for the meeting of drillings, at which spectators were maltreated, and one was compelled to take an unlawful oath-that the party went out of their way to insult the man whom they had previously assaulted that they marched to the place of assembly with banners, with caps of liberty, with mottoes, not merely, as had been said, of fine high-sounding words, but manifesting a formal purpose to overawe the civil authorities by a show of numbers, and to terrify them from the exertion of their powers. But, happily for Manchesterhappily for the country, the magistrates were not intimidated, but acted with a spirit and resolution, for which all the neighbourhood owed them gratitude. Many present were old enough to remember the riots in London, and the mischiefs which ensued from the tardy exertion of justice. Had these efforts, which were made on the sixth or seventh day, been put forth on the first, very little of the enormous evil would have been effected. At Manchester, the magistrates, acting from a wise discretion, granted a warrant, which the peace officers declared, that it would be impossible to execute without military aid; what other course could they then pursue, but to summon that aid? They had exercised their lawful powers with a firmness, a temper, and a wisdom (and he would not say this, if the contrary had not been asserted) which entitle them, instead of reprehension, to the thanks of their neighbourhood, and of their coun

COURT OF KING'S-BENCH, GUILD

HALL, APRIL 13.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL AssoCLATION. -The King, v. Charles Murray, sir John Sewell, Longueville Clarke, and Joseph Budworth Sharpe.

Messrs. Scarlett, Denman, and Evans, appeared as counsel for the prosecution; and Messrs. Gurney, Tindall, and Adolphus, for the defendants.

The indictment alleged, that the defendants, being evil disposed persons, and designing to usurp several of the prerogatives of the king, and to bring them into contempt, to subvert public justice and the liberties of the realm, and to oppress certain individuals, and to extort from them money, goods, and chattels, did conspire to threaten to indict, and to indict, divers of his majesty's subjects for the publication of pretended seditious and treasonable libels, they (the defendants) not being personally aggrieved by the pretended libels, nor being required to give evidence respecting them, holding any office under the crown; and also, that they conspired to extort money, goods, and chattels from certain persons, under colour and pretence of abstaining from further proceeding against them, and for so abstaining from proceeding. There were various overt acts of the conspiracy, laid in several counts. There was also a count for administering an unlawful oath; counts for extortion without laying the conspiracy; and a count for improperly compounding prosecutions to the prejudice of public justice.

nor

James Atkinson gave the following evidence:-I am a bookseller, and live in London-road, St. George's-fields. On the 23rd of March last year, I was arrested, at about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, and taken first to Serjeants' Inn coffee-house, and afterwards to Kemp's Lock-up-house, in Serle'splace, where I passed the night. The next day, I was brought before the lord chief justice at his chambers. I was then accompanied by my bail, Mr. Bradshaw and Mr. Fussey, and found Mr. Murray, and Mr. Gibbons, the officer who had taken me into custody. Gibbons said, that he knew me and my bail, and the lord chief justice observed, that he saw no objection to their being immediately taken. Mr. Murray said, that he must have 48 hours notice of bail. His lordship said, that he thought no notice was necessary; and that, if any were required, 24 hours notice would suffice. Mr. Murray replied, that the prosecutor must have 48 hours notice, and on this I was committed to Horsemonger-lane gaol. I went to prison with Mr. Gibbons in a hackney-coach, the fare of which I paid myself. I remained five days in the gaol; at the expiration of which, on a Monday evening, I went to Unionhall, when I entered into recognizances, and was set at liberty after paying 14s. as a fee. On the evening of the Thursday after my liberation, I was at a stationer's in Wood-street, when Mr. Murray, and a person whom I have heard was Mr. Clarke (the witness was mistaken in the name) but whom I do not know to be so named, came in, and said that they had been at my house after me. I went with them in a hackney-coach to my house. Murray said, that I must give up all the political books I had, and sign an agreement to sell

no more in future. I said that I had none; they said that I had, and that they would drive the coach to the door of the house, where they would be found. They checked the coach at the door of a man named Baker; I said they were not there, but at Mr. Fussey's to whom I had given them as waste paper. We went to Mr. Fussey's, and brought the papers from thence to my house. There was among them one copy, and only one, of Carlile's New Year's Address to the Reformers, on which the prosecution was founded. They were taken into my parlour and unpacked, when the parties said, that they were all violently seditious, and some very nearly approaching to high treason. Murray and the other gentleman said, that Kingston assizes were at hand; they would go there and prefer a bill, on which I should most probably be convicted and sentenced to two years imprisonment and a heavy fine. In consequence of what they said, I gave up all the papers, which they packed up and took in a coach accompanied by Bradshaw. The next morning about 7 o'clock, before I was up, a person came on horseback to my house, and delivered a message. In consequence of this message, I went with Bradshaw to the lord chief justice's chambers in Serjeants' Inn, where we met Mr. Murray. He showed me the list of the books taken from me, and asked, if they were all I had? I said yes; he said I must make an affidavit of it, which I accordingly did. As we were coming along Fleet-street towards my house, we met the person who had called at my house in the morning, and I observed to Mr. Murray, that the sum of 18l. 16s. 8d., which he had demanded, was a very exorbitant charge. Mr. Murray said, " he could not help it; that was the sum of the expenses incurred, and that must be paid." I told him, that I could not afford to pay it; he said he would take off the odd shillings, which I replied would be of no use. He then offered to take 15l., on which we parted. Nothing before this had been said to me about the expenses. I then went with Bradshaw to the office of the association in Bridge-street, where the committee was sitting. We went up stairs, and were introduced into the committee room, where there were a number of gentlemen, whom I did not personally know, except Mr. Sharpe; but I heard one addressed as sir John Sewell, and another as Mr. Clarke. I explained the business on which we came, and Mr. Sharpe said, they could say nothing till Mr. Murray came, and asked us to walk into another room and wait. After waiting in the next room more than an hour, Mr. Sharpe came out, and told us Mr. Murray was arrived, and we might go into the committee. We returned and found Mr. Murray there with the others, and sir John Sewell in the chair. After some observation from the chairman and Mr. Murray, they said they had looked over the books and caricatures, and they returned me a dozen caricatures, as not coming within the scope of their proposals. Sir John Sewell said, that the committee, taking into consideration my imprisonment, my giving up the books, and my loss of time, had agreed to take 5l. towards the expenses. I consented to pay this sum, but no particular day was appointed for its payment. I then went away with Bradshaw. On the same day I received a note from Mr. Murwhich I have not with me. In

ray

consequence of this note, I went on the same day or the following day, to Mr. Murray's chambers, where it was agreed that the money should be paid on the Monday following. The next day, which was Friday, I received a message from Mr. Murray, and went to his chambers in Shorter's-court. I said, that as the money was to be paid on Monday, I wondered he should insist on it then. He said that was of no consequence, the money must be paid then, or he should proceed as at first. I promised, in consequence, to pay it in the evening, and he appointed 6 o'clock for that purpose, when I attended and paid it. He gave me a receipt. (The receipt was then put in and read. It was intituled, "In the King's-bench: the King on the prosecution of the Constitutional Association, against James Atkinson," and acknowledged the receipt of 5l. as part of the costs of a prosecution stayed at the request of the defendant.]

Mr. William Bradshaw. I am a stationer. I offered myself as bail for Mr. Atkinson. I am a man of substance, and sufficient bail for the sum required. I was before the lord chief justice with Atkinson, Gibbons the officer, Fussey the other bail, Mr. Murray, and a tall gentleman, when Gibbons said he thought the bail sufficient. Mr. Murray replied he must have 48 hours notice of bail. I remember nothing else which passed, but Atkinson was committed to Horsemonger-lane gaol. I afterwards called at the office of the association, in Bridge-street, on the subject, and saw Mr. Sharpe several times. I told him, I called to offer a concession on the subject of the indictments, and he said that he would make a report to the committee when they sat, and let me know their decision. I afterwards received a note from Mr. Sharpe, requesting me to call in Bridgestreet, where I was introduced by him to the committee. I called there several times before the final settlement, which was, that the books should be given up, and 5l. paid for the expenses. Before this, while Atkinson was in prison, I saw the committee, and it was mentioned that Mr. Atkinson should pay the expenses of the prosecution that was the idea given. After the liberation of Atkinson, I saw Murray in Woodstreet, who said the expenses would be between 18l. and 19l. I went to represent his poverty to the committee. On the way from Serjeants' Inn, I applied to Murray to take less; he talked about taking off the odd shillings, and said that it was of no use to take up more of his time, as it would only increase the expenses.

Mr. James Baston. - I am a student keeping my terms at Gray's-inn. I know Mr. Robert Wardell well, and remember going on his behalf a little before Easter, in last year, to Mr. Murray's house, in John-street, Bedford-row.

I

first applied to Mr. Murray not to enforce any warrant against Mr. Wardell, as he was a gentleman, and not likely to abscond. Mr. Murray said, he was aware that Mr. Wardell was a gentleman, and that he would not enforce any warrant against him. Bail was afterwards given, and Mr. Wardell, in fact, never was taken into custody. I then made a request, that the proceedings might be stayed on Mr. Wardell's suffering judgment by default, and coming up for judgment in case any thing objectionable should appear in his paper, the Statesman. It was ultimately agreed between Mr.

Murray and myself, that Mr. Wardell should suffer judgment by default, enter into recognizances for his good behaviour for a certain term, and pay all costs. The costs were first mentioned, when I was leaving Mr. Murray, who said, "Of course you understand, that Mr. Wardell is to pay the costs;" I replied, "Of course I do," and I had always supposed so, although nothing had been said on the subject. I thought so, because we were asking a favour, and Mr. Wardell, I knew, had reasons for disliking a public discussion. I was present afterwards, when Mr. Murray said the costs would be 56l. or 571.; my impression is, either I or Mr. Wardell asked for a bill of the costs. Mr. Murray said, he had not had time to copy the bills, but I understood that he had prepared them. Mr. Wardell paid the money asked, which he was very glad to do from the particular situation in which he stood. He thanked Mr. Murray for his politeness, and thought himself very well treated.

On his cross-examination by Mr. Adolphus, the witness said, that Mr. Wardell was not in court today; he was out of town; but, added Mr. Baston, "I know he disclaims charging Mr. Murray with any extortion."

Thomas Dolby, examined by Mr. Denman. I am a bookseller in the Strand. I went with my attorney, Mr. Nettlefold, several times to Mr. Murray. The first time, Mr. Nettlefold mentioned that the objectionable publication had been discontinued, before the prosecution began. Mr. Murray expressed a wish to get at the actual author of the article indicted. I stated at that time, and I then thought, that I could and would give up his name. Mr. Murray

give up his name. Mr. Murray said, that he was disposed to stay proceedings if the author were given up, and that he would consult the committee; and he appointed another meeting. In the interval, I ascertained that I could not give up the actual writer, but I offered to give up the editor and proprietor of the publication, which was a work published every fortnight, called "The Pasquin." He did not seem to think this sufficient, but wanted the actual writer. In reply, Mr. Nettlefold quoted the case of "Wright v. Cobbett," where the lord chief justice had laid it down, that the editor and proprietor of a work were equally liable to prosecution with the author. Mr. Murray then appeared satisfied, said he would consult the committee, and appointed another meeting at his house. We attended there accordingly, two or three days after, when the subject was mentioned again. His manner appeared rather queer and mysterious; but at last he drew a paper from his drawer containing his terms. [It being sufficiently ascertained by the evidence of Mr. Nettlefold on the subject, that the paper was retained by Murray, the witness proceeded to state its contents. The terms were, that I should plead guilty, give up, on affidavit, my entire stock of the offensive publication, sign a paper expressive of my contrition, which they should publish as they thought proper, and enter into an engagement, not, for two years, to sell any.publication which the society should deem offensive or improper. I said that I thought the last condition oppressive, and begged for some little time to consider it. I mentioned Cobbett's Register, and asked, if that would be deemed of VOL. LXIV.

fensive ? Mr. Murray replied, that he could not undertake to say what I might or might not sell, but I must take care to sell nothing seditious. Another condition mentioned was, that I should pay all expenses. I objected to the stipulation respecting the two years, as placing me in a very painful situation during that period; but Mr. Murray said, that, if the society were satisfied with my conduct, he could almost undertake to say, that I should be exonerated from it at the expiration of six months. At this stage of the business, a gentleman put his head in at the door; Mr. Murray went out to him, and continued absent about ten minutes; on his return he walked up and down the room as if in a state of indecision, put his hand two or three times to his head, and said he was sorry the negotiation had gone so far, as it could be carried no farther.

John Lindsey Turner.-I am a printer; I remember seeing Mr. Murray in April last, about a prosecution pending against me. I went to him in consequence of being directed to do so by the late alderman Rothwell, then treasurer of the association, to whom I had been recommended by a friend who knew him. Mr. Murray said, that, if I wished to have the prosecution stayed, I must agree to pay the costs; I must give up all my publications, which might be deemed seditious; and enter into securities to perform the stipulations. I had not then heen arrested. I asked what the expenses would be. He said 251. or 261. I said, I thought it was a large sum, and I would consider and call the next day. I did so, and then said, that I thought the conditions hard, as I had only sold, and not origi 2 D