Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

vernment made penal laws against Papifts neceffary; yet this Bill repeals none made during the firft ten years of his reign: it only repeals fome additional penalties introduced by an A&t that paffed at the end of his reign, which is notoriously known to have been countenanced or promoted by him. Therefore be the merits of the Bill, called Sir George Savile's, as it may, it is totally a mifreprefentation to infer from thence that Papifts are tolerated. It is a cry to raise the blind fpirit of fanaticifm, or enthusiasm, in the minds of a deluded multitude, which, in the hiftory of the world, has been the cause of much ruin and national deftruction. But I have already told you the merits of this law are totally immaterial upon this trial; and nothing can be fo difhonourable to government, as to be forced to make, or to repeal, by an armed multitude, any law from that moment there is an end of all legislative authority.

There is another matter I muft mention to you, before I come to ftate the queftions upon which you are to form a judgment, and fum up the evidence, from which that judgment is to be a conclufion.

Ă doubt has faintly been thrown out at the bar, whether it is lawful to attend a petition to the Houfe of Commons with more than ten perfons? Upon dear-bought exrience of the confequence of tumultuous affemblies, under pretence of carrying and fupporting petitions, an Act of parliament paffed in the reign of King Charles the Second, forbidding, under a penalty, more than ten perfons to attend a petition to the king, or

either houfe of parliament: but it is faid, that the law is repealed by the Bill of Rights. I fpeak the joint opinion of us all, that the Act of Charles the Second is in full force; there is not the colour for a doubt: the Bill of Rights does not mean to meddle with it at all: it afferts the right of the fubject to petition to the king, and that there ought to be no commitments for fuch petitioning; which alluded to the cafe of the bishops in King James's reign, who petitioned the king, and were committed for it. But neither the Bill of Rights, nor any other ftatute, repeals this Act of Charles the Second: and Mr. Justice Blackftone, in his Commentaries, treats of this A&t as in full force; and, as I have told you, we are all of that opinion; and confequently the attending a petition to the House of Commons by more than ten perfons is criminal and illegal. -Having premised these several propofitions and principles, the fubject-matter for your confideration naturally refolves itself into two points.

First, Whether this multitude did affemble and commit acts of violence with intent to terrify and compel the legislature to repeal the Act called Sir George Savile's.-If upon this point your opinion fhould be in the negative, that makes an end of the whole, and the prifoner ought to be ac quitted: but if your opinion fhould be, that the intent of this multitude, and the violence they committed, was to force a repeal, there arifes a fecond point

Whether the prisoner at the bar incited, encouraged, promoted, or affitted in raifing this infurrection,

and

and the terror they carried with them, with the intent of forcing a repeal of this law.

Upon these two points, which you will call your attention to, depends the fate of this trial; for if either the multitude had no fuch intent, or fuppofing they had, if the prifoner was no caufe, did not excite, and took no part in conducting, counfelling, or fomenting the infurrection, the prifoner ought to be acquitted; and there is no pretence that he perfonally concurred in any act of violence.

[His lordship now fummed up the evidence verbatim to the jury; in the course of which he told them, that he obferved that moft of them had taken very full notes that he purposely avoided making any ob fervations upon the evidence, chufing to leave it to themselves; then concluded as follows:] This, gentlemen, is the whole of the evidence on either fide: you will weigh this evidence, and all the obfervations made at the bar, or which occur to yourselves, upon it-I avoid making any. The points for you to determine are-Whether this multitude were affembled and acted with an intent to force a repeal of this called Sir George Savile's A&t; and if you think fuch was their intent, whether the fhare the prifoner had in getting together such a number of people to go down to the House of Commons-- in meeting them in St. George's Fields-in talking to them in the lobby-in wearing the cockade on Friday and Saturday -or in any other part of his con.

duct-had the fame intent, by the
terror of an outrageous multitude,
and the violences they committed
and threatened, to force a repeal
of this Act. If there was no fuch
intention, either in the mob or in
the prifoner, he ought to be ac-
quitted: but if you think there
was fuch an intent in the multi-
tude, encouraged, incited, or pro-
moted by the prifoner, then you
ought to find him guilty.

If the scale fhould hang doubt-
ful, and you are not fully fatisfied
that he is guilty, you ought to
lean to the favourable fide, ard
acquit him.

The court fat at eight o'clock on the Monday morning; and at three quarters after four on the Tuesday morning the jury withdrew. They returned into court at a quarter after five o'clock with a verdict finding the prisoner

NOT GUILTY.

Particulars of the Trial of M. De la
Motte, on a Charge of High
Treafon.

N Saturday morning the

[ocr errors]

14th of July, at nine o'clock, M. De la Motte was brought from New-Prifon, Clerkenwell, to the Old-Bailey, and having challenged feveral of the jurymen, twelve were chofen, after which his trial came on.

The counfel who attended on behalf of the crown were, the attorney and folicitor general, Mr. Howarth, and Mr. Norton. For the prifoner, Mr. Dunning and Mr. Peckham. The

indictment

indictment confifted of numerous counts, the firft of which charged M. De la Motte with compaffing the death of the king, and the others laid divers overt acts of a teafonable connection with the French court to destroy the naval power of this country.

The firft witnefs examined was Stephen Radcliffe, who had a veffel conftantly going to Boulogn, and was frequently the carrier of packets from the prifoner to the French commiflary. His pay was 20.1 for every trip to the conti

nent.

The next witness, Mr. Rougier, proved the engagement of himself and Radcliffe in the fervice of the prifoner; that he received eight guineas a month for his trouble in forwarding packets, and alfo all his charges from Dover to London, when he waited on the pri foner in town: that a Mr. Waltern was concerned in the business with the prifoner, and letters frequently came from France directed to himself, which he never opened, but delivered to the prifoner or Mr. Waltern, knowing they were for those gentlemen.

Mr. Stewart depofed to having received from Radcliffe feveral packets intended for an English merchant at Boulogn, who appeared to be an agent for the French miniftry; but which, inftead of forwarding, he ftopped and communicated to Lord Hillfborough, who took copies of all, and then returned them to Mr. Stewart, who, by his lordship's order, fent them to Boulogn, and by this contrivance the fchemes of the prifoner were fruftrated, by government having a previous

knowledge of the contents of the various packets.

Sir Stanyer Porten, of Lord Hillsborough's office, depofed that he received a packet from Mr. Stewart, in July; that he copied one of the letters himself, and had others copied for him, and then put the originals again into the cover and delivered them to the poft; another of the fecond of Auguft, and fome others after that time, received in like manner, were copied, and put into the Poft-Office, to be conveyed to Mr. Stewart, with orders to be forwarded to their deftination.

On cross-examination Sir Stanyer faid, he delivered the papers to a Mr. Maddifon, and two other gentlemen, clerks in the PoftOffice, but he could not recollect to which person of the three.

Here an argument arose, whether or not these copies of letters ought to be admitted as evidence; the counfel for the profecution contending, that the copies being authenticated, were as admiffible as the originals; and the counsel for the prifoner concluding they were not, and Mr. Peckham even going fo far as to contend, that if the ori ginals themselves were produced they would not be admiffible, as not being proved to have been delivered from M. De la Motte to Radcliffe, and not appearing the author of them from any handwriting or fignature; to which laft obfervation it was anfwered, that Radcliffe received the packets from Rougier, which Rougier received from De la Motte, and thus the chafm was filled up; but here a doubt arofe, whether the letters which were copied by Sir Stanyer

Porten

Porten were the identical letters fo traceable to De la Motte through Radcliffe, and through Rougier, in order to complete the chain neceffary to make the copies admiffible.

The conftable who apprehended the prifoner, proved, that he threw feveral papers out of his waistcoat pocket, which being read, appeared to be an account, comprehending all the particulars of Governor Johnstone's fquadron, and intelligence of our marine in the different ports, their destination and condition, both with regard to victualling and strength.

Mr. Slater, the king's meffenger, depofed, that he took Mr. Lutterloh into cuftody at his house at Wickham, in the neighbour hood of Portsmouth; that Mr. Lutterloh made a free confeffion of his guilt, and by his direction he found a bundle of papers in the garden, several of which were the hand-writing of the prifoner, directed to the Commandant of Breft, and others to the Commandant of Cadiz, together with inftructions to Mr. Lutterloh, from the prifoner, prefcribing a mode of conduct during their connection in the treasonable confpiracy againft this kingdom.

Mr. Lutterloh was next called, and his teftimony was of fo ferious a nature, that the court seemed in a state of aftonishment during the whole of his long examination. He said, that he embarked in a plot with the prifoner in the year 1778 to furnish the French court with fecret intelligence of the navy; for which at first he received only eight guineas a month; the importance of his information appeared, however, fo clear to the VOL. XXIV.

prifoner, that he shortly after allowed him fifty guineas a month, befides many valuable gifts; that upon any emergency he came poft to town to M. de la Motte, but common occurrences relative to

their treaty he fent by the poft. He identified the papers found in his garden, and the feals, he said, were M. De la Motte's, and well known in France. He had been to Paris by direction of the prifoner, and was clofetted with Monfieur Sartine, the French minifter. He had formed a plan for capturing Governor Johnstone's fquadron, for which he demanded 8000 guineas, and a third fhare of the fhips to be divided amongst the prifoner, himself, and his friend in a certain office, but the French court would not agree to yielding more than an eighth fhare of the fquadron. After agreeing to enable the French to take the commodore, he went to Sir Hugh Pallifer, and offered a plan to take the French, and to defeat his original project with which he had furnished the French court. Mr. Dunning was wearied out in croisexamining this witnefs, and declared, he was fo fhocked that he must retire; and, after staying up ftairs fome time, he went home extremely ill. Mr. Peckham then for a long time queftioned the witnefs.

On being feverely queftioned by Mr. Dunning, Lutterloh gave a fhort abftract of his life, of which the following are the most remarkable circumftances :--About fifteen years fince he came to England upon a visit to an uncle, who was ambaffador from the Duke of Brunfwick; and going to a Mr. Taylor's to learn English, he be [Q]

came

came enamoured of that gentleman's daughter, and married her, whereby he incurred the difpleafure of his relations. Being reduced to diftrefs, he engaged as a livery fervant to Capt. Phillips, upon quitting whofe fervice he lived in the fame capacity with Mr. Wildman of Lincoln's Inn. Being difmiffed from Mr. Wildman he took a chandler's fhop in Great Wild-ftreet, and having accepted the drafts of a relation to a confiderable amount, he was much haraffed by the preffing importunities of his creditors, to avoid whofe importunities he retired to Germany, fome time after which he returned to England, and availed himself of an infolvent a&t.

Being at Portsmouth during the late naval review, he gained employment as book-keeper at the George Inn. In this fituation he projected a scheme for purchafing arms in the petty German ftates for the ufe of America, and vifited that quarter of the globe, in order to promote this plan, which how ever was not attended with fuccefs, and after this commenced his connection with the prifoner.

He acknowledged, that he fupplied the prifoner with accounts of the ftate of the Weft-India fleet, the number of fick and wounded at Haflar, in a letter directed to Mr. John Tweed, of PhilpotJane, London, and that other information was conveyed, under cover of franks, to Mr. Wall, of Little Carrington-fireet, May fair, who deals in pamphlets, newspapers, &c.

He further confeffed, that in violation of a folemn engagement with the prifoner, wherein it was

ftipulated, that they should on no confideration betray each other, after being raised from a state of the most extreme indigence to independency with respect to pecuniary circumftances, by his generofity, he had, with a view to make fome reftitution to the country he had been fo induftrious to injure, but more with a defign to enrich himfelf, communicated the whole particulars of the iniquitous schemes in which he had been engaged.

He was afked by Mr. Dunning, whether, immediately after leaving the grand jury, when the indictment was preferred, he did not fay to Rouffeau, that, there was not evidence for finding a Bill without the facts to which he was to fwear, but that his depofitions would caufe De la Motte to be convicted, in which case he should derive great profit. This he dinied; but owned he had offered to lay a wager that De la Motte A great num-. would be hanged ber of letters which he, the witnets, had fworn to be the handwriting of De la Motte, relative to the ftate of our fleet, rates, guns, weight of metal, outfit, commanders, deftination, complement of men, &c. &c. were read, and appeared to contain the mol precife, and we prefume, accurate accounts, which fully con firmed the obfervation made by the attorney-general, on his opening the profecution, and which he faid ought to be much regretted, "that the great fums the prifoner had to di pofe of enabled him to carry corruption to very great and dangerous lengths."

Mr. Roufleau depofed, that on the day when the indictment was preferred before the grand jury,

Lutter

« AnteriorContinua »