ing him in his prayer, call the Prince Regent a poor wretched or infatuated being, he not taking a warning by his father's fate that Nebuchadnezzar had been driven from the society of men for his sins, and that our King had been the same. The pannel compared the Prince Regent to Belshazzar, by drinking out of the vessels of the Temple of Jerusalem, along with his wives, concubines, and courtiers, and polluting them: that Louis XVI. of France had lost his life by bad counsellors, and that the Prince Regent also would not listen to poor petitioners, owing to bad counsel.

John Weddell, tobacconist, Glasgow, said, that he went, about ten or twelve weeks ago, to hear the pannel preach three times, and that the text was Daniel, v. ; that the impression on his mind at the time was, that Mr Douglas said that the Prince Regent was as fit for a gibbet as a throne; but there was a great deal of confusion at the time; this was the first night he heard Mr Douglas, and the service was begun before he went there, but recollects nothing else. When he went the second time, the pannel said that some of those who were concerned in the battle of Waterloo thought it an honour, but, for his part, he thought it a disgrace. The declarations of the pannel which were admitted by the pannel's Counsel, were then read, and closed the proof for the Crown.

Exculpatory Proof.

Allan Campbell, teacher in Glasgow, is a regular attender of Mr Douglas's chapel attended his evening lectures in February and March last: remembers him lecturing on Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar, and drawing a partial parallel betwixt them and the King as to his derangement. He never said the King had been afflicted on account of his infidelty and sins-he prayed that the King might be resto,

red to his throne, if not to one in heaven. He always spoke of the King with respect, and generally prayed for him. He thinks Mr Douglas prayed more fervently for him than any minister in the Established Church whom witness has heard. Never heard him say that the Prince Regent was an infatuated wretch, or a devotee of Bacchus-he can safely swear so. On the 9th of March, witness was told there were spies in the house, and he paid particular attention to the discourse that evening-there was nothing said about the House of Commons-never heard him say it was corrupt or unjust, or that the members were thieves and robbers. He always spoke highly of the laws and administration of justice. Witness recollects of him saying, the Sunday after his son's trial, that he deemed it a high honour to be a native of a country where the laws were so impartially administered-his son had been tried and convicted of swindling, and this was seriously said from the pulpit. Witness knows Mr Douglas in private life; he always spoke highly of the Government and Constitution-he was a friend to reform, but he deprecated all rioting or force, but by petition. He advised his hearers to have nothing to do with the riots which took place in the Calton last summer. He never heard him say that the Prince Regent was as fit for a gibbet as a throne.

William Warrell, weaver in Glasgow, also regularly attended Mr Douglas's chapel, and recollects him lecturing on Nebuchadnezzar; he compared him to the King, principally on account of the length of their indisposition; he said the head was afflicted for the sins of the nation. He prayed that the King might be restored to his throne and reason in the same manner as Nebuchadnezzar; he recommended to his hearers to pray for the King. He applied the term thieves

and robbers, from the 10th chapter of St John, to ministers of the church who came in by patronage, as not coming in by the door, but climbing up some other way. In every other particular, this witness corroborated the testimony of the preceding.

William Nisbet, weaver in Glasgow, in every particular, corroborated the evidence of the two preceding.

John Rentoul, candlemaker in Glasgow, also attended Mr Douglas's chapel regularly for twelve years, and was present at all his evening lectures in February and March last. Remembers Mr Douglas making mention of the name of the King, but cannot recollect any thing about an allusion to Nebuchadnezzar never heard him make use of the expressions in the indictment. He must have heard him if he had. He used to pray for the King more earnestly than any minister witness ever heard-he always spoke of him with respect. In other particulars this witness corroborated the preceding.

David Young, weaver in Glasgow, and John Chalmers, gave similar testimony.

Mr Jeffrey stated that he had several more witnesses in attendance, but he considered it quite unnecessary to take up the time of the Court at this late hour with calling any more.

The Solicitor-General addressed the jury for the Crown. He acknowledged that the evidence adduced against the prisoner had fallen far short of what he had had reason to expect; it had not been such, he admitted, as to warrant a verdict of Guilty on any of the charges; but though this had not been made out, he would expect a verdict of Not Proven.

Mr Jeffrey then followed on behalf of the prisoner. He stated, that as nothing had been proved against Mr Douglas, he was not bound to suffer such a stain on his character as a ver

VOL. X. PART II.

dict of Not Proven would attach to it, and he confidently expected a verdict of Not Guilty.

The Lord Justice Clerk said, after what had been so ably stated by the Counsel on both sides, he would leave the case entirely with the jury.

The jury having retired for a few minutes, returned a viva voce verdict by Mr Dundas of Dundas, their chancellor, unanimously finding the prisoner Not Guilty.

The Lord Justice Clerk, after a short admonition to Mr Douglas, advising him in future to be more careful in the selection of his subjects for the moral and religious instruction of his hearers, dismissed him from the bar.

Mr Douglas thanked the Court, and added, that he ever had, and ever would pray sincerely for his Majesty and the Royal Family.

ANDRew MackinlaY FOR ADMINISTERING UNLAWFUL OATHS.

Court of Justiciary, Edinburgh, July 19.

The Lord Advocate having opened the case, John Campbell was called for the crown, and after some objections, allowed to give his evidence.

John Campbell, sworn and examined, in initialibus, if he had received any reward, or promise of reward, for being a witness. He answered, he had. The Lord Advocate moved that the witness's words should be taken down. The witness was then desired to state distinctly, how and in what manner. Depones, That he was apprehended, along with the prisoner, he thinks, upon the 22d day of February last, without cause assigned, or without a warrant. He was called before the Sheriff on the Tuesday or Wednesday following, and examined, and asked, if

с

he knew what he was brought there for; he said he did not know; and the Sheriff insisted he did, and that it would be wisdom in him to make his breast clean. After some similar conversation, the Sheriff went out, leaving the witness with Mr Salmond, and he is not sure if there was any other person present. Mr Salmond said, "John, I suppose you are not aware that I know so much about this business;" and added, "I suppose you do not know that I have the oath you took at Legget's, on the 1st of January?" Witness denied it. After several examinations before the Sheriff, and being often closetted with Mr Salmond, one of these times, after using many entreaties, and these having failed, Mr Salmond began railing against the prisoners as villains, who had betrayed him (the witness,) for whom he expressed a great respect; and added, "John, I assure you, I have six men who will swear you took that oath, and you are as sure to be hanged as you are in life." Depones, That upon this he answered him, if he got six men to swear so, they would perjure themselves; Mr Salmond said, " John, John, it is impossible six men could be got to perjure themselves." After this, Mr Salmond said; "You will ruin yourself if you persist in this way; but, if you take the other way, you will do yourself much good." Depones, That after much conversation, he said, he was not much afraid of what came one way, and he could not see any good the other. Mr Salmond said, that the Lord Advocate was in Glasgow, and he would come under any obligations if he would be a witness: That shortly after this he was taken before the Sheriff, when Mr Drummond, the Advocate-Depute, came into the room, after which he was examined; but the subject of the obligation was not mentioned; and soon after he was removed to Edin

burgh Castle: That when in the castle, he was visited by Mr Drummond, who told him Mackinlay had been served with an indictment, and that his name was in the list of witnesses; that now was the time for him to determine whether he would be a witness or not. Witness said, he would not; and he, Mr Drummond, knew, that if he did, he need not go back to Glasgow, as he could not live there: That Mr Drummond said, he might live somewhere else, and change his name; but witness said, he would not, and that it would be much the same, if he lived in any other manufacturing place, as in Glasgow: That Mr Drummond said he was thinking of a plan to write to Lord Sidmouth, to get him into the Excise, and that if the witness chose, he would write, and shew him his lordship's answer. Witness an. swered, he did not choose the office of an exciseman, and remarked, at the same time, it was the only office under government he was capable for; but as it was an office exposed to risk and ill will, he did not chuse it, as he had formerly been a peace-officer: That, at this conversation, no person was present but Mr Drummond; and he was with him in the castle several times. At the first interview, Mr Drummond asked him what he wanted to have? Witness remained silent, and made no answer. Mr Drummond then stated, that if he gave such information as would please the Lord Advocate, he would neither be called for as a witness, nor brought to trial: That he said that was a very uncertain matter, and he did not know what information they wanted, or that he could give more than they already had; and that if his information did not please the Lord Advocate, he lay open to every attack that might be made against him. Mr Drummond said, "I wish to do every thing to favour you, and will give you a day or

two to think of it. Do you wish that I should call back again?" After some hesitation witness said, you may do as you please. In a few days Mr Drummond came back again, and said, "Now, Campbell, this is the last time, you must determine now." Witness asked him if he had written to Lord Sidmouth? Mr Drummond answered, no; as he had rejected it. Mr Drummond asked if he had made up his mind yet? Witness said, he had, upon conditions. He asked what these were? A passport to go to the continent. Mr Drummond answered, he supposed nobody could stop him. Wit ness said, being a mechanic, the law of the country did not allow him to get it. He answered, with a smile, If that is all, there can be no question you will get it, and means to carry you there." They were standing when this took place; and witness said, upon these conditions, he would be a witness, provided his wife were taken into consideration. Mr Drummond said, "Campbell, sit down, and let us understand each other properly, as I would not wish that we should misunderstand each other at the latter end." They then sat down, and witness mentioned to Mr Drummond that his wife was very delicate, and in poor circumstances, having nothing but what she carned; and if it was known that he was to be a witness, she might suffer ill-will from the public. Mr Drummond then said, "Poor woman, she will be ill off; write a letter to her, give it to Captain Sibbald, and mark a one pound note on it." Sibbald would bring it to him, and he would enclose the note. Mr Drummond also desired him to write her that he was to be witness, and to leave Glasgow, and go to his (witness's) father's at Symmington in Ayrshire. Witness said that would be the first thing that would make it known in Glasgow, as she could not read writing well. Af

ter some conversation about writing to some friend at Glasgow, it was agreed that witness should write a letter to his wife, stating, that a friend of his would send her a one-pound note to bear her expences to Edinburgh by the coach, and she would receive money there to carry her back. This letter was given to Mr Sibbald in consequence of the conversation with Mr Drummond; but some days after, it was brought back to Mr Drummond, who told him, that the Lord Advocate disapproved of such a letter, but that Mr Salmond, at Glasgow, had been directed to send for the witness's wife, and tell her to come to Edinburgh. After stating this, Mr Drummond read a letter from Mr Salmond, stating, that he had bought her a ticket to come in the coach to Falkirk, and from thence to Edinburgh; but she was unwell, and could not come, but would come in a day or two; and the witness then burnt the letter he had written. It was mentioned by Mr Drummond, that the Sheriff was coming to examine him, and he and his Substitute, Solicitor-General, Procurator-Fiscal, and a clerk came in. On the first question being put-" Well, Campbell, what have you got to say in this business?" he answered, supposing he was concerned in that affair, and was to tell the whole truth, he did not consider either himself or his wife safe; and that without he got a passport to the continent, and means to carry him there, he could not be a witness. Upon which Mr Drummond said to the Solicitor-General, ❝ Answer you that." The Solicitor-General then ordered the clerk to write these words, as he thinks :-" Whereupon the Solicitor-General assures the declarant, that every means necessary will be taken to preserve him and his wife, and that he will get a passport to quit the country and go to the continent, and the means to carry him

66

there." During this time, the Sheriff was walking up and down the room, which is pretty large; he was desired to come and sign this; when he came and sat down at the table, and, after perusing the paper for some time, said, I will not sign this;" and stated, that he being an officer of the crown, it was his duty to see justice done; and he could assure the witness, that if he was to sign that paper, he would have much to answer for; for when he was brought as a witness, if he said, he had received no reward, nor promise of reward, and that paper be produced, he would perjure himself. Wit ness answered, No, if it was consider ed as a means of his preservation; and he was supported in the same argument by Mr Drummond. Upon which the Sheriff said. "He would sign no such paper." Mr Drummond proposed that it should be put down that he should go into one of the British colonies, but the Sheriff refused this also; adding, "that he was willing to put down, that every means should be used for the preservation of him and his wife, but nothing more." A pause ensued; and Mr Drummond looked at the witness, and said, "Now, Campbell, you know best whether you will be a witness on these terms or not." Witness remained silent, and Mr Drummond said, "Now, Campbell, do you believe we are able to do that for you which you expect without its being set down on paper?" and, at this time, the Sheriff was sitting at the table. Witness said, he knew they were able, if they were willing. Mr Drummond said, "Would he rely upon them for that." Witness said, "May I?" Mr Drummond said, "You may ;" and then witness said loudly, "Then I shall rely on you as gentlemen." Shortly after this, he was allowed to write his own declaration, all excepting one part relating to Mr Kerr. A few days after, the Sheriff, Procurator-Fiscal,

and a clerk, came up to have the nar rative signed, when the Sheriff advised him to go home to his loom when he got rid of this, and let them rule the nation as they chose. Witness answered, that if he thought he was to go back to his loom again, he would rather be served with an indictment, even after all he had written; to which the Sheriff said, he had nothing to do with that, as it remained between him and others. Witness was again visited by Mr Drummond, when he ordered Captain Sibbald to give him plenty of books, which he got, to the extent of nearly 100 volumes. About a fortnight or three weeks ago, he wrote a letter to Mr Drummond, stating, he wanted some clothes and money for his wife. He received a pair of shoes from Mr Sibbald, by orders of Mr Drummond; and received for answer from Captain Sibbald, that he could not get any money at present, but that he would get it after the first trial. He wrote another letter to Mr Drummond, stating, a part of what was stated in his declaration, as a gentle demand for money, and received the same answer from Captain Sibbald, who said he received it from Mr Drummond: That, although the engagement was not in writing, in consequence of the interference of the Sheriff, and which writing was immediately burnt in his presence; yet he considers it an existing engagement, upon the performance of which he thinks himself entitled to rely; and that the declaration he made and gave to the Sheriff of Mid-Lothian, was made upon a reliance on that engagement: That at the conversation with Mr Drummond, when he got the order to get books, he had been cited as a witness on the trial of Mackinlay, and the first book was on the 22d of April last, in the week Mr Drummond went the circuit: That the idea of danger to himself was first suggested by the Sheriff and Fiscal of Glas