Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 16.pdf/525

 474


 * The Green Bag.|}}

sideration for 'our submitting at all to gov ernment. If the plain letter of the statute of Edward the Third applies to the conduct of the prisoners, let it in God's name be ap plied; but let neither their conduct nor the law that is to judge it be tortured by con struction, nor suffer the transaction, from whence you are to form a dispassionate con clusion of intention, to be magnified by scandalous epithets, nor overwhelmed in an indistinguishable mass of matter, in which you may be lost and bewildered, having missed the only parts which could have fur nished a clue to ä just or rational judgment." The government had strained every nerve to convict Hardy, and, hot content with their defeat in that case, they determined to pro ceed with the trial of rforne Tooke (25 St. Tr. i). Erskine was again successful in de fense of the prisoner. The groundless alarm of the government, stimulated by spies and informers, was exemplified by the evidence in this case. For instance, Home Tooke had received a letter containing the inquiry, "Can you be ready by Thursday?" This inquiry was supposed by the government to refer to a rising; but it appeared .that it re ferred only to "a list of the titles, offices, and pensions bestowed by Mr. Pitt upon Mr. Pitt, his relations, friends and dependents." The result of these trials was most salutary. A conviction would have branded free speech as treason, and very likely brought about in reality the revolution which the government feared. The prosecution of Thomas Walker in 1794 expressed all the fears of the govern ment, and its issue exposed their extrava gance. Walker, a respectable and wealthy merchant of Manchester, and six others, were charged with conspiracy to aid the French invasion and overthrow the govern ment. The arms that were to have been used proved to be mere toys; and the fire arms found in Walker's possession had been secured by him to defend his own house

against a mob by which it had been attacked. The entire charge in fact was founded on the statements of a disreputable informer named Dunn, whose falsehoods were so plain that the prisoners were immediately acquit ted, and Dunn was committed for perjury. From the indulgence and release which had been extended to most of the prisoners after the acquittal of Hardy and Home Tooke, Henry Redhead Yorke had been excepted. In April, 1794, at a meeting assembled in Sheffield, he had spoken in strong terms of the corruption of Parliament and the necessity of reform. He was im mediately arrested on a charge of treason, which, after a long imprisonment, was at length -abandoned, but in July, 1795, he was brought to trial on the charge of conspiring to defame the Commons, and inciting the people to sedition. Yorke was a mere youth who had engaged in political agitation with more zeal than discretion. He was pos sessed, however, of considerable ability, and ably defended himself. Justice Rooke admit ted to the jury that the language uçed by the prisoner could only be construed to be criminal in connection with the circum stances of public excitement under which it was uttered. He was found guilty, fine3 two hundred pounds, and imprisoned two years. The ridiculous measures in which the panic of the government manifested itself during this period are well illustrated by the prose cution of Crossfield for complicity in what was ironically termed the "Pop-Gun Plot" (26 St. Tr. i). In 1794 the government dis covered an alleged conspiracy among the members of the Corresponding Society to assassinate the king. The murderous instru ment was a tube or air gun through which a poisoned arrow was to be discharged! When, at length, nearly two years later, the alleged conspirators were brought to trial, the ridi culous features of the case prevailed over the public alarm and the prisoners were all acauitted