and I looked at him in the same way, through the window on the Monday. I can't tell what there is particular in his face, but I am fully persuaded that it is the man by his features, and his hair being straight over his forehead, and his round shoulders.

Mr Cross. If you should to-morrow see the gentleman that has now questioned you, you would know him? Yes, sir, I should.

The Judge. He has given you some

reason.

Mr Cross. You have conducted yourself with great propriety.

Mr Starkie objected to the pane gyric on a witness.

The Judge.-No, no, she has given her evidence with great fairness. I never saw a young woman bear an examination better. It is for the jury to judge of credibility.

Mr Thomas Littlewood. My house is in Pendleton. I have a grocer's shop in Salford. My family consisted of myself, my wife, Mrs Marsden, in her 75th year, who lived with me ten years, Hannah Partington, in her 20th year, she lived with me two years. It was my custom to go, together with my wife, to the shop every marketday. We went on the 26th about nine in the morning, and returned in the evening at eight. I had left about 160., 140/. in notes, and nineteen guineas in gold, half-a-guinea, and a sevenshilling piece. We left the money in a drawer where we slept; the drawer was not locked. I saw the money at seven in the morning. There was plate in the kitchen. I heard of the alarm as I came to the iron-gate; I went on in front of the house; the shutters were to, but not fastened; there is a loose board to fasten them, which the men did not understand. I tried the door, it was locked; the yard-door was locked, and the key in it. I go in at a lobby at the end of the house; I found the key of the door under the

bear next morning. We took a ladder and went in by an upper window; some went in before me; I went straight into the kitchen; Mrs Marsden was sitting in the chair she always occupied; Hannah Partington was ly. ing under the dresser, with her knees bent towards her head; they were quite dead and cold; the kitchen was covered with blood; the poker was bent and very bloody; the cleaver, which was always hung in the kitchen, I found in their bed-room, with a little blood on it; the money was all gone; the notes were 11. and 21. Bank of England notes; out of the same drawer were taken shirts and silk handkerchiefs; from other drawers, in the same chest, were taken shawls and things belonging to my wife; all could be put into two or three small bundles ; a person, standing in the Three-nooked Field, can see the house and frontway as clear as if they were on the premises.

Cross-examined. I never saw the Ashcrofts in my life. I did not examine the wounds. I could not stand that. There was scattered blood. I did not see any account of examinations in the Manchester papers. Partington was a very handsome girl; she had no sweetheart. I am sure she had none.

Ely Dyson, weaver, was passing about four in the afternoon of the 26th. He saw James and David Ashcroft and Holden come out of Littlewood's gate with a bundle. Did not suspect them, as they appeared to be gentlemen, but was surprised that they looked so earnestly at him.

A number of other witnesses had seen the persons about the house at the time.

William Collins.-I was removing to Manchester, in April, on a Friday, (25th.) Removed my things in a cart belonging to John Astley. When I got to Manchester, Richard Young

claimed the cart. He took me up, and got me taken to the New Bailey on Saturday forenoon. I was put into the lock-ups. On Sunday night, I saw old James. He was in the same cell with me the first night. I tell'd my case over, and he tell'd me his. One day, as he came back, I said, "How are you going on now?" He said, he was in very poor heart, forthey brought fresh witnesses against him every time. He said it was very doubtful but what they would be all hanged. He said, that there was him and his son, and his brother David and Holden, had made it up for to murder and rob Mr Littlewood's house. He said, that him and his son and Holden went; but when they gaed nearly to Mr Littlewood's house, they saw some person, and they were afraid to go in ; that he went to a butcher's shop for a little pith to rub his corns; then they went past the Hare and Hounds, then turned back again; they went down to see a raven kept by a gentleman, and then came back again. After they had passed Littlewood's a third time, Holden went into a barber's shop to shave himself; they went then to a place to buy some cheese and bread; then they went to a public-house, where they had some beer; I went down a lane into a field near Mr Weston's manufactory, and sat under a hedge in that field; I saw my son James and Holden go into Lit. tlewood's; I was a-back of that hedge for a signal for them at the window; if I seed any body go towards Mr Littlewood's house, I was to lay my hat on a thorn that I sat under for a signal; I never saw any body, and never lay my hat on the hedge; after seeing them come out, I went towards them. Just as he said that, they put other prisoners in with us, and we never had any conversation after that. We were never alone after that.

The Chief Baron summed up the

evidence in a very luminous address of more than an hour and a half. Towards the conclusion of it, David Ashcroft begged to be allowed to say something farther. The Chief Baron said, it was quite irregular, but he would certainly indulge him. He then threw out many incoherent charges against the evidence for the prosecution, and begged to have Mr Wright, a magistrate, and Mr Witherton, a constable, examined, to contradict Mary Hallows.

The Judge said, he would allow it, but insisted that Mr Williams, the counsel for the Ashcrofts, and Mr Starkie, the counsel for Holden, should be sent for.

After a considerable interval, Mr Williams appeared; and, after he had conversed for a considerable time with his lordship and with the prisoners, David Ashcroft said, he would leave the case as it was to God Almighty, who, he hoped, would direct his lordship and the jury to do justice.

James Ashcroft the elder." O! may God, by his Holy Spirit, inspire the jury to perceive the truth, and to give a true verdict, for we are all innocent of this murder."

The Chief Baron.-I'll listen to any thing for which you can offer evidence; but you must not be allowed to make speeches of that kind. His Lordship then concluded, by a very impartial and solemn peroration.

The jury in two minutes returned their verdict. James Ashcroft the elder, David Ashcroft, James Ashcroft the younger, and William Holden, Guilty. John Robinson, Not Guilty.

James Ashcroft the elder.-This is murdering us in cold blood. God will reveal this injustice. I pray earnestly, that he would now send two angels to declare upon that table who committed thus murder. We are innocent, and I will declare so to the last.

David Ashcroft invoked God, and protested his innocence in the same

manner.

James Ashcroft the younger. If I must suffer death for a crime I never committed, I implore your honour to look in mercy on my poor wife and children. (Here a tremendous shriek burst from a female in the crowd, who it was found was his unfortunate wife.)

William Holden.-Silence, silence! (flinging one arm towards. Heaven, and the other towards his earthly judge.) There is a God yonder, who knows that we are innocent, and who will make amends for this.

Judge declared, that no sensible per son who had heard the evidence, could have a doubt of their guilt; that he owed it to justice to say, that he con sidered the verdict the only one an intelligent jury could have returned. The moment sentence was pronounced, James Ashcroft the elder, waved his right hand, with a white bundle in it, over his head, and exclaimed aloud, "Glory to God!" David Ashcroft said, he hoped God would not allow the injustice done to them to be al ways unknown. James Ashcroft the younger said, he would meet a higher Judge with a conscience clear of this guilt. William Holden vociferated in

The prisoners again repeated their innocence, and declared all the evidence against them to be perjuries and lies.

The awful sentence of death was then pronounced. They were ordered for execution on Monday next. The

there is Mr Fox, (attorney for the prosecution,) and, before they leave the earth, God will punish them." Thus they were hurried away from the bar, while every person in Court was penetrated with a chilling horror at such a dreadful scene.

MR SOUTHEY FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF WAT TYLER; WITH OBSERVA⚫ TIONS MADE IN PARLIAMENT BY MR SMITH, AND REPLY BY MR SOUTHEY.

Tuesday, March 18.

In the Court of Chancery, Mr Hart moved for an injunction to restrain Messrs Sherwood, Neely, and Jones, from printing and publishing the poem of "Wat Tyler," a juvenile production of Robert Southey, Esq. poet laureat. Sir Samuel Romilly resisted the ap

plication, on the ground that it was not such a publication as entitled the author to the protection of the Court. He would venture to say, that a more dangerous, mischievous, and seditious publication, had never issued from the press. Clothed in the most seductive language, it was calculated to excite a spirit of disaffection and hatred to the government and constitution of the country, as well as open rebellion against the sovereign. The Lord Chan cellor was of opinion, that if the book deserved the character that had been given of it, he certainly, as a judge of

a court of equity, had no right to interpose; it was the province of the Attorney-General to look to it. He should take the book home with him and read it, in order to satisfy his mind whether it had the pernicious tendency ascribed to it. The following day, the Lord Chancellor gave his opinion. His lordship said, he had given some attention to prior cases on the same subject, and he found in all of them, that the Court had acted on the principle of not giving protection to the author of a work which was, or must be, represented in a legal sense, as immoral or seditious. He had no opinion to give on the character or merits of the publication in question; but it was a principle on which the Court uniformly acted, to refuse an injunction in every case where the author could not maintain an action for the infringement of a copy right. It was a singular feature in this case that the manuscript should have so long been neglected. With the merits of the publication, he, as a public individual, had nothing to do, as it did not lie within his jurisdiction. It was not, It was not, however, a work that he could feel himself justified in granting any protection to. The courts of law had the cognizance of all libellous matters, and of all attacks on principle and character; but his jurisdiction as Chancellor was solely confined to property.

The injunction was refused."

This trial was brought into notice by the observations made upon it in the House of Commons by Mr William Smith, who observed, " He did not think it dishonourable for any man to change his early sentiments, when the change arose out of mature reflection, and appeared not to be connected with interested motives; but if there was one thing more disgusting and offensive than another, it was the

VOL. X. PART II.

heat and malignancy of a renegado." He then compared several passages of the poem with some articles which Mr Southey was understood to have written in the Quarterly Review, and added: "The poem appeared to him the most seditious book that ever was written; its author did not stop short of general anarchy; he vilified kings, priests, and nobles, and was for universal suffrage, and perfect equality. The Spencean plan could not be compared with it.""

To this attack Mr Southey published a reply, from which we select the following, as the most important passages.

For the book itself, (Wat Tyler), I deny that it is a seditious perfor mance; for it places in the mouths of the personages who are introduced, nothing more than a correct statement of their real principles. That it is a mischievous publication, I know; the errors which it contains being especially dangerous at this time. Therefore I came forward without hesitation to avow it; to claim it as my own property, which had never been alienated; and to suppress it. And I am desirous, that my motives in thus acting should not be misunderstood. The piece was written under the influence of opinions, which I have long since out-grown, and repeatedly disclaimed, but for which I have never affected to feel either shame or contrition; they were taken up conscientiously in early youth; they were acted upon in disregard of all worldly considerations, and they were left behind in the same straight-forward course, as I advanced in years. It was written when republicanism was confined to a very small number of the educated classes; when those who were known to entertain such opinions were exposed to personal danger from the populace; and when

E

a spirit of anti-jacobinism was predominant, which I cannot characterize more truly than by saying, that it was as unjust and intolerant, though not quite so ferocious, as the jacobinism of the present day.

"In my youth, when my stock of knowledge consisted of such an acquaintance with Greek and Roman history as is required in the course of regular scholastic education, when my heart was full of poetry and romance, and Lucan and Akenside were at my tongue's end, I fell into the political opinions which the French revolution was then scattering throughout Eu rope; and following those opinions with ardour, wherever they led, I soon perceived that inequalities of rank were a light evil compared to the inequalities of property, and those more fearful distinctions which the want of moral and intellectual culture occasions between man and man. At that time, and with those opinions, or rather feelings, (for their root was in the heart, and not in the understanding), I wrote Wat Tyler, as one who was impatient of "all the oppressions that are done under the sun." The subject was injudiciously chosen; and it was treated, as might be expected by a youth of twenty, in such times, who regarded only one side of the question. There is no other misrepresentation. The sentiments of the historical characters are correctly stated. Were I now to dramatize the same story, there would be much to add, but little to alter. I should not express those sentiments less strongly ; but I should oppose to them more enlarged views of the nature of man, and the progress of society. I should set forth with equal force the oppressions of the feudal system, the excesses of the insurgents, and the treachery of the government; and hold up the errors and crimes which were then committed, as a warning for this and for future ages. I should write as a man, not

as a stripling; with the same heart, and the same desires, but with a ripened understanding, and competent stores of knowledge.

"In my productions, Mr William Smith may have seen expressed an enthusiastic love of liberty, a detestation of tyranny wherever it exists, and in whatever form; an ardent abhorrence of all wicked ambition, and a sympathy not less ardent with those who were engaged in war for the defence of their country, and in a righteous cause-feelings just, as well as generous in themselves. He might have perceived also frequent indications, that, in the opinion of the youthful writer, a far happier system of society was possible than any under which mankind are at present existing, or ever have existed since the patriarchal ages, and no equivocal aspirations after such a state. In all this he might have seen something that was erroneous, and more that was visionary; but nothing that savoured of intemperance or violence. I insist, therefore, that in as much as Wat Tyler may differ in character from these works, the difference arises necessarily from the nature of dramatic composition. I maintain that this is the inference which must be drawn by every honest and judicious mind, and I affirm that such an inference would be strictly comformable to the fact.

"Do not, however, sir, suppose that I shall seek to shrink from a full avowal of what my opinions have been; neither before God or man am I ashamed of them. I have as little cause for humiliation in recalling them, as Gibbon had, when he related how he had knelt at the feet of a confessor; for while I imbibed the republican opinions of the day, I escaped the atheism and the leprous immorality which generally accompanied them. I cannot, therefore, join with Beattie in blessing