 to the country as attempting to kindle the torch of civil war, and to 
 lay it in blood and destruction ! The fact, upon which I found this 
 charge, is notorious, and cannot be denied. A Convention of dele- 
 gates, from all the Societies of the Friends of the People in Scotland, 
 assembled in this city on the llth day of December last. Of this 
 Convention I had the honour of being a member. The Convention 
 accorded with the Association in Goldsmiths' Hall, in their zeal to 
 support the Constitution, in their abhorrence of sedition, and in their 
 determination to concur with good citizens in the suppression of riot 
 and tumult. And to testify their principles and their object, the 
 Convention ordered a number of its members to repair to Gold- 
 smiths' Hall, and to subscribe the declaration there lying of adherence 
 to the Constitution. In this number I was included. We did so 
 and what were the consequences ? Why, the Association erased 
 our names, and published their proceeding in the Papers of the 
 day ! Was not this an act of public proscription against us all ? 
 Accused this day of sedition, of an attempt to overthrow the Con- 
 stitution, shall those men be my Jurymen, who have not merely
 
 56 
 
 accused me, but likewise judged and condemned me, without know- 
 in? me, without hearing me in my vindication? My Lords, this 
 trial is no trivial matter. It affects me ; but it affects the country 
 more. The noise of it will pass down to other times, and pos- 
 terity may fancy their most valuable rights connected with its 
 consequences. 
 
 " Bat, my Lords, this is not the only objection I state to the 
 gentlemen of Goldsmiths' Hall being of my Jury. I am accused of 
 circulating the works of Mr. Paine. That Association has publicly 
 advertised their horrors at the doctrines contained in these works. 
 Nay, more, they have offered a reward of five guineas to any one 
 who will discover a person who may have circulated them ! If this 
 is not prejudicating my cause, I demand to know what prejudication 
 is ? Upon these two objections I shall make no farther observations. 
 To suppose them not well founded, would be to insult the common 
 sense and feelings of mankind. 
 
 " My Lords, I demand justice. Let me be tried fairly, not by a 
 Jury of the Association of Goldsmiths' Hall, not by a Jury of the 
 Association of the Friends of the People, but by men unconnected 
 with either, and whose mii.ds are not warped with prejudices. I, 
 therefore, solemnly protest that no person, who is a member of 
 the Association in Goldsmiths' Hall, can sit as a Juryman on my 
 trial." 
 
 Solicitor General Blair replied, that he considered this objection 
 to be of the most extraordinary nature. The pannel is accused of 
 forming associations contrary to the Constitution, and he presumes to 
 object to those gentlemen who formed associations in its defence. 
 V\ ith equal propriety might the pannel object to their Lordships on 
 the Bench, to be his Judges in this trial, for their Lordships had 
 sworn to defend the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Muir. " This day I will not descend into the quibbles of a 
 lawyer. I object to these gentlemen, not because they associated in 
 defence of the Constitution. I too, as well as they, have associated in 
 defence of the Constitution. But my objection is, that they by an act 
 of theirs, have publicly accused me of being an enemy to the Consti- 
 tution, and have virtually pronounced my condemnation." 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk " I can see nothing in the objection, and am 
 clear for repelling it." 
 
 The objection was accordingly unanimously repelled by the Court. 
 When the Jury were now all selected by the Court and sworn, Mr. 
 Muir again rose and stated that he believed them to be men of truth 
 and integrity, but he could not help recalling to their attention the 
 peculiarity of their situation. They had already determined his fate, 
 and as they valued their own reputation and eternal peace, he en- 
 treated 
 
 Here Mr. Muir was interrupted by the Court, who concurred in 
 opinion that his conduct was extremely improper in taking up their 
 time, an the objection had already been repelled.
 
 57 
 
 (We now publish the names of the Jury, and beg to render some of 
 their designations a little more complete than they have yet been :) 
 
 Gilbert Innes of Stow, Foreman.* 
 Sir James Fowlis of Collington.-|- 
 Capt. John Inglis of Auchindiny.J 
 John Wauchope of Edmonstone.$ 
 Andrew Wauchope of Niddry Marichal.|| 
 John Trotter of Mortonhall. ^f 
 James Rochead of Inverleith.** 
 John Alves of Dalkeith. 
 Wm. Dalrymple, Merchant, Edinburgh. 
 Donald Smith, Banker, there.-J--|- 
 James Dickson, Bookseller, there. 
 George Kiunear, Banker, there. 
 Andrew Forbes, Merchant, there. 
 John Horner, Merchant, there. 
 John Balfour of Pilrig, Clerk. 
 
 The Lord Advocate now proceeded to call the following evidence 
 for the Crown. 
 
 Alex. Johnstone, bleacher, Kincaid Printfield, Campsie. 
 
 Mr. Muir objected to this witness. He did not know him, and 
 did not remember if he had ever seen him, but he offered to prove, 
 by respectable witnesses, that this man had declared that he would do 
 all that he could to get him (Mr. Muir) hanged. 
 
 Solicitor General replied, that if this objection were listened to, 
 it would be in the power of any person to disqualify himself from 
 being a witness in any cause. 
 
 The Court unanimously repelled the objection. 
 
 The witness being sworn, stated that he was present at a meeting 
 in Kirkintilloch, in November last, known by the name of a Reform 
 Society. Henry Freeland, weaver in Kirkintilloch, was president. 
 Mr. Muir was there, and said he was happy to see so full a meeting ; 
 he mentioned the disadvantages under which this country laboured 
 from an unequal representation of the people in Parliament ; said that 
 many places which contained great numbers of inhabitants were not 
 represented at all ; spoke of the Rotten Boroughs, and the small 
 number of votes in such places the influence of Lords and that one 
 
 * Deputy Lieutenant for the County of Edinburgh, &c. &c. We observe this gentle- 
 man has lived to append his name to the late anti-reform petition in Edinburgh. 
 He must now be nearly worn out in the service ! See p. 20. 
 
 f Sea Pension list of Scotland name " Fowlis." 
 
 i In the pay of Government. 
 
 Commissioner of Property Tax, Edinburgh. 
 
 || Commissioner of Property Tax, Edinburgh. Par nobile fratrum ! 
 
 \ One of the protegees of the late Lord Melville. 
 
 ** Commissioner of Property Tax, Edinburgh. 
 
 ft Deputy Lieutenant, Edinburgh. 
 
 We have thus analyzed the majority of these gentlemen, and leave the rest in 
 peace and quietness.
 
 58 
 
 man in some places could make two Members of Parliament that the 
 Members of the British Parliament were often not the representatives of 
 the people that if a man threw away L.20,000, in making himself a 
 Member of Parliament, he surely had some interest in it that the Duke 
 of Richmond had complained of this, but that L.30,000 had been put 
 into his pocket to silence him. Mr. Muir also observed that the French 
 would now, without a doubt, be successful that they were more 
 equally represented than the people of Britain, and their taxes less. 
 Mr. Muir pointed out regulations for the Society ; said they should 
 be well acquainted with the principles of those they admitted into it : 
 the sole intention of such societies was to obtain a more equal repre- 
 sentation of the people, and a shorter duration of Parliaments advised 
 the meeting to publish their sentiments, to obtain political knowledge 
 by corresponding with other Societies, and reading political books or 
 pamphlets. The witness being Interrogated if Mr. Muir men- 
 tioned any particular book answered, that he mentioned none in 
 particular. Interrogated by the Solicitor General, if there was 
 any thing said about the Royal family No, nothing was said on that 
 subject, except that they were to hold it legal to have a King : No- 
 thing was said about the powers of the King, or the expenses which 
 his Government might incur : Some person present inquired into the 
 principles of the Society ; and one near him said, that for his part he 
 had no need of any explanation, as he had read Paine's Rights of 
 Man : Did not know that Mr. Muir heard this conversation : The 
 meeting was principally composed of Weavers, from 18 to 21 years 
 of age : Mr. Muir did not join the meeting till after it was constituted : 
 It was known that he would attend : He was considered the chief 
 person at it : Mr. Muir recommended to the people, who intended to 
 form themselves into Societies for Reform, to do so as soon as possible, 
 in order that they might be able to communicate their sentiments to 
 one another, and lay their Petitions before Parliament. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Muir : Admitted that Mr. Muir recom- 
 mended order and regularity, and told the meeting that any act of 
 tumult would ruin their common cause, and that there was no other 
 mode of procuring redress but by applying to Parliament : He also 
 recommended to the meeting to beware of admitting immoral characters 
 as members. 
 
 Robert Weddel, weaver in Kirkintilloch, was at a meeting at 
 Kirkintilloch in November last the object of which was to obtain 
 Parliamentary Reform : It was called a meeting of the " Friends of 
 the People :" Witness was vice-president of the meeting, and James 
 Baird was secretary : Saw Mr. Muir after it was constituted, who 
 made a speech about the inequality of representation : Mr. Muir 
 was for King, Lords, and Commons : Said that the Society ought 
 to petition the House of Commons, and proceed in a constitutional 
 manner : Nothing was said about the expenses of the King, or the 
 burden of taxes, or any comparison made between the Government 
 of France and of this country : Did not recollect how long Mr. 
 Muir spoke : Was at another meeting with him : The conversation
 
 \ 
 
 / 
 
 59 
 
 at this second meeting (iu the house of W. Wallace, Kirkintilloch) 
 was on different subjects,^relating to the news of the country, 
 and about books : There might be above eight individuals present ; 
 not one-fourth of the first meeting : Henry Freeland, president, and 
 James Baird, secretary of the former meeting, were present at this one 
 also : Flower's book on the French Constitution was mentioned in the 
 course of the conversation : Witness never heard of that book before : 
 Thinks it was Muir who mentioned the book, but cannot be positive : 
 Paine's book was not spoken of at this meeting, but was at the former, 
 where one Robert Boyd asked Mr. Muir's opinion of Paine, and Mr. 
 Muir answered, that it was a book quite foreign to their purpose. 
 
 The Lord Advocate asked the witness what was said about Flower 
 on the French Constitution ? 
 
 Mr. Muir objected to the question : " My Lords, Mr. Flower's 
 book contains no sedition ; but although it had been of a most sedi- 
 tious and treasonable nature, yet the indictment is utterly silent about 
 it. I am not here accused of recommending or circulating that book, 
 and how, therefore, can any thing concerning it be now adduced in 
 evidence against me ? I plead upon a great principle of natural justice. 
 I look forward to other times, and tremble for the precedent. If 
 this were not the case I would say, not merely that I approved of 
 Mr. Flower's book, which does honour to its enlightened author, but 
 in this great audience, I would recommend its principles to every man 
 who values his country." 
 
 Lord Advocate. " The charge against the pannel is sedition, 
 branched out under various heads. One is, advising people to pur- 
 chase seditious books, and the prosecutor was entitled to examine as 
 to such facts, though every particular book or fact was not condescended 
 on in the libel." 
 
 Mr. Muir replied, that a charge in criminal law ought not to be 
 general. Would it be fair in the Lord Advocate, if he, Mr. Muir, 
 had been tried for robbery, to bring a proof that he was guilty of 
 murder? He could have proved that Mr. Flower's book is no libel, 
 or he might have brought evidence to prove that he never recommended 
 or circulated it ; but here an unfair advantage was taken of him ; it 
 was a secret trap, an engine laid to ensnare him. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. By the statute of James the 6th, wherever 
 " art and part," is libelled, there can be no objection to the generality. 
 This is a proper question and it has a tendency to establish the major 
 proposition, and it ought to be sustained. 
 
 The Lord Advocate, however, gave up the question. 
 
 The examination of the witness was resumed. He deponed that 
 there was something mentioned at the meeting about purchasing books, 
 and Henry's History of England was mentioned. Being interrogated 
 as to what books were purchased in consequence of this conversation ? 
 Mr. Muir objected to the question on the same ground as before ; but 
 the objection was repelled by the Court. The witness was then again 
 interrogated, what were the books he had purchased, or any other 
 person he knew ? Deponed, that he purchased two or three copies of
 
 the Political Progress of Great Britain, and three or four copies of 
 the Paisley Declaratiou of Rights : That these purchases were made 
 merely for his own amusement: That a copy was laid upon the tahle 
 before the meeting was gathered : Knew of no copies of Paine being 
 circulated : Had read it, but did not recollect from whom he had 
 received it : Had seen one of the numbers of the Patriot, whiv 'i was 
 shown to him by William Muir. 
 
 Cross-examined Henry's History of England was spoken of by 
 Mr. Muir: Did not advise the people to riot: Mr. Muir rather 
 advised them to constitutional measures, and said, the more constitu- 
 tional the more successful they would be. 
 
 Re- interrogated by Solicitor General, and asked what he meant 
 by a Reform in Parliament ? Was every man to have a vote ? N\ it- 
 ness hesitated, and said there were different opinions they wanted a 
 more equal representation. Interrogated what he meant by a more 
 equal representation who were to have votes ? The witness did 
 not reply readily to this question, and the Solicitor General observed, 
 that he wondered what Mr. Muir intended to make of the people ; 
 if all the members of the Society were as ignorant as this witness 
 this Vice- President they must know nothing about the matter. 
 Witness then stated, that there were two opinions in the Society one 
 party was for having the rights of voting confined to landed property, 
 the other wanted every man to have a vote. Interrogated, which 
 party was he of? Witness had not fully made up his mind on the 
 question. Did Mr. Muir give his opinion on this point ? He did not. 
 Again cross-examined by Mr. Muir Witness remembered that 
 Mr. Muir dissuaded the people from tumult and sedition ; and stated 
 to the Society, that if they were to pursue unconstitutional measures, 
 he (Mr. Muir) would desert them: Did not recommend one book 
 more than another. 
 
 Rev. James Lapslie,* Minister of Campsie. 
 
 Mr. Muir rose and stated, that he had many objections to state, 
 both to the admissibility and credibility of this witness. " My Lords, 
 My delicacy with regard to that man will, at present, permit me to 
 adduce the least weighty only, for 1 mean to prove the most important 
 in a different shape in a criminal prosecution against him, when he 
 and I shall exchange places at this bar. I know not what title this 
 reverend gentleman has to act as an agent for the Crown, but this I 
 offer to prove, that he assisted the messengers of the law in exploring 
 for, and citing witnesses against me ; that he attended the Sheriffs in 
 their different visits to the parishes of Campsie and Kirkintilloch ; 
 that previously to the precognition he conversed with the witnesses 
 for the Crown that he attended their precognition put questions 
 to them, and took down notes nay more, that, without being cited 
 by the prosecutor, he has voluntarily come forward as a witness on 
 this trial. My Lords, upon other matters I shall not here dwell ; it 
 
 * See the sketch of him, p. 1 1.
 
 Gl 
 
 is sufficient for me to say, that this witness attended the precognition 
 of other witnesses, and the uniform and late decisions of your Lord- 
 ships have sustained this objection." 
 
 The Court allowed Mr. Muir to adduce evidence in support of 
 his objection, and he called 
 
 Henry Freeland, weaver, in Kirkintilloch, who deponed, that he 
 was examined in a house in Kirkintilloch, before Mr. Honyman,* 
 Sheriff of Lanarkshire. Mr. Lapslie was present, arid put questions 
 to witness. Lapslie asked him if he had ever seen Mr. Muir at any 
 meetings ? Witness answered, he had. When witness was signing 
 his deposition before the Sheriff, Mr. Lapslie asked witness\ " If he 
 had got a college education ?" Upon answering in the negative, 
 Lapslie clapped witness on the shoulder, and said, " You write a 
 good hand." Witness did not reply immediately, and Mr. Lapslie 
 said, " It is a pity for such a clever young man as you to be a wea- 
 ver. Mr. Honyman will, perhaps, procure you a birth." Witness 
 said, <f that is flattery !" Mr. Lapslie again clapped him on the 
 shoulder, and said, " Not at all, Mr. Honeyman will probably call 
 on you again." 
 
 Robert Henry, engraver, Kincaid printfield. Witness admitted that 
 he was examined at Milton, by the Sheriff, and that Mr. Lapslie was 
 present. 
 
 Robert M'Kinlay, print-cutter, near Paisley, was examined at 
 Campsie, by the Sheriff; Mr. Lapslie. rnd Mr. Sheils from Glasgow, 
 were present. Mr. Lapslie spoke to witness before the examination, 
 and bade him tell every thing, as it did not concern him, (the witness,) 
 but Mr. Muir. 
 
 Mr. Muir now proceeded to call James M f Gibbon, when the Lord 
 Advocate gave up Mr. Lapslie's evidence ; consequently no other 
 witnesses were examined in regard to the conduct of that gentleman. 
 The evidence for the Crown was then resumed. 
 Henry Freeland was present at a meeting in Kirkintilloch, called 
 a Society for Reform, in November last witness was president 
 Mr. Muir was there and made a speech that lasted about a quarter of 
 an hour. The general purport of the speech was as to shortening 
 the duration of Parliament, and a more equal representation of the 
 people. Mr. Muir thought the taxes might be lessened by these 
 means said that a Reform was not to affect the King or Lords, but 
 only the Commons. Mention was made of the success of the French 
 arms, and that liberty would be established in France. Mr. Muir 
 spoke of political books, but witness does not recollect of any but 
 Henry's History of England Witness remembers to have seen the 
 proceedings of the Westminster Association, the Patriot, and Paisley 
 Declaration. It had been suggested by one Boyd to purchase Paine, 
 but Mr. Muir shook his head and said it was foreign to the purpose. 
 Had some farther conversation with Mr. Muir in the house of Wallace, 
 
 * Afterwards created a Baronet, and Lord of Session and Justiciary. Sec 
 Pension list of Scotland for ' Honeyman."
 
 62 
 
 Innkeeper, Kirkintilloch ; Mr. Muir said that Paiue's book had a ten- 
 dency to mislead weak minds. Witness expressed a'wish to see the 
 book Mr. Muir told him it was in his great-coat pocket lying on a 
 chair in the room. Witness then took the book out of the great-coat 
 pocket, and said he was surprised that Mr. Muir did not recommend 
 it to him, because every body was pleased with it. Witness said to 
 Mr. Muir that he believed the King's Proclamation was directed 
 against Paine's book : Mr. Muir agreed in this : Witness took the 
 book home with him and read it : He also gave it to others to read, 
 viz. John Scott, wright, and John Stewart, cooper, members of the 
 Society > Witness received two letters from Mr Muir they took no 
 notice of the circulation of the books: Mr. Muir said that a Convention 
 of Delegates of the Friends of the People was to be held soon at 
 Edinburgh, and he hoped to see witness there. A copy of Paiae's 
 work produced in Court, was identified by witness to be the book 
 which he took out of Mr. Muir's great-coat pocket, as before stated : 
 Witness first spoke of the book to Mr. Muir : William Muir was also 
 present on the occasion. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Muir: Witness had a conversation about 
 forming a Reform Society before he saw Mr. Muir : Mr. Wallace, 
 in whose house the meeting took place, was an old servant of Mr. 
 Muir's father : Mr. Muir recommended no particular book except 
 Henry's History of England : He cautioned them to be careful that 
 they admitted none but persons of good moral character into their 
 society also advised them to follow none but legal and constitutional 
 measures and said mobs would ruin their cause. 
 
 INTERROGATED by Mr.Muir, "why was you so desirous to see Paine's 
 book ?" Witness answered, " because I was informed that the King's 
 Proclamation was directed against it, and I was curious to see a book 
 that was so much spoken of." 
 
 William Muir, weaver in Kirkintilloch : When the oath was pro- 
 posed to be administered to this witness, he refused to swear, as being 
 contrary to his religious principles : Being asked what these principles 
 were, he replied that he was one of those who were called the Moun- 
 tain : That he had no objection to be examined and would tell the 
 whole truth, but could not wrong his conscience by taking an oath 
 which he considered unlawful. 
 
 The Court told him, if he would not swear, he would be committed 
 to prison, that there was no way by which he could ever obtain his 
 liberation, and that his imprisonment would be perpetual : He replied 
 that he could not help it, and that he knew the Lord could be with 
 him in prison as well as any where else. 
 
 The Lord Advocate moved that this person should be committed 
 to prison for his contumacy and in express words informed him that 
 there was no way by which he could ever be set free that, in short, 
 " his imprisonment would be eternal ! !" 
 
 Mr. Muir My Lords, I believe this person to be a good and con- 
 scientious man. Whether he be right or wrong in refusing to take 
 this oath, is not an object of my inquiry: He is adduced as a witness,
 
 63 
 
 in the prosecution against me. I have therefore the most material 
 interest that he should be sworn, but rather than he should suffer for 
 acting according to the dictates of his conscience, I waive my right, 
 and I will admit every word he utters, though not upon oath, to be 
 as true as if it were. 
 
 The Court observed that neither they nor the Jury could listen to 
 any evidence except such as was given upon oath. The law expressly 
 required it and it could not be dispensed with. 
 
 The witness persisting in his refusal, the Court committed him to 
 prison, declaring that they knew no mode by the law of Scotland by 
 which he could be liberated ! He nevertheless went to prison with 
 the most astonishing composure. 
 
 John Brown, weaver at Lennoxtoun, Campsie : Was present at a 
 meeting at Campsie about the month of October or November last : 
 Mr. Muir and Mr. Buchanan were also present, and both spoke at 
 that meeting: Witness was also at a meeting in Kirkintilloch : Did 
 not understand that these meetings were called by Mr. Muir: Wit- 
 ness bought Paine's book, but does not recollect whether he did so 
 before or after the meetings : Witness bought the book from mere 
 curiosity, having seen it accidentally in the window of a shop in 
 Glasgow : Does not remember whether that book was mentioned at 
 the meetings : Does not recollect Mr. Muir speaking of France : 
 The tenour of Mr. Muir's speech was to inculcate on the meeting the 
 necessity of sobriety to pursue constitutional measures and to 
 read constitutional books. In a conversation witness heard Mr. 
 Muir say that Paine's book was not a constitutional book, and would 
 not do. 
 
 Ann Fisher, late servant to Mr. Muir's father.* Witness, while 
 in the service of Mr. Muir's father, had frequent occasion to know 
 how Mr. Muir was employed : During the vacation in harvest last, he 
 was chiefly engaged in reading and writing : Does not know what he 
 was writing: Remembers going to Mr. Menons, Printer in Glasgow, 
 with a paper, which witness thinks was called a " Declaration of 
 Rights," in order to have it reprinted : Saw a great number of country 
 people come to Mr, Muir's father's house, with whom he had some- 
 times conversation in the back shop : Has often heard Mr. Muir say 
 that Paine's Rights of Man was a very good book : Witness has 
 bought that book for people in his company, sometimes at his desire, 
 and sometimes at desire of the people: Remembers of being sent to 
 purchase a Civic Sermon : Mr. Muir's uncle (Alexander Muir) was 
 one of the people for whom she bought two different parts, at different 
 times, of Paine's book : Also bought it for John Muir, hatter, who 
 was much pressed by Mr. Muir to get one : Witness bought the book 
 
 * This woman was precognosced by the Rev. Mr. Lapslie. She was the prin- 
 cipal witness against Mr. Muir, and it was noticed in the early reports of the trial 
 that she answered the questions put to her by the prosecutor, with much prompti- 
 tude and flippancy, and did not appear to be any way embarrassed when before the 
 Court, a circumstance rather unusual for a girl in her situation of life. But we, 
 perhaps, can give a cue to all this, when we state, that shortly before the trial 
 she was taken into the service of the late Mr. John Carlisle, Collector of Taxes 
 for Glasgow ! We will give the remainder of her history in a little.
 
 in Brash anil Reid's, Booksellers, Glasgow : She purchased it also for 
 one Barclay, a Weaver at Calder : Knows Thomas Wilson, who is Mr. 
 Muir's hairdresser : Muir told Wilson to buy Paino's work, and keep 
 it in his shop for the people who came there : Muir said it would 
 enlighten their minds, and that it confuted Mr. Burke entirely : Wit- 
 ness herself has read Paine's hook, as she was curious to see what was 
 in it: The copy she read belonged to Mr. Muir's servant.* Witness 
 has also seen Flower on the French Constitution : Has also seen t!ie 
 Declaration of Rights in Mr. Muir's room, and in the dining-room : 
 Also the Dialogue betwixt the Governors and the Governed, which 
 she has heard him read to his mother, sister, and others, but does not 
 know any other persons who were present : Mr. Muir said it was 
 written by Volnew,f one of the first wits in France : Witness does not 
 remember to have seen the Patriot, but has heard Mr. Muir read the 
 Paisley Declaration : Never heard him read law-books : Mr. Muir's 
 conversation was commonly on political subjects, and he frequently 
 read French law-books: Witness recollected hearing a conversation, 
 wherein Mr. Muir said, that if every body had a vote he would be 
 Member of Parliament for Calder : That Members of Parliament 
 would then have 30s. or 4Q.S. a-day, and that none but honest men 
 would be Members of Parliament, who would keep the Constitution 
 clear: That they would give new Counsellors to the King, who would 
 govern the nation with justice : Mr. Muir said that France would 
 soon be one of the most flourishing nations in the world, for they had 
 abolished tyranny and were free : He also said that our Constitution 
 would be very good if it had a thorough Reform : And that the Court 
 of Justiciary would need a thorough Reform too, for it was nonsense 
 to see the parade with which the Circuit Lords came into Glasgow : 
 Said they got their money for nothing but pronouncing sentence of 
 death on poor creatures, &c. 
 
 Mr. Muir here rose and objected to this line of examination. He 
 said, that the conduct of the Lord Advocate was in. every respect 
 highly reprehensible. He has put a variety of questions to witnesses, 
 with regard to crimes of which I am not accused. The indictment 
 charges me with making seditious speeches at Kirkintilloch and at 
 Campsie, vilifying the Constitution and the King, and inflaming the 
 minds of the people to rebellion. It charges me with distributing 
 seditious books and it speciflea that I gave away Mr. Paine's works 
 the Dialogue by Volney, &c. The indictment charges nothing 
 more. There is not a word within its four corners which points out 
 to me the charge of speaking disrespectfully of Courts of Justice, or 
 " tending" in any manner to excite the people against the administration 
 of the law. If the Public Prosecutor had evidence that I was guilty 
 of a crime of this nature, he ought to have made it an article of accu- 
 sation, and then I would have defended myself in the best way I could. 
 But to attempt to steal it in as evidence in this way, to prove a crime 
 which he durst not openly libel, because he knew it could not be 
 
 * This other servant was not examined to cor: firm Fisher! 
 f Volnfy.
 
 65 
 
 supported, deserves the severest reprobation. I know the tendency 
 of tliis little art. This witness this domestic and well-tutored spy, 
 is brought to prove words which may irritate the minds of your Lord- 
 ships against me. Yes, this is the artifice this is the object. But, 
 my Lords, I contend upon the great principle of natural justice upon 
 the Constitutional law of this country, that no person can be tried for 
 a crime of which he has not been previously accused. What is the 
 purpose of an indictment? and why is it served upon the pannel fifteen 
 days before his trial, but just to enable him to prepare for his defence ? 
 It is vain to say that, under the general charge of sedition, every thing 
 " tending" to prove it, can be adduced, though not specially mentioned. 
 If this is now to be adopted as law, what portion remains to us of our 
 national liberties ? Everj r thing is insecure an indictment will no 
 longer be regarded but as a piece of unmeaning paper. The unfortu- 
 nate man who receives it may say, I am charged with robbery I 
 have many witnesses to prove I did not perpetrate the crime, but 
 what avails preparing a defence ? For I may be instantly called upon 
 to defend myself against a charge of murder of sedition or of high 
 treason. In short, if under the specious pretence of being allowed to 
 introduce what is not specified in the libel, to support its generality, 
 if you establish a precedent of this kind, you strike a fatal blow 
 against individual security, of general safety, and the forms, precedents, 
 and principles of the Criminal law of this country are for ever gone. 
 It is vain to say that the statute of James the 6th allows this pro- 
 ceeding. That statute is now obsolete. It was enacted under a 
 despotic reign, when the freedom of Scotland was trampled under the 
 foot of power. It opposes every principle of justice, and will you, 
 my Lords, after the lapse of so many years, descend into the grave, 
 and drag up the pestilential carcase, in order that it may poison the 
 political atmosphere ? This question, my Lords, is of little importance 
 to the individual who is n6w struggling for the liberties of his country. 
 But the eyes of your children will be fixed upon this trial, and they 
 will tremble and shudder at the precedent. I feel for the country I 
 feel for posterity I will not sanction the procedure, which is to 
 produce to both a system of injustice of ruin and of murder. 
 
 Lord Advocate. The pannel is indicted for the crime of sedition, 
 and that crime may consist of many facts and circumstances, and of 
 these the strongest must be, the feloniously and seditiously stirring 
 up the inhabitants against the King and Constitution. To prove this, 
 his Lordship contended, that he was entitled to bring, in evidence, 
 every word of any conversation which might have passed betwixt Mr. 
 Muir and ignorant people, every paper, every fact, and every witness 
 which could be got. No person could deny the relevancy of the fact, 
 viz. that the abusing and vilifying the Courts of Justice was an aggra- 
 vation of the crime of sedition, it is that crime of which the panuel is 
 accused, and his Lordship certainly would be permitted to bring for- 
 ward every thing which could support the charge. If it had been neces- 
 sary to specify in the indictment, all the facts against the pannel, that 
 indictment would have covered, by its magnitude, the walls of the Court,
 
 66 
 
 Mr. Muir. This is not the time to entertain your Lordships with 
 frothy declamation with sounding, but unmeaning periods. 1 pleaded 
 my objection upon just principles. Every person here must see their 
 strength, and admit their truth. 
 
 Lord Swinton said, that it was the general proposition of the libel, 
 that the pannel went about sowing sedition ; and as Courts of Justice 
 were parts of the Constitution, he was of opinion, that reflecting on 
 them was included in the general charge. 
 
 Lord Dunsinnan was of the same opinion, and declared that every 
 particular circumstance, that may come out in evidence, need not be 
 libelled. 
 
 Lord Abercrombie said, there was no necessity for specifying in 
 the libel every seditious expression that might be used. 
 
 The Lord Justice Clerk, after making a few observations, also 
 concurred, and the objection was therefore unanimously disregarded. 
 
 The witness, Ann FisJier, on being re-called, stated, that she heard 
 Mr. Muir say, he was for a Monarchy under proper restrictions ; 
 that a republican form of Government was best ; but that, as the 
 Monarchy had been so long established in this country, it would be 
 improper to alter it. Witness was sent, by Mr. Muir's desire, 
 to an organist in the streets of Glasgow, and desired him to play 
 Ca Ira. 
 
 The examination of Fisher being now concluded by the Lord Ad- 
 vocate, Mr. Muir was asked if he had any questions to put to the 
 witness ? He replied, " No, my Lords ; I disdain to put any ques- 
 tions to such a witness." 
 
 The witness, on her part, turned round, and asked the Court if 
 she might put a question to Mr. Muir? The Lord Justice Clerk 
 said he would not permit this, and his Lordship characterized Mr. 
 Mair's recent expressions as very improper. 
 
 His Lordship /complimented the witness by saying, that " he had 
 never heard a more distinct and accurate witness in his life." 
 
 Lord Henderland declared, that if Mr. Muir had not been standing 
 at that bar, as a pannel, he would have ordered him to prison for the 
 expressions he had just used ! 
 
 As the witness was withdrawing, one of the Jurymen (Captain 
 Inglis) called her back, and asked her, if she had had any quarrel in 
 Mr. Muir's father's family ? To which she replied, that, so far from 
 that, her mistress had given her five shillings more than her wages, 
 and that Miss Muir had given her a petticoat, with some other 
 presents.* 
 
 Thomas Wilson, barber in Glasgow, was in use to dress Mr. Muir 
 in autumn last. Mr. Muir asked witness if he had bought Paine's 
 works ? Witness said he had not. Mr. Muir advised him to get a 
 
 * She might have added, that Mr. M uir's mother supported her parents when 
 they were in a state of abject poverty. These circumstances, and others we could 
 state, only make the conduct of this witness the more flagrant. We are not yet 
 done with her.
 
 67 
 
 copy, as a barber's shop was a good place to read. Witness did not 
 purchase the work, but he bought a copy of the *' Address to the 
 Addressers," and kept it a day or two, but this was not by Mr. 
 Muir's advice. Remembers an old man from the country coming to 
 Mr. Muir, when he was dressing him, and Mr. Muir told witness 
 that the old man was a great Reformer, on which the old man replied, 
 that Mr. Muir was only taunting him. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Muir. Witness has heard Mr. Muir say, 
 that he would maintain the Constitution ; that he wished for peace 1 , 
 good order, and morals among the people never heard him say any 
 thing against the King : Has seen Mr. Muir's library in the country, 
 which is a large room open to all the family. 
 
 After this witness was examined, the Lord Advocate informed the 
 Court that he had just received a note from Mr. Dunn, Minister of 
 Kirkintilloch, (cited as a witness) respecting Mr. Muir, who was com- 
 mitted to prison for refusing to take the oath : The note intimated that 
 Mr. Muir was a parishioner of Mr. Dunn's, and that if the latter 
 were allowed to converse with him, he might be able to remove his 
 objection to taking the oath : After some dissussion, Mr. Dunn was 
 sent to converse with the prisoner in presence of one of the officers of 
 Court, and Mr. Dunn* was ordered to confine himself solely to the 
 removing of Muir's scruples, and not to say any thing on the subject 
 of the trial. 
 
 John Muir, hat manufacturer in Glasgow, knew Mr. James 
 Muir's father : Saw Mr. Muir at his house in September last : Mr. 
 Muir and witness had a conversation about Mr. Paine's book : Wit- 
 ness asked Mr. Muir as a favour to get it for him, when Mr. Muir 
 said, he had it not, but would send for it : A servant girl was ac- 
 cordingly sent for the book, and she purchased it at Brash and Reid's, 
 booksellers in Glasgow : Witness took home the book with him and 
 read it. 
 
 John Barclay, of Calder,' was acquainted with Mr. Muir : Con- 
 versed with him about Paine's work, because witness saw it adver- 
 tised in the papers : Mr. Muir said he might buy it, but added " it is 
 not a book for us :" Witness was an elder in the parish of Calder, and 
 voted on the same side with Mr. Muir in the election of a minister : 
 In consequence of this, witness was frequently with Mr. Muir, and 
 in his library, from which witness borrowed books : Had many con- 
 
 * This gentleman got over the finger ends by the Lords of Justiciary. lie had 
 preached a Sermon before the Synod, and the Reformers thought it so liberal and 
 excellent, that they sent Mr. Dunn their written vote of thanks for it. This 
 was quite enough to stamp the good man as a radical. His house was searched 
 for " seditious papers." He took alarm and threw the vote of thanks in the fire. 
 He candidly told the fact. But what was the consequence? The Lord Advo- 
 cate presented a Petition and Complaint against him to the Lords of Justiciary. 
 He threw himself "on the clemency of the Court." " Their Lordships after de- 
 livering their opinions on the criminality of the act in which they were unani- 
 mous, observed that if Mr. Uunn had been served with an indictment, (instead of 
 a Petition and Complaint,) and been found guilty, the Court must have inflicted 
 the highest arbitrary punishment. But their Lordships were pleased at being 
 relieved from going so great a length. They therefore ordained him to be imprisoned 
 in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh for three months ! ! /" Vide Etlin. Advertiser, 1793.
 
 68 
 
 versations with Mr. Muir, heard him say that the Constitution was 
 an excellent one, and the best in the world : Heard Mr. Muir praise 
 the King, and always heard him speak of order, regularity, and obe- 
 dience to the ruling powers. 
 
 James Campbell, W. S. was present at a meeting of the Convention : 
 Called there on his way home from the Parliament House : Mr. Muir 
 came to the meeting soon after, and read a paper, being the address 
 from the Society of United Irishmen : Colonel Dalrymple opposed 
 the paper being read, and talked of taking a protest : After Mr. Muir 
 read it he said nothing more, but before he read it he spoke of answer- 
 ing it : Does not know how the paper came there. -Interrogated 
 whether the purport of Mr. Muir's speeches approved or not of this 
 paper ? Witness answered, that he knows nothing more than that he 
 proposed its being read and answered : It was assigned as a reason 
 for not receiving the address, that they had no connexion with it : 
 Mr. Muir thought there was no impropriety in receiving and answering 
 the address, and said be would take the burden on his own shoulders. 
 James Denholm, Writer, Edinburgh, was at the Convention in 
 December : Pannel was there : Heard him read the Irish address : 
 Objections were made : Mr. Muir answered that he saw no harm in 
 it, and moved that an answer should be sent to it, though witness 
 thinks it was carried that an answer should not be sent. 
 
 Cross-examined. Never heard Mr. Muir say any thing unconsti- 
 tutional : The object of the Association was to get a Reform in Par- 
 liament. 
 
 Mr. Robert Forsyth, Advocate : * Witness was a member of the 
 Convention of Delegates of the Friends of the People, who met in 
 December last : Was present when Mr. Muir read the Irish address : 
 Recollects that objections were made to the reading of it : Some 
 members objected to the legality of the paper : Witness objected to it 
 on the ground that it was " not expedient to answer it :" There were 
 some exceptionable passages in it. In one place it said something 
 about an inviolable Constitution being tyranny : Witness thought they 
 should have nothing to do with it : At same time, witness did not 
 think it a seditious paper ; only that it contained some expressions too 
 strong : Mr. Muir defended the paper, and proposed that it should lie 
 on the table and be answered. 
 
 Cross-examined Witness remembered the Convention coming to 
 a resolution of adhering to the genuine principles of the Constitution : 
 The object of the Convention was to obtain a Reform in Parliament : 
 Was not present when a resolution was entered into about sedition, 
 and for expunging such members as behaved riotously : Mr. Muir 
 proposed that a suitable answer should be sent to the Irish address : 
 Never heard him advise the people to sedition, tumult, or riot, and 
 never heard him make any speeches that had that tendency. 
 
 * This gentleman has surely changed his early political principles, for we observe 
 his name at the late anfi-reforni petition in Edinburgh ! Vide Scotsman news- 
 paper of March, 1631.
 
 69 
 
 William Muir. The Rev. Mr. Dunn having succeeded in remov- 
 ing the scruples of this individual, he returned to Court, and took the 
 oath as a witness. He then stated that he was present at a meeting 
 in the house of W. Wallace in Kirkintilloch with Mr. Muir : Henry 
 Freeland and Wallace were there : They had a copy of Paine's works 
 at this meeting, which was taken out of Mr. Muir's great-coat pocket : 
 Does not know whether Mr. Muir desired it to be taken out of his 
 pocket : Does not recollect what was said about the book : Knows 
 that Paine's book says that the people's will is the sovereign will : 
 Cannot say that the pannel said so : Witness got the loan of 1 1 Nos. 
 of the Patriot, and Political Progress, from Mr. Muir, at Huntershill : 
 Witness mentioned that he was in a Reading Society, and Mr. Muir 
 bade him shew the pamphlets to the Society : Heard pannel speak 
 something about the inequality of the representation, and mentioned 
 Old Sarum. 
 
 Henry Davidson, Sheriff-Substitute of the county of Edinburgh,* 
 was called to prove the declarations emitted by Mr. Muir before the 
 Sheriff, and the papers found upon him when apprehended at Stranraer. 
 Mr. Muir, however, in order to save time and trouble, offered to admit 
 them under condition that none of them should be used as evidence 
 of criminality, seeing there was not a single article in the indict- 
 ment which alleged that these papers were even of a culpable 
 " tendency." 
 
 The Lord Advocate insisted that he was entitled to bring forward 
 every circumstance which might tend to criminate the pannel ; although 
 these circumstances should only be collateral, and not in direct issue. 
 
 The Clerk of Court was about to read the declaration, letters, &c. 
 inserted in the Appendix, when 
 
 Mr. Muir stated, that before the letters were read he had an objec- 
 tion to state, though he believed he would state it in vain, for however 
 just any objection made by him might be, it was sure to be -over-ruled ; 
 but every mind tinctured with humanity would shrink at the wanton 
 disclosure of the anxiety and grief of a private family for the purpose 
 of indulging an idle curiosity.-f- 
 
 The Lord Advocate disclaimed any intention of indulging hi idle 
 curiosity, but insisted that the letters should be read, as they would 
 go to shew that the pannel was conscious of his guilt. 
 
 Mr. Muir I am convinced of the reverse. I now, therefore, join 
 issue with the prosecutor, and consent to these letters being read. 
 There was nothing in them which he wished to conceal on his own 
 account. 
 
 After the declaration and letters, &c. had been read, the Lord Ad- 
 vocate declared the proof finished on the part of the Crown. 
 
 Mr. Muir proceeded to adduce the following evidence in support of 
 his defence. 
 
 * Afterwards appointed Sheriff Clerk, county of Iladdington. 
 t Mr. Muir obviously referred to letters he had received from his father aud 
 mother.
 
 70 
 
 William Skirving, of Strathruddie, Secretary to the British Con- 
 vention. Witness knows that it was considered necessary that Mr. 
 Muir should attend a meeting of the Friends of the People, held in 
 London in January last. Witness received a letter from Mr. Muir, 
 mentioning that he had appeared in the Society at London, of which 
 Mr. Grey* is a member, and giving an account of what had been 
 done there. Witness cannot at present find the letter, owing to some 
 late circumstances which occurred in his family ; but, according to the 
 best of his recollection, it also stated, that Mr. Muir was advised by 
 some friends to go to France, as he might have some influence with 
 the leading people there, in mitigating the fate of the King. While 
 Mr. Muir was at Paris, witness received a letter from him, giving an 
 account of the execution ; and Mr. Muir stated, that he would return 
 to Scotland as soon as his friends here thought his presence necessary. 
 Witness has frequently been with Mr. Muir in private, and often 
 heard him speak in public in the Societies : Never heard him speak 
 against the Constitution : The general tenour of Mr. Muir's address 
 to the people in the Societies was, to impress on their minds the 
 necessity of good order : Never heard Mr. Muir speak against the 
 monarchial part of our Constitution. Witness has been in his Com- 
 pany in his most unguarded moments : Remembers a private conver- 
 sation with Mr. Muir, in which he disapproved of many of the 
 principles in Paine's book, and both agreed that many of them were 
 impracticable. Interrogated by the Lard Advocate, if he was not 
 the person who had designed himself, on a late occasion, Secretary 
 General to the Association of the Friends of the People ? Witness 
 answered, that it was a mere mistake in writing out the petition 
 he was Secretary to the General Association of the Friends of the 
 People. 
 
 James Campbell, W. S. acted as agent for Mr. Muir in the begin- 
 ning of last winter : Received two letters from him from France, 
 which witness produced. These letters were .read by the Clerk of 
 Court. They expressed Mr. Muir's willingness to return home when- 
 ever it should be necessary.t Never heard Mr. Muir attempt to 
 excite, the people to sedition or outrage : He exhorted them to avoid 
 riotous conduct, to behave orderly and peaceably, and to attend to 
 the moral character of those whom they admitted members : Knows 
 that Mr. Muir's opinion of Paine's book was, that it might be danger- 
 ous for people of weak minds. 
 
 John Buchanan, baker, Edinburgh, has often heard Mr. Muir 
 speak in societies in favour of Parliamentary Reform : Heard him 
 recommend morals, peace, and good order, and that all their applica- 
 tions should be directed to Parliament in a constitutional manner. 
 Mr. Muir used to say in conversation, that the Constitution ought 
 to be to them the Polar star ; and they should b?gin reformation by 
 first erecting among themselves the temple of morality : Does not 
 
 * Our present Noble Premier. 
 
 t Vide Letters themselves, Appendix.
 
 71 
 
 remember of hearing him give any opinion on Paine's books : he 
 always wished the people to have their minds informed. 
 
 Captain W. Johnston, Edinburgh, never heard Mr. Muir harangue 
 the people to excite sedition : Has heard him speak at several public 
 meetings : Knows that the principles of Mr. Muir were for supporting 
 the Constitution, and all the other principles held by him grew out 
 of this one. While Mr. Muir was in France, witness received one 
 or two letters from him on general subjects, in which Mr. Muir also 
 mentioned his intention of returning home. 
 
 Maurice Thomson, starchmaker, Edinburgh, once heard Mr. 
 Muir, in a Society of the Friends of the People, deliver a speech about 
 Reform : He recommended that their measures should be moderate 
 and constitutional. 
 
 Charles Sailer, brewer in Edinburgh, has heard Mr. Muir speak 
 in Societies three or four times : He exhorted them to Constitutional 
 measures, peace, and good order ; and declared, that if ever they did 
 any thing unconstitutional, he would be the first man to oppose them. 
 
 Peter Wood, teacher, Edinburgh, has heard the pannel speak in 
 Societies, and impress upon them the necessity of petitioning the 
 House of Commons: Never heard him speak against the King or 
 House of Lords : Never saw him distribute any books or pamphlets : 
 Heard him say, that no members should be admitted into the Society 
 who were inclined to faction. 
 
 David Dale, merchant, Glasgow, was present with Mr. Muir at 
 meetings of the Friends of the People, in the Star Inn, Glasgow : 
 Recollects a motion was made recommending political books, which 
 Mr. Muir opposed, and said, that no political books should be recom- 
 mended, as most of them partook too much of party spirit, and that 
 knowledge could only be acquired by general reading: Advised the 
 people to inform themselves on both sides of the question : He also 
 said, that it was only by calm and constitutional means that the people 
 could gain their ends, and that they had no other mode of obtaining 
 it than by petitioning Parliament : Never heard him say any thing 
 which had a tendency to excite sedition : He always advised the 
 people to be quiet and orderly : Never knew of his distributing books, 
 or recommending Paine's works : He advised the Society to expel any 
 member who behaved seditiously or disorderly, and declared, that he 
 would absent himself if unconstitutional measures were adopted. 
 
 Cross-examined by Lord Advocate, and asked if he recollected 
 when Mr. Muir was first apprehended ? Witness answered, he could 
 not tell precisely. Interrogated if he thought it was in the month of 
 January, or in any of the succeeding months ? Witness answered, 
 that he could not be positive it might be about five or six months ago. 
 
 Lord Advocate. " You have a very short memory, Mr. Dale ?" 
 Witness, " I have, my Lord." 
 
 William Riddel, baker, Glasgow, was present at several meetings 
 in Glasgow with Mr. Muir : Never heard him recommend any books 
 or pamphlets and never saw any disorder in the meetings of the 
 Friends of the People.
 
 72 
 
 William Ileid, bookseller, Glasgow, is a partner of the firiu of 
 Brash and Iteid, booksellers, Glasgow : Had au accidental conversation 
 with Mr. Muir, and witness asked his opinion respecting the propriety 
 of selling Paine's Rights of Man : Mr. Muir dissuaded witness from 
 selling it, and said, " it was an improper book, and dangerous to 
 weak minds." 
 
 Cross-examined by Lord Advocate. Mr. Muir gave witness this 
 advice a few days before the Sheriff came to take precognition con- 
 cerning the book. 
 
 George Waddel, manufacturer in Glasgow, was at a meeting of 
 the Friends of the People, in Glasgow, when a motion was made, 
 recommending political books. Colonel M'Leod and Mr. Muir, who 
 were present, opposed the motion, and said, that every political book 
 contained something good and something bad : Never heard Mr. 
 Muir recommend any other books than Blackstone's Commentaries on 
 the Laws of England, and Erskine's Institutes of the Laws of Scot- 
 land. Mr. Muir continually advised moderate but firm measures, and 
 said he would glory in having the table of the House of Commons 
 covered with Petitions in favour of Reform : It was proposed by 
 some members to address the French Convention on the success of 
 the Revolution, but Mr. Muir opposed it. 
 
 John Russell, merchant, Glasgow, sworn, and the usual question 
 being put, " If any person had instructed him what to say ?" He 
 answered, none ; except to tell the truth. Being asked by the Court 
 who instructed him so, he replied he could point out no person in 
 particular, but that it was the general advice of all to whom he spoke. 
 He was required to produce his summons as a witness, from which it 
 appeared that he had only received it four days before the trial, and 
 he was told by the Court that any person who spoke to him must 
 have done so in the interval of these four days. And, therefore, that 
 it was impossible he could forget all their names. The witness 
 replied, that the general instruction to speak the truth was so common, 
 that he could not remember at present any particular person who 
 bad given it. 
 
 The Lord Advocate moved that the witness should be committed 
 to prison for " prevarication on oath !" 
 
 Mr. Muir rose and attempted to speak in behalf of the witness, but 
 he was interrupted by the Court, who commanded him to sit down, 
 as he had no right to interfere in the business. 
 
 Lord Henderland gave his opinion. Every appearance, said his 
 Lordship, was against the witness, who wished to conceal the truth. 
 He merited punishment, and should be committed to prison. 
 
 The rest of the Judges concurred with Lord Henderland ; and Mr. 
 Russel was committed to prison for three weeks as guilty of conceal- 
 ing the truth on oath ! ! * 
 
 John Brock, manufacturer, Glasgow, attended a meeting of the 
 Friends of the People in the Star Inn, Glasgow, where he heard Mr. 
 
 * See letter of explanation from Mr. Russel, Appendix.
 
 73 
 
 Muir recommending good order and adherence to the Constitution. 
 Mr. Muir declared, that if the people became riotous, he would leave 
 them that moment : Has heard Mr. Muir speak of books of the law : 
 Cannot remember any in particular, although he thinks he referred to 
 the works of the great John Locke. 
 
 Wm. Clydesdale, cabinet-maker, Glasgow : Witness never joined 
 any Society of the Friends of the People, but is a member of a So- 
 ciety in Glasgow for a Reform of the Boroughs. In December last, 
 Mr. Muir visited that Society, and said that the Borough Reformers 
 had made great exertions. He recommended to them perseverance, 
 firmness, and peaceable measures reprobated the idea of equality 
 and said that the division of property was chimerical, and could never 
 take place. 
 
 George Bell, manufacturer, Glasgow : Has heard Mr. Muir speak in 
 the Society of the Friends of the People at Glasgow, and declare that 
 no members should be admitted into the Society but such as acknow- 
 ledged the King, Lords, and Commons : Never heard him speak 
 against the Constitution: He" only recommended such books in general 
 as would inform their minds, and render them better members of 
 society. 
 
 Daniel M' Arthur, master of the Grammar School, Glasgow, remem- 
 bers to have had a conversation with Mr. Muir in the Coffee-room, at 
 Glasgow, in September or October last : Saw Mr. Muir and another 
 gentleman walking together. The gentleman having gone away, Mr. 
 Muir came up to witness, and said that the person with whom he had 
 been, was Chairman of the Society of the Friends of the People in 
 Edinburgh. Witness said to Mr. Muir, " Do you not think this is a 
 wrong time to insist for Reform in Parliament ?" Mr. Muir answered, 
 that he thought it a proper time, as the country enjoyed the blessings 
 of peace, and that there was no comparison betwixt this country and 
 France that, in France, they had brought about a Revolution, but 
 we wanted only a Reform. 
 
 James M l Gibbon, Kincaid Bleachfield, was a member of the Re- 
 form Society of Campsie : Has seen Mr. Muir there : Never heard him 
 recommend any books, or speak against King, Lords, or Commons. 
 
 Robert Hendrie, Kincaid, gave evidence to the same effect. 
 
 The Lord Advocate said it was unnecessary for Mr. Muir to bring 
 so many witnesses to prove the same thing. 
 
 Mr. Muir replied, that he intended to bring witnesses from every 
 part of the country where he had attended meetings for Reform, that 
 he might clearly prove his innocency : He had only a few more wit- 
 nesses to adduce. 
 
 Wm. Orr, manufacturer, Paisley, stated, that Mr. Muir and Colonel 
 Dalrymple came to Paisley, and with witness visited and addressed 
 the different Societies of the Friends of the People there. Mr. Muir, 
 in his speeches, inculcated a firm attachment to the King and Consti- 
 tution : He recommended peace and regularity, and reprobated riot 
 and sedition : He also exhorted the people to be steady, and to pursue 
 their object by all legal means. After having gone through the difr
 
 74 
 
 ferent Societies, Mr. Muir, Colonel Dalrymple, and witness, went to 
 Sinclair's Inn, Paisley ; and, in the course of private conversation, he 
 heard Mr. Muir say nothing against the King and Constitution, but 
 heard him say that the King was the best of Princes. 
 
 James Craig, manufacturer, Paisley, saw Mr. Muir in a Society at 
 Paisley : Heard him say that the Constitution was a good one, and 
 that the King was the friend and father of his people. 
 
 James Richardson, merchant, Glasgow, is a member of the same 
 Society of the Friends of the People in London, of which Mr. Grey is 
 a member : Witness is not a member of any Society of the Friends of 
 the People in Scotland : was present at a meeting of the Friends of 
 the People in Glasgow, when he heard Mr. Muir exhort them to keep 
 by the Constitution, and that if any of the members were against it, 
 they should be expelled. Mr. Muir, in a very masterly manner, ex- 
 posed the absurd idea of liberty and equality, as implying a division of 
 property, and said that such a system was totally impracticable. 
 
 Mr. Muir now stated that he had finished his proof in exculpation : 
 that it was in his power to adduce many more witnesses, but that he 
 deemed it totally unnecessary. 
 
 The Lord Advocate rose and addressed the Jury nearly as follows : 
 
 Gentlemen, 1 now require your most serious consideration of what 
 has passed. The pannel at the bar is the man, as I shall afterward 
 show you, that has been sowing the seeds of discontent and sedition 
 under the specious pretext of reform. He has appeared here before 
 you, after having been fugitated in this country, and now by your ver- 
 dict, from which there is no appeal, either his guilt must be fixed or 
 extinguished. Gentlemen, This is the moment which I have long 
 and anxiously looked for ; and I declare, that in the range of my offi- 
 cial capacity, among the persons whom I have brought to this bar, if 
 there has been any one whose actions particularly pointed him out for 
 prosecution, whose conduct appeared the most criminal, who has 
 betrayed the greatest appearance of guilt, this is the man. 
 
 Gentlemen, We all know the pernicious effects of the many in- 
 stances of seditious writings and practices which have lately appeared 
 in this country ; and all those persons who have had the courage to 
 come and stand a trial at this bar, have met with the same fate they 
 have all been found guilty. And I trust, that as the evidence has 
 clearly unfolded the diabolical and mischievous conduct of this person, 
 that he will receive a similar verdict. 
 
 Gentlemen, I could not have conceived that a man, who lias re- 
 ceived a liberal education who has practised as an advocate at this 
 Bar, should be found, on any occasion, among ignorant villagers, and 
 low manufacturers,* purposely to sow sedition among them. 
 
 The charge against the pannel divides itself into three distinct heads, 
 which, however, all centre in one general charge of exciting sedition. 
 
 1st. That he circulated Paine's Rights of Man, to speak of which I 
 
 * What a libel on the nation ! by a man, too, whose family have sucked so 
 many thousands of the public money !
 
 7-5 
 
 think it unnecessary, after he himself considered this book " too dan- 
 gerous to weak minds." Yet he has wilfully circulated this book in 
 such a manner, as proves that his intention was to overturn our happy 
 Constitution. 
 
 2dly. He has always been found, as I have stated, making seditious 
 speeches and harangues among knots of ignorant labourers, and herds 
 of poor manufacturers, whom, I am entitled to say, had it not been for 
 him, would have remained peaceable and contented, and never thought 
 of that incendiary Paine, nor of forming meetings, till he, like the 
 demon of sedition, stirred them up by forming clubs. The very at- 
 tempt was the same which, in another country, has produced so much 
 anarchy and confusion, and which no government could allow. 
 
 3dly. He was in a meeting, calling themselves a Convention of 
 Delegates for obtaining Parliamentary Reform. Gentlemen, We all 
 remember the transactions of last winter. It was then that sedition 
 raised its hydra head, but which the spirit of this country crushed, 
 and since that day has held in utter detestation. It was then that 
 good men felt and trembled, and though some late circumstances may 
 have given cause to suspect that discord is still endeavoured to be 
 excited, I have not a doubt that you will by your verdict this day, 
 show that you still entertain the same abhorrence of these practices. 
 There, in that Convention I shall call it by no other name he, al- 
 most alone, was found the supporter and defender of a paper a paper 
 penned by some infamous wretches, who have, like himself, fled from 
 the punishment that awaited them which came from a Society styling 
 themselves United Irishmen,* and which, even in that convention, was 
 considered dangerous. Yet this person was the ringleader, who in- 
 sisted that it should be received and answered. 
 
 These three heads resolve all into one charge that of exciting dis- 
 content, nay almost rebellion, against the Government ; that most 
 dangerous kind of sedition, which, according to Judge Blackstone, is 
 next to high treason. 
 
 Gentlemen, In one tln'ng I agree with the person at the bar, that 
 this trial is of consequence to posterity. I grant that it is ; but whe- 
 ther as it strikes him, you are this day to judge. It has been my 
 wish to obtain, in this case, the verdict of such a respectable Jury as I 
 now see. Gentlemen, You are to determine if sedition be a crime 
 
 * This tirade was levelled at Mr. Hamilton Rowan, a gentleman to whom WB 
 have already referred, and who might well stand a comparison with the Lord 
 Advocate Dundas, either in regard to birth or fortune. Mr. Hamilton Rowan, 
 on hearing that the above language was applied to him, instantly c.amc over from 
 Ireland with his friend the Honourable Simon Butler, brother, we believe, of the 
 Earl of Kilkenny, and demanded an explanation or apology from the Lord Advo- 
 cate. But his Lordship would not come to the scratch, whereupon Mr. Hamilton 
 Rowr.n posted him in the following terms: " The Lord Advocate of Scotland, 
 Robert Dundas, having asserted on the trial of Thomas Muir, Esq., that an Ad- 
 dress from the United Irishmen of Dublin to the Delegates for Reform in Scot- 
 land, to which my name was affixed as Secretary, was penned by those infamous 
 wretches, who, like himself, have tied from the punishment that awaited him ; 
 and an explanation having been avoided, under the pretext of official duty, I find 
 it now necessary to declare that such assertion of the Lord Advocate is A FALSE- 
 HOOD ! ! (Signed) A. H. ROWAN. 
 
 Dec. 17, 1793."
 
 76 
 
 of such a horrid nature as I represent it ? I bring forward the arm of 
 power to crush it, and which will be either invigorated or palsied by 
 the verdict which you are to give. You will consider the conduct of 
 the pannel, and then say whether it is such a conduct as in your 
 minds ought to be passed over. 
 
 Gentlemen, As the charge is of three kinds, the witnesses are 
 also of three kinds : and if ever there was a respectable set of wit- 
 nesses, whose evidence stands on the basis of truth, they are to be 
 seen here : and in place of being contradicted by his witnesses, they 
 are completely corroborated by them. 
 
 Gentlemen, As to the charge of seditious speeches, we find him 
 in different parts of the country exciting in the people a spirit of dis- 
 affection to the lawful Government. There has he been recommending 
 books to enlighten their minds, a measure in which, however, he has 
 been very unsuccessful, if we may take Weddel, the learned vice- 
 president of the Kirkintilloch Society, as an example of its effects. 
 
 The evidence I chiefly rest upon here is Johnstone's, and no evi- 
 dence can be more distinct, connected, and clear. He and Freeland 
 both agree, that the pannel spoke of the success of the French arms. 
 What could be his motive for discoursing on this subject to such low, 
 ignorant, and illiterate people ? Why talk to them of the burden of 
 taxes, if he did not mean to light up the flame of discontent in the 
 country ? Gentlemen, We may hope to live to see these burdens- 
 lightened, but you will not allow that person to proceed in his mode 
 of doing it. The lessening of taxes, and payment of the national 
 debt, are subjects which always engage the attention of the lower 
 ranks of men, and you will judge the propriety of haranguing them 
 on such popular topics. He told them, that if they were more equally 
 represented, they would not be so heavily taxed, and that the bur- 
 den of taxes prevented them from bringing their goods to market upon 
 equal terms with the people of France. Could any measure be de- 
 vised more calculated to produce discontent and sedition than this ? 
 Had such societies existed before he came among them, the case 
 would have been somewhat different ; but he appears everywhere the 
 ringleader. We find him with them on the Tuesday preceding the 
 meeting, and conversing about it. He comes to the meeting, ha- 
 rangues them, and then adjourns with a select party to Wallace's. 
 Can you desire any stronger proof of his being the main instrument 
 and promoter of these dangerous meetings, than the clear, convincing, 
 and connected evidence, I have laid before you ? 
 
 Gentlemen, The circulating seditious books is the next charge I 
 shall speak to. The passages selected from them, you will see in the 
 indictment. The witness Freeland 13 again an evidence here. I must 
 observe to you, that it appears extremely doubtful whether he told all 
 that he knew. You might have seen by his face that he prevaricated ; 
 and when closely questioned, the sweat broke upon him. He says 
 he got Paine's book out of Muir's pocket. This is a mode of circu- 
 lating a book which a man of his disposition would very naturally 
 adopt. He did not go openly, but privately. You will judge of him
 
 77 
 
 when you have compared his actions with his professions. Indeed 
 every evidence goes to prove, that this wretch is tainted with sedition 
 from head to foot, and more unworthy of the protection of the law 
 than the meanest villain. 
 
 The next witness I shall speak of is Anne Fisher ; and though the 
 pannel, by an expression which he made use of, has endeavoured to 
 prejudice you against her, I dare say, Gentlemen, you will agree with 
 me, that her evidence is correct, well founded, stands on the basis of 
 truth, and is corroborated by the evidence of others.* She was repeat- 
 edly sent to purchase Paine's book, and she mentions the persons for 
 whom she bought it. She was sent from her master's house, the 
 pannel's father, who I am informed is a respectable citizen ; but I do 
 not mean to attach any criminality to him. That person at the bar 
 has the miserable reflection of having himself imbittered the lives of 
 his unfortunate parents. There in his father's shop, did he harangue 
 all the poor ignorant country people, and persuaded them to lay out 
 their miserable sixpence to purchase the Rights of Man. There was 
 he always found in the back shop reading seditious publications. In 
 that den of sedition he sat like a spider spinning his filthy web to 
 entrap the unwary. The witness names the persons for whom she 
 purchased Paine's book. One of those persons she condescends upon, 
 is the uncle of that unfortunate wretch at the bar. But I decline 
 bringing the uncle as an evidence against the nephew. 
 
 Wilson likewise corroborates the evidence of Anne Fisher, when he 
 depones, that he was advised to keep a copy of Paine's book in his 
 shop, because " it would enlighten his customers, for that it refuted 
 Mr. Burke entirely." What! he confuted Mr. Burke! a man whose 
 wonderful talents astonishing genius, and sublime efforts, have lately 
 been so nobly exerted in the defence of our glorious Constitution I 
 Gentlemen, you have now only to read the passages quoted from that 
 book in the indictment, and if you are loyal to your king if you love 
 your country, and are desirous to preserve it, you will return a verdict 
 against this man, who has dared to recommend that wretched outcast 
 and his writings works which I never read till my official situation 
 obliged me to it. But I need not tell you my opinion of this book, since 
 the whole country holds it in detestation. (Here the Lord Advocate 
 read some passages from the indictment.) 
 
 Now, Gentlemen, when he approves of sentiments such as these, 
 what signifies all his evidence of attachment to the King and Consti- 
 tution ? We are told, indeed, by one of his witnesses, that be advised 
 him not to sell Paine's book ; but when closely questioned upon his 
 cross-examination, it unfortunately turns out that this was from a sense 
 of danger, not from real sentiment it happened, you will remember, 
 Gentlemen, about the time that the Sheriff came to inquire about this 
 book. 
 
 Gentlemen, it even appears from the evidence of Fisher, that the 
 
 * This witness, so much lauded by the Court and Prosecutor, became a common 
 strumpet, and died like the vilest of the vile.
 
 78 
 
 poor organist could not pass the door of this demon of mischief, lut 
 he must be stopped to play Ca Ira-*-*, tune which is made use of in 
 that unhappy country France, as a signal for blood and carnage. It 
 may be said that the evidence of this girl is somewhat contradicted by 
 that of the pannel's friend old Barclay the elder. But you will recol- 
 lect the salvo* that this witness chose to introduce when be took the 
 oath that did not look well. 
 
 I am now advanced to the third charge of the indictment, which 
 relates to the pannel's proceedings in that " Convention of Delegates," 
 as they styled themselves. It is clearly proved that in that place, 
 he read, approved of, and defended the Irish Address. But, Gentle- 
 men, you will not approve of such a paper, nor disregard such a con- 
 vincing proof of his guilt nor will you, were his abilities ever so 
 great, or his views ever so comprehensive, permit that person to' set 
 up his daring and seditious opinions, in opposition to the excellent 
 Government of this country. Indeed, his actions in some instances 
 appear tinctured with madness and were it not that we find him every 
 where a determined enemy and ringleader in a horrid scheme of sedi- 
 tion against our happy Constitution, it would be impossible to tell 
 whether his conduct was marked more with wickedness or insanity. 
 
 Gentlemen, Having finished my remarks upon the evidence an 
 evidence which I am convinced must appear to you incontestible, there 
 remains only two topics on which I must beg to make a few observa- 
 tions. The pannel has sakl that he left this country on business of 
 importance that he was unwillingly detained in France and that he 
 always wished to come forward to this trial. But we shall soon see 
 how this corresponds with facts. I should have made no objection to 
 his proving this. It would have argued some degree of honour. But 
 these false assertions are all clearly refuted, and I will make it appear 
 that \\ejled from this country under the impression of guilt and now 
 he is returned to be again the past of Scotland, with the same diabo- 
 lical intention as before. But, Gentlemen, what was the reason of his 
 going to France? I was never more surprised at any thing than the 
 evidence of Skirving, when he told us that the pannel was sent to 
 France by persons styling themselves the Friends of the People, because 
 it was believed he might have influence in saving the life of the King of 
 France.t Did the witness know did he recollect that he was at that 
 time accusing the pannel of high treason ? But why were these people 
 so much interested in averting this event ? The witness has informed 
 us. It was thought such an event would hurt their common cause. 
 What cause ? The design of overthrowing the Government of this 
 country. There then, he stands an ambassador from a Society in this 
 country to France, a circumstance which greatly heightens his guilt. 
 
 Gentlemen, I have postponed this trial much longer than I ought 
 to have done, because I was willing to give the pannel every opportu- 
 
 * After uttering the words of the oath, "to tell the truth o far as you know," 
 the witness properly added, " and can recollect." This was the " salvo" to which 
 the Lord Advocate alluded. 
 
 f- See explanation of this in a letter of Skirving, Appendix.
 
 79 
 
 nity of returning, and I inserted the adjournment in the public papers 
 in the expectation that it might find him while roaming through the 
 world. Observe the shipmaster's receipt it is dated the 16th of 
 May what became of him all the time from that date, till the 31st 
 of July, when be was apprehended ? Nobody was informed of his 
 intention of returning. How unlucky that not one solitary letter 
 was wafted by the winds, or impelled by the waves, to his friends 
 here, and inserted in the Edinburgh Gazetteer, or Caledonian Mer- 
 cury, to give notice of what he says was his earnest wish ; but the 
 very reverse of this was the case. By his father's letter we find him 
 in Ireland, and who knows how he was employed there ? We know 
 nothing of him all this time, except what we may discover from the 
 diploma of the respectable Society of United Irishmen. 
 
 Gentlemen, You may know a man by the company he keeps. 
 Among his papers there is a letter addressed to the Rev. T. Fyshe 
 Palmer ; a man who in a few days is to be tried at Perth. The seal 
 of that letter is remarkable. It is a Cap of Liberty on a Spear, and 
 under it is the motto Ca Ira. You see, Gentlemen, the pannel returns 
 to this country with all the insignia of sedition about him. 
 
 Gentlemen, I beg your attention to a passage which I shall read to 
 you from a celebrated French author. We will see what was his 
 opinion of the British Constitution. (Here the Lord Advocate read 
 a very long quotation from De Lolme on the British Constitution, 
 from the middle of page 554 to the end of the book.) 
 
 Gentlemen, You have heard what a foreigner has said of our 
 glorious Constitution, and you must be sensible how carefully we 
 ought to preserve it. I trust you will view this case in the same 
 light as I do. You will protect your King from the attacks of hia 
 enemies, and you will guard this temple of freedom from all the 
 attempts of the factious. You will not allow it to be violated 
 by that person at the bar ; and you will now, Gentlemen, prevent his 
 attempts in future ; and I conjure you to do justice to your country, 
 and honour to yourselves, by returning such a verdict as shall stop 
 that man in his mad career, who has been sowing sedition in every 
 corner with so liberal a hand. 
 
 Mr. Muir addressed the Jury nearly as follows : 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, I now rise in my own defence. I have 
 long looked forward with joyful expectation to this day. All that 
 malice could devise all that slander could circulate, has been directed 
 against me. Gentlemen, I speak with pride and triumph. After an 
 inquisition, perhaps unexampled in the history of this country, my 
 moral character stands secure and uniuipeached. Upon my public 
 conduct I regarded that inquisition with scorn and in silence. With 
 the paid and anonymous assassins of public reputation with such 
 mean and worthless adversaries, I disdained to enter the lists. I reserved 
 my vindication to this day, when before you, in the face of Scotland, 
 I should manifest my innocency. Gentlemen, I supplicate no favour. 
 I demand justice. You are bound to grant it. I shall not imitate the
 
 80 
 
 example of the Public Prosecutor, who has just finished his pleading. 
 Sounding and unsubstantial declamation is unsuitable for you it is 
 unworthy of me. This is not the time to temporize. The eyes of 
 this country are fixed upon us both. The records of this trial will 
 pass down to posterity. And, Gentlemen, when our ashes shall be 
 scattered by the winds of heaven, the impartial voice of future times 
 will rejudge your verdict. In the meantime, let faction rage let the 
 spirit of party in the present hour proudly domineer the illusion will 
 soon vanish away. In solitude, the power of recollection will assume 
 its. influence and then, Gentlemen, it will be material to you to con- 
 sider whether or not you have acted uprightly, or sinned against your 
 own eternal conscience, in my acquittal, or in my condemnation. Gen- 
 tlemen, there are two circumstances which have been strongly insisted 
 upon by the Public Prosecutor, though they have little or no connex- 
 ion with the general nature of the evidence he has adduced. I shall 
 take some notice of these circumstances here, before I enti>r into a 
 particular vindication of my conduct. Long, indeed, has he harangued 
 upon them, and has exhibited them in every form his imagination 
 could suggest. He maintains, that, after I had been examined by a 
 Magistrate, after an information had been filed against me, I fled from 
 this country, conscious of my guilt ! Gentlemen, 1 admit the fact of 
 my departure. But, in those days, in these circumstances, can it be 
 ascribed only to conscious guilt ? When the whole strength of arbi- 
 trary power is exerted against one individual, would it be commend- 
 able in him to expose himself as a sacrifice, when his sufferings might 
 be of no service to his country, and would only present posterity with 
 an addition to the vast catalogue of the victims of despotism ? If 
 there are only two motives to which you can assign my departure, 
 you are bound in justice to ascribe it to the most charitable. But do 
 the circumstances attending my departure bear any resemblance to a 
 flight ? Did I not publicly announce it the preceding evening in a 
 numerous meeting of citizens ? Did I not cause it to be published in 
 a newspaper? Did 1 affect the garb of concealment? When in 
 London did I remain in obscurity? Did I not appear in a distin- 
 guished Society the Society of the Friends of the People ? And 
 did not that Society afterwards publish a resolution, announcing in 
 its preamble my appearance among them ? 
 
 But why did I go immediately to France ? In Mr. Skirving's evi- 
 dence respecting a letter he received from me before I left London, he 
 has said that I proposed to go to Paris, as it was the advice of some 
 friends I might be of some service in mitigating the fate of the late 
 King of France. The words of Mr. Skirving, " some friends," have 
 been ingeniously represented to be members of that truly respectable 
 Society ; and it is boldly argued that I went as a missionary from that 
 body. Nothing can be more injurious : I am sorry that Mr. Skirving 
 has not been able to produce the letter alluded to * it would have 
 clearly demonstrated the falsehood of the assertion. But Mr. Skirving 
 
 See letter of explanation from Mr. Skirving, Appendix.
 
 81 
 
 never said so 1 No person can or dare say, that I went as a missionary 
 to a foreign power, or even received any delegation either from indi- 
 viduals or from any Society whatever. Building, then, upon this 
 unsubstantial basis of words, never uttered in evidence by Mr. Skirving, 
 I am accused of a species of " high treason," in being a missionary to a 
 foreign power without any legal authority from this country. The 
 charge is equally ridiculous with the misrepresentation on which it is 
 founded Let it, however, be considered as serious, I dare the proof, 
 I challenge the Prosecutor to adduce the smallest vestige of evidence 
 in support of it. 
 
 Gentlemen, I admit I wrote to Mr. Skirving of my intention of 
 going to France nor will I deny the motive. 1 saw in the execution 
 of the late King a specious pretext for plunging the country into a war, 
 and for extending the effusion of human blood to every corner of the 
 world. I may have erred ; I may have acted from enthusiasm ; but 
 it was an enthusiasm in the cause of man. If at the period when it 
 was free for every person to publish their sentiments upon that awful 
 occasion, is it to be imputed to me as a crime that I wished likewise 
 to publish mine? Has not the Prosecutor lamented that disastrous 
 event, and will he not excuse a man who wanted to prevent it ? who 
 with many friends to humanity of every nation, and of every party, in 
 private, and in public, in conversation, and from the press, exerted 
 their abilities to ward it off, because they considered it pregnant 
 with evil to this country, and foresaw that it would introduce years 
 of blood and of sorrow ? 
 
 It is said that my departure from Scotland, and my journey to Paris, 
 are circumstances which afford some presumption of guilt. But, Gen- 
 tlemen, that presumption is now done away, I have returned. 
 
 Gentlemen, The Public Prosecutor has boasted that he delayed the 
 trial to give me an opportunity of returning that he postponed it for 
 some weeks and advertised it in the public papers, which he supposed 
 would find me " roaming in some part of the world." But was he 
 ignorant that hostilities were at that time commencing, and that it was 
 tedious and difficult to procure passports ? Of that difficulty surely 
 every person here is convinced. 
 
 All my private letters which have this day been read, prove my 
 uneasiness on account of the delay, and my anxiety to return. But 
 before I procured any passport, hostilities had commenced between 
 this country and France the flames of war were blazing over Europe. 
 There were only two ways by which I could return home, the first 
 by the way of Hamburgh the second by the longer, but more certain 
 circuit of America. The latter course appeared more safe, and less 
 liable to interruption. I therefore adopted it I left Paris I arrived 
 at Havre de Grace, and found a vessel there bound for New York. 
 The receipt from the master of that vessel for the payment of my 
 passage, which was found in my pocket-book when I was stopped on 
 my landing in Scotland, proves that I had actually taken my passage. 
 This vessel, however, was detained almost three months by taking on 
 board her cargo, and by an embargo, which was at that time laid on all 
 
 F
 
 82 
 
 neutral vessels in the ports of France. In the interval another Ameri- 
 can vessel, the Hope, of Baltimore, arrived, which was to touch at Bel- 
 fast for a part of her cargo before she returned to America. This 
 appeared to me a fortunate circumstance, and I immediately adopted 
 the plan of returning to Scotland by the way of Ireland ; not to sup- 
 plicate favour not to implore protection, but to demand justice. 
 
 After a short passage I was landed in Ireland, but I remained there 
 only three days. I did not conceal my name. I appeared in all the 
 places of public resort to all I announced my situation and inten- 
 tions. But it is said there have been insurrections in that country, 
 and the Prosecutor insinuates that the " demon of sedition," as he 
 calls me, was probably the cause of these insurrections. Gentlemen, 
 I smile at the ridiculous accusation. It might have been easy for me, 
 by the testimony of my friends in Ireland, whom I love and honour, 
 to have proved how I spent every hour of my time. I could have 
 made it appear, that I associated with a few friends who were chiefly 
 engaged in literary pursuits. 
 
 Gentlemen, The Prosecutor has said I came from Ireland to Scot- 
 land in " & private and clandestine manner," and his composition, the 
 Indictment, contains the same injurious assertion. Now, Gentlemen, 
 I am extremely sorry that the respectable Magistrate, Mr. Ross, at 
 Stranraer, is not here. In the list of witnesses adduced against me I 
 saw his name, and the name of Carmichael, the person who first re- 
 cognised me on my landing at Portpatrick, I therefore expected to 
 have found them both inclosed with the witnesses for the Crown ; 
 and I would have adduced them to prove, that so far from concealing 
 myself, I announced myself publicly and without disguise. But the 
 conduct of the Public Prosecutor is uniformlymarked with disingenuity. 
 When he served upon me, in the list of the witnesses for the Crown, 
 the names of Carmichael and Ross, I could not entertain the least 
 doubt but that they were to be adduced. This, however, seems to 
 have been an art to prevent me citing them at my own instance. It 
 has succeeded, and I am now precluded from the benefit of their 
 testimony. But why did not the Prosecutor at least produce the 
 declaration which I made before the Magistrates at Stranraer ? That 
 declaration would have proved, that I did not come into this country 
 in a clandestine manner. And as much invective has been founded 
 upon my coming into Scotland in a clandestine manner, as it is charged 
 as a circumstance of aggravation against me in the Indictment, you 
 will judge of the rectitude of the Prosecutor's conduct in thus declaim- 
 ing upon a fact which he shrinks from proving, and which his artful 
 contrivance prevents me from disproving. 
 
 Gentlemen, You are now, I trust, convinced that no " conscious- 
 ness of guilt " led me from Scotland ; that no improper motive carried 
 me from England to France ; and no deep and secret intention in- 
 duced me to return in disguise to my native country. Gentlemen, I 
 have already stated to you, that the object of that return was to 
 demand justice, to wipe away the imputation of the crime of which 
 I am now charged. And what, I ask, is that crime ? It is SEDITION
 
 83 
 
 a term the most vague and undefined, a term familiar to power 
 familiar to corruption, a term which has been applied in one age to 
 men rejected by society, but whose names were honoured by after 
 times, and upon whose virtues and sufferings, in the succeeding age, 
 the pillar of the Constitution was erected. Gentlemen, the records 
 of history the monuments of former ages the annals of the present 
 period all attest that this crime of sedition is of the most ambiguous 
 complexion. Those who have dared to oppose arbitrary poicer, who 
 have ventured to stem the tide of corruption, or to come forward in 
 the hour of danger, and to save their country, have been branded with 
 this epithet. The term, in fact, is no longer injurious. Experience 
 will make you to connect along with it no prejudices. You will 
 scrutinize the idea ; you will investigate the fact combined with the 
 intention. And, Gentlemen, let us proceed to that investigation. 
 Tell me where the smallest vestige of sedition has appeared ? Has 
 property been invaded ? Has the murderer walked your streets ? Has 
 the blood of the citizens flowed ? O no ! But it is said, although the 
 effects of sedition have not taken place, the attempt was meditated I ! 
 
 Gentlemen, The Prosecutor has talked of the danger the people of 
 this country were in last winter of the deep-laid plots and treason- 
 able conspiracies of the Friends of the People ! And I am the man 
 whom he charges as the author of the whole, whom he represents 
 as similar in malignity to the demon of mischief, and whom he 
 honours with the title of the "pest of Scotland!" Well, then, let it 
 be supposed that an attempt was formed to overthrow the Constitu- 
 tion, to kindle the torch of civil war, and to lead rapine through the 
 land ; where, I ask, has the proof of this design been found ? 
 
 Gentlemen, Every thing has been explored. An inquisition, unknown 
 even in Spain, has been carried on. Every thing transacted within 
 the walls of private families has been industriously inquired into ; and 
 to prove this mighty crime which is to convulse the State which is 
 to tear the Constitution from its basis the principal witnesses are a 
 true and respectable scullion girl, and a hairdresser, who cannot 
 speak to actions but to words! I have addressed numerous 
 Societies the doors were open. We disdained concealment, for 
 our intentions were pure. Could not some ruffian be procured 
 who could at least give a manly testimony to our " atrocious" 
 purposes ? But to adduce a girl, and a hairdresser, the domestics 
 of a private family, to prove a crime which required the co-opera- 
 tion of many thousands of bearded men, while it excites the frown, 
 must likewise call forth the smile of contempt, from the just and 
 the impartial. But let us be candid. Let us advance upon fair 
 and open ground. Let us throw away miserable pretexts. If stand- 
 ing forward for an equal representation of the people in the House of 
 Commons, is the impelling motive of this prosecution, (and I judge it 
 is,) let it be acknowledged. I shall give little trouble. I will plead 
 guilty to the charge. I will save you, Gentlemen of the Jury, the 
 wretched mockery of condemning a man for a trifle, while the principal 
 cause of condemnation cannot be declared, and must be concealed.
 
 Yes, Gentlemen, I plead guilty. I t>ll you that I openly, actively, 
 and sincerely embarked in the cause of a Parliamentary Reform, in the 
 vindication and in the restoration of the Rights of the People. Nor do 1 
 hesitate to unfold to you my motives they are supported by their own 
 intrinsic strength, and they are sanctioned by the great and venerable 
 names of the living and of the dead. Gentlemen, I have boldly con- 
 tended for an equal representation of the people, in what I shall ever 
 call the House of the People, because I consider it to be a measure 
 essentially necessary to the salvation of the State, and to the stability 
 of our boasted Constitution. Gentlemen, I ask in what consists the 
 excellency of that time-tried fabric, cemented by the blood of your 
 fathers, flowing from the field and from the scaffold ? I will tell you : 
 It consists in the JUST BALANCE of the three great impelling powers 
 of King, Lords, and Commons. If one of these powers lose its vigour, 
 the efficacy of the Constitution is proportionably impaired if one of 
 these is absorbed by another, the Constitution is annihilated. Is it 
 not known to you, and acknowledged by all the world, that the popular 
 branch of our Constitution has suffered the ravages of time and ot 
 corruption ? The fact is indisputable. The representation of the 
 people is not what it once was, AND is NOT SUCH, AS I TRUST IN GOD, 
 ONE DAY IT SHALL BE. And, Gentlemen, no enmity to bis country 
 can surely be said to influence the conduct of that man who sounds 
 alarm when the Constitution is in danger who summons all who may 
 be concerned in its reparation, and labours to preserve it, by endea- 
 vouring to restore it, to its original purity. 
 
 Such, Gentlemen, are the motives which have influenced my con- 
 duct. If you find me guilty, you implicate in my condemnation, men, 
 who now enjoy the repose of eternity, and to whose memories a grate- 
 ful posterity has erected statutes. I have been doing what has been 
 done by the first characters of the nation. I shall not at this time 
 repeat all the venerable catalogue. But is any one ignorant of the 
 illustrious LOCKE, whose treatise on Government is written in the 
 irresistible language of reason and of truth, and who supported by 
 philosophy the cause of liberty and of man. Was not he the friend of 
 the British Constitution ? Yet he was an advocate for a Reform in 
 Parliament, for a more equal representation of the people in the House 
 of Commons. Will you, therefore, tear the records of his fame wiH 
 you stigmatise his memory, and brand him with the name of Sedition ? 
 
 Let us rapidly proceed down to modern times. Let us pass 
 over in silence many illustrious names, whose memories, with that of 
 the Constitution, will perish together. Let us come to our own days. 
 Gentlemen, are ye ignorant of BLACKSTONE, the man who first col- 
 lected the laws of his country from the deformed chaos into which 
 they had been thrown, who arranged them with elegancy, and adorned 
 them with every flower which the classic field could produce ? Are 
 not the volumes of this revered Judge in the hands of all ? And has 
 not Blackstone, not with the levity of ill pondered words not in the 
 private hour of relaxation not in the heat of popular debate, but in 
 the calmness and solitude of study maintained the same propositions
 
 85 
 
 which I maintain been guilty of the same sedition of which I am 
 guilty, when he pronounced that the Constitution was imperfect in its 
 popular branch, and that if any alteration was necessary, it was 
 there to be desired. 
 
 But, Gentlemen, I shall not refer to writers who are now no more, 
 and who are beyond the reach of punishment. Vengeance ceases 
 in the grave. There factions and parties cannot rage. But if I 
 have been guilty of a crime, I shall not claim the protection of the 
 dead. I shall not wander among the tombs supplicating the assistance 
 of those who cannot hear me. I have the greatest living characters on 
 ray side men high in rank and power who enjoy the confidence of 
 the King, and are admitted into the bosom of his Counsels. Why, 
 Gentlemen, the Prime Minister of the country, Wm. Pitt, and the 
 Commander-in-Chief of the army, the Duke of Richmond, have both 
 been strenuous advocates of Reform. Are they not then criminal as 
 1 am ? It can never be forgotten, that, in the year 1782, Mr. Pitt 
 was tainted with sedition by proposing a Reform in the House of 
 Commons. Did he not advise the people to form themselves into 
 Societies ? and did he not encourage them by his example, and coun- 
 tenance them with his presence ? Beware, then, how you condemn 
 me ; x for at the same time you must condemn the confidential servant 
 of his Majesty, who was in the year 1782, what I am in the year 
 1793 a Reformer. 
 
 Gentlemen, You will further remember, that, in the year 1 782, the 
 Duke of Richmond was a flaming advocate for the right of Universal 
 Suffrage. He presided in Societies ; and, like Mr. Pitt, advised the 
 formation of such Societies all over the kingdom. Has guilt, then, 
 nothing permanent in its nature does it change with times, and sea- 
 sons, and circumstances ? Shall the conduct which was deemed 
 patriotic in 1782, be condemned as criminal in 1793? 
 
 I have been honoured with the title of the " Pest of Scotland ;" 
 but if similar offences merit similar epithets, the same title must like- 
 wise be bestowed on the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Com- 
 mander of his Majesty's Forces. (Here Mr. Muir turned to the Lord 
 Advocate, and, in a strain of bold and cutting eloquence, exclaimed) 
 And pray, my Lord, what term of super-eminent distinction will you, 
 the Public Prosecutor, the Lord Advocate of Scotland, claim for 
 yourself? You also were, not many months ago, a Reformer. You 
 contended for a more equal representation of the people in the House 
 of Commons. You were one of those men who, for that purpose, 
 lately assembled in this city, in what they called a Convention, and 
 assumed to themselves the title of Delegates from the Counties; and 
 you were then employed in framing a Bill for extending the Elective 
 Franchise ! Why, my Lord, in accusing me, you charge yourself with 
 sedition every charge in your Indictment against me, recoils upon 
 yourself. If it was lawful for you and your friends to meet in Socie- 
 ties and Conventions, for the purpose of obtaining Reform, it cannot 
 surely be illegal in me and my friends to meet, and to act on the same 
 principle.
 
 I shall not, however, Gentlemen, detain you longer on this point ; 
 although my assertions are founded in truth, and jmy reasoning is just, 
 yet the subject is too ridiculous to be dwelt upon in this man's trial. 
 
 Gentlemen, The first charge in the Indictment is, that I was con- 
 cerned iu convening meetings of the people, at which I made seditious 
 speeches and harangues, vilifying the King and Constitution, &c. 
 
 Now, Gentlemen, the first witness adduced in support of this charge 
 is Alexander Johnstone. You will remember the objection I stated 
 to this witness, and which I could have supported by respectable wit- 
 nesses, if I had been allowed. But what does Johnstone prove against 
 me? (Here Mr. Muir, from his notes, read Johnstone's evidence.) 
 The witness says I stated the imperfection of the representation, from 
 Burghs being rotten, and other places having no vote. And do you 
 call this sedition ? The witness swore he heard me say, that if a man 
 threw away 20,000 to procure a seat in Parliament, he surely had 
 some interest in it. And can it be supposed that any man in his 
 senses would give such a sum for a seat in Parliament without having 
 some sinister view? In no proposition of Euclid is the conclusion 
 more demonstrable than the inference which I drew from this undenia- 
 ble fact. It may be said that this has been done from ambition from 
 a man's desire of exercising great talents for the benefit of his country, 
 or of displaying his eloquence to the world ; but have we not seen it 
 done as often by the man who never said a word within the walls of 
 the House besides aye, or no, as well as by the splendid orator ? And 
 have we not seen it practised by the cool and cautious speculator, who 
 never lays out his money without calculating on a profitable return ? 
 Bribery at elections has for a long time been sapping the foundation 
 of liberty, and ruining the morals of the people. The most flagrant 
 instances of its baneful influence stand recorded on the journals of the 
 House of Commons ;* and is it not an evil which the corrupt cannot 
 deny, and which good men have always endeavoured to redress ? 
 The witness depones that I said the Duke of Richmond had got 
 20,000, or 30,000, put into his pocket and what though I said 
 so ? I again say that that was the salutary opiate which calmed and 
 cooled the fever of his brain, and probably saved him the mortification 
 of standing his trial also for the crime of sedition. But, Gentlemen, 
 this has no concern with the question at issue. It is not the Duke 
 of Richmond, but the King himself, that I am accused of vilifying. 
 
 , Allow me, Gentlemen, before I proceed farther, to make one remark. 
 If you do not consider all the circumstances under which such words 
 were spoken, and even the manner in which they were uttered, you 
 may attach to them a meaning which the speaker never intended 
 you may torture them into guilt, or explain them into innocence. 
 
 Gentlemen, With regard to what was said about France is it not 
 notorious that the representation of the people in France is more equal, 
 and the taxes less, than in this countty ? Are incontrovertible truths 
 
 * Just think of the recent case of Liverpool, where upwards of 4"80 : 000 have 
 beeu expended by Messrs. kwart & Dtnnison !
 
 87 
 
 to be construed into a libel ? But who ever heard before that it was 
 unlawful to compare the British Constitution with that of another 
 country ? If the British Constitution is the boast of ages, the pride 
 and glory of the world, can it suffer by any comparison ? No, Gen- 
 tlemen. 
 
 As to Paine's book the witness does not say that I recommended 
 it he says that I did not recommend any particular book, but reading 
 in general and he has not been able to prove one single unconstitu- 
 tional expression. Now, Gentlemen, when I recommended general 
 reading, I advised the people to communicate among themselves the 
 knowledge which they might have possessed, I gave them good advice, 
 and such as I should repeat, were I again in the same situation. And 
 will I be condemned for so doing? Is the time come when the mind 
 must be locked up, and fetters imposed on the understanding ? And 
 are the people to be precluded from that information and knowledge 
 in which others are so materially concerned? Oh, unhappy country ! 
 Miserable people ! the remembrance of former liberties will only make 
 you more wretched. Extinguish, then, if you can, the light of heaven, 
 and let us grope, and search for consolation, if it can be found under 
 the darkness which will soon cover us. But, Gentlemen, the prospect 
 before us is not so dismal. We live and we act under the British 
 Constitution a Constitution which, in its genuine principles, has for 
 ages consecrated freedom. We live, and we remember the glorious 
 Revolution of 1688, which banished despotism, and placed the family 
 of Hanover on the throne. We remember the Bill of Rights nor 
 shall we forget one of its most sacred clauses, which declared, esta- 
 blished, and sanctioned, the inalienable claim of the Citizen to petition 
 Parliament. If, then, you condemn me for advising people to inform 
 themselves, and to diffuse the knowledge obtained by that information 
 to others, and then calmly and deliberately to petition Parliament, you 
 iiot only condemn me, but you trample upon the liberties of the people, 
 and you proscribe the Constitution. 
 
 Gentlemen, The advice I gave, I repeat, I shall always consider to 
 be good advice my motives were pure. I did not enlist myself under 
 the banners of a faction. I combatted neither the Ministry nor the 
 Opposition neither the Inns or the Outs. I fought in the cause of 
 truth and how is that cause to be successful, but by general, com- 
 plete, and impartial information of the different arguments advanced 
 upon either side of the great question of Parliamentary Reform ? 
 
 The witness swears, that I said the Constitution ought to consist of 
 King, Lords, and Commons. Is this vilifying the Monarchy? Is this 
 representing that part of the Government as expensive and cumber- 
 some, as the Indictment accuses me ? Is this " inflaming the minds 
 of the people," and " exciting them to insurrection and rebellion ?" 
 
 The witness further says that the meeting was principally composed 
 of young Weavers, from 18 to 21 years of age. I blush to mention 
 the inference which the Lord Advocate has drawn from this, that 
 people in that situation of life, and of that age, have no right to con- 
 cern themselves in public affairs ! People in that situation ! W T hy,
 
 Gentlemen, instead of sneering at them, it would have been more 
 becoming in the Lord Advocate to have said that they are in the 
 <k situation" of those who compose the great mass of society, who 
 support the Government by their industry, and who fight the battles 
 of their country. And what age ? That period of life when the 
 heart is uncorrupted, when the soil is best prepared to receive the 
 good seed, and when the mind is most susceptible of the impressions 
 of virtue and humanity. Must the members of that Society be held 
 up to derision, because the majority was composed of Weavers and 
 because they might be principally young men ? Must they be cen- 
 sured for interesting themselves in the welfare of that country in which 
 they were to spend the remainder of their days ? And must they not 
 presume to inquire into the nature of that Constitution in the opera- 
 tion of which the happiness of their future lives is so materially con- 
 cerned ? Gentlemen, You will remember that this witness stated that 
 I recommended peace and regularity, that I told them there was no 
 other way of procuring redress, but by an application to Parliament ; 
 that I advised them to receive no immoral characters as members 
 and you will judge how far such advice accords with the criminal 
 charges of the Indictment. 
 
 The next witness is Robert Waddel, Vice-President of the Kirkin- 
 tilloch Society. From his examination there appears no proof of 
 criminality, not the most slight indication of guilt. It is to be 
 observed, that he depones to circumstances which occurred in the 
 same meeting, at which the former witness was present ; they, how- 
 ever, do not agree respecting my general conduct. I am accused of 
 vilifying the King and Constitution ; and what does this witness 
 say? that I made a speech, in which I advised regularity in their 
 proceedings, and that they ought to proceed in a constitutional man- 
 ner, as the law now is, by King, Lords, and Commons. This indict- 
 ment alleges, that I reprobated the monarchial branch of the Consti- 
 tution. But the witness swears that I said nothing about the expense 
 of the King, nor the comparative expense of the French Constitution, 
 nor the success of their arms. Gentlemen, I speak with candour : it 
 is not in my remembrance that I spoke concerning the comparative 
 excellency of the French and British Constituions. You hear one 
 witness declaring that I merely compared them together ; you hear 
 this witness declare, that I made no mention of either Constitution. 
 Both of them may have spoken truth, according to the impression on 
 their minds ; but they shew you the danger of trusting to the memory 
 of witnesses, when it relates to words spoken in the warmth of a 
 public discussibn, and attempted to be recollected after the lapse of 
 many months. But give whatsoever degree of strength you choose 
 to Johnston's evidence, draw from the comparison which you may 
 assume, I instituted, between the French and British Constitution, I 
 eay, draw from it an inference as highly criminal as you possibly can, 
 still the testimony of that man is completely overthrown by this wit- 
 ness. Mr. Waddel has stated to you what passed after the meeting 
 was over, in private company, in the unguarded hour, when the mind
 
 89 
 
 dreads no danger, and when vigilance is asleep. Can any thing prove 
 more strongly than the deposition of this man, the innocency of my 
 conduct ? The conversation related to politics and to new publica- 
 tions, and he remembers me speaking of Flower on the French Con- 
 stitution, which, though not mentioned in the indictment, you will 
 recollect the Lord Advocate wished to bring forward as seditious, and 
 as a circumstance " tending to prove the crime charged." I am not 
 acquainted with the respectable author of that book ; but if, from 
 writing, a true idea may be formed of the heart, there is not a man 
 that I would more fondly call my friend. If any one wish for a 
 Reform in Parliament, let him read and weigh well the lessons which 
 Mr. Flower has inculcated, Gentlemen, the witness next depones, 
 that I recommended Henry's History of England. And so, I am 
 called an enemy to the Constitution, because I recommended to the 
 people the book best calculated to instruct them in its principles and 
 progress, a book which was warmly recommended by the great 
 Earl of Mansfield, who first brought it into notice, and procured the 
 author a pension from the King ! 
 
 This witness, you will recollect, was asked by the Solicitor-Gene- 
 ral, what he meant by a more equal representation ? He stopped for 
 a moment to consider. Oh ! what a matter of triumph was this ! 
 then burst the contemptuous sneer from the other side ; and then, 
 with affected ridicule, was pointed out the absurdity of men, so igno- 
 rant, embarking in the cause of Reform, when even their Vice-Presi- 
 dent, if any had known, should have been the man. Why, Gentle- 
 men, by all, excepting Mr. Pitt and the Duke of Richmond, who 
 contended for Reform, and in all that was said in the late debate in 
 the House of Commons, no specific plan was actually brought for- 
 ward. Is it then a matter of surprise, that the witness, who is 
 certainly as much entitled to become a Reformer as the Lord Advo- 
 cate, stopt for a moment to consider his answer to the question ? But, 
 Gentlemen, his answer was such as did honour to the coolness of his 
 mind, and to the soundness of his understanding. Two opinions, 
 replied he, divided the Society : one was for confining the right of 
 voting to landed property, the other, for every man having a vote ; 
 but he had not made up his mind upon either. He declared at the 
 same time, that I did not give any opinion on this subject. 
 
 Gentlemen, I shall not at this time say much with regard to the 
 very Rev. gentleman who was next called as a witness, as I intend to 
 bring a criminal prosecution against him. My objections to his ad- 
 xnissibility were sustained, before I entered upon the threshold of my 
 proof, by the Lord Advocate's wisely giving him up. I am sorry for 
 the Prosecutor's timely precaution ; it prevented me from bringing a 
 cloud of witnesses against this gentlemen, to prove practices, nay 
 
 crimes, which but I shall go no farther at present, my most 
 
 rancorous enemy was aware of what would have followed ; and even 
 he, it appeaars, would have blushed to have brought forward this 
 man's testimony. But I trust that you, Gentlemen of the Jury, will 
 this night do justice to my innocency, and if by your verdict I am
 
 90 
 
 acquitted from this bar, I here solemnly pledge myself, that I shall 
 in my turn become his prosecutor. 
 
 Gentlemen, I am charged in the Indictment with having convoked 
 the meetings which I afterwards harangued. Now, Henry Freeland, 
 the next witness, President of the Society at Kirkintilloch, depones, 
 that there was an intention of having a Society there before he ever 
 saw me. Where then is this charge in the libel supported by evi- 
 dence ? He mentions that the general purport of my speech was 
 about shortening the duration of Parliament, and a more equal repre- 
 sentation ; that I said I thought taxes might be lessened by these 
 means, and that reform was not to take place as to the King and 
 House of Lords, but only as to the Commons. Call you this sedition ? 
 Does not every thing brought forward by these witnesses of the 
 Crown, confute the false, the injurious, and the scandalous charge in 
 the libel, of " vilifying the Constitution," and of " exciting the people 
 to rebellion against the King ?" 
 
 Gentlemen, I now come to the most material part of Mr. Freeland's 
 evidence indeed the most material evidence which the Prosecutor 
 has been able to produce. A wide field is now before us, and I re- 
 quest your most serious attention to what I shall now say, as it relates 
 to a principal charge of the libel. 
 
 Gentlemen, The Indictment charges me with " wickedly and 
 feloniously circulating and distributing Paine's book, in order to in- 
 flame the minds of the people against the Constitution." Now, 
 Gentlemen, I ask you to lay your hands upon your breasts, and to 
 say whether, in the circumstances under which I lent that book to 
 the witness, there appears a shadow of " felonious " intention ? You 
 know, Gentlemen, the newspapers of the day were full of advertise- 
 ments announcing where the works of Mr. Paine were to be found. 
 The cause of this curiosity in the public mind maybe easily unfolded, 
 without uttering a single syllable upon the intrinsic merit or demerit 
 of these works. The situation of France roused the attention of 
 Europe. To that country every eye was turned, and every man who 
 could wield a pen, was employed in discussing the principles which 
 the revolution had called forth. Mr. Burke entered the field of con- 
 troversy. The name of that gentlemen would give sale and diffusion 
 to any production. Mr. Burke fought upon one side of the question. 
 He was encountered upon the opposite by Thomas Paine both of 
 them champions of approved vigour, and of undoubted prowess. 
 Could public curiosity not be awakened to the contention of such 
 men ? It was most completely : the works of Burke and Paine flew 
 with a rapidity to every corner of the land, hitherto unexampled in 
 the history of political science. Is there a single man among you, 
 who has not read the works either of Paine or of Burke ? Is there a 
 person upon the Bench, upon the Jury, or in this audience, who has 
 either not purchased, or lent the treatise upon the Rights of Man ? 
 Now, if one of you lent to a friend or relation, who might participate 
 in the common curiosity, a single pamphlet of Mr. Paine's, you are just 
 as guilty as I am. If there had been a public law of the kingdom
 
 91 
 
 condemning that book, the presumption of innocence could not be 
 admitted by its rigid rule, and the mere act of giving away a single 
 copy, would have been considered a violation of the letter of the la\v. 
 But at the period when I lent Mr. Freeland, Paine's works, was any 
 sentence of reprobation thundered against them ? No ! Therefore, 
 Gentlemen, I was guilty of offending no existing law. I was not 
 certified of my danger I was not put upon my guard. Was there a 
 judgment of any Court in England or Scotland against this book at 
 that time ? No. Therefore I had no cause for alarm. True, some 
 months before, a proclamation against seditious writings had been 
 issued ; but a proclamation, Gentlemen, is not law it has no legisla- 
 tive authority ; and there was no mention of Mr. Paine's works in that 
 proclamation. Can you, therefore, now suppose, that there was any 
 " felonious intention " in lending this book ? Did I advise the witness 
 to read it, or to adopt its principles ? Why, Gentlemen, the mighty 
 crime of sedition, with which I am charged, reduces itself into this 
 simple fact that to gratify the natural curiosity of a person who lives 
 in my neighbourhood, and who is a distant relation, I lent a book 
 which was in universal circulation, unnoticed by courts of justice, and 
 uncondemned by law. 
 
 f/Here symptoms of impatience began to be manifested by some of 
 the Jury ! Mr. Muir instantly noticed it, and said :] 
 
 Gentlemen, If, whether right or wrong, you have come here 
 determined to find me guilty, say so boldly, openly, and, let me add, 
 honestly : resort not to idle pretexts and expedients to justify a stretch 
 of power. The unprejudiced eye will soon penetrate into these pre- 
 texts, and the determination will soon receive the contempt and 
 indignation of mankind. 
 
 Gentlemen, I would now wish to direct your attention to what 
 Mr. Paine's writings are, and to the particular manner in which they 
 are presented in accusation against me. And, Gentlemen, I will 
 allow, that any writing which calls upon the people to rise in arms, 
 to resist the law, and to subvert the Constitution, is something worse 
 than seditious that it is treasonable. But do the writings of Mr. 
 Paine stand in that predicament ? Can you point out a single sentence 
 where he provokes insurrection ? In fact, Gentlemen, Mr. Paine's 
 writings are indisputably of a speculative nature. He investigates the 
 first principles of Society he compares different forms of Government 
 together, and where he gives the preference, he assigns his reason for 
 so doing. 
 
 Gentlemen, I have neither time nor inclination to entertain you by 
 any dissertation on the liberty of the press. If that liberty is sickly, 
 the Constitution is likewise diseased. If that liberty is extinguished, 
 the Constitution expires. You may ask what is the precise notion 
 which I affix to the term Liberty of the Press? I will tell you 
 honestly and without disguise. By the liberty of the press, I mean 
 not the power of assassinating the reputation, or torturing the feelings 
 of individuals. No crime, in my estimation, can be more heinous. 
 By the liberty of the press, I mean not the power of degrading and
 
 contaminating the public mind by tales of immorality. By the 
 liberty of the press, I understand not the power of inflaming the 
 minds of men against the Constitution of stimulating the people to 
 insurrection, and of tearing down the barriers of public property and 
 of public security. Where Government is established, that Govern- 
 ment must, or ought to be respected. And the truest Republic- which 
 ever yet existed, never could tolerate the internal foe, who within its 
 own precincts, sounded the charge to civil war. By the Freedom of 
 fthe Press, I understand the INALIENABLE RIGHT OF PUBLISHING 
 I TRUTH ; of presenting to the world whatever may tend to public good 
 [ not hurting the feelings of individuals trampling down morals or 
 established laws. 
 
 Gentlemen, Constitutions of Government are the workmanship of 
 men: that Constitution is the most perfect which can be most easily 
 amended. There are Constitutions which, step by step, without con- 
 vulsion and without blood, have advanced to superior degrees of per- 
 fection, which by their own internal energy have effected their own 
 reformation, and avoided the calamities of a Revolution. These pro- 
 gressive Constitutions, if I may use the expression, must always cherish 
 and support the liberty of the press, as the chief instrument of their 
 preservation. And, Gentlemen, how grateful should we be to Eternal 
 Providence, that our Constitution possesses in itself the power of 
 amendment that without a Revolution, it can rectify its abuses and 
 that silently and without disorder, it can advance towards that chas- 
 tened liberty, which constitutes human felicity. You have read the 
 history of the British Constitution, and what is it but the history of a 
 continual progress ? And what has been the impelling cause of that 
 progress ? 1 answer, the universal diffusion of information by means 
 of the liberty of the press. If you destroy that liberty, the people 
 will be buried in ignorance the iron throne of despotism will be 
 erected. Let us then apply this argument to the case of Mr. Paine. 
 This work, 1 again state, is merely of a speculative nature, upon the 
 principles of Government. Now, if Mr. Paine's work is inconsistent 
 with the principles of the British Constitution, what is the conse- 
 quence ? If the book is written with ingenuity, it will acquire readers. 
 No man in his sound senses, the keenest advocate for a Parliamentary 
 Reform, but will avert his eyes bathed in tears, and in horror of soul, 
 from a Revolution. He will compare the principles of Mr. Paine 
 with the Constitution. If Mr. Paine has pointed out any thing defec- 
 tive in the Constitution, he will contribute his humble efforts to have 
 that defect repaired. If, on the other hand, he still imagine that Mr. 
 Paine has taken an erroneous view of this edifice, has misrepresented 
 its properties, he will become more and more sensible, from his inquiry, 
 of the security which he enjoys under its protection. The sense of 
 danger will be removed, and his mind, undisturbed by gloomy appre- 
 hensions, will enjoy tranquillity. Oh, how little do ye deem the British 
 Constitution, who think that it is built upon the sand, which, when the 
 rains descend, and the floods come, and the winds blow, and beat upon 
 it, that it shall fall. No, Gentlemen ! When the rains descend, when
 
 93 
 
 the floods come, wlien the winds blow, it shall NOT FALL, for it is founded 
 upon a rock. I then maintain, though not in accents sweet to the ear 
 of corruption, or grateful to our courtly pride, or acceptable to ill-got 
 power, that those speculative writers, who investigate the principles of 
 our Constitution, who compare that Constitution with those of other 
 countries, perform a meritorious service to this nation ; these writers 
 rather impel us to rectify that which is wrong, or more strongly con- 
 firm us in our love and in our attachment to that which is right. Let 
 Mr. Paine, then, be considered the bitterest enemy, if you will, to our 
 Constitution, yet as long as he confines himself to speculation, we 
 should not complain. Our best interests are involved in the Consti- 
 tution, but, alas ! like interests of a higher rank which are superior 
 to time and extend to eternity they are too apt to be forgotten, or 
 to make%ut little impression upon us. But, Gentlemen, I say that if 
 Mr. Paine has pointedly called our attention to the Constitution, he 
 has performed to us an essential service he has led us to contemplate 
 its perfection, or roused us from our lethargy, to rectify such parts of 
 it as may have suffered decay by time and corruption. 
 
 Gentlemen, Shall the lending of a single copy of the works of this 
 writer be held criminal ? Was there ever such a violation of the rights 
 of Britons ? Mr. Paine has composed no model of a perfect Common- 
 wealth, as Mr. Hume has done ; yet I dare say you have all read the 
 political works of Mr. Hume, and even applauded them. But if you 
 do condemn a man for lending a copy of Mr. Paine's work, you do 
 what even was not attempted to be done in the reign of Henry the 
 Eighth, when the Constitution, if I may so speak, was shorn of its 
 strength, and nearly strangled on the rack of despotism. Gentlemen, 
 allow me to ask, whether with equality of rights, Mr. Paine has ever 
 preached equality of property ? a chimera which may have entered 
 into the brains of those who dream of a golden age, but who do not 
 understand human nature. Yet, Gentlemen, under the arbitrary reign 
 of Henry the Eighth, did not the illustrious Sir Thomas More, enjoy- 
 ing the confidence of the King, and placed at the head of the law, 
 publish his Utopia, the plan of his republic, of which an equal division 
 of property, an Agrarian law, an universal community, formed the 
 grand basis ? And, Gentlemen, in this enlightened age ; when after 
 so many fiery trials, our Constitution, in its pure and genuine princi- 
 ples, stands unveiled to our view, will you condemn a man for lending a 
 work equally speculative, and, if such a thing existed as a well-founded 
 panic against " levellers," I would say, infinitely more dangerous ? 
 
 Gentlemen, I should be the last man to propose to your imitation 
 the conduct of despots ; but I call upon you to ponder well the words 
 of a man, who rendered the terms republic and despotism nearly the 
 same I mean CROMWELL. Under his Protectorship, when Harring- 
 ton published his Oceana, a host of informers denounced that work. But 
 what was CromwelKs memorable answer to them ? " My cause" 
 said he, " is too strong to be hurt by paper shot." Gentlemen, if you 
 say, that by any publication the British Constitution can be injured, 
 I think you would be guilty of the crime of libelling its strength.
 
 9* 
 
 But, Gentlemen, to conclude upon this head, I maintain, that to 
 suppress works purely speculative, provoking not the people to dis- 
 obedience to the laws, nor to rebellion, however much these works 
 may differ from the Constitution, would destroy the Liberty of the 
 Press would trample upon the best and the surest bulwark, which 
 defends the approaches to that stupendous erection. If, Gentlemen, 
 to lend the works of Thomas Paine, to-day be sedition, to lend a 
 translation of the Republic of Plato, to-morrow would be treason. 
 Gentlemen, the works of Mr. Paine are lying before me. I could 
 read to you many passages to prove what 1 have so often stated, viz. 
 that they are merely of a speculative nature ; but, Gentlemen, you 
 are exhausted, and so am I ; and yet we have some length of field to 
 travel over before we conclude. For some of these passages I refer 
 you to the late celebrated speech of Mr. Erskine,* one of J ?0ie best 
 friends the Constitution ever knew, although he is one of that proscribed 
 and reprobated cast called the " Friends of the People !" Gentlemen, 
 I trust that you will now be persuaded, that neither the publishing, 
 nor the lending of a speculative political book, is sedition. But I now 
 call your attention to another circumstance the manner in which 
 criminality is attempted to be attached to that book and to myself. 
 Various detached passages are quoted from it in the Indictment. They 
 are called " wicked," " inflammatory," and " seditious." In the 
 sacred name of justice, will you condemn any book for detached 
 passages, separated from the whole connexion ? cut off from recipro- 
 cal explanation, and from which neither its general ten our nor scope 
 can be discovered ? If you do this, where is the book in which you 
 cannot discover sedition, by dissecting its separate sentences and para- 
 graphs ? For my part, if you proceed in this manner, I do not know 
 a more dangerous collection than the very books of holy inspiration. 
 Only separate verse from verse, and then combine them according to 
 your whim or pleasure, and, Gentlemen, you may make the Bible one 
 of the most seditious and treasonable books which ever was written. 
 But you are neither to condemn that book nor me, for those detached 
 passages exhibited in the Indictment. You must carry along with 
 you the whole works of Mr. Paine you must scrutinise line by line, 
 and you must pronounce upon the general context. If, after trying 
 them by this test, you find these works provoking the people to 
 resistance, calling them forth to arms, to subvert the Constitution, 
 then no doubt they are seditious. But if you find the author indulging 
 himself in nothing but philosophical and political speculation, however 
 much your principles and his may differ, you cannot condemn him for 
 composing these works, or me, after they were composed and pub- 
 lished, for lending them to a relation. 
 
 Gentlemen, If you condemn books for being seditious, on account 
 of passages culled from this page and from that, and artfully combined 
 together, you have it in your power to award a proscription against 
 universal literature. For, as I have already mentioned, there is uot a 
 
 * Vide Lord Erskine's Speech, vol. ii. Defence of Paine.
 
 95 
 
 single book in which, by dissecting it in this manner, sentence by 
 sentence, and passage by passage, you may not discover immorality, 
 blasphemy, and treason. Indeed, if the sad objects of reflection which 
 present themselves to my mind, when I contemplate the state of my 
 country, could permit me to indulge in a vein of ridicule, I would 
 advise you at once to lay the axe to the root of the tree, and to bring 
 an Indictment against the Alphabet itself, because it is the source of 
 the evil to be dreaded ; its parts form the component elements of sen- 
 tences and of paragraphs, which may contain the most dangerous 
 sedition, and the most horrible treason. But this is not the time for 
 me to indulge in the sport of humour. 
 
 Gentlemen, I shall admit, for a moment, that the passages from Mr. 
 Paine, and the books exhibited in the Indictment, may be highly 
 criminal ; but will any person venture to say, that I lent these books 
 for containing such passages, or that I particularly pointed them out, 
 and gave them my approbation ? If the Prosecutor has a right to 
 presume that it was upon account of these passages I lent these writ- 
 ings, I, too, have a right to draw a contrary presumption in my favour, 
 and to say, that if there are sentiments in the works of Mr. Paine 
 (and many such there are) fraught with universal benevolence, incul- 
 cating universal amity and brotherhood, and of a tendency to dispel 
 those passions and prejudices which animate and impel nation against 
 nation, into fields of blood and of carnage, I am entitled to plead upon 
 these passages I have a right to say that it was the antidote, and not 
 the poison, I recommended and you must know that the law of this 
 country obliges you, where opposing presumptions are of equal strength, 
 to let the balance preponderate on the side of the accused. 
 
 Gentlemen, I shall conclude on the subject of Mr. Paine's works, 
 by observing, that all the witnesses have uniformly sworn that I 
 refused to recommend them ; that when the matter was proposed, I 
 said the principles contained in them might mislead the people, aa 
 they were foreign to the object of the Society, and might misguide 
 weak minds. There is not a witness adduced by the Prosecutor who 
 says the contrary of this ; and will you agree in opinion that the charge 
 in the Indictment of " circulating" and " recommending" these books, 
 has the slightest shadow of support ? Gentlemen, I will tell you the 
 reason why I did not recommend Mr. Paine's books to the Societies 
 in Scotland, and why I declared them foreign to their purpose. Mr. 
 Paine is a Republican, and the spirit of Republicanism breathes through 
 all his writings. This is his darling system. Whereas the object of 
 these Societies was, by Constitutional means, to procure a reforma- 
 tion in the Constitution, and not a revolution, which implied its 
 destruction. In other words, their object was to have their long lost 
 rights restored, but not by the assumption of new rights derived from 
 a different system. Gentlemen, I am happy to find the people of 
 Scotland rapidly advancing to a true sense of their Constitutional 
 liberties to see them demanding to have the Constitution restored to 
 its genuine principles, in order that they may behold their liberties 
 confirmed, and their happiness established. That they should advance
 
 9G 
 
 with more ardour in this cause, it was necessary that they should know 
 the Constitution, what it had been in its vigour, and what it now is m 
 its decay, by the corruption of men and of ages. And pray what did 
 I do to effectuate these legal and enviable objects ? I did not present 
 to the people the splendid fabrics of ancient or of modern Republics. 
 I wished them to keep their eyes confined at home, to repair their 
 own mansion, rather than pull it down, and not to expose themselves 
 to the inconveniences and dangers of building upon new plans, the 
 advantages or disadvantages of which could only be known by the 
 uncertain experience of future ages. All the witnesses who speak of 
 my conduct in the Societies, tell you that I recommended none but 
 Constitutional measures and that the only book which I recommended 
 to them was Henry's History of England, the best calculated, by its 
 accuracy and plainness, to give them insight into the nature and pro- 
 gress of the Constitution. 
 
 Gentlemen, Having already explained the principle on which I 
 refused to recommend the works of Mr. Paine ; I again ask, was 
 it ever before held criminal in an author to publish what speculative 
 systems of Government he pleased, provided he confined himself to 
 mere speculation, and did not advance forth to the field of action ? 
 Was it a crime of Plato, under the Athenian Republic, to compose 
 his beautiful system ? Was it high treason in Cicero, under the 
 Roman Commonwealth, to write those renowned works which have 
 been lost in the darkness of the Gothic night, and of which a few 
 fragments could only be found when the morning of letters began to 
 dawn upon Europe ? Was Sir Thomas More led forth to the scaffold 
 for composing his Utopia ? Harrington proscribed for his Oecana ? 
 Or Hume expelled for his Commonwealth ? No, Gentlemen, 
 these authors indulged themselves in a liberty, which, if we are 
 now to be deprived of, must leave this land in darkness and despair, 
 since the attempt at amendment and reformation will be for ever 
 precluded. 
 
 Gentlemen, I now close my observations on the subject of Mr. 
 Paine's works, by calling you to remember that it was only a single 
 copy which I lent ; and the circumstances attending which, admitting 
 the book to be as seditious and as treasonable as can be imagined, 
 utterly excludes the idea of a "felonious" circulation on my part. 
 You are the first Jury in Scotland before whom Mr. Paine's works 
 have yet been brought. I trust you will act in such a manner as to 
 do honour to yourselves, in doing justice to him and to me that you 
 will not attempt to annihilate political science that, in this country, 
 where our chief glory has arisen from literature, you will not limit 
 her researches, but that you will rather indulge her in her unbounded 
 flight into every region where the materials of human happiness and 
 human improvement can be collected, finally, I must tell you, that 
 you are not bound by what any Jury has done in England you are 
 bound by the law of Scotland. But even the decisions in England 
 have lost the respect due to them, although they were to be held out 
 as precedents ; for we have seen Juries one day condemning the author
 
 97 
 
 and the publishers, and on the succeeding day we have seen other 
 Juries pronounce a verdict of acquittal. 
 
 Gentlemen, The next witness is Ann Fisher, a late servant in my 
 father's house. Her evidence comes forward to you with peculiar dis- 
 tinction caressed by the Prosecutor, and complimented by the Court. 
 I will soon shew you, Gentlemen, that she has but few pretensions to 
 that accuracy of which the Lord Advocate spoke in such high terms 
 and that her memory possesses a singular quality retentive to what- 
 ever may militate against me but hesitating and confused to whatever 
 may seem in my favour. What this domestic, and well-tutored spy, has 
 given in evidence against me, fills my mind with little concern. On 
 the contrary, it affords me much satisfaction to find, that, when I was 
 surrounded in the place where I expected most security where all sus- 
 picion was lulled asleep, my conduct was so guarded. What do I say? 
 guarded ! Innocence, Gentlemen, has no need to be on the watch. 
 
 Even malice itself cannot condemn my conduct. But before I 
 proceed to read her evidence from my notes, let me solemnly cau- 
 tion you against the dangerous precedent of giving credibility to 
 witnesses of this kind, under accusations of this nature. The 
 crime of sedition, if you attend to its essence, never can be committed 
 within the walls of a private house. It supposes the highest publicity 
 the convocation of many individuals together. But if power shall say 
 that words spoken in an unguarded moment within the sacred walls of 
 a family, amount to this crime, what will follow ? Not those with 
 whom you have acted in your political life, and who, with the impres- 
 sion of the oath of God upon them, can best tell the truth not those 
 whom you may have admitted to your friendship, and to your con- 
 fidence, and who best know the secrets of your soul ; but the meanest 
 of your domestics, who could hardly approach your presence, even in 
 their menial duties, if the expression may be used, to whom the mem- 
 bers of a family are almost unknown ; these ! these ! the meanest 
 and the lowest, will be brought forward to swear away your property, 
 your reputation, and your life ! And such, Gentlemen, is this witness, 
 who is adduced against me with such parade. Oh, Gentlemen, beware 
 how you sanctify this shameful proceeding. It is not me you wound 
 alone, but you destroy the confidence which subsists between man and 
 man you lead, by your own hands, to the fire-sides of your chil- 
 dren and your dearest relations, the fiends of suspicion and of danger : 
 and you for ever put an end to that reciprocity of communication, which 
 enlivens and endears domestic society. But let us hear what this witness 
 has to say. 1 will read you from my notes her evidence. If I have erred 
 in taking it down, I will of course be corrected. (Here Mr. Muir read 
 the evidence of Ann Fisher.) Gentlemen, the testimony of this witness 
 seems to relate to two of the principal charges in the indictment. The 
 first, to my having made speeches in public societies, vilifying the King 
 and Constitution ; the second, to my having distributed and recommended 
 sedititous books, viz., Mr. Paine the Patriot, &c. Under these two 
 different articles let us examine the testimony of this witness. 
 
 Gentlemen, The Prosecutor has told you that he could adduce any
 
 98 
 
 thing against me he pleased, under the generality of the term sedition, 
 even though it should not be specified in the libel. The Court has 
 permitted him to do so : and in the case of this witness, you may see 
 the dangerous effect of such doctrine. Gentlemen, I am accused of 
 making seditious harangues in public, but this servant girl is adduced 
 to swear to what she says, she may have heard in private, when she 
 was probably instructed to take her watch, and mark to destruction 
 those who fed her. But what is tlie dreadful language she has heard 
 me use, even in my unguarded moments ? I will repeat what she 
 says I will recall to your remembrance her express words, which 
 were" that if every body had a vote, I would be member for Cal- 
 der that members of Parliament would have 30s. or 40s. a day, and 
 in that case, there would be none but honest men to keep the Con- 
 stitution clear." Gentlemen, you remember how the Public Prosecutor 
 expatiated on these words of this witness. After labouring long in 
 vain, he now fancied he had got something against me. I smiled at 
 the indecency of his exultation at this part of the proceeding, but next 
 moment I pitied him when I reflected he was a lawyer and chief 
 Counsel for the Crown in Scotland. Here, said the Prosecutor, " You 
 see the cloven foot ! you see French principles manifested ! here 
 you discover the whole tincture of his soul. Members of Parliament 
 to have 30s. or 40s. a day for their attendance ! to be honest men, 
 and to keep the Constitution clear ! Is not this evidence that he 
 means to introduce in place of our House of Commons a National 
 Convention, on French principles, and according to French forms !" 
 
 Gentlemen, Sorry am I to see the ignorance of this Lord Advocate 
 of Scotland. Is there a man who has opened the volume of the His- 
 tory of our Constitution, who does not know, that until a very late 
 period indeed, when corruption glided in, and tainted and poisoned 
 it, Members of Parliament received their wages from the hands of the 
 people alone? Oh, how I speak it with joy when I review the past 
 with sorrow when I contemplate the present. Our virtuous ancestors 
 would have scorned to have received the price of their attendance 
 from any other hands, than from the hands of the people. Then, 
 indeed, the Constitution possessed all its energies. Then, indeed, it 
 towered in the strength of age, but with the bloom of youth. The 
 people delegated as their representatives, none but men of tried virtue 
 and patriotism, in whom they could repose the most unbounded confi- 
 dence. Look back, I entreat you, to all the great and good men whom 
 English history records. Turn your eyes to the Hampdens to the 
 
 Sidneys to the Marvilles, of former times to these men but I 
 
 stop. Let the Lord Advocate pronounce their eulogium by his invective. 
 
 Fisher proceeds to state, that she has heard me say, that France 
 was the most flourishing nation in the world, as they had abolished 
 tyranny and got a free Government ; that the Constitution of this 
 country was very good, but that many abuses had crept in which 
 required a thorough reform ; therefore, Gentlemen, even in my most 
 unguarded hours, this domestic spy cannot, by her evidence, support 
 a tittle of the indictment, where it charges me with vilifying the King
 
 99 
 
 and Constitution. Of her idle story of what I said concerning Courts 
 of Justice, that they needed a Reform, and that this Court in par- 
 ticular got. their money for nothing but pronouncing sentence of death 
 upon poor creatures, &c. I disdain to take notice; only you will dis- 
 cover her exquisite art. This day I am tried before this Court, and 
 she supposes that by inventing, and throwing in a circumstance of this 
 kind, in order to irritate the Judges against me, she will more com- 
 pletely execute the wretched job she has undertaken to perform. 
 Were there not more servants in the house, who had infinitely better 
 opportunities to hear my conversation ? and must she, the lowest of 
 them all, with whom she cannot pretend I had ever two minutes' 
 conversation, be singled out and pitched upon for this drudgery ? 
 
 She next depones, that she heard me say that a republican form of 
 Government was the best ; but then she qualifies it by saying, that 
 when I spoke of this country, I never deviated from the Constitution, 
 but said, that a limited monarchy, under proper restrictions, was the 
 best adapted to its interests. 
 
 Gentlemen, The next article of sedition to which she depones, is of 
 the most extraordinary kind, viz. that I had sent her to employ an 
 organist, on the streets of Glasgow, to play the French tune, Ca Ira. 
 What ! Gentlemen ! was a tune like this to lighten up the names of 
 civil discord, and to be the forerunner of this most terrible revolution ? 
 Have you read the words of that most popular song and can you 
 discover a single allusion in them to the state of England ? Gentle- 
 men, England has always cherished Freedom ; and shall it be deemed 
 criminal in me to listen to the effusions of joy poured out by a neigh- 
 bouring people, on obtaining that first of human blessings, which 
 always constituted our peculiar distinction ? 
 
 But I know it well. The word Freedom is soon to be proscribed 
 from our language ; it carries alarm and sedition in the sound. If 
 I had caused to be recited one of those noble choruses of the Grecian 
 drama, in which, with the enthusiasm of Liberty, the glories of the 
 Republics of Athens or of Sparta were displayed in language more 
 than mortal, my offence would have been deemed the same with that 
 of amusing myself by hearing the national song of France. If it had 
 been possible for me to have caused to be sung upon the streets of 
 Glasgow one of the Psalms of the Hebrews, in the original language, 
 in which the triumphs of the people and the destruction of tyrants 
 are recorded in a strain of the highest poetical inspiration, the crimin- 
 ality would have been the same with that of listening to Ca Ira* 
 
 Gentlemen, Let me abandon the subject. My political career has 
 neither been obscure nor inglorious it has undergone the severest 
 scrutiny which ever fell to the lot of man and after every engine has 
 been employed after heaven and earth have been moved, the tremen- 
 
 * We wonder what Lord Advocate Uundas would have said to the patriotic song 
 of Burns, " Scots wha hae \vi' Wallace bled?" We think he would have called the 
 following lines wicked and treasonable. 
 
 " Lay the proud usurpers low! 
 Tyrants fall in every foe ! 
 Liberty's in every blow, 
 
 Forward ! let us do or die!"
 
 too 
 
 <lous charge of sedition is, after all, to be supported by the testimony 
 of a domestic spy, swearing, not to my serious occupation, but to the 
 amusement of an idle hour, in listening to a foreign tune ! ! But let 
 us next attend to the evidence of Fisher, as far as it relates to " seditious 
 publications" She swears that I used to recommend to a great many 
 country people (who came to my father's shop) to purchase and to 
 read the works of Mr. Paine. But, Gentlemen, in the " number of 
 country people," she can only specify one, viz. John Barclay, and when 
 you examine his evidence, you will see he gives her the flattest con- 
 tradiction. She swore that she bought at two different times for my 
 uncle, Alexander Muir, at my request, a copy of the 6rst part, and a 
 copy of the second part of the Rights of Man. Can you suppose that 
 if my intentions had been " felonious " I would have introduced such 
 writings into my own family? Can you imagine that I would have 
 wished to involve in the conflagration of my country my nearest rela- 
 tions, to whose property 1 may eventually succeed. Why is Alexan- 
 der Muir not brought forward as a witness ? Certain it is, that he 
 was closely interrogated before the inquisition held by Mr. Sheriff 
 Honyman. But the Lord Advocate says that his feelings would not 
 permit him to examine the uncle against the nephew. Goodness ever 
 to be remembered and extolled ! But, my Lord, (turning to the Lord 
 Advocate,) did you not advise and direct the whole proceedings against 
 me, and will you have the effrontery to maintain that Alexander Muir 
 was not dragged like a felon from his own home by the myrmidons of 
 power, carried before your friend Honyman, and that every art was 
 employed to wring from him every domestic secret ? 
 
 Speak, then, to us of your humanity I Aye ! Continue to speak to 
 us of your feelings ! 
 
 Gentlemen, Fisher next swears that I pressed John Muir to pur- 
 chase Paine's works that he was prevailed upon, and that she was 
 sent to purchase them. Now you heard the evidence of this man in 
 express contradiction to this witness. She next tells you that I advised 
 another domestic, Wilson my hair-dresser, to purchase Paine's works 
 and keep them in his shop, " in order to enlighten the people," and you 
 heard Wilson express himself far otherwise. She speaks of carrying 
 some paper which she thinks was a Declaration of Rights to a printing 
 office to be corrected. Every thing in her evidence is made to tally 
 with the Indictment. I am there accused of circulating a paper entitled 
 a Declaration of Rights by the Friends of Reform in Paisley ; and this 
 respectable personage, so highly complimented by the Court, must 
 likewise swear something concerning it. Yet her tenacious memory 
 utterly fails her here. She thinks she can only remember what the title 
 was, but nothing more. She knows nothing of the substance of the 
 writing but her evidence is to give a colour to the allegation of my 
 having circulated that paper from Paisley, and to furnish ground for 
 insinuating that I was the author of it. 
 
 Gentlemen, The witness next swears to a fact which must rouse 
 your keenest indignation. Vigilant has this family-spy been in the 
 course of her duty. She tells you what books she has seen on my
 
 101 
 
 table, &c. Gentlemen, from this moment lock up your libraries. If 
 they are extensive as you have heard mine is, there is no crime in the 
 whole decalogue, of which by the testimony of your own servants, you 
 may uot be found guilty. The possession of Plato, of Harrington, or 
 of Hume, will mark you down for Republicans. The misfortune of 
 having the Koran of Mahomet will cause the shipwreck of your faith, 
 and stigmatize you as the disciples of the conqueror of Mecca, Well 
 do I congratulate the Lord Advocate of Scotland. He has discovered 
 a new region in the sphere of criminality he will not merely confine 
 himself to one voyage of discovery, but, along with his associates, he 
 will make many voyages to this fertile land, and return home loaded 
 with many valuable cargoes. But seriousness becomes this place. 
 Can it be believed, that in the close of the 18th century, that this 
 night, the servants of a man should be examined concerning what 
 particular books he may have had in his house, and that the proof of 
 possession of particular books may ruin his reputation sweep away 
 his property and deprive him of his life ! Gentlemen, if you pos- 
 sess the common feelings of men, every sentiment of indignation must 
 be excited, not against this witness, for she is rather to be pitied, but 
 against the manner in which this crime of sedition has been attempted 
 to be proved. 
 
 Gentlemen, The libel charges me with "feloniously circulating a 
 Dialogue between the Governors and the Governed," extracted from 
 the Ruins of Volney. This Dialogue is narrated in the Indictment, and 
 it is charged to be felonious and seditious. There is not a word in 
 this Dialogue which is not true. Alas ! in colours but too faithful, it 
 delineates the mournful history of six thousand years, the crimes of 
 despots, and the artifices of impostors, to subjugate and to blind the 
 people. It is purely abstracted. It is entirely speculative. To no 
 particular nation, much less to England, does it allude if to any it 
 must be to France under the ancient system. Yet this Dialogue is 
 libelled as seditious and inflammatory. The truth is, the crime of 
 sedition must be brought home against me, and the possession of any 
 book, as well as that of Volney, might be employed to substantiate it. 
 Let us hear what the witness says concerning the "felonious" circu- 
 lation. She heard me read it in presence of my mother, sister, and 
 some other people that 1 said it was very clever, and done by one of 
 the first wits in France. Who were those " other people," that were 
 in company with my mother and sister, when I read it ? Her accuracy, 
 so much extolled by the Court, again totally fails her here. But the 
 propagation of sedition must not be confined to a mother and a sister, 
 it must have a wider range : " other people present !" and founding 
 upon his beloved generality, the Prosecutor has reason to argue that 
 there might have been a full company a numerous meeting uay, an 
 immense congregation ! 
 
 Gentlemen, You have heard the testimony of Fisher, and are these 
 the arts by which I am to fall ? I again say, that if you receive such 
 testimony, you for ever destroy domestic society you blast the 
 sweets of family confidence. And is it not sufficient to weep over
 
 102 
 
 public calamities, without thinking, that when we retire to our own 
 homes, we must be obliged to confine ourselves in dismal solitude, 
 guarded by suspicion and by danger, where no kindred affections can 
 enter, and where no reciprocal consolation can be admitted ? 
 
 Gentlemen, I hasten over the evidence of the remaining witnesses 
 against me. I am overcome by the exertions of this day ; and you 
 must be greatly exhausted. 
 
 The next is the evidence of Thomas Wilson, my hairdresser, and 
 he is brought to bring up the rear of Fisher's testimony. He 
 depones, that I asked him if he bad bought a copy of Paine's works, 
 and that I advised him to get a copy of them, as a barber's shop was 
 a good place to read in. Does this confirm the testimony of Fisher, 
 who says I desired him to buy that work, and " to keep it in his shop 
 in order to enlighten the people ?" Mark the art of Fisher. How 
 strongly she paints what might seem to strike against me " to en- 
 lighten the people !" But does Wilson concur in this ? No. He tells 
 you, that he bought a copy of the Address to the Addressers ; but 
 not by my advice. He even recollects the levity of conversation. 
 An old man from the country came in while he was dressing me. He 
 remembers I said, that this old man was a great reformer. If I ever 
 said so, I wish it may not have been in jest, but in earnest, and that 
 the fact with regard to the man was true ; for, Gentlemen, I know of 
 none who should be greater reformers of themselves and of others, 
 than those who are standing on the brink of the grave, or hastening to 
 eternity. But I am afraid that this witness only remembers a piece 
 of unmeaning gaiety; for he adds, the old man said, " I was taunting 
 him." 
 
 Gentlemen, The conclusion of the evidence of Wilson affords me 
 much consolation. It is a proof of the innocency of my private life, in 
 moments when I could not possibly think of the affectation of integrity. 
 He swears that he has always heard me say, that I would " maintain 
 the Constitution ;" and that I wished for " peace and good order," 
 and " good morals among the people ;" and that he " never heard me 
 speak against the King." 
 
 The next testimony is that of John Muir. He tells you, that he 
 had a conversation with me in September last about Paine's book in 
 my father's house ; that he asked the loan of it from me ; that I told 
 him I had it not. Does this resemble the conduct of a man accused 
 of distributing these books to all and sundry, and scattering them over 
 every portion of the land ? He says, I mentioned I would send a 
 servant who would get it for him ; that a servant girl accordingly 
 went and got it. Does not this completely confute the testimony of 
 Fisher, who affirms that I much " pressed " this man to purchase that 
 book ? since he tells you, that he himself asked the loan of it ? Is uot 
 this a complete contradiction of her testimony ? 
 
 The next witness is John Barclay, that old and venerable person, 
 whom you saw adduced as a witness by the Prosecutor, and who 
 informs you, that we were Elders in the same parish the parish of 
 Calder, in which the lands of my father are situated. Gentlemen,
 
 103 
 
 the Lord Advocate, in speaking of this virtuous and venerable old 
 man, exclaimed with insolent contempt, " Such men as these are the \ 
 companions, and such men as these are the friends of Mr. Muir !" 
 Yes; I tell the Lord Advocate I tell the Aristocracy of Scotland 
 I glory more in the friendship of such an old, poor, and virtuous man, 
 than in the friendship of the highest titled Peer, who derives the 
 sources of his guilty grandeur from the calamities of the people ; 
 who wrings out a splendid, but a miserable revenue, from their sorrow 
 and distress, from their tears, and from their blood, which he 
 squanders in dissipation, to the ruin of private virtue, and to the j 
 contamination of public morals. 
 
 Let us see, then, what Mr. Barclay says against me ; that " he 
 asked my opinion concerning Paine's books," that I told him he 
 might purchase them if he chose, as they were printed, but that I 
 afterwards said " they were not books for us." Does Mr. Barclay's evi- 
 dence support the criminal charge in the libel, of my advising people 
 to purchase seditious books, and of my circulating them over the 
 country ? Does not Mr. Barclay's evidence shew that I never recom- 
 mended Mr. Paine's works, and said that they were not works for 
 us, who were simply engaged in the cause of a Parliamentary and 
 Constitutional Reform ? Gentlemen, is there a single witness brought 
 forward by the Prosecutor, who has in the smallest degree stated any 
 conversation of mine which was unconstitutional ? Hear what Mr. 
 Barclay says : he was frequently with me, and in my library, from 
 which he borrowed books ; that he had many conversations with me, 
 and heard me say, that the Constitution of this country was an excel- 
 lent one : that I praised the King, and always spoke of order, regu- 
 larity, and obedience to the ruling powers. In short, Gentlemen, 
 the best of the witnesses for the Prosecutor use the same uniform 
 language, attest that neither in public nor in private, a single expres- 
 sion ever dropped from me, which the most violent associator 
 could construe into guilt. 
 
 The last witness of whom I shall take notice is William Muir, the 
 person whose religious principles at first induced him rather to suffer, 
 according to the elegant expression of the Lord Advocate, eternal 
 imprisonment, than to take the oath, until his scruples were removed 
 by the Rev. Mr. Dun. He swears, that in my father's house, at 
 Huntershill, I gave him eleven numbers of the Patriot, and a copy of 
 the Political Progress. From these numbers of the Patriot several 
 passages are quoted in the indictment. Of the Political Progress 
 there is no mention made; and I maintain that every passage in the 
 Patriot, quoted in the libel, is highly constitutional. The sentiments 
 advanced in them may not sound musically sweet to the ears of cor- 
 ruption. They call upon the people to arise and vindicate the purity 
 of the Constitution to vindicate their long lost rights ; and, Gentle- 
 men, if my feeble voice could extend to the remotest corners of 
 Scotland, I should resound the same sentiment in the same language. 
 These numbers of the Patriot speak to you concerning Septennial 
 Parliaments. And I say, thut the Act which converted Triennial
 
 104 
 
 Parliaments into Septennial, violated our Constitution, tore the charter 
 of our national liberties, and paved the way for the inroads of a 
 frightful despotism. But this witness concurs with all the preceding 
 witnesses in regard to my conduct and principles. He swears 
 that he does not remember to have heard me speak against Govern- 
 ment ; that I did not advise unconstitutional measures, and that he 
 heard me tell how Old Sarum was represented. Old Sarum repre- 
 sented ! Do not the friends of the Constitution weep, and do 
 not the enemies of the Constitution smile, when they hear of such 
 representation ? 
 
 Gentlemen, Before I speak to the third article of accusation, the 
 reading in the Convention the Address of the Society of United Irish- 
 men of Dublin, permit me to make one observation on the manner in 
 which the Prosecutor spoke of the papers found in my custody. Do 
 they correspond with the view which he presented of them ? Are 
 they the documents of correspondence with foreign or internal foes ? 
 No, Gentlemen. Among my papers there is not one which can be 
 construed into any thing like guilt. They consist of pamphlets, 
 unconnected with the politics of the day, and of the various publica- 
 tions of a Society, pure and untainted in its principles, of which I 
 have the honour to be a member. But every thing must be ransacked 
 to heap crimination upon my head. One of the letters which I had 
 undertaken to deliver in Scotland, is addressed to the Rev. Fische 
 Palmer. " Mark !" cries the Lord Advocate, " the company which 
 this man keeps. Who (says he,) is Mr. Palmer, but a person who 
 is likewise indicted for sedition, and who is to be tried in a few days 
 at Perth." Unheard of cruelty unexampled insolence ! What ! 
 before this Court this Jury this audience do you (looking in the 
 face of the Lord Advocate,) attempt to prejudicate and condemn Mr. 
 Palmer in his absence, undefended, and without any possibility of 
 defending himself? But, exclaims the Lord Advocate, the "seal 
 upon the letter" is a proof of the most atrocious guilt. Gentlemen, 
 what is it ? Horrible to tell ! it is the Cap of Liberty ! supported 
 upon a spear, with the words Ca Ira above ! Gentlemen, all this is 
 perfectly consistent. W'hen you attempt to banish the substance of 
 freedom, the shadow must follow ! When a new coinage takes place 
 his Lordship has given a most excellent hint. The officers of the 
 Mint will surely profit by the lesson, and they will no more scatter 
 sedition throughout the land, by impressing upon our halfpennies the 
 figure of Britannia, with a spear in her hand, mounted with the Cap 
 of Liberty ! But I am ashamed to enter into such trifles. 
 
 Gentlemen, I now come to the last charge that of having read in 
 the Convention of Delegates, the Address from the Society of United 
 Irishmen in Dublin. Gentlemen, I admit the fact, and I glory in the 
 admission. The Prosecutor has represented that Society as a gang of 
 mean and nefarious conspirators ; and their diploma* of my admission 
 into their number, as an aggravation of my crime. Gentlemen, let me 
 tell the Lord Advocate of Scotland, that that Society stands too 
 * Copied in Appendix.
 
 105 
 
 high to be affected by his invective, or to require the aid of my de- 
 fence. I arn a member of that Society ; and in the last moments of 
 my life to have been so, shall be my honour and my pride. The Lord 
 Advocate has represented to you in general terms, that that Address 
 amounts almost to Treason, but he durst not attempt to point out 
 in his speech, a single passage which could support the aspersion. 
 I maintain that every line of that Address is strictly constitutional. 
 You must carry the whole of it along with you, and not judge of 
 particular passages scandalously mutilated in the Indictment. Gentle- 
 men, I will read over many passages of this Address, not merely because 
 they are the production of an immortal pen, but because every word is 
 regulated by the spirit of the Constitution. (Here Mr. Muir read 
 the Address, which we have published at length in the Appendix.) 
 
 Gentlemen, The Lord Advocate, however, has represented the 
 authors of this Address, as the meanest of mankind, and has expressly 
 called them " infamous wretches who had fled from the punishment 
 due to their crimes." What slander ! what false unfounded slander ! 
 Has Doctor Drennan has Mr. Hamilton Rowan, whose names are 
 at the head of this Address, fled from crimes and from punishment ? 
 and they are " infamous wretches!" Gentlemen, if ever after ages shall 
 hear of my name, I wish it may be recorded, that to these men I had 
 the happiness of being known. To be honoured by the notice of Dr. 
 Drennan is an ambition .to which, in the most exalted station of life, 
 I would fondly aspire. To have it said that I was the friend of Mr. 
 Hamilton Rowan, I would consider as the passport to the only ac- 
 quaintances whom I value, those who found their claim to distinction 
 upon the only true basis, I mean their own virtues. Mr. Rowan is in- 
 deed indicted to stand trial in Ireland upon a charge similar to my own. 
 He will boldly meet his accusation and let me say along with those 
 who know him, that although it is impossible to add new lustre to his 
 character, yet as he has often come forward in the cause of individual 
 humanity, he will display himself upon that occasion, the firm, the 
 intrepid, and I hope the successful champion of the liberties of his 
 native Country.* 
 
 Gentlemen, I hasten to a conclusion. Much yet remains to say. 
 But after, upon my part, the unremitted exertion of sixteen hours, 
 I feel myself nearly exhausted. 
 
 Look once more, I entreat you, to the Indictment, and compare it 
 with the evidence. 
 
 The first charge against me is, that, in public speeches, I vilified 
 the King and Constitution. All the witnesses adduced, attest, that 
 both in public and in private, even in my most unguarded moments, 
 my language was always respectful to the King, and that I always 
 recommended the Constitution. 
 
 The second charge against me is, that of advising the people to read 
 seditious books, and of distributing inflammatory publications among 
 them. And you hear it proved, by the almost unanimous voice of 
 
 * See quotation from the eloquent Speech of Curran in Defence of Mr. Rowan, 
 Appendix, in which allusion is made to Mr. Muir.
 
 106 
 
 the witnesses for the Crown, that I refused to recommend any books, 
 and that the only one which I recommended was Dr. Henry's History 
 of England. You will not forget the circumstances in which 1 lent 
 Freeland a copy of Paine's works ; nor will you forget the manner in 
 which the writings of that man were introduced in conversation with 
 Wilson, Muir, and Barclay. With regard to other books and pam- 
 phlets mentioned in the libel, there is not any proof.. Wm. Muir has 
 deponed, that I gave him one or two numbers of the Patriot, and some 
 other pamphlets, whose titles I cannot remember. Gentlemen, I 
 frankly acknowledge that I gave him those numbers of the Patriot ; 
 and if I were not now entirely overcome by fatigue, I could demon- 
 strate to you, that, in those numbers, there is not a single sentiment 
 unconstitutional or seditious. 
 
 I am accused of reading the Irish Address in the Convention, and 
 of moving a solemn answer in return. That Address is " neither 
 " seditious, wicked, nor inflammatory." There is not a sentence in it 
 which I have not defended in your presence. Gentlemen, you neither 
 can do justice to me, nor to the country, if you condemn these different 
 publications, upon account of the scandalously mutilated extracts from 
 them in the libel. You must carry the whole of them along with you 
 from this place. It is not upon detached passages you are to judge ; 
 but you must decide upon the whole. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, This is perhaps the last time that I shall 
 address my country. I have explored the tenour of my past life. 
 Nothing shall tear from me the record of my former days. The 
 enemies of Reform have scrutinized, in a manner hitherto unexampled 
 in Scotland, every action I may have performed every word I may 
 have uttered of crimes most foul and horrible have I been accused 
 of attempting to rear the standard of civil war to plunge this land in 
 blood and to cover it with desolation. At every step as the evidence 
 of the Crown advanced, myinnocency has brightened. So far from inflam- 
 ing the minds of men to sedition and to outrage, all the witnesses have 
 concurred that my only anxiety was to impress upon them the neces- 
 sity of peace, good order, and good morals. What, then, has been my 
 crime ? Not the lending to a relation a copy of Mr. Paine's works 
 not the giving away to another a few numbers of an innocent and 
 constitutional publication but my crime is for having dared to be, 
 
 1 according to the measure of my feeble abilities, a strenuous and active 
 advocate for an equal Representation of tJie People in the House of 
 the People for having dared to accomplish a measure, by legal means, 
 which was to diminish the weight of their taxes, and to put an end to the 
 profusion of their blood. Gentlemen, from my infancy to this moment, 
 I have devoted myself to the cause of the People. IT is A GOOD 
 
 CAUSE IT SHALL ULTIMATELY PREVAIL IT SHALL FINALLY 
 
 TRIUMPH. Say, then, openly, in your verdict, if you do condemn me, 
 which, I presume, you will not that it is for my attachment to this 
 cause alone and not for those vain and wretched pretexts stated in the 
 Indictment, intended only to colour and disguise the real motives of 
 my accusation.
 
 107 
 
 Gentlemen, Tlie time will come, when men must stand or fall by 
 their actions when all human pageantry shall cease when the 
 hearts of all shall be laid open. If you regard your most important 
 interests if you wish that your conscience should whisper to you 
 words of consolation, or speak to you in the terrible language of re- 
 morse, weigh well the verdict you are to pronounce. As for me, I 
 am careless and indifferent to my fate. I can look danger, and I can 
 look death in the face, for I am shielded by the consciousness of my 
 own rectitude I may be condemned to languish in the recesses of a 
 dungeon 1 may be doomed to ascend the scaffold. Nothing can 
 deprive me of the recollection of the past, nothing can destroy my 
 inward peace of mind, arising from the remembrance of having dis- 
 charged my duty." 
 
 When Mr, Muir sat down, an unanimous burst of applause was 
 expressed by the audience. (He spoke nearly three hours com- 
 menced his address at 10 at night ; and finished about 1 on Saturday 
 morning.) 
 
 The Lord Justice Clerk shortly summed up the evidence. His Lord- 
 ship said that the Indictment was the longest he had ever seen ; but it 
 was not necessary to prove the whole, in order to find the pannel guilty, 
 for the Jury had only to look at the concluding sentence of the In- 
 dictment, from which k was plain, that if any one part of the libel 
 was proven, it established the guilt of the pannel the same as if the 
 whole was substantiated. 
 
 Now (said his Lordship), this is the question for consideration : Is 
 the pannel guilty of sedition, or is he not ? Now, before this question 
 can be answered, two things must be attended to that require no proof. 
 First, That the British Constitution is the best that ever was since the 
 creation of the world, and it is not possible to make it better. For is 
 not every man secure ? does not every man reap the fruits of his own 
 industry, and sit safely under his own fig-tree ? The next circum- 
 stance is, that there was a spirit of sedition in this country last winter, 
 which made every good man very uneasy. And his Lordship coin- 
 cided in opinion with the master of the Grammar-school of Glasgow, 
 who told Mr. Muir that he thought proposing a Reform was very ill- 
 timed. Yet Mr. Muir had at that time gone about among ignorant 
 country people, making them forget their work, and told them that a 
 Reform was absolutely necessary for preserving their liberty, which,/ 
 if it had not been for him, they would never have thought was in I 
 danger. His Lordship did not doubt that this would appear to them,! 
 as it did to him, to be sedition. 
 
 The next thing to be attended to was the outlawry. Running 
 away from justice that was a mark of guilt. And what could he do 
 in France at that period ? pretending to be an ambassador to a foreign 
 country, without lawful authority, that was rebellion ; and he pretends 
 to have had influence with those wretches, the leading men there. 
 And what kind of folks were they ? His Lordship said, he never 
 liked the French all his days, but now he hated t/tem. 
 
 The Pannel's haranguing such multitudes of ignorant weavers,
 
 108 
 
 v \ >1 
 V \V > *\ 
 
 \| 
 ' 
 
 \. > V 
 
 5- >i 
 
 about their grievances, might have been attended with the worst con- 
 sequences to the peace of the nation, and the safety of our glorious 
 Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Muir might have known, that no attention could be paid to 
 such a rabble. What right had they to representation ? He could 
 have told them that the Parliament would never listen to their petition. 
 How could they think of it ? A Government in every country should 
 be just like a Corporation,* and in this country it is made up of the 
 landed interest which alone has a right to be represented. As for the 
 rabble, who have nothing but personal property, what hold has the 
 nation of them ? What security for the payment of their taxes ? They 
 may pack up all their property on their backs, and leave the country 
 in the twinkling of an eye, but landed property cannot be removed. 
 
 The tendency of the Pannel's conduct was plainly to promote a 
 spirit of revolt, and if what was demanded was not given, to take it 
 by force. His Lordship had not the smallest doubt that the Jury were 
 like himself, convinced of the Pannel's guilt, and desired them to 
 return such verdict as would do them honour. 
 
 The Court retired at two o'clock on Saturday morning, and met 
 again at 12 o'clock of the same day, when the Jury returned a verdict 
 unanimously finding the Pannel " GUILTY of the crimes libelled." 
 
 The verdict being recorded, the Lord Justice Clerk addressed the 
 Jury, and said that this trial bad been of the greatest importance. He 
 was happy that they had bestowed so much attention upon it, and 
 informed them that the Court highly approved of the verdict they had 
 given. He then desired their Lordships to state what punishment 
 should be inflicted, which they did to the following purport. 
 
 Lord Henderland\ observed, that the alarming situation in which 
 this country was, during the course of last winter, gave uneasiness to 
 all thinking men. His Lordship said, that he now arrived at the 
 most disagreeable part of the duty incumbent upon him, which was, 
 to fix the punishment due to the crime of which the pannel was found 
 guilty. The Indictment contained a charge of sedition, exciting a 
 spirit of discontent among the inferior classes of people, and an attack 
 against the glorious Constitution of this country. The Jury, by the 
 verdict which they had returned, and to which the Court had alone 
 recourse, had found the paunel guilty ; and it was their Lordships' 
 duty only, now to affix the punishment due to the offence. His 
 Lordship said he would not dwell upon the evil consequences of the 
 crimes committed by the prisoner. The melancholy example of a 
 neighbouring country, which would for ever stain the page of history, 
 rendered it unnecessary for him to recapitulate the circumstances of 
 the case. In that country, the consequences of such measures have 
 produced every kind of violence, rapine, and murder. There appeared, 
 he said, to have been in this country a regular plan of seditious mea- 
 sures. The indecent applause which was given to Mr. Muir last 
 
 * Horace Twiss, Sir Charles Wetheral, and Co. must have been studying his 
 Lordship lately ! Excellent worthies! 
 f " Clerk of the Pipe" for Scotland.
 
 109 
 
 night, at tlie conclusion of his defence, within these walls, unknown 
 to that High Court, and inconsistent with the solemnity which ought 
 to pervade the administration of justice, and which was insulting to 
 the laws and dignity of that Court, proved to him that the spirit of 
 sedition had not as yet subsided. He would not, he said, seek to 
 aggravate the offence committed by the pannel, by the misconduct of 
 others, in order to increase the punishment. The punishment to be 
 inflicted is arbitrary, of which there is a variety. Banishment, he 
 observed, would be improper, as it would only be sending to another 
 country, a man, where he might have the opportunity of exciting the 
 same spirit of discontent, and sowing with a plentiful hand sedition. 
 Whipping was too severe and disgraceful, the more especially to a 
 man who had bore his character and rank in life. And imprisonment, 
 he considered, would be but a temporary punishment, when the crimi- 
 nal would be again let loose, and so again disturb the happiness of 
 the people. There remains but one punishment in our law, and it 
 wrung his very heart to mention it, viz. transportation. It was a duty 
 his Lordship considered he owed to his countrymen to pronounce it, in 
 the situation in which he sat, as the punishment due to the pannel's 
 crimes. His Lordship observed, it was extraordinary that a gentleman of 
 his description, of his profession, and of the talents he possessed, should 
 be guilty of a crime deserving such a punishment; but he saw no 
 alternative ; for what security could we have against his future opera- 
 tions, but a removal from his country, to a place where he could do 
 no further harm ? His Lordship was therefore of opinion, that the 
 pannel should be re-committed to prison, there to remain till a proper 
 opportunity should offer for transporting him to such place as his 
 Majesty, with the advice of his Privy Council, might appoint, for the 
 space of fourteen years from the date of the sentence ; and that he 
 should not return within that period, under the pain of death. 
 
 Lord Swinton.* The crime with which the pannel is, by a Jury of 
 his country, found guilty, is sedition. It is a generic crime defined 
 by our lawyers to be a commotion of the people without authority, 
 and of exciting others to such commotion against the public welfare. 
 This crime, he observed, consisted of many gradations, and might 
 have run from a petty mob about wages, even to high treason. He 
 thought the punishment should be adapted to the crime. The ques- 
 tion, he said, then was, what was the degree of the crime the pannel 
 has been guilty of? and that was to be discovered from the libel, of 
 which he has been found guilty by the unanimous verdict of the Jury. 
 It appeared to his Lordship to be a crime of the most heinous kind, 
 and there was scarcely a distinction between it and high treason, as 
 by the dissolution of the social compact, it made way for, and so 
 might be said to include every sort of crime, murder, robbery, rapine, 
 fire-raising, in short, every species of wrong, public and private. 
 This, he observed, was no theoretical reasoning, for we had it exem- 
 plified before our eyes in the present state of France, where, under 
 
 * See Pension List of Scotland for " Swinton."
 
 
 110 
 
 the pretence of asserting liberty, the worst sort of tyranny was estab- 
 lished, and all the loyal and moral ties which bind mankind were 
 broken. Nay, shameful to tell, even religion itself was laid aside, 
 and publicly disavowed by the National Convention. And in this 
 ntt y certain wretched persons had assumed to themselves, most 
 ~jMfalsely and insidiously, the respectable name of Friends of the People 
 and of Reform, although they deserved the very opposite denomina- 
 ''tion ; by which means they have misled and drawn after them a great 
 number of well-meaning, though simple and unwary people. If pun- 
 ishment adequate to the crime were to be sougbt for, there could be 
 found no punishment in our law sufficient for the crime in the pre- 
 sent case, now that TORTUHE is happily abolished.* 
 
 By the Roman law, which is held to be our common law where 
 there is no statute, the punishment was various, and transportation 
 was among the mildest mentioned. Paulus L. 38, Dig. de Poems, 
 writes, Actores seditionis et tumultus, populo coneitato, pro qualitate 
 dignitatis, aut in furcam tolluntur, aut lestiis objiciuntur, aut in 
 insulam deportantur. We have chosen the mildest of these punish- 
 ments. By the Codex, lib. 9, t. 30, de scditiosis et his qui plebem 
 contra rempublicam undent collegere, 1. 1 and 2, "such persons are 
 subjected ad mulctam gravissimam. Baldus writes, Provocans tumul- 
 tum et clamorem in populo, debet mori, pccna seditionis. And by a 
 Constitution of the Emperor Leo, Subdandos autem pcenis eis quas 
 de seditionis et tumultus auctoribus retustissima decrela sanxerint. 
 
 The sole object of punishment among us is only to deter others 
 from committing the like crime in time coming ; therefore, the pun- 
 ishment should be made equal to the crime. All that is necessary is, 
 that it serve as an example and terror to others, in time coming, 
 against a repetition of the like offence. In- the present case, he thought 
 that transportation was the lightest punishment that could be assigned, 
 and that for the space of fourteen years* 
 
 Lord Dunsinnan concurred. 
 
 Lord Abercrombie. His Lordship did not think it necessary to say 
 much as to the enormity of the crime, after what had been already 
 said. By our law it might have amounted to treason, and, even as 
 the. law now stands, it came very near it. He observed that Mr. 
 Muir, last night, when conducting his defence, had stated, and which 
 was marked, and it had great weight with him, " That the people 
 should be cautious, and by all manner of means avoid tumults and 
 disorders ; for, through time, the mass of the people would bring 
 about a revolution." (Here Mr. Muir rose and said, " I deny it, my 
 Lord it is totally false.") If any thing could add to the improper 
 nature of the pannel's defence, it was his pretended mission to France, 
 and the happiness he expressed in the circle of acquaintance he had 
 there. It was evident, said his Lordship, that his feelings did too 
 much accord with the feelings of those monsters. His Lordship 
 
 * The use of Torture was only put an end to, in Scotland, by an Act of the 
 British Parliament in 1708.
 
 Ill 
 
 coincided with the rest of their Lordships, in regard to the punish- 
 ment which they thought Mr. Muir deserved. 
 
 Lord Justice Clei'k. His Lordship said he was considerably affected 
 to see the pannel tried for sedition, a man who had got a liberal edu- 
 cation was member of a respectable society possessed considerable 
 talents and had sustained a respectable character. His Lordship 
 considered the very lowest species of this crime as heinous, and that 
 it was aggravated according to the object in view. Here the object 
 was important ; for it was creating in the lower classes of people dis- 
 loyalty and dissatisfaction to Government, and this amounting to the 
 highest sort of sedition is bordering on treason, and a little more would 
 have made the pannel stand trial for his life. 
 
 His Lordship agreed in the propriety of the proposed punishment, 
 and he observed, that the indecent applause which was given the 
 pannel last night convinced him, that a spirit of discontent still lurked 
 in the minds of the people, and that it would be dangerous to allow 
 him to remain in this country. His Lordship said, this circumstance^ 
 had no little_wejght with him, when considering of the punishment 
 Mr. Muir deserved. He never had a doubt but transportation was 
 the proper punishment for such a crime, but he only hesitated whether 
 it should be for life, or for the term of fourteen years The latter he 
 preferred, and he hoped the pannel would reflect on his past conduct, 
 and see the impropriety which he had committed ; and that if he should 
 be again restored to his country, he might still have an opportunity of 
 showing himself to be a good member of that Constitution which he 
 seemed to despise so much. 
 
 After his Lordship had delivered his opinion, and during the time 
 the sentence was recording, Mr. Muir rose and said : 
 
 " My Lords, / have only a few words to say. I shall not animad- 
 vert upon the severity or the leniency of my sentence. Were. I to be 
 led this moment from the bar to the scaffold, 1 should feel the same 
 calmness and serenity which I now do. My mind tells me that Ihave 
 acted agreeably to my conscience, and that I Jiave engaged in a GOOD, 
 a JUST, and a GLORIOUS cause, A CAUSE WHICH SOONER OR 
 
 LATER, MUST AND WILL PREVAIL, AND BY A TIMELY REFORM, 
 SAVE THIS COUNTRY FROM DESTRUCTION." 
 
 " SENTENCE. 
 
 " The Lord Justice Clerk and Lords Commissioners of Justiciary 
 having considered the foregoing Verdict, whereby the Assize, all in one 
 voice, Find the Pannel GUILTY of the CRIMES libelled the said 
 Lords, in respect of the said Verdict, in terms of an Act passed in the 
 25th year of his present Majesty, entitled an Act for the more 
 effectual Transportation of Felons and other offenders in that part of 
 Great Britain called Scotland,' Ordain and Adjudge, that the said 
 Thomas Muir be Transported beyond Seas to such place as his Ma- 
 jesty, with the advice of his Privy Council, shall declare and appoint, 
 and that for the space of FOURTEEN YEARS from this date; with 
 certification to him, if after being so transported he shall return to, 
 
 /
 
 112 
 
 and be found at large, within any part of Great Britain, during the 
 said fourteen years, without some lawful cause, and be thereby legally 
 convicted, he shall suffer Death, as in cases of Felony, without bene6t 
 of Clergy, by the law of England and Ordain the said Thomas Muir 
 to be carried back to the Tolbooth of Edinburgh, therein to be detained 
 till he is delivered over, for being so transported, for which this shall 
 be to all concerned a sufficient warrant. 
 
 (Signed) ROBERT M'QuEEN." 
 
 No. II. 
 
 Copy Letter, Rev. WM. DUN, Minister of Kirkintilloch, to Mr. MUIR. 
 
 MY DEAR SIR, The unanimous wish of the Session of Cadder, 
 and I am desired to say, the prevailing wish of the people of Cadder, 
 is, to have the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper dispensed among them 
 this season ; of this they have desired me to inform you, hoping it 
 will meet with your approbation. The Presbytery of Glasgow is to 
 be advised of it on Wednesday first, and requested to appoint a day 
 for the purpose, and the fourth Sabbath of July has been thought of 
 by some. As an ordinance of our holy religion, it is surely proper 
 in other respects it may do good, and can do no harm. 
 
 To have your approbation of this design before the meeting of 
 Presbytery, would be agreeable to the Elders, and also to him who 
 has the pleasure to be, 
 
 DEAR SIR, 
 
 With respect, 
 
 Your most humble Servant, 
 
 WM. DUN. 
 Kirkintilloch, June 8, 1792. 
 
 No. III. 
 Answer by Mr. MUIR. 
 
 DEAR SIR, The proposed celebration of the Sacrament of the 
 Lord's Supper, in the parish of Cadder, is a measure to which I cor- 
 dially give my highest approbation. Whatever political opinion may 
 be entertained by different parties, in this instance, I should consider 
 their interference as a crime of the deepest guilt.* I therefore hope, 
 that upon all sides there will be universal unanimity. No exertion 
 upon my part shall be wanting, to render every thing convenient for 
 the Ministers who may attend. -f- 
 
 You are, however, sensible, that from the various altercations which 
 have lately occurred, much of the utility of the measure will depend 
 upon a prudent choice of these Ministers. I could wish that gentle- 
 men, obnoxious to no party, should be invited, whose public minis- 
 trations will not be associated in the minds of the people with prior 
 
 * To the scandal of the Church of Scotland, political animosity, at this time, 
 frequently displayed itself from the pulpit! 
 
 f Mr. Muir generally entertained the Ministers at Iluntershill.
 
 113 
 
 political conduct whom they will regard solely as the Ministers of 
 religion, and not as the partisans of any particular party. Upon this 
 subject I beg your advice. I value the interests of religion, and I 
 consider this to be to them of the highest moment. 
 
 Returning you my sincere thanks for your attention to the parish, 
 in a matter of such superior importance, I remain, 
 
 DEAR SIR, 
 
 Yours most respectfully, 
 
 Edinburgh, llth June, 1792. THOMAS MuiR. 
 
 Rev. Mr. WM. DUN. 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 Original List of Assize, or of the 45 Jury men, from whom the Lord 
 Justice Clerk " selected" the 15 who sat on the Trial, shewing/ the 
 order in which these 15 were selected. 
 
 1 Sir John Clerk of Pennycuick, Baronet 
 Sir William Dick of Prestonfield, Baronet 
 Sir John Inglis of Cramond, Baronet 
 Sir Archibald Hope of Craighall, Baronet 
 
 1 5 Sir James Fowlis of Collington, Baronet 
 
 Sir Philip Ainslie of Comley-Bank 
 Charles Watson of Saughton 
 James Forrest of Comiston 
 Thomas Craig of Riccarton 
 
 2 10 Captain John Inglis of Auchindinny 
 
 3 John Wauchope of Edmonstone 
 
 4 John Balfour younger of Pilrig 
 David Johnston of Bavelaw 
 John Davie of Gaviside 
 
 5 15 Andrew Wauchope of Niddry Marishal 
 
 6 John Trotter of Mortonhall 
 
 7 Gilbert Innes of Stow 
 John Davidson of Ravelrigg 
 
 8 James Rochied of Inverleith - 
 20 John Newton of Curriehill 
 
 James Calderwood Durham of Polton 
 Thomas Wright of Greenhill 
 
 James Gillespie of Spyelaw > * . 
 
 Thomas Sivewright of Soutli-house 
 25 James Kerr of Woodburn 
 
 9 John Alves of Dalkeith, portioner 
 Patrick Pridie, hatter in Edinburgh 
 Thomas Brown, bookseller there 
 Andrew Smith, perfumer there 
 
 30 James Charles, hosier there 
 
 Alexander Inglis, merchant there 
 William Pattison, merchant there 
 William Cooper, upholsterer there 
 Andrew Ramsay, slater there.
 
 114 
 
 35 Thomas Duncan, bookseller there 
 
 10 William Dalrymple, merchant there 
 Francis Buchan, merchant there 
 James Mansfield, banker there 
 
 11 Donald Smith, banker there 
 
 12 40 James Dickson, bookseller there 
 
 Samuel Paterson, merchant there 
 
 13 George Kinnear, banker "there 
 
 14 Andrew Forbes, merchant there 
 
 15 John fforner, merchant there 
 
 45 Alexander Wallace, banker there. 
 
 No. V. 
 
 List of Witnesses for the Croion. 
 1 John Brown, weaver at Lennoxtoun, parish of Campsie, and 
 
 county of Stirling. 
 
 John Spier, weaver at Lennoxtoun aforesaid. 
 William Robertson, excise-officer there. 
 Francis Clark, calico-printer at Lennox Mill, parish and county 
 
 aforesaid. 
 5 Alexander Johnston, bleacher at Kincaid Printfield, Campsie 
 
 aforesaid. 
 
 Henry Freeland, weaver in Kirkintilloch. 
 William Muir, weaver there. 
 John Scott, wright there. 
 Robert Weddel, weaver there. 
 10 James Baird, hosier there. 
 
 The Rev. Mr. William Dunn, minister of Kirkintilloch. 
 John Scott, weaver there. 
 William Knox, weaver there. 
 
 James Muir, student of divinity, residing at Campsie. 
 15 Anne Fisher, servant, or late servant, to Mr. John Carlisle, Col- 
 lector of the Cess in Glasgow. 
 Thomas Wilson, barber in Glasgow. 
 William Reid, bookseller and stationer there. 
 James Brash, bookseller and stationer there. 
 David Blair, manufacturer in Glasgow. 
 
 20 John Muir, senior, late hat-manufacturer, presently residing there. 
 John Barclay, residing in the parish of Calder, in the county of 
 
 Lanark, and one of the elders of said parish. 
 The Rev. Mr. James Lapslie, minister of Campsie. 
 James Campbell, writer to the signet. 
 James Denholm, writer in Edinburgh. 
 25 Hugh Bell, brewer there. 
 
 John Buchanan, baker in Canongate of Edinburgh. 
 Mr. John Morthland, advocate. 
 
 William Skirving of Strathruddy, residing in Edinburgh. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel William Dalrymple of Fordell.
 
 115 
 
 30 Mr. Robert Forsyth, advocate. 
 
 Richard Fowler, student of medicine, residing in Edinburgh. 
 John Pringle, Esq. Sheriff-depute of the county of Edinburgh. 
 William Scott, Procurator-fiscal of the said county of Edinburgh. 
 Joseph Mack, writer in Edinburgh. 
 35 Sir James Colquhoun of Luss, Baronet, Sheriff-depute of the shire 
 
 of Dumbarton. 
 
 William Honyman, Esq. Sheriff-depute of the shire of Lanark. 
 Harry Davidson, Esq. Sheriff-substitute of the county of Edinburgh. 
 George Williamson, messenger in Edinburgh. 
 Mr. James Carinichael, commander of the Justice hulk, in the 
 
 service of the Board of Customs. 
 
 40 William Ross, Esq. one of the Justices of Peace for the county of 
 Wigton. 
 
 No. VI. 
 List of Exculpatory Witnesses for Mr. MUIR. 
 
 1 William Riddle, baker in Glasgow. 
 
 John Hamilton, manufacturer there. 
 
 David Dale, junior, manufacturer there. 
 
 Basil Ronald of Broomloue, there. 
 5 Alexander Park, writer there. 
 
 George Weddel, manufacturer there. 
 
 John Russel, merchant in Gallowgate there. 
 
 John Brock, manufacturer there. 
 
 John Wilson, shoemaker in Gorbals of Glasgow. 
 10 John Lockhart, mason there. 
 
 Walter Hart, heritor in Tradeston, Glasgow. 
 
 Hugh Moodie, spirit-dealer in Glasgow. 
 
 James Cooper, shoemaker there. 
 
 John Gray, manufacturer there. 
 
 15 Daniel M< Arthur, one of the masters of the Grammar-school, 
 Glasgow. 
 
 James Richardson, senior, merchant there. 
 
 William Clydesdale, cabinet-maker there. 
 
 John Tennant, brewer there. 
 
 George Bell, junior, manufacturer there. 
 20 George Stayley, manufacturer there. 
 
 Robert M'Kinlay, print-cutter in Mr. Fulton's employment, near 
 Paisley. 
 
 William Orr, junior, manufacturer in Paisley. 
 
 James Craig, manufacturer there. 
 
 James Gemmel, merchant there. 
 25 William Muir, Fisherrow there. 
 
 Hamilton Ballantyne, Storrie street there. 
 
 James Muir, weaver, Shuttle street there. 
 
 John Buchanan, foreman at Kincaid printfield, Campsie. 
 Robert Henrie, printer there.
 
 116 
 
 30 Patrick Horn, printer there. 
 
 Smollet M'Lintock, block-cutter there. 
 
 William Henry of Borrowstown, parish Balclernock. 
 
 James M' Gibbon, printer at Kincaid printfield. 
 
 John Freeland, distiller in Kirkintilloch. 
 35 Andrew Rochead, younger, of- Duntiblae Mill, Kirkintilloch. 
 
 Robert Boak, surgeon in Kirkintilloch. 
 
 John Edmund, print-cutter, Kincaid printfield. 
 
 Robert Millar, weaver in Cambuslang. 
 
 The Rev. Mr. William Dunn, minister of Kirkintilloch. 
 40 David Wallace, late servant to James Muir of Huntershill, now to 
 James Stark of Adamslie. 
 
 Robert Scott, weaver in Kirkintilloch. 
 
 Archibald Binnie, type-founder, Edinburgh. 
 
 Charles Salter, brewer in Edinburgh. 
 
 Peter Wood, teacher in Portsburgh. 
 45 John Buchanan, baker in Canongate. 
 
 . Bell, tobacconist, Canongate. 
 
 William Skirving, Edinburgh. 
 
 Maurice Thomson, starch-maker there. 
 
 Andrew Wilson, brewer in Portsburgh. 
 50 John Smith, weaver, Lothian Road. 
 
 Peter Hardie, brewer in Portsburgh. 
 
 Colonel William Dalrymple of Fordell. 
 
 William Johnston, Esq. Edinburgh. 
 
 The Right Hon. Lord Daer. 
 55 Newton, residing at St. Patrick's Square, Edinburgh. 
 
 No. VII. 
 Declaration of MTU. MUIR before the Sheriff". 
 
 At Edinburgh, the 2d of January, 1798. 
 
 The which day compeared, in presence of John Pringle, Esq. 
 Advocate, his Majesty's Sheriff-depute of the shire of Edinburgh, 
 Thomas Muir, Esq. Advocate ; who being examined by the Sheriff, 
 and being interrogated, Whether or not the declarant, in the month of 
 November last, was in the towns of Kirkintilloch, Lennoxtown of 
 Campsie, or Milltown of Campsie ? Declares, That he declines 
 answering any questions in this place, as he considers a declaration 
 of this kind, obtained in these circumstances, to be utterly inconsist- 
 ent with the constitutional rights of a British subject : That he has 
 solemnly maintained this principle in pleading for others in a criminal 
 court ; and that, when it comes to be applied to his own particular 
 case, as at present, he will not deviate from it. Declares, That he 
 neither composed, published, nor circulated books or pamphlets, 
 inflammatory or seditious : That in public and private, he always 
 advised, and earnestly entreated those who might be engaged in the 
 prosecution of a Constitutional Reform, in the representation of the 
 people in the House of Commons, to adopt measures mild but firm, 
 moderate but constitutional ; and that he has always inculcated upon
 
 117 
 
 all whom he may have addressed upon any occasion, that there was 
 no other mode of accomplishing a Constitutional Reform in the repre- 
 sentation of the people in the House of Commons, hut by the mode 
 of respectful and Constitutional Petitions to that House, for that 
 purpose ; and that he did not doubt but the wisdom of that House 
 would listen to the voice of the people, when thus constitutionally 
 presented. And being shown three numbers of a paper, intituled, 
 The Patriot, the first dated "Tuesday, April 17, 1792;" the second 
 dated "Tuesday, June 12;" and the third, " Tuesday, July 10," 
 without mention of the year ; and being interrogated, if he gave these 
 pamphlets to William Muir, weaver in Kirkintilloch, and eight other 
 numbers of the same publication ? Declares, that he adheres to the 
 principles which he has mentioned in the preceding part of this decla- 
 ration, and declines answering the question. And being shown a 
 book, intituled, " The Works of Thomas Paine, Esq." and interrogated, 
 if he did not give said book to Henry Freeland, weaver in Kirkintil- 
 loch, and Preses of the Reform Society there ? Declares, That he 
 adheres to his principle, and declines answering the question. And 
 being shown a pamphlet, intituled, " A Declaration of Rights," and 
 an " Address to the People ;" and interrogated, Whether or not he 
 gave the aforesaid pamphlet to the said Henry Freeland ? Declares^ 
 That he declines answering, upon the aforesaid principle. And being 
 interrogated, Whether or not he gave to the aforesaid Henry Freeland, 
 a book, intituled, " Flower on the French Constitution ?" Declares, 
 That he declines answering the question, upon the aforesaid principle ; 
 and all the before-mentioned books are marked as relative hereto, of 
 this date. And being interrogated, Whether or not the declarant 
 was a member of the Convention which met at Edinburgh, in the 
 month of December last, styling themselves the Convention of the 
 Associated Friends of the People, and produced to that meeting a 
 paper, intituled, " Address from the Society of United Irishmen in 
 Dublin, to the Society for Reform in Scotland, 23d November, 1792," 
 and moved, that the thanks of the meeting should be returned to that 
 Society for said Address ? Declares and declines answering the ques- 
 tion, upon the aforesaid principle. All this he declares to be truth. 
 
 (Signed) THOMAS MUIR. 
 JOHN PRINGLE. 
 
 No. VIII. 
 Declaration of GEORGE WILLIAMSON. 
 
 At Edinburgh, 10th August, 1793. 
 
 GEORGE WILLIAMSON, messenger in Edinburgh, declares, That 
 on Friday the 2d of August instant, he received a warrant of the 
 Court of Justiciary, for bringing the person of Mr. Thomas Muir, 
 younger of Huntershill, from the prison of Stranraer to the prison of 
 Edinburgh. In consequence of which he went to Stranraer, and 
 arrived there in the morning of Sunday the 4th instant, when he 
 received the person of the said Thomas Muir ; and he also received 
 from Mr. Kerr, one of the Magistrates of Stranraer, a parcel, sealed,
 
 118 
 
 and intituled, " Papers belonging and found on Mr. Thomas Muir, 
 W. R. J. P." And which packet was sealed with the seal of the 
 burgh of Stranraer, and also with two seals, which he now hears Mr. 
 Muir declare to be his ; and which parcel he now exhibits, with the 
 seals entire. 
 
 And the foresaid parcel having been opened in presence of the said 
 Sheriff-substitute, Hugh Warrender, Esq.* Mr. William Scott, Procu- 
 rator-fiscal of the shire of Edinburgh, George Williamson, messenger 
 in Edinburgh, and Joseph Mack, writer, Sheriff-Clerk's Office ; and 
 also in presence of Mr. Thomas Muir, who admitted that this was 
 the parcel containing the articles belonging to him, which were sealed 
 up by the Magistrates of Stranraer, and to which he then affixed his 
 seals, and which he observed to be entire, previous to its being opened 
 in his presence ; The same was found to contain : 
 
 1. Ten copies of a pamphlet, intituled, " Proceedings of the 
 Society of United Irishmen of Dublin. Dublin, printed by 
 order of the Society, 1793." 
 
 2. A printed copy of the trial, at large, of Samuel Bushby, and 
 Judith his wife. 
 
 3. Twenty-nine copies of a printed paper, intituled, " United 
 Irishmen of Dublin, 7th June, 1793," being an Address from 
 the Catholic Committee, to their Catholic Countrymen. 
 
 4. Five copies of another printed paper, being " Resolutions of 
 the Society of United Irishmen, held on the 15th of July." 
 
 5. Twenty-two copies of a paper, purporting to be an abstract 
 
 of the trial of Francis Graham, Esq. one of his Majesty's 
 Justices of Peace for the county of Dublin, on the 9th July, 
 1793, before the Hon. Baron Power. 
 
 6. A printed copy of an Act to prevent tumultuous risings, &c. 
 of the 27th Geo. III. printed Dublin, 1787. 
 
 7. Eighty-four copies of a printed paper, dated, " Rath Coffy, 
 1st July, 1793 ;" containing a quotation from Milton, on the 
 liberty of unlicensed printing. 
 
 8. Letter, signed J. Muir, dated Glasgow, 21st July, 1793, 
 beginning with, Dear Sir, but having no address. 
 
 9. Letter, signed Thomas Muir, and addressed to Captain 
 George Towers, of the American ship the Hope, from Balti- 
 more, care of Messrs. Cunningham & Co. merchants, Belfast, 
 and dated Dublin, 27th July, 1793. 
 
 10. A Red Turkey pocket-book, containing: 
 
 1. A passport from the Department of Paris, in favour of 
 - Citizen Thomas Muir, dated 23d April, 1793, having 
 
 upon the back an indorsement, dated 5th May, 1793. 
 
 2. Receipt by A. M'DoUgal to Mr. Muir, for 900 livres, for 
 his passage in the cabin of the ship from Havre de Grace 
 to the Port of New York, dated Havre de Grace, 16th 
 May, 1793. 
 
 * Afterwards Crown Agent for Scotland.
 
 119 
 
 3. Certificate that Thomas Muir has been duly elected one of 
 the members of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin, 
 dated llth January, 1793, signed Archibald Hamilton 
 Rowan, Secretary. 
 
 4*. Sealed letter, directed, <( The Rev. Thomas Fische Palmer, 
 Edinburgh." The seal, a Cap of Liberty, over a Fleur de Lis, 
 motto, Ca Ira. 
 
 5. Ditto, directed, " Norman M'Leod, Esq. M.P. Scotland." 
 
 6. Ditto, directed, To Mrs. M'Cormick, at Dr. M'Cormick's, 
 St. Andrews, Scotland." 
 
 7. Another passport, of the Department of Calais, in favour of 
 citizen Thomas Muir, dated 15th January, 1793. 
 
 8. Passport of the Commissary of the Section of the Thuilleries, 
 in favour of citizen Thomas Muir, dated 4th May, 1793. 
 
 9. Declaration of Residence, dated 3d April, 1793, in favour of 
 Thomas Muir. 
 
 10. Letter, signed D. Stewart, dated No. 52, Frith-street, Soho, 
 London, February 1. 
 
 1st. (Addressed) John Hurford Stone, Esq. or Thomas Muir, 
 Esq. Advocate, No. 99, Palais Royal, Paris. 
 
 11. Letter, signed James Campbell, dated No. 10, St. Andrew's 
 Square, Edinburgh, 26th January, 1793 : addressed to Thomas 
 Muir, Esq. younger of Huntershill. 
 
 12. Letter, signed D. Stewart, dated 52, Frith-street, January 30 : 
 addressed, Thomas Muir, Esq. Advocate, to the care of John 
 Hurford Stone, Esq. Paris. 
 
 13. A letter, signed W. Skirving, without date, addressed to 
 Thomas Muir, Esq. younger of Huntershill. 
 
 No. IX. 
 
 Copy Certificate of Society of United Irishmen of Dublin. 
 
 I hereby certify that Thomas Muir has been duly elected ; and 
 having taken the Test, provided in the Constitution, has been admitted 
 a Member of this Society. 
 
 (Signed) ARCHIBALD HAMILTON ROWAN, Sec. 
 No. 205. Jan. 11, 1793. 
 
 On the margin of the original, is the figure of a harp, with this 
 motto, " It is new strung, and shall be heard." 
 
 No. X. 
 
 Passport at Paris. 
 
 Republique Francaise Department de Paris. 
 
 Passport delivre en execution de la Loi du 7 Decembre, 1792, 1'an premier de la 
 Republique Francaise. 
 
 Vu 1'avis du Conseil general de la Commune de Paris, laissez passer 
 le citoyen Thomas Muir, ailant a Philadelphie, domicilie a Paris,
 
 120 
 
 tnunicipalite cle Paris, departement cle Paris, natif de Ecosse, horn me 
 de loi, age de vingt bait ans, taille de 5 pieds 9 ponces, cbeveux et 
 sourcils chatain, yeux bleux, nez aquilin, boucbe raoyenne, menton 
 roud, front baut, visage long et plein, pretez-lui aide et assistance, 
 au besoin. 
 
 Fait en directoire, le 23 Avril mil sept cent quatre vingt treize : 
 1'an deuxeime de la Republique Francaise ; et a ledit citoyen Muir 
 signe avec nous administrateurs composant le Directoire du Departe- 
 ment de Paris. 
 
 (Approbatif) THOMAS MUIR. 
 
 DUBOIS. 
 
 E. J. B. MAILLARD. 
 
 LE BLAUIF. 
 
 NICOLEAU, Presid. 
 
 Vu par nous Ministres des Affaires Etrangeres. A Paris, le 29 
 Avril 1'an 2'me de la Republique. 
 
 LE BRUN, 
 
 MAILLE, GARAT, Gr. 
 
 Translation. 
 
 Passport delivered in execution of the law, of the 7th December, 1792, first year 
 of the French Republic. 
 
 Having seen the recommendation of the Council General, the 
 Commune of Paris, permit citizen Thomas Muir to proceed on his 
 way to Philadelphia, domiciled at Paris, municipality of Paris, depart- 
 ment of Paris, native of Scotland, a lawyer, 28 years of age, 5 feet 9 
 inches high, his hair and eye-lashes of a chesnut colour, blue eyes, 
 aquiline nose, small mouth, round chin, high forehead, long and full 
 face. Send him aid and assistance if in want. 
 
 Executed in the Directory, 23d April, 1 793, second year of the 
 French Republic. Citizen Muir signs this with us administrators, 
 composing the Directory of the Department of Paris. 
 
 (Approved) Signed as above. 
 
 Seen by us Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Paris, 29th April, second 
 year of Republic. 
 
 Signed as above. 
 
 No. XL 
 
 Letter from Mr. MUIR to Mr. CAMPBELL, Writer to the Signet, 
 
 Edinburgh. 
 
 Paris, Jan. 23, 1793. 
 
 DEAR SIR, I wrote you from Calais and from Paris, and impa- 
 tiently expect your answer. Write me fully about my private affairs, 
 but about nothing else. Whenever you or my friends judge it expe- 
 dient or proper, I will immediately return ; but I cannot leave Paris 
 without regret. I am honoured by the notice and friendship of an 
 amiable and distinguished circle ; and to a friend of humanity, it 
 affords much consolation to find according feelings in a foreign land.
 
 121 
 
 Present nay best wishes to all our friends, to Messrs. Johnston, 
 Skirving, Moffat, Buchanan, &c. I entreat you to find means to send 
 over the numbers of the two Edinburgh Newspapers. The London 
 papers come here but irregularly. One wishes to know what is going 
 on at home ; but tell my friends, it is only through the channel of 
 Newspapers, I can receive that intelligence. Write me under the 
 following cover, Au Citoyen de Coudile, Hotel de Toulon, No. 1, rue 
 des Fosses du Temple. Communicate this address to all my friends. 
 Inform them no letter can reach me, if the postage is not paid in 
 Edinburgh. I am, 
 
 DEAR SIR, 
 
 Yours, &c. 
 
 THOMAS MUIR. 
 
 P. S. My compliments to Mr. Dick ; entreat him to take the 
 charge of my things. 
 
 No. XII. 
 Second Letter from Mr. MUIR to Mr. CAMPBELL. 
 
 DEAR SIR, I have written you frequently: whenever you think 
 it proper I shall return. At the same time, honoured as I am by the 
 civilities and attention of many amiable characters, it would be with 
 reluctance I could quit Paris for a month or two. About my private 
 business write me, but not a word on any other subject. Remember 
 me to Johnstone, Skirving, Moffat, &c. Tell them no distance of 
 space shall obliterate my recollection of them. Write me punctually, 
 I entreat you. Cause them likewise write me. Omit no post. My 
 address is under cover, Au Citoyen Coudile, Hotel de Toulon, No. 1, 
 rue des Fosses de Temple. 1 am, 
 
 Yours, &c. 
 
 THOMAS MUIR. 
 
 Paris, Jan. 27, 1793. 
 
 No. XIII. 
 
 Letter from Sir JAMES M'!NTOSH to Mr. CAMPBELL. 
 
 SIR, I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter respecting 
 the business of Mr. Muir. I did not lose a moment in finding a safe 
 and speedy conveyance to him at Paris for your letters, and those of 
 his other friends in Scotland, sent to my care. I delayed from day to 
 day, in the perpetual expectation of seeing Mr. Muir here on his 
 return. It becomes now, however, necessary for me to inform you, 
 that he is not yet come ; and considering the extreme anxiety which 
 he must have felt to return as soon as possible, I think it very probable 
 that this delay ought to be ascribed to the embargo laid on the vessels 
 in the ports of France, which may perhaps have rendered it impossible 
 for him, though even at Calais, to make his passage to England. I
 
 think this probability at least sufficiently great to be pleaded for a 
 delay of his trial, and it is to enable you and his friends to make any 
 use of it that you may think fit, that I have now thought it necessary 
 to communicate this state of facts to you. I am, 
 
 SIR, 
 
 Yours, &c. 
 
 JAMES M'INTOSH. 
 
 St. Charlotte Street, Portland Place, Feb. 7, 1793. 
 
 No. XIV. 
 Letter from Mr. Mum's Father to Capt. GEO. TOWERS. 
 
 Glasgow, July 21, 1793. 
 
 DEAR SIR, I am at a very great loss how to answer your letter, as 
 it's not understood by me : if it's the Friend that I have, if it's he, I 
 would be overjoyed to see his hand-writing, and to know what has 
 become of him these three months. I thought he had been at Phila- 
 delphia ere now, where letters are forwarded for him ; and if you are 
 to stay any time at Belfast, be so kind as write in course ; and I will 
 come over and see you and him. You can write the time you mean 
 to stay. Mr. John Richardson, a son of Deacon James Richardson, 
 I saw him this week at Greenock ; he is to sail in the Almy of New 
 York directly, and has two packets of letters for him ; and there are 
 many letters wrote for him to the first people of America. Once he 
 were there, he'll get letters to General Washington ; and I hope, dear 
 Sir, you'll shew him every civility in your power, which I hope some 
 day gratefully to thank you for. There is a trunk also in the Almy 
 for him, which Mr. Richardson will deliver into his own hand. 1 sin- 
 cerely wish you a safe, pleasant, and successful voyage, and a happy 
 meeting with your friends. And I remain, 
 
 DEAR SIR, 
 
 Your most humble servant, 
 
 J. MUIR. 
 
 If it's the person I mean, a cousin of his, William Muir, formerly 
 of Leith, is lying at Philadelphia. His ship is an American bottom. 
 The loss of this young man has been a dreadful affliction to us. Please 
 give our friend this letter. I honoured his draft in favour of Mr. 
 Masey. He'll get his letters at the post-office, Philadelphia. 
 
 I hope in a year or two he can return, if he doth not love America ; 
 and be eo good as cause him write me one line in your letter. You 
 can direct it ; and if he does not c/ioose to sign it, you can put your 
 initials to it. 
 
 No. XV. 
 
 Letter from T. MUIR to Capt. GEO. TOWERS. 
 
 Dublin, July 27, 1793. 
 
 DEAR SIR, This day I received yours; and will be down upon 
 Tuesday evening. I have taken my place in the coach for to-morrow.
 
 123 
 
 I am happy to hear nay friends are well. I will write them from Bel- 
 fast. Of this you can give them information. I am, 
 
 D~EAR SIR, 
 Your respectful Friend, 
 
 THOMAS MUIR. 
 
 Capt. GEO. TOWERS, of the American ship, 
 the Hope, from Baltimore, at Belfast. 
 
 No. XVI. 
 
 Letter from W. SKIRVING to D. STEWART, Esq. No. 52, Frith-street, 
 Soho, London, Secretary to the Society of Friends of the People. 
 
 Edinburgh, Sept. 2, 1793. 
 
 SIR, I ought to have wrote you on Saturday, to give your Society 
 the means of contradicting the aspersion, which you will see by the 
 accounts of Mr. Muir's trial, has been thrown upon them. I have not 
 been able to command a settled thought since the alarming issue of 
 that astonishing trial. I never had a higher opinion of any person's 
 integrity, uprightness, and philanthropy ; nor is it diminished, but 
 increased. The feelings which I must, therefore, have had, since that 
 event, will plead my excuse with men of feeling. 
 
 In the evidence which I was called on to give, I stated the reason 
 for his going to London, and that I bad received a letter from Mr. 
 Muir, when at London, explaining the cause of his proceeding to Paris ; 
 which letter I was very sorry that I could not produce, though I had 
 preserved it carefully. Being desired to state, if I could recollect, the 
 reason which Mr. Muir assigned in that letter for his journey to Paris, 
 I said, that it was the opinion of friends, that if Mr. Muir would go 
 to Paris, he might have great influence with many to mitigate the 
 sentence of the French King. These friends were taken for your 
 Society ; and much freedom was used, to reprobate both the Society 
 of the Friends of the People in London, for presuming to send a mis- 
 sionary into another country, and Mr. Muir, for accepting such com- 
 mission. But I declare, upon my honour, that the thought of his being 
 sent by the Society of the Friends of the People in London, never 
 came into my mind. And if I expressed myself so, which it is impos- 
 sible I could do, I expressed a falsehood, and which I am bound in 
 justice to the Society, in this manner to contradict. 
 
 Mr. Muir is behaving with astonishing manliness. 
 
 I am, Sir, your obedient humble servant, 
 
 W. SKIRVING. 
 
 No. XVII. 
 
 Address to the Public. 
 
 IN the different accounts which have been published of Mr. Muir's 
 trial, mention is made of my having been committed to prison for 
 prevarication, or an attempt to conceal the truth. These accounts, 
 in so far as they regard me, being defective, I think it incumbent upon
 
 me, in justice to myself and my character, to present the public with 
 a candid statement of the whole matter. 
 
 Being called to the bar of the Court, and having taken the oath to 
 tell the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I was interrogated, 
 " Has any person instructed you what you should say ?" I answered, 
 None ; but mentioned that several persons had desired me to tell the 
 truth. I was then asked who had done so ? My answer was, that I 
 did not recollect ; but that no person had given me any particular 
 instructions, what I alluded to having been only the general observa- 
 tion of several persons with whom I had spoken on the subject. I was 
 then questioned, when I had been cited as a witness ; upon which I 
 produced my summons, bearing date the 26th of August. I was again 
 interrogated, if it was after the citation that I had the conversation 
 referred to, and with whom I held these ? To which I replied, that 
 it was both before and after citation ; but, as it was only a kind of 
 general instruction, I could not recollect any particular person. 
 
 I was then ordered to withdraw ; and, on being again called into 
 Court, was ordered to prison for three weeks. 
 
 This sentence not a little surprised me, as I was totally at a loss to 
 guess the cause, not having been conscious of any wrong. Indeed the 
 whole error (if it may be so called) was the effect of confusion and 
 mistake, which were natural enough, considering my utter ignorance 
 of law proceedings, and that I never before had been examined as a 
 witness in a Court of Justice. 
 
 I do not mean to reflect on the Court, but to justify myself from 
 the charge of prevarication, or of concealing the truth, which 1 had no 
 idea of committing. On the contrary, it appears to me that I was to 
 blame only for an over-anxiety to tell the whole truth in terms of my 
 oath ; for had I answered the first question in the negative, (which I 
 was entitled to do, as no person had put words in my mouth,) I would 
 not have had the mortification of being imprisoned. 
 
 Conscious of the purity of my intentions, I submit my case to the 
 public ; and, leaving it with them to judge with candour, I have only 
 farther to observe, that I grieve not so much on account of my con- 
 finement, of the injury it may do me in business, or my reputation, as 
 I am sorry that, from my being rejected, Mr. Muir may be the greater 
 sufferer of the two, as he was prevented from having the benefit of my 
 evidence which would have tended highly to his exculpation of the 
 charges against him 
 
 JOHN RUSSEL.* 
 Edinburgh Tolbooth, Sept. 3, 1793. 
 
 * The Judges, in rejecting in toto the evidence of this gentleman, acted in 
 defiance of every principle of law and justice. They ought to have admitted his 
 evidence, leaving to the Jury to determine its credibility. See afterwards the 
 debate in the House of Commons on this very point. Mr. Russel, we are happy 
 to say, suffered nothing in the estimation of the public, in consequence of the treat- 
 ment he met with on the above occasion. He died a few years ago in affluent 
 circumstances.
 
 No. XVIII. 
 
 ADDRESS from the SOCIETY of UNITED IRISHMEN in Dublin, to 
 the DE LE GATES for promoting a REFORM in SCOTLAND, which 
 was brought by the Cretan as evidence of Sedition against Mr. MUIR, and 
 which he read on his Trial. 
 
 WE take the liberty of addressing you, in the spirit of civic union, 
 in the fellowship of a just and a common cause. We greatly rejoice 
 that the spirit of freedom moves over the face of Scotland ; that light 
 seems to break from the chaos of her internal government ; and that a 
 country so respectable for her attainments in science, in arts, and in 
 arms ; for men of literary eminence ; for the intelligence and morality 
 of her people, now acts from a conviction of the union between virtue, 
 letters, and liberty ; and now rises to distinction, not by a calm, con- 
 tented, secret wish for a reform in Parliament, but by openly, actively, 
 and urgently willing it, with the unity and energy of an embodied 
 nation. We rejoice that you do not consider yourselves as merged 
 and melted down into another country, but that in this great national 
 question, you are still Scotland, the land where Buchanan wrote, 
 and Fletcher spoke, and Wallace fought. 
 
 Away from us and from our children those puerile antipathies so 
 unworthy of the manhood of nations, which insulate individuals, as 
 well as countries, and drive the citizen back to the savage I We 
 esteem and respect you. We pay merited honour to a nation in 
 general well educated, and well informed, because we know that the 
 ignorance of the people is the cause and eUect of all civil and religious 
 despotism. We honour a nation regular in their lives, and strict in 
 their manners, because we conceive private morality to be the only 
 secure foundation of public policy. We honour a nation eminent for 
 men of genius, and we trust that they will now exert themselves, not 
 so much in perusing and penning the histories of other countries, as 
 in making their own a subject for the historian. May we venture to 
 observe to them, that mankind have been too retrospective ; canonized 
 antiquity, and undervalued themselves. Man has reposed on ruins, 
 and rested his head on some fragments of the temple of liberty, or at 
 most amused himself in proving the measurement of the edifice, and 
 nicely limiting its proportions; not reflecting that this temple is truly 
 Catholic, the ample earth its area, and the arch of heaven its dome. 
 
 We will lay open to you our hearts. Our cause is your cause 
 If there is to be a struggle between us, let it be which nation shall be 
 foremost in the race of mind ; let this be the noble animosity kindled 
 between us, who shall first attain that free Constitution from which 
 both are equi-distant, who shall first be the saviour of the empire. 
 
 The sense of both countries with respect to the intolerable abttses 
 of the Constitution has been clearly manifested, and prove that our 
 political situations are not dissimilar ; that our rights and wrongs are 
 the same. Out of 32 counties in Ireland, 29 petitioned for a reform 
 in Parliament ; and out of 56 of the royal burghs of Scotland, 50 
 petitioned for a reform in their internal structure and Government. 
 If we be rightly informed, there is no such thing as popular election
 
 126 
 
 in Scotland. The people who ought to possess that weight in the 
 popular scale, which might bind them to the soil, and make them cling 
 to the Constitution, are now as dust in the balance, blown abroad by 
 the least impulse, and scattered through other countries, merely be- 
 cause they hang so loosely to their own. They have no share in the 
 national Firm, and are aggrieved not only by irregular and illegal 
 exaction of taxes ; by misrule and mismanagement of corporations ; by 
 misconduct of self-elected and irresponsible magistrates ; by waste of 
 public property ; and by want of competent judicatures ; but, in our 
 opinion, most of all, by an inadequate parliamentary representation, 
 for we assert, that 45 Commoners and 16 Peers, are a pitiful repre- 
 sentation for two millions and a half of people ; particularly as your 
 Commoners consider themselves not as the representatives of that 
 people, but of the Councils of the Burghs by whom they are elected. 
 
 Exclusive charters in favour of Boroughs, monopolize the general 
 rights of the people, and that act must be absurd which precludes all 
 other towns from the power of being restored to their ancient freedom. 
 
 We remember that heritable jurisdictions and feudal privileges, 
 though expressly reserved by the Act of Union (20th art.) were set aside 
 by Act of Parliament in 1746, and we think that there is much stronger 
 ground at present, for restoring to the mass of the people their alien- 
 ated rights, and to the Constitution its spirit and its integrity.* 
 
 Look now we pray you upon Ireland. Long was this unfortunate 
 island the prey of prejudiced factions and ferocious parties. The rights 
 or rather duties of conquest were dreadfully abused, and the Catholic 
 religion was made the perpetual pretext for subjugating the state by 
 annihilating the citizen, and destroying, not the religious persuasion, 
 but the man ; not property, but the people. It was not till very lately 
 that the pait of the nation which is truly colonial, reflected that 
 though their ancestors had been victorious, they themselves were now 
 included in the general subjection ; subduing only to be subdued, and 
 trampled upon by Britain as a servile dependency. When therefore 
 the Protestants began to suffer what the Catholics had suffered and 
 were suffering; when, from serving as the instruments, they were 
 made themselves the objects of foreign domination, then they became 
 conscious they had a country ; and then they felt like Irishmen, they 
 resisted British dominion, renounced colonial subserviency, and fol- 
 lowing the example of a Catholic Parliament, just a century before, 
 they asserted the exclusive jurisdiction and legislative competency of 
 this island. A sudden light from America shone through our prison. 
 Our volunteers arose. The chains fell from our hands. We followed 
 (j rattan, the angel of our deliverance, and in 1782, Ireland ceased to 
 
 * What an unanswerable argument to the narrow-minded anrt-reform paper 
 freeholders of Scotland, who are now wasting their lungs by bawling about the 
 inviolability of the Treaty of Union, as if the Treaty of Union was made purposely 
 for them. The conduct of these ninnies reminds us of the conduct of the karl of 
 Nottingham, who was once, we believe, Lord Chancellor of England, and who, 
 when that Treaty was in agitation, gravely declared, that the changing of the term 
 England to that of Great Britain, would positively subvert all the laws of Eng- 
 land ! ! !
 
 127 
 
 be a province, and became a nation. But, with reason, should we 
 despise and renounce this Revolution, as merely a transient burst 
 through a bad habit; the sudden grasp of necessity in despair, from 
 tyranny in distress, did we not believe that the Revolution is still in 
 train ; that it is less the single and shining act of 82, than a series of 
 national improvements which that act ushers in and announces ; that 
 it is only the herald of liberty and glory, of Catholic emancipation, as 
 well as Protestant independence ; that, in short, this Revolution indi- 
 cates new principles, foreruns new practices, and lays a foundation for 
 advancing the whole people higher in the scale of being, and diffusing 
 equal and permanent happiness. 
 
 British supremacy changed its aspect, but its essence remained the 
 same. First it was force, and on the event of the late Revolution, it 
 became influence ; direct hostility shifted into systematic corruption, 
 silently drawing off the virtue and vigour of the island, without shock 
 or explosion. Corruption that glides into every place, tempts every 
 person, taints every principle, infects the political mind through all its 
 relations and dependencies ; so regardless of public character as to set 
 the highest honours to sale, and to purchase boroughs with the price 
 of such prostitution ; so regardless of public morality, as to legalize the 
 licentiousness of the lowest and most pernicious gambling, and to 
 extract a calamitous revenue from the infatuation, and intoxication of 
 the people. 
 
 The Protestants of Ireland were now sensible that nothing could 
 counteract this plan of debilitating policy, but a radical reform in the 
 House of the People, and that without such reform, the Revolu- 
 tion itself was nominal and delusive. The wheel merely turned round, 
 but it did not move forward, and they were as distant as ever from the 
 goal. They resolved they convened they met with arms they 
 met without them they petitioned ; but in vain ; for they were but 
 a portion of the people. They then looked around and beheld their 
 Catholic countrymen. Three million we repeat it three million 
 taxed without being represented, bound by laws to which they had 
 not given consent, and politically dead in their native land. The 
 apathy of the Catholic mind changed into sympathy, and that begot 
 an energy of sentiment and action. They had eyes, and they read. 
 They had ears, and they listened. They had hearts, and they felt. 
 They said, " Give us our rights, as you value your own. Give us a 
 share of civil and political liberty, the elective franchise, and the trial 
 by jury. Treat us as men, and we shall treat you as brothers. Is 
 taxation without representation a grievance to three millions across 
 the Atlantic, and no grievance to three millions at your doors ? Throw 
 down that pale of persecution which still keeps up civil war in Ireland, 
 and make us one people. We shall then stand, supporting and sup- 
 ported, in the assertion of that liberty which is due to all, and which 
 all should unite to attain." 
 
 It was just and immediately a principle of adhesion took place for 
 the first time among the inhabitants of Ireland ; all religious per- 
 suasions found in a political union their common duty and their
 
 128 
 
 common salvation. In this Society and its affiliated Societies, the 
 Catholic and the Presbyterian are at this instant holding oat their 
 hands and opening their hearts to each other, agreeing in principles, 
 concurring in practice. We unite for immediate, ample, and substantial 
 justice to the Catholics, and when that is attained, a combined exertion 
 for a Reform in Parliament is the condition of our compact, and the 
 seal of our communion. 
 
 British supremacy takes alarm ! The haughty monopolists of na- 
 tional power and common right, who crouch abroad to domineer at 
 home, now look with more surprise and less contempt on this " besotted" 
 people. A new artifice is adopted, and that restless domination which 
 at first, ruled as open war, by the length of the sword ; then, as covert 
 corruption, by the strength of the poison ; now assumes the style and 
 title of Protestant Ascendancy ; calls down the name of religion from 
 heaven to sow discord on earth ; to rule by anarchy ; to keep up dis- 
 trust and antipathy among parties, among persuasions, among families ; 
 nay to make the passions of the individuals struggle, like Cain and Abel, 
 in the very home of the heart, and to convert every little paltry neces- 
 sity that accident, indolence, or extravagance bring upon a man, into a 
 pander for the purchase of his honesty and the murder of his reputation. 
 
 We will not be the dupes of such ignoble artifices. We see this 
 scheme of strengthening political persecution and state inquisition, by 
 a fresh infusion of religious fanaticism ; but we will unite and we will 
 be Free. Universal Emancipation with Representative Legislation is 
 the polar principle which guides our Society, and shall guide it through 
 all the tumult of factions and fluctuations of parties. It is not upon 
 a coalition of opposition with ministry that we depend, but upon a 
 coalition of Irishmen with Irishmen, and in that coalition alone we 
 find an object worthy of reform, and at the same time the strength 
 and sinew both to attain and secure it. It is not upon external cir- 
 cumstances, upon the pledge of a man or a minister, we depend, but 
 upon the internal energy of the Irish nation. We will not buy or 
 borrow liberty from America or from France, but manufacture it our- 
 selves, and work it up with those materials that the hearts of Irishmen 
 furnish them with at home. \V 7 e do not worship the British, far less 
 the Irish Constitution, as sent down from heaven, but we consider it 
 as human workmanship, which man has made, and man can mend. 
 An unalterable Constitution, wliatever be its nature, must be despotism. 
 *lt is not the Constitution, but the People, which ought to be inviolable; 
 and it is time to recognise and renovate the rights of the English, the 
 Scotch, and the Irish nations. Rights which can neither be bought 
 nor sold, granted by charter, or forestalled by monopoly, but which 
 nature dictates as the birthright of all, and which it is the business of 
 a Constitution to define, to enforce, and to establish. If Government 
 has a sincere regard for the safety of the Constitution, let them coin- 
 cide with the people in the speedy reform of its abuses, and not by an 
 obstinate adherence to them, drive that people into Republicanism. 
 
 We have told you what our situation was, what it is, what it ought 
 to be : our end, a National Legislature ; our means, an union of the
 
 129 
 
 whole people. Let this union extend throughout the empire. Let 
 all unite for all, or each man suffer for all. In each country let the 
 people assemble in peaceful and Constitutional Convention. Let 
 delegates from each country digest a plan of reform, best adapted to 
 the situation and circumstances of their respective nations, and let the 
 Legislature be petitioned at once, by the urgent and unanimous voice 
 of Scotland, England, and Ireland. 
 
 You have our ideas. Answer us, and that quickly. This is not a 
 time to procrastinate. Your illustrious Fletcher has said, that the 
 liberties of a people are not to be secured, without passing through 
 great difficulties, and no toil or labour ought to be declined to pre- 
 serve a nation from slavery. He spoke well ; and we add, that it is 
 incumbent on every nation who adventures into a conflict for freedom, 
 to remember it is on the event (however absurdly) depends the estima- 
 tion of the public opinion ; honour and immortality, if fortunate : if 
 otherwise, infamy and oblivion. Let this check the rashness that 
 rushes unadvisedly into the committal of national character, or if that 
 be already made, let the same consideration impel us all to advance 
 with active, not passive perseverance; with manly confidence and 
 calm determination, smiling with equal scorn at the bluster of official 
 arrogance, and the whisper* of private malevolence, until we have 
 planted the flag of Freejtlcim on the summit, and are at once victorious 
 and secure. .>*' 
 
 (Signed) WM. DRENNAN, Chairman. 
 
 ARCHD. HAMILTON ROWAN, Secy. 
 
 No. XIX. 
 
 (Abridged from the Morning Chronicle and Scots Magazine, 1794.y 
 
 BRITISH PARLIAMENT. 
 
 HOUSE OF LORDS, JANUARY 31, 1794. 
 
 Trials of Mr. Muir and Mr. Palmer. 
 
 Earl STANHOPE rose and said, that their Lordships would admit 
 that no part of their duty was more important than that of watching 
 the proceedings of the Courts below. The due administration of jus- 
 tice was one of the most essential rights of the people, and every right 
 of the people created a correspondent duty in them. The case upon 
 which he was to call their Lordships' attention was one of the strongest 
 that ever occurred, if not the very strongest. Perhaps he should be 
 asked if there were any precedents for the measure he was about to 
 propose ; though he did not hold himself bound to find precedents, 
 and though he thought it the duty of the House to make a precedent 
 where justice demanded it, yet here he had precedents. In the 1st of 
 William and Mary, there were no less than four Acts passed, reversing 
 the unjust attainder of Alderman Cornish, of Alice Lisle, of Algernon 
 Sydney, and of Lord Russell. That of Alderman Cornish originated 
 in that House, and was strictly in point, as their Lordships would see 
 by a reference to the journals.
 
 130 
 
 The proceedings in the late trials against Mr. Muir and Mr. Palmer, 
 before the Lords of Justiciary in Scotland, were so extraordinary that 
 it became their Lordships, by a regard to the sacred character of jus- 
 tice, to inquire into them they were contrary to the principles of 
 immutable justice, and directly in opposition to resolutions of that 
 House. In the impeachment of Mr. Hastings, their Lordships had 
 made, in the year 1790, no less than four resolutions, which shewed 
 their sense of principles which belonged to no one nation, and to no 
 one tribunal, but were of the essence of justice. The principle was, 
 that when a man was put upon his trial, no charge could be brought 
 forward in evidence which was not set forth in the original indictment. 
 
 Now, if this principle was applied in the case of Mr. Hastings, who 
 was to have months, and even years, to prepare his defence, how much 
 more forcibly did it apply to Mr. Muir, who was to answer on the 
 moment ? But what would their Lordships say when they heard that 
 facts were brought forward in evidence not charged in the indictment, 
 " because," forsooth, said the Lord Advocate, " if he had enumerated 
 all the acts of the defendant in the indictment, it would have covered 
 the walls of the Court." This was not all, Mr. Muir was obliged, 
 by the practice of the Court, to give in a list of the witnesses the day 
 before the trial. Then, after seeing all that he meant to prove in his 
 justification, the Prosecutor was suffered to bring forth new facts 
 against him, of which no notice had been given him, under the pretext 
 of their being collateral to the main point, and for which he could not, 
 even if he had had a hundred witnesses in Court that could refute 
 them, have adduced any one of them, because their names had not 
 been given in the day before. By this means the gentleman was 
 entrapped; he begged that his words might be attended to. The 
 gentleman was entrapped in a manner most outrageous to all ideas of 
 common justice. There were other circumstances in this trial equally 
 at variance with all the principles which we reverenced. Challenges 
 were made of several of the Jurors upon grounds that ought to have 
 been irresistible ; nay one of the Jurors felt the force of the objection 
 so strongly, that he requested permission to withdraw this was over- 
 ruled. If all this was the law of Scotland, which certainly he could 
 not take upon himself to deny, he would only observe that Scotland 
 had no more liberty than it had under the race of the Stuarts. All 
 that he contended for, was that they should inquire into the trials : he 
 meant to propose no censure in the first place ; he desired only that 
 the sentences passed against these persons should not be put into exe- 
 cution until their Lordships should have time to inquire, for nothing 
 was so clear that they ought to prevent the evil consequences of these 
 harsh and indiscreet proceedings, not to suffer them first to take place, 
 and then find that they were wrong. He had some similar motions 
 in his hand, for the four cases that had already occurred in Scotland, 
 of Mr. Muir, Mr. Palmer, Mr. Skirving, and Mr. Margarott. He 
 concluded with moving the first, That our humble Address be pre- 
 sented to his Majesty, humbly to represent to his Majesty, that some 
 time ago Thomas Muir, Esq. was tried on a criminal prosecution be-
 
 131 
 
 fore the Lords Justiciary of Scotland ; in consequence of which sen- 
 tence of transportation beyond seas for fourteen years had been passed 
 upon him. That this House were forthwith to take into their consi- 
 deration the proceedings had on the said trial and sentence. And, 
 therefore, praying his Majesty not to carry into execution the said 
 sentence, until the House had made the proposed inquiry. 
 
 The EARL of MANSFIELD said, that a motion of a more singular 
 nature he had never heard. On an attack on a Court to which ho had 
 the honour to belong, he could not give a silent vote ; though the 
 Noble Earl had not concluded with a motion of censure, yet in lan- 
 guage which he must think was intemperate and unprovoked, he had 
 thrown forth charges of a severe and unfounded nature. In regard to 
 the trial, the persons had been convicted by a verdict of their country. 
 Their Lordships were bound to consider the verdict as legal, until an 
 appeal came before them ; but no appeal, it might be said, could come 
 from the courts below in criminal cases ; true, but there was a way of 
 bringing every such question before the cognizance of Parliament, and 
 God forbid that the day should ever come, when the conduct of Judges 
 in the administration of justice was not subject, in the proper form, to 
 the strict revision of Parliament. The only question which could 
 come before them, was, whether the sentence, as passed by the Judges 
 in the cases alluded to, was legal, and whenever that question should 
 be brought before them, he pledged himself to shew that the sentence 
 was strictly legal in every point of view. 
 
 The EARL of LAUDERDALE said, he had endeavoured to persuade 
 the Noble Lord not to bring forward the important question in a way 
 in which, by the orders of the House, it could not be entertained ; and 
 even now he hoped he would withdraw it, only that it might be brought 
 forward in a more regular way ; if he persisted in it, he should only 
 decline voting: at all. But as the motion was made, he would just say, 
 that it was no wonder that these trials had produced so much public 
 emotion, and had so warmly interested the feelings of mankind, since, 
 that men in Scotland should be transported to Botany Bay for four- 
 teen years, for what in England had raised others to the most splendid 
 situations, was certainly calculated to excite surprise and even more 
 unpleasant sensations. Nor would it escape their observation, that 
 there must be something extremely harsh in the law of Scotland which 
 should inflict a punishment of fourteen years' transportation for the 
 same offence, which, in England, would subject a man to no more 
 than twelve months' imprisonment. That, undoubtedly, there were 
 extraordinary proceedings on the trial, no man who had read the dif- 
 ferent accounts could deny ; and he concluded with saying, that if the 
 Noble Lord should take the opinion of the House, he certainly would 
 not vote against him. 
 
 The EARL of COVENTRY said a few words against the motion. 
 
 The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that in the situation in which he 
 
 stood, it became him to deliver a few words on the most extraordinary 
 
 motion he had ever heard. For, granting even that there had been, 
 
 in the cases alluded to, a mis-trial, that any doubts were entertained
 
 132 
 
 of the legality of any part of their proceedings, that the verdict of the 
 Jury had not been justified by the evidence, that the conduct of the 
 Judges had in any degree been founded in misapprehension of the 
 case, that there had been a misapplication of the law, or in short, if 
 there had been any thing irregular in the trial, verdict or sentence, 
 there was a remedy provided by the Constitution, for bringing the 
 whole into revision. But who ever heard of a single instance of an 
 address being moved for in this House, to pray his Majesty to post- 
 pone the execution of a sentence ? Nothing was more certain than 
 that human judgment might err ; and not a year, not an assize, not a 
 term, almost passed, without instances of cases being brought into that 
 state, when one Judge was happy to have his judgment revised by his 
 brothers, and when, by more deliberate discussion of a question, any 
 error into which he might have fallen might be corrected to the ease 
 and remedy of the parties concerned. Cruel and hard would be the 
 situation of a Judge, if such means were not given him, of retracting 
 any misapprehension or error into which he liad fallen. What was 
 the way in which this was to be done ? By the person, who stood 
 convicted by a Jury of his country of a crime, humbling himself be- 
 fore the throne, and presenting a petition stating the hardship of his 
 case, and praying his Majesty to interfere with the gracious exercise 
 of his prerogative. It certainly was not unfit that a person upon whom 
 a verdict of guilty was so passed by his country, should so humble 
 himself before the throne ; in truth it was not humbling it was be- 
 coming, that a man against whom such a sentence lay should present 
 his case in terms of supplication. Was it so here? Had any petition 
 been presented by the persons tried in Scotland ? No such thing. 
 He could take upon him to say, that such was the anxiety of those 
 whose duty it is to advise his Majesty in that to which his own dis- 
 position so constantly leads him, for the clear ascertainment of the 
 legality of the sentences in question, that though no petition had been 
 presented by the parties, an inquiry had been made ; and he would 
 take upon himself to say, that when this paper should be laid before 
 their Lordships, they would see that no pains had been spared to 
 determine whether any circumstances had occurred either of irregu- 
 larity in the trials, or of illegality in the sentence. It was not neces- 
 sary for him to volunteer the production of this paper, but if ever their 
 Lordships should think proper to entertain an inquiry into the case, 
 he would pledge himself that they should find the conduct of the 
 Judges of Scotland had been such as their Lordships would always 
 desire to find in men intrusted with functions so important. He 
 avoided any more sounding and extravagant terms of praise, because 
 he wished not to enter into eulogiums that might be thought over- 
 strained. 
 
 The Noble Earl had referred to resolutions of that House, as a 
 ground for arraigning the proceedings on the trials. The Scotch 
 Judges neither could know officially, nor be guided by any resolutions 
 of that House ; they could act only by the practice of their own 
 Court. The Lord Advocate had a right to prove facts collateral with
 
 133 
 
 the main fact, though not specially stated in the indictment. In the 
 same way with respect to the challenges, nothing could be more ahsurd 
 than the grounds on which they were made. To challenge jurors 
 because they had entered into associations, was in fact to challenge all 
 that was respectable in the country, for almost every man of rank or 
 respect, had at that time associated for the purpose of supporting the 
 Constitution. In short, all tlie objections which had been made on 
 these trials properly over-ruled, were something in the nature of the 
 speech of that man, who, being put on his trial, said he would swear 
 the peace against the judge, for he had a design upon his life. 
 
 EARL STANHOPE said, that he had not heard the only thing that 
 could induce him upon any occasion to withdraw a motion an argu- 
 ment. The Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack confessed, 
 that there might be a mis-trial, and that in case of a mis-trial there 
 was a legal remedy. And what was the legal remedy ? That a per- 
 son unjustly condemned must humble himself before the throne. And 
 this is the boasted justice of England ! He trusted that no man would 
 be base enough, who felt conscious innocence, to humble himself; nor 
 was it very becoming the dignity either of national justice, or even of 
 royal prerogative, to expect of an injured man such submission. He 
 had done however good by his motion, for he had drawn from the 
 Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack a declaration, that, on the 
 question being represented in the shape of a petition, the remedy 
 would be obtained. (The Lord Chancellor in an under voice, signified 
 his dissent from this statement of his words.) The Noble Lord then 
 means to say, that there will be no remedy ; he advises a petition, but 
 declares at the same time that a petition is to be of no avail. My 
 Lords, I persist in my motion, and I shall divide the House if I stand 
 alone ; I do not care with how many or with how few I divide, but I 
 will never give up the principle, that it is better to prevent an evil, 
 than afterwards to repent of it. 
 
 The question was then put on the motion for the Address on the 
 case of Mr. Muir, and as Earl Stanhope persisted in taking their sense 
 by a vote, they divided. 
 
 Content, ... 1 
 Not Contents, . . 49 
 
 The other motions were then put and negatived. 
 
 PROTEST. 
 
 Die Veneris, 31 st Jan. 1794. 
 
 The Order of the Day being read for the Lords to be summoned, 
 
 It was moved, That the several Entries in the Journal of the 8th, 
 10th, and 13th of June, 1689, relative to the bill intitled, " An Act 
 for reversing the attainder of Henry Cornish, Esq. late Alderman of 
 the City of London," be now read. 
 
 The same were accordingly read by the Clerk. 
 
 Th.en it was nv>ved, That an humble address be presented to his 
 Majesty, humbly to represent to his Majesty, that this House has been 
 informed that Thomas Muir, Esq. who was tried before the High
 
 134 
 
 Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh, in the month of August last, upon 
 a charge of sedition, has been condemned and sentenced to be trans- 
 ported beyond seas for the space - of fourteen years ; and further to 
 represent to his Majesty, that this House intends to proceed without 
 delay to examine the circumstances of such condemnation and of such 
 sentence ; and therefore humbly to beseech his Majesty, that the said 
 Thomas Muir, Esq. may not be transported beyond seas, until this 
 House shall have had sufficient time to make such examination. 
 
 Which being objected to, after debate, 
 
 The question being put thereupon, it was resolved in the negative. 
 
 rp ,, f E. Stanhope, Content, 1 
 
 '' \ E. Stair. Not Contents, 49 
 
 Whereupon the following protest was entered on the Journals by 
 Earl Stanhope. 
 
 Dissentient. 1st, Because the attending to the due administration 
 of justice, and the watching over the conduct of the various Courts in 
 this kingdom, is one of the most important branches of the business 
 of this House, and is at all times also one of its most essential duties. 
 
 2dly. Because it obviously appears to be proper to examine into 
 the justice and legality of a sentence, before it is executed, and not to 
 permit it to be executed first, and then to examine into its justice and 
 legality afterwards. 
 
 Sdly. Because, for want of such timely interference on the part of 
 this House, it has formerly happened, that, within a short time, no 
 less than four unjust and illegal judgments were actually carried into 
 execution, as appears from the respective attainders of the innocent 
 sufferers having been afterwards reversed and made void (when it was 
 too late) by four Acts of Parliament, made and passed in the first year 
 of the reign of their late Majesties King William and Queen Mary, 
 namely, in the cases of Alderman Cornish, Alice Lisle, Algernon 
 Sidney, and Lord Russell. 
 
 4thly. Because it is contrary to the first and immutable principles 
 of natural justice, that any thing to the prejudice of a defendant should 
 be brought before a jury in a criminal prosecution, that is " only col- 
 lateral, not in issue, nor necessary in the conclusion." 
 
 5thly. Because it is not (nor ought to be) competent for the Pro- 
 secutor to produce any evidence to support any matter that is not 
 charged in the indictment ; that is to say, distinctly and precisely 
 charged, and not by mere epithets or general words, such as oppres- 
 sion, sedition, vexation, or the like. 
 
 (it hly. Because in like manner it is not (nor ought to be) competent 
 for a Prosecutor to produce any evidence to prove any crime to have 
 been committed by a defendant, in any other particular than that 
 wherein it is, in the indictment expressly charged to have been com- 
 mitted. 
 
 7thly. Because no such proceedings as those above stated, nor any 
 of them, can be justified under pretence, that " if it had been necessary 
 to specify in the indictment all the facts against the defendant, the
 
 indictment would have covered, by its magnitude, the walls of the 
 Court." And, 
 
 Sthly. Because in one year of the trial of Warren Hastings, Esq. 
 namely in the year 1790, there were no less than four decisions of 
 the House of Lords upon this subject, viz. on the twenty-fifth day of 
 February, when the Lords resolved, 
 
 That the Managers for the Commons be not admitted to give evidence of the 
 unfitness of Kelleram for the appointment of being a renter of certain lands in the 
 province of Bahar ; the fact of such unfitness of the said Kelleram not being 
 charged in the impeachment. 
 
 And again on the 4th day of May, when the Lords decided, 
 
 That it is not competent to the Managers for the Commons to put the following 
 question to the witness upon the Seventh Article of Charge, viz. : Whether 
 more oppressions did actually exist under the new institution than under the old ? 
 
 And again on the 18th day of May, when the House of Lords 
 resolved, 
 
 That it is not competent to the Managers for the Commons to give evidence of 
 the enormities actually committed by Deby Sing ; the same not being charged in 
 the Impeachment. 
 
 And again on the 2d day of June, when the Lords resolved, 
 
 That it is not competent for the Managers, on the part of the Commons, to give 
 any evidence upon the Seventh Article of the Impeachment, to prove that the 
 letter of the oth of May, ITS I, is false, in any other particular than that wherein 
 it is expressly charged to be false. 
 
 The said divisions of the House of Lords are founded upon princi- 
 ples not peculiar to trials by impeachment. They are founded upon 
 common sense, and on the immutable principles of justice. In Scot- 
 land those principles are peculiarly necessary to be adhered to, inas- 
 much as by the laws of that part of the united kingdom, a defendant 
 is obliged to produce a complete list of all his witnesses in exculpa- 
 tion, the day before the trial. That alone appears to me a considera- 
 ble hardship. But if, after such list is actually delivered in by the 
 defendant, any facts (or supposed facts) not particularly set forth as 
 crimes in the indictment, may, on the following day, for the first 
 time, and without notice, be suddenly brought out in evidence upon 
 the trial against the defendant : such defendant, from such an entrap- 
 ping mode of trial, may be convicted, although innocent. Such pro- 
 ceedings (whether supported or unsupported by any old Scotch 
 statute passed in arbitrary times) ought, I conceive, to be revised. 
 For, in a free country, there ought not to be one mode of administer- 
 ing justice to one man, namely, to Mr. Hastings, and an opposite 
 mode of administering justice to another man, namely, to Mr. Muir. 
 
 STANHOPE. 
 
 HOUSE OF COMMONS. 
 
 February 24fA, 1794. 
 
 ( Abridged from the Scots Magazine and Morning Chronicle of 1794. J 
 Mr. SHERIDAN presented a petition from the Rev. Mr. Fische 
 Palmer, who had been tried and convicted of sedition at Perth, com-
 
 136 
 
 plaining of the sentence of transportation for seven years, which had been 
 pronounced against him. An interesting discussion took place on tins 
 petition, in the coarse of which 
 
 Mr. ADAM (now the venerable Lord Chief Commissioner of the 
 Jury Court in Scotland) rose and stated, that, on Thursday next, he 
 would feel it his duty to bring under the consideration of the House 
 the proceedings of the High Court of Justiciary in Scotland, in refer- 
 ence to the case of Thomas Muir the younger of Huntershill. 
 
 Mr. Fox stated, that he considered the sentence of Messrs. Muir 
 and Palmer as illegal and abhorrent of the principles of justice. 
 
 Mr. SHERIDAN said, it was very confidentially reported, that 
 although sentence was passed, yet there was good reason for believing 
 that a sentence so abhorrent to the very spirit of our law, a sentence 
 which no man in the House would dare to vindicate if applied to a 
 similar offence in England would not be carried into execution. 
 That lending a book (which was the case of Mr. Muir) should subject 
 a man to transportation like a felon for fourteen years, would be enough 
 to raise the people of this country in arms. If Ministers attempted 
 to make the law of Scotland the law of England, (but they dared 
 not,) they would find it a sufficient crime to forfeit their heads. 
 " They charge us," said Mr. Sheridan, " with making a party question 
 of this, when we ought to have applied to the fountain of mercy." I 
 know what mercy was shewn them before we made any question on 
 the subject. I speak with some information ; I have seen those 
 unfortunate victims I have visited them in those loathsome hulks, 
 where they were confined among common felons, not indeed with 
 irons upon them, but with irons recently taken off, separated from 
 each other, deprived of the comfort of conversing, and that on a pre- 
 tence that there was danger of sedition in this society that two 
 imprisoned men could create an insurrection. " I saw these gentle- 
 men, and I boast of it ; for whatever may be the feelings of some, I 
 shall always be proud to countenance whomsoever I conceive to be 
 suffering under oppression." 
 
 March \Qtli, 1794. 
 
 Mr. ADAM began at five o'clock a speech of three hours and a 
 half, which displayed great extent of historical and legal information. 
 He set out with a very fine appeal to the House on the importance, 
 interest, and gravity of the question which he was about to bring 
 before them. He rose, he said, to offer to the House a proposition 
 on a subject which had already undergone much discussion : to 
 review the decision of the 31st of August last in the Supreme Court 
 of Justiciary in Scotland against Thomas Muir ; and the trial of the 
 Circuit Court of Justiciary, which was also a supreme Court, against 
 Thomas Fysche Palmer. From these Supreme Courts there lay no 
 appeal, and therefore it became necessary for that House to enter 
 into the review. He felt great confidence, as well as great anxiety, 
 upon the present occasion confidence in the cause which, from its 
 gravity, importance, and interest, he was sure would engage them to
 
 13? 
 
 indulge him with the most patient attention ; and yet he felt great 
 anxiety at the idea of having to discuss, in a popular assembly, a 
 question that ought to be tried in a Court of Appeal. That resort 
 was denied. He was driven to the necessity of agitating it in that 
 place, where, however, he had comfort in seeing around him so many 
 persons of great talents in every way men of great legal talenta 
 without legal practice, as well as men at the head of the profession ; 
 and who were Doctri utriusque legis. He referred to the Right 
 Honourable Gentleman' opposite to him, who had successively filled 
 the offices of Solicitor-General and Lord Advocate (Mr. Dundas) as 
 well as to the present Lord Advocate, who had so material a share in 
 the present proceedings. He had great confidence therefore, that the 
 discussion of the question would be made in that House with the 
 effect to be expected from men accustomed to form decisions on 
 subjects of jurisprudence, and experienced in the clear, pure adminis- 
 tration of the law of the land. He should enter into the discussion 
 with all the coolness, temper, and gravity, which would be used in a 
 Court of Law, as if he were arguing it on a writ of error, and plead- 
 ing for a new trial. He was sensible of its importance, of its extent, 
 and of its difficulty ; but he would not attempt, as Lord Bacon said, 
 " to use a number of words to find talk or discourse ; to raise diffi- 
 culties ; to contradict and confute, but to weigh and consider" the 
 case with candour and with gravity. He would endeavour to avoid 
 all technical discussions, of which a great legal character had truly 
 said, " That forms of law were the tenses of justice." He should 
 avoid as much as possible every thing that was merely technical, 
 though it was obvious that the whole merits of the question must, iu 
 a great measure, depend on the forms and proceedings in the criminal 
 courts and of the law of Scotland ; and by these the legality or the 
 illegality of the proceedings must be determined. His proposition was, 
 that there should be laid before the House certain parts of the Records 
 in these two trials; he said parts of the Records, that he might the better 
 point out the particulars to which he meant to draw their attention. 
 These parts were, the indictment, the plea, the verdict, and the sentence. 
 There were some things also which related to Mr. Muir particularly, 
 which he desired to have before the House; they were the order of com- 
 mitment of two witnesses, William Muir and John Russell, as well 
 as the objection that was made to the Jurors, which was over-ruled. 
 These were the subjects of his intended motions : but he did not mean 
 to rest here ; though this would be the question immediately before 
 the House, he meant undoubtedly to go farther ; he meant from these 
 records to question the legality of the sentence, and upon that doubt, 
 as no appeal could lie from this questionable conviction, he proposed 
 to move for a most respectful Address to his Majesty, in favour of 
 these unfortunate men. He assured the House that in pursuing this 
 course, he would make the Address as respectful as it was in his 
 power to do. It was the duty of every individual and of every body 
 of men, who addressed the throne with a petition for the exercise of 
 the prerogative of mercy, to approach his Majesty with the most
 
 138 
 
 respectful language ; as it ought to be the care of all men to preserve 
 that loyal obedience to Majesty, which, as Judge Blackstone well said, 
 the Constitution had ascertained to the King. He would use that 
 eminent lawyer's own words : it had been the care of their ancestors, 
 " Not to make the Monarch appear in any of the invidious parts of 
 the Constitution ; but in those works in which the nation only see him 
 engaged personally ; works of legislature, magnificence, and mercy." 
 By the course which he proposed to himself then, he maintained the 
 truest reverence for the throne ; since he moved only for the exercise 
 of his most shining prerogative ; and though he questioned the legality 
 of the sentence, and the soundness of the discretion, yet his Address 
 to the throne should be most respectful. This was the nature of his 
 proceeding, and in the discussion of the subject, he thought himself 
 bound to maintain the following propositions : 
 
 First, That the crimes set forth in the indictments against Thomas 
 Muir and Thomas F. Palmer, are what the law of Scotland calls 
 leasing-making ; that is, uttering words or publishing matter, tending 
 to breed discord between the King and his people. This is properly 
 a misdemeanour in the nature of a public libel, tending to affect the 
 state, or disturb the government, and these indictments charge no other 
 crime whatever. 
 
 Second, That the punishment of transportation, cannot, by the law 
 of Scotland, be legally inflicted for the crime of leading -making. The 
 Act of Queen Anne, 1703, c. iv. having appropriated to that crime 
 the punishment of fine, imprisonment, and banishment only, and that 
 the annexing the pain of death to the return from such transportation, 
 was an aggravation not warranted by law. The punishment of death 
 being expressly taken away by that statute, and no statute having 
 passed since that time, which varies or alters that law ; and 
 
 Third, That if the acts charged in the indictments do not con- 
 stitute the crime of leasing-making, or public libel, the indictments 
 charge no crime known to the law of Scotland ; 1st, because there is 
 no such crime known to the law of Scotland at common law, as real 
 sedition constituting a distinct and separate offence; 2d, because if 
 there is such a crime, these indictments do not state it ; 3d, because, 
 if there were such separate and distinct offence in Scotland at common 
 law, it would be contrary to law to punish that offence by transporta- 
 tion, and not warranted by law to inflict the pain of death for return- 
 ing from such transportation. These were the propositions which he 
 thought it incumbent upon him to lay down and to maintain. At the 
 same time he conceived, that if he made out the first, be made out his 
 whole case, since that would comprehend the illegality. An indict- 
 ment in Scotland is laid in the form of a syllogism; its major contains 
 the corpus dilecti, of which the minor states the facts, and the conclu- 
 sion is, that the major should be proved by these facts. The indict- 
 ment of Thomas Muir states in the major, that advising and exhorting 
 persons to purchase and peruse seditious and wicked publications, and 
 to distribute and circulate them, &c. &c. are crimes of a heinous 
 nature ; and the facts stated in the minor are, that he did make
 
 139 
 
 speeches in certain societies and meetings, and did advise persons to 
 buy and read Paine's Rights of Man, and did circulate the same. It 
 appears, then, that the major of this proposition holds out no other 
 crime than that of leasing -making ; and all the facts stated in the 
 minor proposition of his indictment, aggravated as they are by the 
 terms of the major, go no farther than the crime of leasing -making. 
 He said he held in his hand one of three trials of Thomas Muir, that 
 had been printed in Edinburgh, the one printed for William Creech, 
 because it was evidently written against the prisoner. If there should 
 be any objections to the quotations which he made from that pamphlet, 
 he gave notice to the House that he held in his hand official copies of 
 the record, with which he had been furnished from Scotland, and to 
 which he should be ready to refer. He said, that by the best autho- 
 rities on the law of Scotland, there was no such thing as the sort of 
 sedition which the indictment here affected to hold out. The law of 
 Scotland understood from all the facts mentioned in this indictment 
 no other crime than that of leasing-making. Sir George Mackenzie, 
 who wrote towards the latter end of the last century, who was so 
 closely connected with the Duke of Lauderdale, and the apologist for 
 all his maladministration, was an authority that the House would not 
 be disposed to dispute, inasmuch as it would not be conceived that 
 he would give the most favourable interpretation of the law in 
 favour of the liberty of the subject. What does he say on the 
 point ? That, a commotion of the people tending to disturb the 
 Government was treason, but if a commotion was excited upon any 
 private account it was in Scotland called, a convocation of the lieges. 
 Sedition was never laid as a crimen per se, but as it was connected 
 with other crimes of which it was an aggravation. The seditio regni 
 was punishable as treason, and was always so laid in the indictment, 
 and the relevancy of the crime to infer the punishment of treason was 
 always first found by the Court. Here then was an authority which 
 came home directly to the matter in issue, in support of his assertion, 
 that the crime charged upon Muir and Palmer was no other than that 
 described by the Act of Queen Anne to be leasing-making. No 
 convocating of the people without arms, and without an overt-act of 
 rebellion, was treason, and they knew of no other sort of sedition in 
 the whole history of the law of Scotland. To be present at meetings, 
 says Sir George Mackenzie, was not relevant to infer the punishment 
 of treason, even though the meetings might be of a tumultuous nature. 
 There could be in short no real sedition without actual rebellion, and 
 every thing short of this real sedition was by the Act of Queen Anne 
 defined to be leasing-making, and restricted to an arbitrary punishment. 
 The punishment ordained by that law brought him to his second propo- 
 sition : it was confined, as he had said, to three kinds, fine, imprisonment, 
 and banishment ; and banishment certainly did not mean transportation 
 to a particular spot. A short history of the Act of Queen Anne 
 would give them a master-key to unlock the mystery of all this pro- 
 ceeding, which he called questionable legality and unsound discretion. 
 It was an act founded on the Claim of Right, which was the Charter
 
 of the people of Scotland, and correspondent to the Bill of Rights in 
 England, and therefore it ought to be construed liberally in favour of 
 the people ; it was a penal statute, and ought not therefore to be in- 
 terpreted strictly as to the letter. There was a great advantage in 
 knowing the history of an Act, as the means of expounding its inten- 
 tion ; and it was a curious fact, that the Claim of Right, from which 
 this law was derived, contained this important clause ; that the ' causing 
 to pursue and forfeit persons, upon stretches of old and obsolete laws, 
 upon frivolous and weak pretences, upon lame and defective probations, 
 as particularly the late Earl of Argyle, are contrary to law.' If Ens- 
 land could boast her Russel and her Sidney, Scotland also could 
 boast her Argyle and her Salton. The Earl of Argyle was indicted 
 for high treason and leasing-making, on account of his conscientious 
 explanation of his subscription to an unconscientious list. The history 
 of his case was not unknown to Gentlemen, Hume says of it, ' It is 
 needless to enter into particulars, where the iniquity is so apparent : 
 though the sword of justice was displayed, even her semblance was not 
 put on, and the forms alone of law were preserved, in order to sanctify 
 or rather aggravate the oppression.' The horror excited by this case 
 induced the people of Scotland, to insert the memorable clause, which 
 he had read in the claim of right, and under this they thought them- 
 selves secure. Eleven or twelve years afterwards, however, on the 
 memorable occasion of Darieu's settlement, a number of prosecutions 
 were begun, which roused the Parliament, and they passed a statute, 
 the statute immediately before that on leasing-making, confirming the 
 claim of right in more precise terms, and declaring it to be treason to 
 counteract any part of it. Immediately after this memorable statute, 
 was passed the statute declaring that public libel was merely leasing- 
 making, and was subject only to one or other of the three punishments 
 which he had already mentioned. How important to the true under- 
 standing of this statute was the short history : it clearly shews the 
 intention of the Scotch Parliament it did not repeal the crime, but it 
 changed the punishment ; it was no longer to incur the pain of death, 
 but the pain of fine, imprisonment, or banishment, and these punish- 
 ments were intended to be mild, and to be favourable to the subject. 
 This act remained to the present day : nothing had happened since to 
 alter, or to change the statute. Now the question was, Whether the 
 word banishment, and the word transportation, were synonymous. In 
 his mind nothing could be more distinct ; and he hoped he should be 
 able to shew the House, that through the whole series of the Scottish 
 history, from the lowest case of mere precedent up to the highest of 
 Legislative act, there was nothing to countenance the idea that the 
 word banishment in this act could infer transportation. Let it be 
 recollected that the act intended to mitigate the punishment, and if 
 there was any doubt about the term, the Judges were bound by sound 
 discretion, to take it in the most lenient sense. To be banished from 
 one's country, 
 
 Around the world Abroad to roam, 
 
 l-'iir from his native seat and pleasing homo,
 
 141 
 
 has always been considered as a severe and heavy sentence. But to 
 be transported beyond seas to a particular spot to be imprisoned in 
 a distant and desolate land to be doomed to the most despotic disci- 
 pline and servitude, was such an aggravation of the punishment as did 
 demand clear authority for its justification. The distinction between 
 banishment and transportation was clearly known in all countries ; it 
 was known to the Roman law ; it is known to the English law ; and, 
 in Scotland, it was of necessity clearly and perfectly understood and 
 acted upon. Banishment was inflicted, but not transportation. Why ? 
 Because banishment was practicable, but transportation was not. 
 Every condemnation must suppose a competent jurisdiction. Now 
 Scotland had no colonies to which it could transport; it had no juris- 
 diction abroad, and it therefore could not inflict that species of punish- 
 ment. " With us," says Sir George Mackenzie, " no judge can 
 confine a man whom he banisheth to any place without his jurisdiction, 
 because he hath no jurisdiction over other countries, arid so cannot 
 make acts, nor pronounce any sentence relative to them." This was 
 not merely the opinion of the great law authorities of Scotland ; it has 
 also been found by decisions of the Court. There was a memorable 
 case before a Scotch Sheriff, where he pronounceti the sentence of trans- 
 portation. The case was appealed to the Court of Session, and they 
 decided that he had not the power of punishing by transportation, as he 
 had no power out of his own shire. They, however, approved of the 
 conviction, and they banished the man forth of Scotland, with certifica- 
 tion, that, on his return, he should be punished with transportation ; thus 
 declaring their own sense of the difference between banishment and 
 transportation. Nothing could be more glaring than this fact ; for 
 they thus, in the face of all the world, had decided the general dis- 
 tinction between the one and the other. The whole series of the 
 statutes of Scotland served to confirm this interpretation. The law of 
 1609, which punished libels with banishment, was the only law on the 
 subject before the act of 1703 ; and as Scotland had no colonies until 
 the settlement of Darieii, it was clearly understood that it was simple 
 banishment only, arid not transportation. It was certainly true, that 
 there were many instances of transportation or of banishment to the 
 West Indies, but they were all statutary ; and they were all passed 
 upon crimes that were capital. Wherever the words were added, and 
 which were borrowed from England, they gave a severer meaning to 
 the original Scotch term of banishment, and where they were not 
 superadded, they were not to be implied. Transportation was first 
 introduced by Charles II. and Sir George Mackenzie, his apologist, 
 endeavours to give a colourable pretext to the Act, entitled, " Against 
 such as shall refuse to depone before the Privy Council against delin- 
 quents," one clause condemns those who shall refuse or delay to de- 
 pone, to be banished to his Majesty's Plantations in the West Indies ; 
 but in the same Act there is another clause, that no man's declaration 
 shall infer against himself any other penalty than simple banishment. 
 Tims even the statute made a distinction between the two. As to all 
 the Acts of the infamous Privy Council of Scotland, which could only
 
 142 
 
 be paralleled in iniquity by the Star Chamber in England, it was im- 
 possible for him to say a word, as they could not be produced or 
 referred to : they were hidden in the darkness with which oppression 
 and iniquity always clothed themselves. But with respect to the sen- 
 tences of the Court of Justiciary, he would take upon himself to say, 
 that there was not a single instance of transportation passed upon any 
 one offence that was not in itself a capital offence. He could not have 
 looked with his own eyes, but he had been favoured with very accu- 
 rate notes, and he gave the challenge to the Learned Gentlemen on 
 the opposite side of the House, that in the whole of the records of 
 the Justiciary Court of Scotland they should produce a single instance. 
 He trusted to the industry of gentlemen of most accurate investiga- 
 tion, under directions the most precise. There were three kinds of 
 capital cases in Scotland upon which transportation had been inflicted ; 
 the first were capital punishments mitigated to transportation, and 
 such were the capital crimes of notorious adultery, rape, disturbing a 
 man in his dwelling, &c. &c. these crimes, all capital by the law, were 
 frequently mitigated to transportation by the discretion of the Judges. 
 There was a long list of these crimes, which it was not necessary for 
 him to repeat. There was a second class of capital crimes where 
 transportation was also used as a mitigation, and these were the cases 
 in which, before the verdict was passed, the prosecutor agreed to 
 restrict it to an arbitrary punishment. Gentlemen not acquainted 
 with the Scotch law would understand that this was a very common 
 practice in their trials. There was a third class of capital crimes also, 
 where the prosecutor and prisoner consented to transportation, and 
 which compact was a species of mitigation or pardon. In all these 
 cases, the House would see that in all the three classes of capital 
 crimes mitigated, capital crimes restricted to an arbitrary punishment, 
 and capital punishments avoided by compact, transportation was passed 
 only as a mitigation of a higher punishment. It constantly descended 
 downwards ; it did not ascend upwards. There was not a single case 
 in the whole history of the practice of the Courts of Justiciary, of the 
 sentence of transportation being passed on any man whose crime did 
 not infer a capital punishment. Now the act of 1703 having made 
 leasing-making, what we in England call a mere misdemeanour, and hav- 
 ing delared that it should no longer be capital, it certainly was not 
 competent for the Court, in sound discretion, to pass a higher sentence 
 than the law ordained. The act of 1609, which was a law for punish- 
 ing scandalous libels against the people of England an odd law, if 
 we were to judge by the manners of the present age, where abusing 
 the Scots was more generally the practice, condemned the offence to 
 banishment, or more rigorous corporeal pain. Banishment there could 
 only mean banishment out of Scotland ; for then Scotland had no 
 jurisdiction abroad; and the Act of 1703, being the next, took away 
 all corporeal pain, and was professedly a mitigation of the Act of 
 1609. But it would not have mitigated the act of 1609, if what was 
 banishment in the first, could be interpreted into transportation in the 
 second. And that the direct contrary was the case, that the Act of
 
 143 
 
 1703 mitigated the former statutes, was manifest, from the opinion of 
 the greatest lawyers recently after the passing of that Act. In 1715 
 and 1716, prosecutions were entered into against persons for distribut- 
 ing Jacobite medals among the Faculty of Advocates. Among others, 
 against a person* whose family had since certainly shown invariable 
 loyalty to the family on the throne. The indictments were laid upon 
 the statutes, and Sir David Dalrymple, the Lord Advocate, stated in 
 his information, that ' the laws against leasing -making were anciently 
 odious, but, since the happy Revolution, that grievance, among many 
 others, has been removed, what was useful in the acts of leasing-mak- 
 ing, preserved by the act of 1703, the bitterness of the punishment is 
 restrained, and so thg odiousness of the law is taken off.' The next 
 consideration was, to inquire, whether the laws passed since the Union 
 would change the effect of the statute of 1703. The 4tb of George 
 I. specially excludes Scotland ; the 6th of George II. recognized what 
 was formerly the law of Scotland, but did not go an iota further 
 than it had gone. The general definition of crimes was different 
 in the two countries. There was no such thing as what we call 
 misdemeanour ; there was no such thing as sedition at common 
 law ; and all the sentences of transportation go, as he had said, upon 
 capital offences. The 25th of Geo. III. the Act made on the spur of 
 a necessity, in consequence of the loss of America, certainly did not, 
 either by its spirit or letter, change the body of the Scotch law ; it 
 ordained the transportation of felons to such places as his Majesty in 
 his council should think fit; but it did not ordain, that what before 
 was a less punishment should from thenceforward be a greater. 
 Surely Parliament would not say, that this statute, which merely 
 went to enable the King to send persons to any place beyond seas, in 
 consequence of our having lost America, could be construed to alter a 
 statute to which it even does not allude ; it must be consistent with 
 itself, and as it neither affects to repeal or alter the former statutes, it 
 goes only to declare, that where persons were subject to transporta- 
 tion, the King in council shall have the power to transport them 
 where he pleases. To show the very little accuracy that there was in 
 this Act of Parliament, he stated that it contained the word "felon" a 
 word not known to the Scotch law, and which the Scotch statutes 
 had never mentioned ; and even the sentence of Mr. Muir was incon- 
 sistent with this Act ; for by his sentence he might return to Ireland, 
 and yet, by the Act of Parliament, if he did, he was liable to be exe- 
 cuted. The Act of 1703 stood then the last and only one upon which 
 the crime of leasing -making could be tried ; and that crime of leasing- 
 making, which was the crime (if any) of Muir and Palmer, was subject 
 by that statute to fine, imprisonment, or banishment only. He came now 
 to his third proposition, that if the indictments did not charge the crime 
 of leasing -making, they charged no other crime ; for, as he had said, 
 sedition was no crime at common law in Scotland. And he could not 
 hear without horror, that a doctrine had been set up in justification of 
 
 * Mr. Dundas. '-'
 
 144 
 
 the proceedings in Scotland, that as new manners made new crimes, the 
 Court of Justiciary was supreme, and could make law applicable to 
 the occasion. If it was possible to conceive that any Court of Judi- 
 cature in this country, that boasted of its freedom and of the pure 
 administration of criminal justice, could have such power, he could 
 only say that it violated all his ideas of the Constitution of this coun- 
 try, and was an outrageous libel upon common sense. That such a 
 declaration had come from the seat of justice, lie had indeed heard, 
 but sure he was, that it demanded a very strict and pre- 
 cise animadversion. The old laws with respect to Conventicles 
 were clearly done away, and so perhaps were the Burgh Acts ; 
 and it was a question, whether, when the English statutes against 
 treason were made to extend to Scotland, they did not abrogate the 
 old laws of treason. It was manifest, he thought, that they abrogated 
 the treason laws of Scotland, where those treason laws varied from 
 those of England. It was treason in Scotland, for instance, for a 
 person to kill another whom he had in trust, as a schoolmaster his 
 pupil, or a guardian his ward ; but though, on the extension of the 
 treason laws of England to Scotland, this ceased to be treason, it was 
 still a crimen in se it was still the crime of murder. It was the 
 same thing, the same analogy would apply to the crime of sedition ; 
 the English law could make that treason in Scotland which was not 
 so in England. But they were not charged in the indictment with 
 any other than that crime which in England is the misdemeanour of 
 libel ; and he believed there was hardly one man that heard him, that 
 would deny that their punishment exceeded all the bounds of sound 
 discretion. There was a phrase in the Scotch law which answered to 
 what in English law was called accessary ; the term was, art and part. 
 But by the Scotch law the principal may be charged as art and part. 
 The prisoner is obliged to deliver in the list of witnesses that he in- 
 tends to call to his justification ; and yet to prove art and part cir- 
 cumstances may be introduced not contained in the indictment ; and 
 if so, be is not permitted to call any new witnesses to his defence 
 against such new charge. This might be consistent with the practice 
 of the courts of Scotland, but it was contrary to all the principles of 
 reason and justice. This was done in the case of Mr. Muir ; it was 
 proved that he had recommended Flower on the Constitution of 
 France, and that he had uttered some expressions about reforming the 
 abuses in the courts of law, although neither of these had been articu- 
 lated in the indictment. He contended, that by art and part the 
 indictment could merely mean art and part of the crimes libelled, and 
 not of any other crimes ; but the Lord Advocate said, that under the 
 terms of art and part he could prove the sedition of his whole life, 
 and draw into it every act of every kind. So he found had been the 
 declaration on the trial. If so, he must aver that the gentleman had not 
 had a trial that ought to subject him to the dreadful punishment 
 passed upon him in the sentence. It was said, as an imputation upon 
 the criminal law of England, that it was not necessary to name the 
 precise d.y upon which a crime was committed, but the law required
 
 14.5 
 
 that they should name and prove a day. But what was the practice 
 in Scotland ? They were not obliged to confine themselves to a day ; 
 nay, after taking, in the case of Mr. Muir, the period of months, for 
 his conduct during all which he was to prepare his defence, they 
 extended their evidence to a time even beyond this, said they had 
 a right to take in his whole life, and he was denied the power of 
 bringi^ evidence in his defence, because he had not previously given 
 a list of witnesses to refute charges of which he had never heard. / 
 say, tfien, said Mr. Adam, that substantial justice has not been done to 
 this gentleman ; and if we have either the feelings or the hearts of 
 men, we will not depart tlie House this night icithout an Address to 
 the Throne for mercy. The next great objection to the fairness of 
 his trial was, that which related to his Jury. A Society was formed 
 in Scotland, at Goldsmiths' Hall, resembling that at the Crown and 
 Anchor, in consequence of the Institution of certain Societies called 
 Friends of the People, of the publication of Paine's Rights of Man, 
 &c. Of the Friends of the People, he should content himself with 
 saying, that though many respected friends of his were advocates for 
 a Reform of the Representation of the people in Parliament, he had 
 no opinion in common with them on the subject ; and of Paine's 
 Rights of Man he should only say, that he had been favoured with 
 the reproach, in company with two Right Honourable Gentlemen 
 over the way, for having disapproved of his doctrines. This Society 
 at Goldsmiths' Hall had reprobated in severe terms Paine's book, and 
 had excluded Mr. Muir from their society on account of his approving 
 of that book. Gentlemen of this Society were the Jury, and an objec- 
 tion was made by Mr. Muir, a strong, a valid objection, that they were 
 prejudiced men, had declared their prejudice, and had acted upon it. It 
 was an objection common to the law of Scotland. There was a memo- 
 rable instance in the trial of Lord Balmerino in the year 1631. He 
 objected to Lord Marishal and Lord Dumfries, as having expressed 
 themselves in his disfavour, and he put them to their oath they took it. 
 He made the same objection to Lord Blantyre, who refused to take the 
 oath of his not having spoken to his disfavour, and he was rejected. 
 Now, with a precedent so strictly in point, when they saw the Lord Jus- 
 tice Clerk repel the objection, because, forsooth, it would go far to exclude 
 every man who has taken the oaths to Government Good God, what 
 must be the feelings of mankind on seeing so little regard paid to the 
 decency of justice, and the fate of a fellow-creature ! The men who 
 had declared Mr. Muir to be seditious, and who had acted so far 
 against him as to exclude him a society, were yet held to be fair 
 jurors ! The treatment in regard to the witnesses was equally hostile 
 to all justice. John Russell, a witness for the defendant, was sentenced 
 to three weeks of imprisonment, because at the very commencement 
 of his examination, he had not been able to mention the names of the 
 persons who had spoken to him on the subject of the trial. Mr. 
 Adam shewed the legal distinction between the credibility of a wit- 
 ness and his competency. The Court had no right to withhold the 
 evidence of a witness who was competent, on account of prevarication ;
 
 146 
 
 they ought to send it to the Jury, who are to judge of the credit that 
 is due to it ; but here they chose to deprive the prisoner of the evi- 
 dence of his witness altogether. Another witness, William Muir, 
 who from motives of conscience hesitated at taking an oath, was 
 ordered to be imprisoned for ever! It was monstrous! It teas 
 impossible to speak of such an act without horror ! Now after this 
 sort of trial they were to consider the most material part of th^vhole 
 proceeding, the discretion of the Court in the sentence which they 
 passed on the prisoner. It was with the utmost reluctance that he 
 came to agitate the conduct of a court of justice in that assembly ; he 
 felt the delicacy and the difficulty of the subject ; and he wished that 
 the House had granted, what in his opinion ought yet to be done, the 
 right of appeal, so as to bring these questions forward in a different 
 shape. Ele had avoided carefully throwing forth, till now, any doubt on 
 the subject of their conduct, because he thought it right that the question 
 should be examined to the bottom, and that before a doubt was hazarded, 
 gentlemen should be made acquainted with all the facts upon which 
 it arose. Now that he had examined the whole proceeding with the 
 most anxious and attentive mind, he must gravely declare, that he did 
 doubt and question the soundness of their discretion in the sentence 
 which they had passed. What was the crime ? Misdemeanour. 
 What was the punishment ? Transportation, the most aggravated and 
 most afflicting that it could be. Let gentlemen consider what would 
 have been the punishment passed in this country, on a similar offence? 
 What would have even been the punishment of Mr. Paine himself? 
 He might certainly say that it would have been no more than fine and 
 imprisonment. Such would have been the punishment in England. 
 But in Scotland they sentenced them to the most shocking species of 
 transportation. Transportation not to America, not to a cultivated 
 society, to an easy master, and to kind treatment, but to an inhospit- 
 able desert at the extremity of the earth condemned to live with 
 ruffians, whom the gibbet only had spared, and under a system of 
 despotism rendered necessary for the government of such a tribe I He 
 illustrated the horrors of such a punishment by a beautiful passage 
 from the philosophical Gibbon, and said, that though punishment 
 ought not to be different for different classes of men, yet as the object 
 of punishment was the prevention of crime, they surely ought to take 
 care not to wound the feelings of mankind by exerting the utmost 
 grasp of discretion to more than it could reach, or more than it could 
 hold. The mind of man, shuddering at a disproportionate sentence, 
 could feel no respect for the administration of justice so strained, and 
 the hand of authority was therefore weakened and palsied by the act. 
 In the exercise of sound discretion it was natural to think that the 
 Court would have looked for the guides the most congenial to the 
 feelings of the country. An article in the Union should have guided 
 their discretion ; the practice of England should have guided their dis- 
 cretion ; unless it was meant that their authority was to be the stalk- 
 ing-horse for extending the same sort of severity to England. They 
 should have remembered that as the two countries were bound together
 
 147 
 
 by political and moral ties, that their allegiance was the same, their 
 duties the same. They should have taken care that a punishment so 
 outrageously different from that of the one country, should not have 
 been suffered in the other. It was necessary even to the safety of 
 England that this should be done. Even in the most violent case that 
 England exhibited, that of Bishop Atterbury, our milder administration 
 of justice thought only of an act of pains and penalties. But instead 
 of this, they had had recourse to the despotism of the Romans, when 
 the Romans had sunk under the tyranny of one man. It was with 
 horror that he saw them referring to the practice of the Roman laiv, 
 under Nero and Domitian, instead of the mild practice of the neigh- 
 bouring country. One of the Judges had quoted the doctrine from 
 the Roman law, and he took it for granted that the Latin quotation 
 was correct, as the writer of the pamphlet would hardly have known 
 it. He said that by the Roman law, " Actores seditionis et tumultus, 
 populo concitato, pro qualitate dignitatis, aut in fuream tolluntur, aut 
 bestiis objiciuntur aut in insulam deportantur." " We have chosen," 
 says the learned Judge, " the mildest of these punishments." Having 
 gone through the case, Mr. Adam made a short, but warm and elegant 
 conclusion, on the motives that had induced him to bring forward the 
 subject. He had not done it from motives of professional interest; 
 he had no personal knowledge of the sufferers ; not from personal 
 prejudice to the Judges, for he respected their characters ; not from 
 his love of Paine's principles, for he had frankly declared his opinion 
 on them ; but because he considered the distribution of criminal justice 
 as the best defence of public liberty ; he did it to save the nation from 
 the disgrace and mischief of individual oppression, and because he 
 believed that the perversion of criminal jurisprudence was likely to be 
 the forerunner of anarchy on the one side, or of despotism on the 
 other. Feeling for t/te honour of the country, for the purity of criminal 
 jurisprudence, for the safely of the British Constitution, lie hud thought 
 it jit to bring before the House a proceeding which had wounded and 
 tortured the feelings of considerate men ; and he proposed to correct 
 the dangerous tendency of this proceeding by the most respectful 
 means ; it was a becoming privilege in the House to petition the 
 Crown to exercise the most divine of its prerogatives, that of mercy, 
 which blesses him that gives as well as him that asks, and by thus 
 procuring seasonable redress to quiet the minds of the people, and to 
 preserve sacred and inviolate the beauty of that Constitution which he 
 hoped would descend unimpaired to the latest posterity. He con- 
 cluded, therefore, with moving, That his Majesty would give directions 
 that there be laid upon the table extracts from the book of a journal 
 of the Supreme Court of Justiciary in Scotland of the trial of Thomas 
 Muir, so far as related to the indictment, &c. 
 
 Mr. Fox seconded the motion. 
 
 The LORD ADVOCATE of Scotland said, this was as serious a sub- 
 ject as ever came before that House for its discussion, for it involved 
 the consideration of the proceedings of a Court of Justice not only 
 the legality of them only, but also the discretion of the exercise of
 
 148 
 
 their power also ; supposing their proceedings to have been strictly 
 legal, in the whole of which he must say, that not the Judges of the 
 Court of Justiciary only were to blame, if blame there was on any 
 part of the prosecution of these trials, but he must also bear his part 
 of the censure, and must have his apology to make ; and if the Learned 
 Gentleman who opened the debate found it necessary to claim the 
 indulgence of the House while he entered on the various topics of this 
 subject, he must, in that respect, follow his example. In the part, he 
 said, he had taken in these prosecutions, he followed .the strict and 
 fair, and to his mind the only mode that was pointed out by the Cri- 
 minal Law of Scotland. He should not go upon the character of the 
 Judges in the Court of Justiciary, further than, to say they were men 
 who had made the study of the law of their country, almost the only 
 study of their lives, in which they had acquired the highest reputation. 
 But if they were wrong in their decisions upon this subject, they were 
 without excuse ; for it had been argued before them over and over 
 again, and they had persisted in the opinion which they originally gave. 
 He admitted the justness of the general principles of the Learned Gen- 
 tleman whom he was now about to answer, but differed almost totally 
 from him in the application of these principles ; and with respect 
 to the exercise of the discretion of the Judges, as well as the legality 
 of their proceedings, he trusted the House would agree with him, if he 
 succeeded in what he should lay down, that the whole conduct of these 
 trials was worthy of the approbation of the House. He must be per- 
 mitted to say that the whole of the speech of the Learned Gentleman, 
 as far as it respected the proceedings in question, was founded either 
 on a complete misrepresentation, misconception, or ignorance of the 
 law of Scotland, and of the practice of the Courts of Law there : and 
 he trusted that the House would not permit a Court of Justice to be 
 attacked in its character and dignity upon slight grounds ; and he must 
 add, that whatever some persons might say about assimilating the laws 
 of Scotland to the laws of England, he was sure that much mischief had 
 arisen from the ignorance and clamour with which the proceedings of 
 the Courts of Scotland had been accused ; these practices might, if 
 not properly opposed, tend to bring the Judges, however high their 
 character, and the law of Scotland, however wise and just, into dis- 
 credit with their countrymen, a thing which he trusted that House 
 would discountenance. The Learned Gentleman had misunderstood 
 the nature of the law which was applied to the case of Messrs. Muir and 
 Palmer ; he had apprehended the law on leasing-making only had 
 been applied to their case : that was not so. They were tried upon 
 a charge distinct from that, which he would endeavour to explain to 
 the House. From various circumstances, it became his duty, for 
 about 17 or 18 months, to look particularly at the law of Scotland, 
 and to look at that part of it which had slept in peace for a century, 
 and until very lately no man thought it would have been necessary to 
 call it forth in the manner it had been ; nor would it, but for the acts 
 of men who seemed to be endeavouring to see how far they could go 
 with impunity. In this situation, it became his duty, and the duty of
 
 149 
 
 those who acted with him, to look into all the old statutes upon these 
 points, from the time of Robert III. down to the present time, and to 
 look at every Act of Parliament in that period that applied to the 
 question to be determined by these trials ; they went over the whole 
 history of the country, and the Act of 1503 was particularly under 
 their consideration ; and the result was, that they were decidedly of 
 opinion that the fact proved against Mr. Muir was not such as came 
 under the meaning of leasing-making, but was separate from that ; for 
 leasing-making was that of telling lies of the King, and so forth. But 
 that the offence of this person was, that of exciting persons to acts of 
 sedition against the King and the Constitution, and therefore he found 
 he could not indict him for leasing-making. But even if Muir had been 
 tried for leasing-making, he (the Lord Advocate) should make it as 
 clear as the sun, that on a conviction of the charge of leasing-making, 
 be would have been liable to have the punishment of transportation 
 inflicted on him, as well as in that of which he was convicted ; he 
 therefore could have no view whatever in charging these men with the 
 offence for which he indicted them, except that of acting according 
 to the law of the country in which they committed the offence. 
 
 He then proceeded to examine the meaning of the word ban- 
 ishment, in which he differed from Mr. Adam in the definition. 
 He did not think that it meant the slighter part of sending away 
 from one place, and to the exclusion of another, which was 
 called the severe part. He defined banishment by the law of Scot- 
 land to mean that of sending to any part the Court should think 
 fit, and that transportation was only the means of carrying ban- 
 ishment into effect. This doctrine he maintained to be supported 
 in the preamble of the Act of Parliament of 1503, so much relied 
 upon by the Learned Gentleman. He maintained also that this prin- 
 ciple was recognized by the different Acts of 1600, 1604, 1661, and 
 all the Acts from that period down to the Act of 1670, under the 
 authority of which several persons had been sentenced to be trans- 
 ported to the West Indies, and other parts beyond the seas, for leas- 
 ing-making. He drew a conclusion from these premises, that the 
 Judges who presided at these trials could not have acted otherwise 
 than they did, could not have inflicted on those defendants slighter 
 punishments, and answer to their country for the duty they owed to 
 it, to their King, and to God. This was the case upon trials for 
 leasing-making, in instances too numerous to mention in the course of 
 this debate, for he could cite above fifty of them, some of a very old 
 date indeed ; for he believed that above two centuries ago, when 
 Shetland and the Orknies belonged to the Crown of Denmark, per- 
 sons were transported from Scotland thither, being at that time the 
 only places to which transports from Scotland could be sent. Indeed, 
 by the regular practice of the Courts of Law in Scotland, these points 
 were arbitrary, and in the discussion of the Judges ; and by Arbitrary 
 Power, by the Law of Scotland, was meant a power to inflict what 
 punishment the Judges should, in their discretion, think proper, short 
 of death. Among many cases he alluded to, he mentioned one as a very
 
 150 
 
 striking case. It was the case of David Bailey, who was tried on the 
 24th of February, 1704. This man was accused of leasing -making 
 of saying that the Duke of Hamilton and the Duke of Queensbery had 
 supported the Pretender. He was convicted of this charge. What was 
 the sentence pronounced upon him ? They declared him to be infa- 
 mous ; they banished him forth of Scotland for ever ; ordered that 
 he be transported to the West Indies, to he imprisoned till he was 
 transported, and to be set upon the pillory at eleven o'clock in the 
 forenoon, on such a day as the Court should appoint. His Lordship 
 said he was open to conviction, and he was sure the Judges of the 
 Court of Justiciary were ; but lie wished to know whether any case 
 could be stronger than this, or how it could be explained away, for 
 this was only eight months after the Act of 1703, on which so much 
 stress had been laid, and justly laid, for that was an important Act. 
 This was after the declaration of grievances, and the claim of rights, 
 and the rights of Queen Anne. Would the Privy Council who pro- 
 nounced this sentence, have dared to pronounce it, and to have ban- 
 ished this man for ever at such a time, if that had not been a legal 
 act ? On inquiry, he found these Privy Counsel were the first men 
 at that time in Scotland, five of whom were Judges. But this was 
 not all, for he maintained, that even the learned character to whom 
 the Learned Gentleman had alluded, and to whom mankind were so 
 much indebted (Sir George Mackenzie), had defined sedition in his 
 Treatise on the Laws of Scotland, and had warranted the conclusion 
 of the Court of Justiciary and Circuit Courts on the present trials. 
 That great lawyer had considered sedition as a common law offence ; 
 indeed, sedition was a crime well known to the law of Scotland. 
 
 The statement of the Learned Gentleman was certainly correct as 
 to the pleadings of the Court of Scotland being in the form of a syl- 
 logism. They certainly had a major and a minor proposition, in the 
 course of which the prisoner was to know in general what was to be 
 alleged against him, but the Learned Gentleman misunderstood the 
 Law of Scotland entirely, if he thought that the Scotch Lawyers 
 were to plead as formally, as they do in England. That was never 
 the practice of the Law of Scotland. This was what some English 
 Lawyers had called a shameful latitude, but so the Law of Scotland 
 was. It was enough by that Law, if a charge was made out in general 
 terms, and the time, by the common practice, in which the prosecutor 
 insisted on any act of the defendant, was the period of three months, 
 within the time of which the prisoner had notice. In either one or 
 other of these days, the prosecutor must give evidence of seditious 
 speeches or writings, but either of them would do upon a charge of 
 sedition generally laid against such prisoner. The prosecutor was not 
 bound to prove what he stated specifically ; it was enough to prove 
 what the nature of the charge was generally to entitle him to give 
 evidence of speech, words, or letters. This doctrine applied to the 
 case of the book, called the " Flower of the Constitution," in the 
 defendant's pocket. An objection was taken to this he was ready 
 to have argued the thing, but before the Court could give their judg-
 
 1,51 
 
 ment, he gave up the point ex gratia, because he thought it not worth 
 while to dispute it. 
 
 As to the objection taken to the Jurymen, because they were mem- 
 bers of the Goldsmiths' Hall Association, if that was to be allowed as 
 a disqualification, they would object to the first characters in the 
 country. They might as well say, they would not be tried by any 
 friend to the Constitution, or by any but those who thought as they 
 did. This must be the case if this objection was allowed, for if we 
 searched the whole country over, there wguld be found but two classes 
 of persons those who wished to support the Constitution, and those 
 who wished to destroy it, and to introduce all the confusion and the 
 anarchy of France. There was no middling class to be found. 
 
 He then took notice of the case, as it respected the witness Russel, 
 and maintained that the answers he gave amounted to prevarication, 
 and therefore he was committed. He maintained that the pannel lost 
 nothing for want of the testimony of this witness, for that he only 
 came to prove what twelve other witnesses had sworn on the part 
 of the defendant, that he frequently desired the populace to behave 
 peaceably, and so on : these witnesses he had no doubt have had a 
 conference at Glasgow upon this subject ; and that was the reason 
 they agreed so well on this part of the story. 
 
 As to the soundness or the discretion of the Court of Justiciary, 
 he found himself bound to defend it under all the circumstances 
 with which it was attended. Upon this subject he entered much at 
 length, and observed that he had heard much of the superiority of the 
 law of England over the law of Scotland ; but for his part, he thought 
 that in this particular case the law of Scotland was superior to the 
 law of England, and much better adapted to suppress sedition. He 
 maintained also, that transportation was the most prudent disposal 
 that could be made of persons, who had been guilty of such atrocious 
 offences, for the persons convicted, if they had been fined, would 
 have had their fines paid by others, and as to imprisonment, they 
 would have borne it with triumph ; and would, as others do, have 
 laughed at their prosecutor ; and might sow the seeds of sedition 
 among poor, illiterate, and heedless people what might be the effect 
 of the people of England having among them such men as Skirving, 
 Margarott, and Gerald ? 
 
 Mr. THOMPSON called to order, and thought it highly improper to 
 bring forward the name of Mr. Gerald, who was not yet tried. 
 
 The LORD ADVOCATE made an apology, and then entered upon 
 the general subject of the trials, and maintained their legality and the 
 soundness of the discretion of the Judges, who, he said, had done 
 nothing more than the law commanded them to do. 
 
 Mr. SHERIDAN took notice of all the arguments of the Lord Advo- 
 cate, and maintained there was a fallacy in the whole tenor of his 
 speech, for he confounded two things essentially distinct, that of 
 hasing-making and sedition. All the cases he had brought forward 
 applied to leasing -making only ; and the question did not involve that 
 consideration, but related merely to sedition, upon wbich not a single
 
 case was to be found. He ridiculed the assertion of lawyers from 
 Scotland telling the House they were not qualified to judge on a point 
 of common sense, because they were not Scotch lawyers. The ques- 
 tion here was a question of common sense, arising out of the history 
 of the country. He reprobated in the most severe manner the obser- 
 vation of the Lord Advocate, that there was no middle class of people 
 in Scotland, between those who wished to destroy the Constitution 
 and introduce the horrors of anarchy, and those who applauded the 
 proceedings of the Court of. Justiciary. The assertion lie hoped and 
 believed to be as false, with regard to the people of Scotland, as he 
 knew it to be false of the great body of the people of England ; he 
 knew that in England there was a class between Republicans and 
 Levellers, and Associators and Alarmists, and much more honourable 
 in their views than either, and men upon whom the safety of this 
 Kingdom might depend, and to whom every honest man might look 
 up to with confidence men who had too much spirit to crouch to 
 power, and too much candour and integrity to stoop to mean artifice, 
 to gain the momentary applause of the unthinking part of the com- 
 munity. He expressed his indignation at the idea of the Learned Lord 
 preferring the criminal law of Scotland to that of England, and said 
 that such assertions should never be suffered to pass unreprobated, 
 lest contempt might by some be construed into acquiescence, and lest 
 some Minister might be bold enough to make an experiment of 
 changing the criminal law of England for that of Scotland. He took 
 notice of the conduct of the Court, with regard to the witness Russell, 
 offered on the part of Mr. Muir, and maintained that both the Lord 
 Advocate and the Court had acted illegally upon that subject ; that 
 their conduct would not have been agreeable to any principle of 
 law, in any civilized society ; that witness had only said, that he 
 did not recollect what no person in Court could prove to be false. 
 He applied many pointed observations on the refusal of the Court of 
 Justiciary to allow the objection of Mr. Muir to the Jury, as having 
 prejudiced his cause in the association of the Goldsmiths' Hall Com- 
 pany. This, he said, confounded two things essentially at variance 
 with one another in the administration of justice in every Court where 
 justice could be known that of the accuser being a Judge, which 
 was the case on the trial of Mr. Muir. He ridiculed the effect of the 
 researches of the Lord Advocate, who had studied the law of Scotland 
 for eighteen months, and had only brought forward a law which had 
 slept for a century, which, when he brought it, turned out to be only 
 a law upon leasing -making, whereas the subject to which he applied 
 it was sedition. He observed that it was rather remarkable, that the 
 Noble and Learned Lord could not have found in the History of 
 Scotland any law for sedition, in the course of a century, although 
 within that time it had produced two rebellions. It was extra- 
 ordinary, he said, that the Noble Lord should never by accident 
 have stumbled on the case of a Mr. DUNDAS (he thought his 
 name was), of Armston, who was accused of distributing medals, 
 which a wicked woman, called the Duchess of GORDON, had given
 
 153 
 
 to him : on these medals were the head of the Pretender, and some- 
 thing very seditious on the other side and of making speeches 
 recommending the cause of the Pretender. It was extraordinary that 
 this circumstance had escaped the historical vigilance of the learned 
 Lord. He took notice also of the charge against Mr. Muir for 
 distributing books, the works of others, and of transporting him 
 for fourteen years for it, as a thing perfectly new. Had the 
 Learned Lord had never heard of such a crime as calling on the 
 people to ask for a Parliamentary Reform ? Perhaps the Noble 
 Lord had never heard of such a thing as a resolution signed William 
 Pitt, Duke of Richmond, and others, calling on the people to do 
 that very thing. [/Here he read the resolution of the Thatched-house 
 Tavern, entered into by Mr. Pitt and his party in 1781.] Perhaps the 
 Noble Lord had not known any thing of the late publications of Mr. 
 Burke against Popular Rights, which however agreed pretty well with 
 the speeches of the Noble Lord at these Trials, for every sentence and 
 almost every word seemed as if borrowed from that admired perform- 
 ance. But the public would see through all this ; they would see that there 
 was something so implacable, so rancorous in the character of an apos- 
 tate, that he can never forgive others for adopting what he has found 
 convenient to abandon : hence all the persecutions against all those who 
 dare to follow the plan of a Parliamentary Reform. He then took 
 notice of the case of Bailey, and maintained that the Privy Council 
 exceeded their power to a shameful degree in that case. He main- 
 tained that the Lord Advocate had misconstrued the whole of the 
 opinion of Sir George Mackenzie on the subject of sedition ; and he 
 observed that the question now for the House to ask itself, was 
 whether they would, in order to clear a point that was at least ex- 
 tremely doubtful, agree to the motion ? He warned the House against 
 the public danger of laying down a precedent which would go to the 
 length of telling the people of this kingdom that the House of Com- 
 mons will never institute an inquiry into the conduct of justice upon 
 any thing short of illegality. 
 
 Mr. WHITBREAD informed the House that he had the honour (for 
 an honour in the true sense of the word he deemed it,) to be acquainted 
 with Mr. Palmer, to whom he paid the most handsome compliments 
 for understanding and virtue. He then took notice of the subject of 
 debate before the House, and declared he thought these severe sen- 
 tences were dangerous to the public welfare and tranquillity of the 
 realm. These were points on which posterity would impartially 
 
 judge Every day Ministers were pushing points too far : a day 
 
 would arrive when these things should be seen impartially. 
 
 Mr. WYNDHAM defended the legality of the trials, on the prece- 
 dents which appeared to him to have been quoted. He was of opin- 
 ion that the Law of England might be altered and assimilated to the 
 Law of Scotland, if it was found adequate to the purposes of suppress- 
 ing sedition. 
 
 Mr. Fox said, he considered the question to be of a nature so 
 alarmingly important, that he could not sit silent after hearing the
 
 154 
 
 arguments that had been brought forward : there were some circum- 
 stances collaterally introduced which lie was obliged to notice before 
 he went to the legality of the conduct of the proceedings that had 
 taken place in Scotland ; and he could not help observing with parti- 
 cular surprise and indignation, the manner in which the Learned Lord 
 expressed a wish that the law of Scotland, as he expounded it, should 
 be introduced into England, instead of those wise and salutary laws 
 under which so much had been secured to this country ; and when 
 the Learned Lord roundly asserted that he was convinced the Scotch 
 criminal law was preferable to the English law, and that he could 
 wish to see them assimilated, he owned he was struck with the violence 
 and boldness of such doctrines. Were they extended to the full length 
 that the Learned Lord, and a Right Honourable Friend of his seemed 
 to wish, he saw no security that he, his Honourable Friends, or any 
 other person had, that they might not be sent to Botany Bay, as it 
 placed them completely in the power, and at the discretion of the 
 executive government. In the present case he thought the Scotch 
 Judges had exercised their discretion to a degree of impropriety that 
 was not justifiable, or if it was justifiable by any law, it was full time, 
 from the enormity of the case, that such law should be repealed, and 
 the people of Scotland put upon the same footing with those in Eng- 
 land. He thought that House had shewn a degree of false delicacy 
 about calling for the record on this case, and reminded them of the 
 petitions in the reign of Charles I. which, though they came some of 
 them from people not of unexceptionable character, were properly 
 attended to by Parliament. With regard to the act of 1703, it certainly 
 was a limiting act, and under the word banishment, never could mean 
 transportation ; and being a mitigating act ought to be construed 
 mildly; he then came to the act 1672, which specifies when trans- 
 portation is the meaning, that some of those convicted under that 
 law, were to be transported to the West-Indies, and in other cases 
 forth of the realm, which is no more than banishment from their 
 country, without any direction where they are to be sent. He consid- 
 ered the negative evidence given by his Honourable Friend who made 
 the motion, as entitled to much weight, as nothing had been said on 
 the other side. His Honourable Friend had proved that there was 
 no one instance, except for capital crimes, of any person being trans- 
 ported after sentence of banishment had passed, and no instance of 
 any trial for sedition in the history of Scotland to be found. In one 
 act, indeed, there were words which went farther on the subject of 
 punishments by banishment to places specified, and added, " or other- 
 wise ;" but certainly no man would say, that this should be acted 
 upon by construing the law with a latitude from those words to the 
 injury of the subject : considering therefore the principle of this law, 
 and of all mitigating laws, he was clearly of opinion that the Scotch 
 Judges had either misunderstood or misinterpreted the law. As to 
 what happened in 1704, and which had been stated as a precedent, it 
 was only necessary to say, that those proceedings were ruled by thy 
 Privy Council, at the time the most reprobated of all the tribunals
 
 155 
 
 that could possibly be mentioned. Indeed, in this opinion he had 
 the high authority of a great lawyer in the other House, who had said 
 from the Woolsack last year, when the precedent of the Appeal to 
 the Privy Council, 1704, was stated, " You must not mention that; 
 you cannot argue from it ; it is no precedent." The Learned Lord 
 had taken pains to explain what leasing -making was, but he had like- 
 wise been obliged to own, that there were other crimes which had 
 been punished as sedition, that did not precisely come within the 
 description of telling falsehoods between the King and the people ; 
 such as the case of his ancestor and others, in the reign of George I. 
 such as drinking the Pretender's health, refusing to ring the bells at 
 Dundee on the King's accession, and others which had not been fol- 
 lowed up by transportation ; and would any man compare the crimi- 
 nality of those cases, to the criminality of the present case, which was 
 merely delivering opinions favourable to a Parliamentary Reform ? 
 He treated with happy irony the argument of the Learned Lord, that 
 he was so much at a loss to find out the proper way of punishing 
 sedition in Scotland, that he was obliged to look into laws that had 
 been dormant for a century ; but if there was no sedition in Scotland 
 for a century, was there none in England that he could look to ? That 
 there should be none in Scotland was the more extraordinary, as within 
 that century there had been two open rebellions. By the Learned 
 Lord's argument, sedition vas a good thing, for they had it in Eng- 
 land, and had no rebellion there ; they had none in Scotland, and 
 there there were two rebellions. He treated Sir George M'Kenzie 
 as the apologist of all the tyranny and oppression that disgraced the 
 latter part of the reign of the Stuarts, and as such considered it 
 humiliating to quote him as an authority ; as far as it went, however, 
 it would be found against the Learned Lord. He came next to dis- 
 cuss the manner in which the evidence had been conducted at Mr. 
 Muir's trial, the bare statement of which, he said, must make the 
 blood run cold of every one who heard it. He argued, in a masterly 
 manner, the impropriety of bringing forward Ann Fisher, Mr. Muir's 
 domestic servant, to prove that he at some time or other had abused 
 the proceedings of the Courts of Scotland. If such unquestionable 
 proceedings were encouraged, wbere was the man who could say his 
 character, his property, or his life, was in safety ? His Right Hon. 
 Friend and he, with many others, who were united in their sentiments 
 against the American war, might have been sent long ago to Botany 
 Bay. In short, all were liable to be accused of sedition who opposed 
 administration at the time, and the whole country was at the disposal 
 of the Executive Government. The whole of the proceedings on this 
 trial, he maintained, were disgusting and monstrous to every lover of 
 justice and humanity. He saw a great similarity between that pro- 
 ceeding and some of the detestable proceedings as to the crime : the 
 Learned Lord's sedition would there be termed incivism ; and as to 
 the punishment to a man of sensibility, there was little difference 
 between Botany Bay and the guillotine. The Learned Lord having 
 no statute law for sedition, had recourse to common law ; but where
 
 156 
 
 can it be found ? The common law could only exist in three 
 ways on practice, on authority, or on the general reasoning of eter- 
 nal justice ; but none of those could answer the purpose of the Learned 
 Lord. He contended very ably, that the Court had been equally 
 wrong in admitting improper evidence for the prosecution, and refusing 
 competent evidence for the defendant alluding to Russell's. He laid 
 it down to be the right of the Jury to judge of the credibility, the 
 Court could only judge of the competency. He then entered into the 
 question of challenging such of the Jury as had associated and offered 
 a reward to convict Mr. Muir, as well as refusing to admit him of 
 their society. This challenge in England would have been admitted, 
 and he knew no reason why it should not be so in Scotland, because 
 by their conduct they certainly had prejudged Mr. Muir. He noticed 
 the want of decorum that prevailed on the Bench, and thought it the 
 grossest levity and nonsense to hear the punishment stated by some 
 of the Judges, to be the mildest and most lenient that could be in- 
 flicted. The Learned Lord would have acted fairer, if he intended to 
 alter the laws of this country, had he gone to the bottom of the plan. 
 He was particularly severe upon the manner in which several of the 
 Judges gave their opinions. If they were serious, they were as absurd 
 as extraordinary ; and if in jest, he would only ask if that was a place 
 or a time for jests and ribaldry ? One among them had noticed with 
 much indecency, the applause that followed Mr. Muir's speech ; and 
 another, in a Latin quotation, pointed put from the Roman law, that 
 the only punishment for sedition in Scotland was the gallows, deliver- 
 ing the delinquent to wild beasts, or transportation ; and concluded, 
 that they in their wisdom had made choice of " the mildest." If there 
 was no law, or no example from their ancestors to direct them, might 
 they not have looked for precedents in this country ? Here he thought 
 himself bound to pay a just tribute of praise to a Right Honourable 
 Gentleman opposite (the Attorney-General). In his official capacity, 
 he had to prosecute to conviction : the sentence was fine and imprison- 
 ment ; but in the execution of that sentence, the Gentleman, Mr. 
 Winterbotham, a clergyman, who had been convicted of preaching 
 two seditious sermons, found himself thrown into jail, amongst felons 
 who had been guilty of every sort of crime ; but no sooner did this 
 come to the Attorney-General's knowledge, then he, with sentiments 
 of honour, justice, and humanity, said, " God forbid that a person of 
 the description mentioned, should, for a single day, be confined in such 
 society;" and took steps, in consequence, that would do him immortal 
 honour. Mr. Fox went into every part of the subject, and concluded 
 a brilliant and animated speech, of which the above is merely a feeble 
 outline, by declaring that he gave the motion his warmest support. 
 
 Mr. PITT contended for the legality of the whole proceedings in 
 the fullest extent; that the act of 1703, by the word ' banishment,' 
 includes transportation ; and was only so far a mitigating act, as it 
 took away capital punishment from a crime that was capital, but left 
 full power, and the exercise of discretion in the application of arbitrary 
 punishment, according to the variety of the circumstances as they
 
 157 
 
 occurred. He said that in all, or most of the sentences passed from 
 1703 to 1754-, transportation was mentioned. He granted that much 
 might justly be said against the Privy Council in 1704, but that was 
 no reason why the whole of their proceedings should be branded with 
 so much infamy. He approved of the manner in which the trial had 
 been conducted, and thought the Lord Advocate right in preferring to 
 libel sedition, instead of leasing-making. He went over what he con- 
 ceived to be the distinctions between leasing-making, sedition, and 
 treason. He contended that the trial was fair, legal, and could not 
 have been conducted in any other way. He complimented the Judges 
 and the Lord Advocate, and thought if it was to be lamented that the 
 punishment was severe upon men of rank and education, it ought to 
 be remembered that their situation was rather an aggravation of their 
 guilt than otherwise. He concluded by giving his negative to the 
 motion. 
 
 Mr. ADAM made a very able and pointed reply, in which he again 
 expressed his astonishment that Ministers should advise the execution 
 of such sentences against men whose offence might perhaps be traced 
 to the doctrines formerly inculcated by some of those who now held 
 distinguished situations in the Cabinet. 
 
 Mr. PITT rose again to say that he saw nothing of promoting a 
 Parliamentary Reform charged in the indictment against Mr. Muir, 
 but circulating Paine's book, and inculcating the pernicious doctrines 
 it contained. 
 
 Mr. GREY affirmed that if the Right Hon. Gentleman had conde- 
 scended to read the indictment and the trial, he could not have been 
 ignorant that whatever words might be introduced, the substantial 
 part of the charge in both cases was promoting Parliamentary Reform, 
 and that, too, on principles much less exceptionable than those held 
 by persons with whom the Right Hon. Gentleman himself had acted 
 in concert. Mr. Grey gave the motion of his Hon. Friend Mr. Adam 
 his unqualified support. 
 
 At a quarter past three o'clock in the morning, and after a debate 
 of ten hours, the House divided. 
 
 For the Motion, ..... 32 
 
 Against it, . . . . . . 171 
 
 Majority against the Motion, . . . 139 
 
 (From the Morning Chronicle.) 
 
 The speech of Mr. ADAM on the Question of the late Judicial Pro- 
 ceedings in Scotland, was, in point of arrangement, reasoning, and lan- 
 guage, one of the ablest discourses we ever heard in Parliament : our 
 account is a very feeble outline, and can hardly give an idea of the 
 impression which he made on the audience part of the House. His 
 reply was spirited and argumentative.
 
 1.18 
 
 Li-tl. of the Minorily on tin- i\foi'in ./ Mr. Ailani. 
 
 Right Hon. C. J. Fox Colonel Tarleton 
 
 S. Wliitbread, Esq. M. A. Taylor, Esq. 
 
 Major Maitland Philip Francis, Esq. 
 
 Lord Jo!m Townsend James Walwyn, Esq. 
 
 Lord William Russell William Plainer, Esq. 
 
 Hon. St. A. St. John . William Smith, Esq. 
 
 Lord Robert Spencer James 1 1 
 
 General Fitzpatrick George Byn-r, Esq. 
 
 Hon. T. Erskino Earl Wycombe 
 
 William Adam, Esq. Hon. Edward Bouveiie 
 
 Dudley North, Esq. Hon. \V. H. Bouverie 
 
 Thomas Thompson, Esq. Sir Edward Wilmington, Bait. 
 
 Henry Howard, Esq. R. P. Knight, Esq. 
 
 Benjamin Vaughan, Esq. John Harrison, Esq. 
 
 Colonel Macleod John Courtenay, E.sq. 
 
 TELLERS. 
 
 R. B. Sheridan, Esq. Charles Grey, Esq. 
 
 Colonel M'Leod \vas the only Scotch Member who voted with 
 Mr. Adam for the motion I 
 
 We regret \ve have not been able to lay our bauds on the names oi 
 the Majority, as they deserved to be published. 
 
 No. XX. 
 
 Tribute to Scotland, and to Mr. MUIH, by CtiRrtAN, taken from his 
 eloquent Speech in Defence of Mr. HAMILTON ROWAN. Jon. 
 29, 1794. 
 
 GENTLEMEN, I am glad that this question has not been brought" 
 forward earlier ; I rejoice for the sake of the court, of the jury, and 
 of the public repose, that this question has not beeu brought forward 
 till now. In Great Britain, analagous circumstances have taken place. 
 At the commencement of tht-A unfortunate war, which has deluged all 
 Europe with blood, the spirit of the English people was tremblingly 
 alive to the terror of French principles ; at that moment of general 
 paroxysm, to accuse was to convict. The danger loomed larger to 
 the public eye, from the misty region through which it was surveyed. 
 We measure inaccessible heights by the shadows which they project, 
 where the lowness and the distance of the light form the length of the 
 shade. 
 
 There is a sort of aspiring and adventurous credulity, which dis- 
 dains assenting to obrions truths, nnd delights in catching at the 
 improbability of circumstances, as its best ground of faith. To what 
 other cause, Gentlemen, can you ascribe, that in the wise, the reflect- 
 ing, and the philosophic nation of Great Britain, a printer has been 
 gravely found guilty of a libel, for publishing those resolutions to 
 which the present minister of that kingdom had actually subscribed 
 his name? To u-liat otln, ribc, ichat in ;//// i> 
 
 still more ftstonixhuif/., ii, x>n'h a cuimtrii ty *<;>tluiid a nation ,,/>/
 
 , \\tEUNIVERfyj 
 
 
 > 
 c-> 
 
 > 
 
 3 
 
 a 
 
 -n <-J 
 
 S ^ - 
 
 %!3AINfl 
 

 
 K 
 
 I 1 
 
 oa 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 M-llBRARY0/r