Part 19

“The King, however, was not at that time at Brighton, but unfortunately confined to his palace in London by so severe an indisposition as to require the issuing of daily bulletins regarding the state of his health. From that indisposition he had now recovered, and he (Mr. Adolphus) prayed to God that he might long be preserved from the recurrence of it. The prisoner at the bar, however, if they were to believe the testimony of Adams, was of opinion, that the present family had inherited the throne long enough, and that it was of no use for the present King to think of ever being crowned.”

The learned Counsel proceeded, “Thus, gentlemen, is the secret detected! Here is the word of the wise and the edict of the powerful! By means like these was the greatest metropolis in the world to be taken, the great roads of communication with the country occupied, and the sea-port towns seized! Yet, by this shameless fabricator of incredible falsehood, and by him alone, is the first count of the indictment supported. It required the greatest human fortitude of face to state it. Well, it was discovered that the first Cabinet dinner was to be given. Cabinet dinners were said to be suspended during the death of the late King, and the illness of the present. On occasion of this first Cabinet dinner the plan was to be executed. Mark, now, how this story breaks itself to pieces!

“On the 16th of February the plot is formed; yet then there was no ministry, and no intention of a Cabinet dinner. This is flagrant, gross, and palpable, too palpable for detection, too flagrant for exaggeration. Several meetings are said to have been held at Fox’s-court. It was found, on the 19th February, that the soldiers had done their duty, and were not to be surprised, therefore something new must be devised. For this purpose comes the ever memorable information in _The New Times_. They had nothing in view but plunder; they sought only the surest way to plunder. Poverty was their goad, plunder their aim. Their designs were not directed against any individuals, however exalted, but as means of plunder. But a committee was appointed, and we see them assembled on the 20th. This is eminently worthy of your attention. On Sunday, at eleven o’clock in the morning, when the snow fell so thick that one could scarcely see his way, the committee met. Tidd took the chair at this rehearsal of the provisional government. Tidd sat in the chair with a pike in his hand. Thistlewood took his station on his right; Brunt was on the left; Thistlewood opens:--‘I presume you know what you have met here for; I mean the west-end job.’ This is presumptuous enough, certainly. Brunt speaks next: he never speaks without an oath, and he, characteristically, says, ‘D--n my eyes, mention it out.’ Tidd calls to order. So orderly was this meeting! Thistlewood then proposes to assassinate the ministers separately, as they cannot be got together.

“Their arrangements for this are like all the other arrangements; barracks were to be taken, cannons carried away, ministers assassinated, government subverted, the Mansion House occupied, all by fifteen or twenty men. Twenty-five were the greatest number ever spoken to. Twenty-five would find themselves completely lost in the Mansion House; they might as well wander through the Tower of Babel. Palin, who was to be particularly important in his services, was to travel from place to place with satchels of burning materials on his back, and was alone to set fire to several places. Mr. Palin alone was to be seen wandering about, setting fire to houses for amusement, or for the perfection of their plan. Each individual was to have his distinct act of assassination; whoever failed was to be himself assassinated. But who the spare assassin was, to assassinate the rest if they failed, was not told. But this is one of the many fictions which you are called upon to swallow.

“The witness ventured, for the first time, to express here some difficulty, and asked whether, if failure proceeded from unavoidable causes, and not from cowardice, the same consequence must follow. Thistlewood relieved him from this apprehension. But how the court-martial was to be formed to try the case was not discovered. Such, gentlemen, is the delirium of delusion, or the suggestions of frenzy, which you are called upon to believe. Mr. Palin delivers a speech in parliamentary form. ‘Agreeing as I do with the plan proposed, I wish to know where men are to be found.’ Then he asks whether the plan is to be communicated to those he meant to call upon. Thistlewood authorizes him to use his own discretion. Gentlemen, if you find in this testimony some remote pointing to probability, believe it; but can you, for a moment, hesitate respecting this gross and flagrant fiction? Furnival’s Inn was selected for setting fire to. No building is less liable to be burnt. It is a modern building, and there are strong party-walls. Other places, which I shall not name, and where some of us live, would be much fitter. Many places between Furnival’s Inn and Fetter-lane, all timber, would take fire at once. But Furnival’s Inn appeared fittest in fiction.

“The witness had been in prison, and having forgotten that Furnival’s Inn was rebuilt, and inventing what he should say to the Privy-Council, he represented Furnival’s Inn as the place to be burnt, because, in its former state, it would readily take fire. The Privy Council, their clerk, as well as the Attorney General, I believe, gave him no assistance; they only placed him before an impartial jury. You know that if the plan were contemplated and effected, a chandler’s shop at Charing-cross, where the various communications diverge into the town, would create more alarm. But this suited the grossness of fiction, or the fondness of delusion, by which this witness looked for impunity and reward. We now come to the business of the exchequer. Brunt says, “D----n my eyes, though I have not worked for some time, I have a 1_l._ note, and I shall give it for a treat.” You will not, gentlemen, suppose that I repeat these oaths as feeling pleasure in doing so. It is painful to me, and disgusting to you; but, in my humble judgment, it is not a needless repetition.

“Suppose Brunt’s generous purpose accomplished, it will give a slice of cheese, a piece of bread, and a glass of gin to each. It appears that 6_s._ was the largest sum seen with them: there was 1_s._ on another occasion; there was 7_d._ for a newspaper, 7_s._ 7_d._ was the treasury then. Whether this and the prospect of sharing in the produce of a 1_l._ note, could induce fifteen men to subvert the Government, I leave you to judge. Nothing stimulated them, then, but the hope of plunder. When they should have done something to create alarm, they expected to have full liberty of plunder.

“Thus have I endeavoured, gentlemen, by hours stolen from my rest, to lay before you the real character of their intentions. My Lord will fairly state the law to you; I need not, therefore, anticipate any thing on that subject. At the meeting on the 21st, information is said to have been given that their proceedings were known at Bow-street, and at the Secretary of State’s office. We might have had evidence whether this information could be well founded, but we have none. Next day, the 22d, the cabinet dinner is announced. Who announces it? Mr. Edwards. This corresponds with what is in evidence before you, that the intelligence was fabricated, and put into the paper for this purpose. “Poverty goads on these men; it is fit,” said the prompters, “that we put them on to what will serve our own purposes.”

“The Court reporter himself did not know of the cabinet dinner. He has told you, that the word ‘grand’ could not be applied by him, as one cabinet dinner was not grander than another. You see, then, how it has been fabricated. I will here once more allude to the execrations of Brunt, and from this time dismiss them from your observation.

“The Attorney General animadverted properly on the impiety and obduracy of heart which the language of Brunt indicated. If it was true, his infamy baffles description. It is, that up to that moment he had been an infidel, but he had been praying to God, and he now believed, because his prayer was answered. Such are the words uttered by the fiction-making witness’s mouth. ‘I have prayed to God, in whom I did not believe, to put in our power innocent men, who are highly favoured in this world.’ These are the fictions of a gross, rank, ignorant, conspirator; they defy the grasp of human investigation; they almost persuade us to believe them, because they are impossible. We are almost led to say, as one said on another occasion, ‘I believe it, because no man would invent what is so incredible.’ But, on a question of life and death, gentlemen, you will not listen to such fictions; you will not regard such fantastical decoys. Perforated by the witness’s own act, his creation sinks to the bottom of the sea; it can form neither buoy nor vessel--it is sunk and destroyed for ever. But he is an infamous witness who cannot be believed at all. You find himself next in the chair; and when one turns upon him like a bull-dog, and another like a bear, he remains firm.

“It was then resolved to have a watch set upon Lord Harrowby’s house. This was certainly done, and was a part of the plan which was undoubtedly formed to murder his Majesty’s Ministers. But after that should have been done, so barren were they of invention, that they were to fall back on their old plan of carrying away cannons without horses; of occupying posts without men; and of performing great deeds without any means.

“Provisional Government! Unless the pronouncing of these words were to ‘raise spirits from the vasty deep,’ I know not what it could mean. A printing press, one would have thought, was indispensable. But no means of printing a placard had they. Their proclamations were written on a piece of cartridge paper. I beg pardon, let me not understate the means possessed by them; on three pieces of cartridge paper were the magical words written. ‘Your tyrants are destroyed.’ Ministers were the tyrants then. Be it so. This is not high treason. It might have been murder; but it is not high treason. ‘The friends of liberty are invited to come forward.’ If this were told by a witness deserving of faith, it would stagger belief; told by one tainted as this witness is, it can excite no inclination towards faith. On the blazing building, I think I am correct in stating it so, these proclamations were to be stuck up, in order that the friends of liberty, happening to pass by the ruins, might know that a provisional government was sitting, we know not where, or for what purpose.

“Is it possible, gentlemen, to sacrifice human life upon evidence like this? Is it possible to credit evidence that has no point of contact with common sense? The Provisional Government, dropped from the clouds, is sitting: the finger-post is destroyed, with the blazing building to which it was attached; you know not where the Provisional Government is to be found.

“The witness stated, that Ings, the butcher, was arrayed in a belt and two bags. The articles which were exhibited to you last night are removed from the table to-day. The bags were to carry human heads. If there is in the human mind any thing so atrocious as to crown assassination with an exhibition like this, I am truly, truly heart-struck with sorrow for it. I was led to review the French Revolution, to which allusion has been made by the Attorney General, and at that early age every drop of blood in my body was chilled with horror at human heads paraded through the streets, and at the atrocious barbarities inflicted on the royal family. I rejoiced that the country to which I belonged was free from such crimes.

“From the hasty view I took of the bags, and it did not occur to me till I left the Court, but from the hasty view I took, I think they are not large enough to contain a human head. I am told that they are: if so, I only say it has the impression of a hasty view. But, for God’s sake, let us not decide by these ignorant visions. Was not Lord Harrowby’s plate, the salvers and goblets, &c., a more natural object of desire, and not heads, which, if any carried, every hand would instinctively strike him from the face of the earth? The hand of Lord Castlereagh was to be put into pickle, whether in order to be shewn for money, as might appear suitable to the situation of Ings, or to be exhibited as a trophy, does not appear.

“The witness says, when the officers entered the loft in Cato-street, they cried out, ‘Here’s a pretty nest of you,’ &c. I shall afterwards remark upon this, because I think it pregnant with importance as to the witness’s testimony, for I think he was not there at all. With the experience which you have had in courts of justice, some of you may have felt astonished that my learned friend did not proceed further into the cross-examination of this witness. Every art has its own difficulties, and my learned friend never shewed more consummate skill in his art than when he refrained from further cross-examination of this witness.

“When my learned friends, the Solicitor General and Mr. Gurney asked questions of this witness, which were the natural and regular inquiries, you heard him refuse to answer, and add, ‘No, I have something else to say before I come to that.’ When their experience and judgment suggested the proper questions, he would not let his contrived and fabricated tale be mutilated. ‘No,’ says the untractable witness, ‘I have not come to that yet.’ If my learned friend had wasted time in cross-examination, he could only have got repetitions of the same words. Such testimony is not to be overthrown by cross-examination, but by his manner before you, and by the probability of the statements he makes. But this important declaration was got from him by cross-examination.

“When my learned friend asked him, in the words quoted by the Attorney General from a great poet, whether he had given information from ‘compunctious visitings,’ he replied, that conscience alone made him disclose what he knew. He is quiet from the murder of Smithers on Wednesday night till Saturday, when he plumes his wings, and goes to the Privy-Council to disburthen his heart. I have had a good deal of experience of the evidence of such persons; and I have heard one, who was chairman of the quarter-sessions for Middlesex twenty-six years, say, that, from the moment that observation was made by an accomplice, he was not to be believed, because that was incredible. Apply that here. He sees the murderer, and goes away, unconcerned as if nothing had happened. He rests on the stings of his conscience for four days. He must think that you have no hearts yourselves--no consciousness of the operations of human feelings--if he imagines that you can believe what no schoolboy would give credit to.

“Have I used levity upon this subject? for God’s sake, absolve me from the intention! Have I treated lightly the contemplation of assassinating men possessing and deserving the highest veneration? For God’s sake, excuse the observations which the absurdity of the evidence made necessary! I cannot hear, without indignation, that the wisdom which has so long presided in one of the most important of our Courts, was thus to become a corpse; and that the valour which fought at Waterloo (for the Duke of Wellington was to have been at the dinner) was to have fallen by assassins. From these two take the measure of all.

“When the destruction of worth and wisdom, of learning and talent, is thus contemplated, the most hardened and flinty heart that ever dwelt in a human bosom recoils with horror, and melts with compassion.

“If then, I have used a light expression, impute it, gentlemen, to inadvertence of language, and not to hardness of heart, because the absurdity of the witness made the observations I offered unavoidable.

“Let us now see how far this witness is supported by other witnesses. Mary Rogers proves his statement as to the lodgings; Joseph Hall confirms him to a similar extent. Lord Harrowby and his servant confirms him so far, as to prove the intention of giving his cabinet dinner on Wednesday night. Of this there is no doubt. Hyden is proved to have spoken to his Lordship in the Park. Three witnesses are called, which was not necessary, to prove that the room in Cato-street had been taken; but the parade of confirmation in this matter is meant to cast an air of credibility over other parts of the evidence. I now advert to collateral confirmations. The sharpening of Ings’s sword, the acquaintance of Harrison with the state of the barracks, the redeeming of a blunderbuss from pawn for murder, not treason, have been all proved.

“It is true, Hyden and Dwyer are not accomplices, they are to be believed, if their testimony is credible. Hyden long ago, before his late Majesty’s death, states to Wilson, with whom alone he was acquainted, that grenades were to be thrown under the table, and that those who should escape were to be killed with the sword. But he mentions no ulterior object deserving of the name of treason. Whatever the object might be, Hyden goes first to Lord Castlereagh, who was the object of their peculiar spleen; then not finding him, to Lord Harrowby. But what the nature of their plan was you may judge from this that, Wilson would not, for the accomplishment of it, lose a shilling or half-a-crown to be gained by going with cream to a nobleman. He knew that no such thing as a revolution was to be done. This, gentlemen, is not the way that kings are destroyed, and governments overthrown.

“I do not say that the question should not enter into your consideration, but I say that you cannot find a verdict for the Attorney General, if you do not believe Adams; and I have laboured very much in vain, if you have not dismissed his evidence from your minds. Monument has not in the slightest degree confirmed Adams as to the proceedings previously to those in Cato-street; and he has no memory of having ever seen so remarkable a man as Adams at Cato-street. Monument knew nothing of the murder of Ministers, and the expectation of plunder as the consequence of its effects on others.

“You have next the very extraordinary and very irregular evidence of Dwyer. He, according to his own account, is a very modest bricklayer, and has for thirty years served one master. His conscience told him, and he told Thistlewood, “It is a very hard thing for me to inveigle the minds of men.” A man who had such notions of right and wrong, ought to have told him that it was very wrong to murder. He gave information to Colonel James within an hour of the time the communication was made to him on the 23d of February. Colonel James advised him to go to the Secretary of State. He tells that Thistlewood was in five or six revolutions. I don’t know Thistlewood’s history or revolutions. [Here the learned Council read large extracts of Dwyer’s evidence.] Here is evident intention of riot, but nothing of a revolution; and it is remarkable that there is not a tittle of mention of a Provisional Government.

“The whole fabric of treason falls to the ground like the card-house of a baby. Adams sees not what is done in Cato-street. Monument sees not Adams, and is not seen by Adams. Dwyer sees neither Adams nor Monument on any occasion. Monument, like Wilson, is so cold in the cause, that, when he has a pair of shoes to mend, he pays no attention to the plot. This is not evidence on which you can believe the existence of treason.

“As a plot, it is beneath the attention of Government.

“That plan of assassination which has filled the nation with horror, was such, that nothing can be too effectual to guard against it, and the utmost vigilance of the magistrates ought to be exercised to prevent a mischief so nefarious from finding shelter in society. But I will say, in the words of a great writer, that ‘the chirpings of the grasshoppers disturb not the stately ox, who grazes unconscious of their noise.’ So is it unworthy of the Government of this country to prosecute as traitors some dozen of ragged beggars, impatient of extreme poverty.

“I shall point out to you in what points Adams is materially contradicted. Here you will remember that one contradiction is of more importance than ten thousand confirmations. Confirmations to any extent, only prove that the witness spoke truth to that extent; one contradiction proves the unprincipled contempt of an oath, and the wilful fabrication of falsehood.

“The learned gentleman again adverted to the meetings which were held in the house where Brunt lodged, and asked, ‘was it not strange that the landlady, Mrs. Rogers, should have known nothing of those frequent meetings, where so many persons attended, and where such noises were made as had been described. Would not the Jury think it a very singular circumstance that the landlady should have been ignorant of all this passing in her own house?’ Let the Jury now look to the account given by Adams of what passed in Cato-street. He stated that there was only one candle lighted. The officers, however, proved that there were eight, and that they were all put out on the firing of the pistol. He was equally incorrect in describing what was said. It was not as he swore, ‘there is a pretty nest of you.’ No; for the evidence of the officers themselves went only to the words,--‘We are officers, lay down your arms.’ He (Adams) knew when in prison, that something was said by the officers, and he made that account which he thought the least likely to be contradicted.

“What would the Jury infer from those contradictions and inconsistencies in his evidence; but, that he was a man who respected neither God nor his Gospel, and who swore to that which he knew to be untrue. Would they, under such circumstances, attach any weight to his evidence? But he (Mr. Adolphus) would come to another part of his evidence, where he was not only contradicted with the account given by others, but where he was inconsistent with himself.

“It would be recollected, that he swore to Strange being present at the meetings on two occasions; yet, when Strange was put to the bar he could not recognise him--not point him out whom he swore to as having been present at two meetings held in the open day. Was this the man upon whose evidence the Jury could return a verdict, which would affect the life of the unfortunate prisoner at the bar.