Monday, the 11th of May, and was going through the lobby towards the
door of the house, when he heard the report of a pistol, which appeared
to have been fired close to the entrance-door of the lobby. Immediately
on the report, he turned towards the place from whence the noise
appeared to proceed, and observed a tumult, and probably a dozen or more
persons about the spot. Almost in the same instant he saw a person rush
hastily from among the crowd, and heard several voices cry out, "Shut
the doors--let no one escape." The person came towards him from the
crowd, looking first one way, then another, rather like one seeking for
shelter than the person wounded. But taking two or three steps towards
the witness, he reeled by him, and almost instantaneously fell on the
floor with his face downward. Before he fell, witness heard him cry,
though not very distinctly; and in what he uttered, he heard the word
"murder!" or something very like it. When he first fell, witness thought
that he might have been slightly wounded, and expected to see him make
an effort to rise; but gazing on him for a few moments, he observed that
he did not stir at all, and he, therefore, immediately stooped down to
raise him from the ground, requesting the assistance of a gentleman
close by him for the purpose. As soon as they had turned his face
upwards, and not till then, he found that it was Mr. Perceval. They then
took him into their arms, and carried him into the office of the
speaker's secretary, where they seated themselves on the table, with Mr.
Perceval between them, also sitting on the table, and resting on their
arms. His face was now perfectly pale, the blood issuing in small
quantities from each corner of his mouth, and probably in two or three
minutes from the firing of the pistol all signs of life had ceased. The
eyes of the unfortunate gentleman were open, but he did not appear to
know witness, nor to take any notice of any person about him, nor did he
utter the least articulate sound from the moment he fell. A few
convulsive sobs, which lasted perhaps three or four moments, together
with scarcely a perceptible pulse, were the only signs of life which
appeared then, and those continued but a very short time longer; and
when witness felt Mr. Perceval's pulse for the last time, just before
Mr. Lynn, the surgeon, arrived, it appeared to him that he was quite
dead. Witness remained supporting the body until it was conveyed into
the speaker's house, but he was unable to give any account of what
passed in the lobby.
Mr. William Lynn, a surgeon in Great George-street, deposed that he was
called to the deceased, but on his arrival he was quite dead. There was
blood upon his white waistcoat and shirt; and upon his examining the
body, he found that there was an opening in the skin. He probed the
wound three inches downwards, and entertained no doubt that the
pistol-ball passed into the heart, and was the cause of death.
Mr. Henry Burgess, a solicitor who was in the lobby, stated, that after
having seen Mr. Perceval fall, as had been already described, he heard
some one exclaim, "That's the man!" and saw a hand pointing towards the
bench by the fire-place, which is on one side of the lobby. He
immediately went over to the bench, and saw the prisoner at the bar
sitting on it in great agitation. There were one or two persons by him;
he looked at his hands, and saw his left hand on the bench; and near or
under his other hand he saw a pistol, which he took, and asked the
prisoner what had induced him to do such a deed? He replied, "Want of
redress of grievances, and refusal by government," or words to that
effect. Witness then said to the prisoner, "You have another pistol?" He
replied, "Yes." Witness asked if it was loaded? to which he answered in
the affirmative. Witness then saw some person take the other pistol from
his person. The pistol which witness took from the prisoner was warm,
and appeared as if it had been recently discharged. The lock was down
and the pan open. (Here the pistol was produced, and recognised by the
witness.) He then stated, that he put his hand into the right
waistcoat-pocket of the prisoner, from which he took a small penknife
and a pencil, and from his left-hand waistcoat-pocket he took a bunch of
keys and some money. The prisoner was detained in custody, and examined
shortly afterwards above stairs in the House of Commons before the
magistrates. Witness related in the presence of the prisoner, on that
occasion, the facts which he had now detailed. When he had concluded,
the prisoner made an observation to this effect, as well as he could
recollect. "I wish to correct Mr. Burgess' statement in one point; but I
believe he is perfectly correct in every other. Instead of my hand
being, as Mr. Burgess stated, upon or near the pistol, I think he took
it from my hand, or upon it."
James Taylor, a tailor, at No. 11, North Place, Gray's-Inn Lane, deposed
that he had been employed by the prisoner to repair some clothes. He was
afterwards in Guildford Street, when the prisoner called him, and took
him to his lodgings in Millman Street, and there directed him to put a
side-pocket into a coat, which he gave him, of a particular length which
he pointed out. He completed the job on the same night, and carried the
coat home.
Mr. John Morris stated that he often attended in the gallery
appropriated for strangers, and went down to the House on Monday, the
11th of May, for that purpose. He passed into the lobby about the hour
of five in the afternoon. He observed the prisoner at the bar standing
in the lobby near the outer door; he was standing beside that part of
the door which is generally closed. It was a double door, and one half
was usually closed, within which half the prisoner was standing, and any
one to have entered the lobby must have passed him at arm's length. He
observed the prisoner as if watching for somebody coming, and he
appeared to look anxiously towards the door. As well as the witness
recollected, the prisoner had his right hand within the left breast of
his coat. Witness passed on to the staircase of the gallery, and almost
immediately after he got into the upper lobby, he heard the report of a
pistol, and found soon after that it was connected with the fatal event
which occurred on that evening. He had frequently seen the prisoner
before in the gallery, where gentlemen who report the parliamentary
proceedings resorted, and about the passages of the House of Commons.
John Vickery, a Bow Street officer, said that he went on Monday
afternoon to New Millman Street, to the lodgings of the prisoner, which
he searched, and found, in the bed-room up stairs, a pair of
pistol-bags, and in the same drawer a small powder-flask, and some
powder in a small paper, a box with some bullets, and some small flints
wrapped in paper. There was also a pistol-key to unscrew the pistol for
the purpose of loading, and some sand-paper and a pistol-mould. The
witness on comparing the bullet found in the loaded pistol with the
mould, and the screw with the pistols, found them all to correspond.
Mr. Vincent George Dowling was next called. He stated that he was in the
gallery on the afternoon in question, and ran down into the lobby on
hearing the report of a pistol. He saw the prisoner at the bar sitting
on a stool, and going to him, he seized him and began to search his
person. He took from his left-hand small-clothes pocket a small pistol,
which he produced, and which, on his examining it, he found to be loaded
with powder and ball. It was primed as well as loaded. The pistol which
had been discharged and that which he took from the prisoner were in his
belief a brace; they were of the same size and bore, and were marked
with the same maker's name. The witness had seen the prisoner several
times before in the gallery and in the avenues of the house, and to the
best of his recollection the last time he saw him was six or seven days
before the death of Mr. Perceval. He was frequently in the gallery
during the debates, and upon several occasions entered into conversation
with the witness. He had often asked for information as to the names of
the gentlemen speaking, and also as to the persons of the members of his
majesty's government.
Other witnesses from Newgate produced the coat worn by the prisoner at
the time of his apprehension, and it was identified by Taylor as the
same into which he had put the side-pocket.
Lord Chief-justice Mansfield then addressed the prisoner, and told him,
that the case on the part of the crown being now gone through, the
period was come for him to make any defence he might wish to offer.
The prisoner asked whether his counsel had nothing to urge in his
defence?
Mr. Alley informed him that his counsel were not entitled to speak.
The prisoner then said that the documents and papers necessary to his
defence had been taken out of his pocket, and had not since been
restored to him.
Mr. Garrow said, that it was the intention of the counsel for the crown
to restore him his papers, having first proved them to be the same which
were taken from him, and had not suffered any subtraction; and that his
solicitor already had copies of them.
General Gascoigne and Mr. Hume (M. P. for Weymouth) proved that the
papers were those which had been taken from the person of the prisoner,
and that they had been in their custody ever since, and had suffered no
subtraction.
The papers were then handed to the prisoner, who proceeded to arrange
and examine them.
The prisoner, who had been hitherto sitting, now rose, and, bowing
respectfully to the court and jury, went into his defence, in a firm
tone of voice, and without any appearance of embarrassment. He spoke
nearly to the following effect:--
"I feel great personal obligation to the attorney-general for the
objection which he has made to the plea of insanity. I think it is far
more fortunate that such a plea as that should have been unfounded, than
that it should have existed in fact. I am obliged to my counsel,
however, for having thus endeavoured to consult my interest, as I am
convinced the attempt has arisen from the kindest motives. That I am or
have been insane is a circumstance of which I am not apprised, except in
the single instance of my having been confined in Russia; how far that
may be considered as affecting my present situation, it is not for me to
determine. This is the first time that I have ever spoken in public in
this way. I feel my own incompetency, but I trust you will attend to the
substance, rather than to the manner, of my investigating the truth of
an affair which has occasioned my presence at this bar. I beg to assure
you that the crime which I have committed has arisen from compulsion
rather than from any hostility to the man whom it has been my fate to
destroy. Considering the amiable character and universally admitted
virtues of Mr. Perceval, I feel, if I could murder him in a cool and
unjustifiable manner, I should not deserve to live another moment in
this world. Conscious, however, that I shall be able to justify
everything which I have done, I feel some degree of confidence in
meeting the storm which assails me, and shall now proceed to unfold a
catalogue of circumstances which, while they harrow up my own soul,
will, I am sure, tend to the extenuation of my conduct in this
honourable court. This, as has already been candidly stated by the
attorney-general, is the first instance in which any the slightest
imputation has been cast upon my moral character. Until this fatal
catastrophe, which no one can more heartily regret than I do, not
excepting even the family of Mr. Perceval himself, I have stood alike
pure in the minds of those who have known me, and in the judgment of my
own heart. I hope I see this affair in the true light. For eight years,
gentlemen of the jury, have I been exposed to all the miseries which it
is possible for human nature to endure. Driven almost to despair, I
sought for redress in vain. For this affair I had the _carte blanche_ of
government, as I will prove by the most incontestible evidence, namely,
the writing of the secretary of state himself. I come before you under
peculiar disadvantages. Many of my most material papers are now at
Liverpool, for which I have written; but I have been called upon my
trial before it was possible to obtain an answer to my letter. Without
witnesses, therefore, and in the absence of many papers necessary to my
justification, I am sure you will admit I have just grounds for claiming
some indulgence. I must state that after my voyage to Archangel, I
transmitted to his royal highness the Prince Regent, through Mr. Windle,
my solicitor, a petition, and in consequence of there being no reply I
came to London to see the result. Surprised at the delay, and
conceiving that the interests of my country were at stake, I considered
this step as essential, as well for the assertion of my own right as for
the vindication of the national honour. I waited upon Colonel MacMahon,
who stated that my petition had been received, but, owing to some
accident, had been mislaid. Under these circumstances, I drew out
another account of the particulars of the Russian affair; and this may
be considered the commencement of that train of events which led to the
afflicting and unhappy fate of Mr. Perceval."
The prisoner then read various documents containing the statement the
whole of his affairs in Russia; and in the course of narrating these
hardships, took occasion to explain several points, adverting with great
feeling to the unhappy situation in which he was placed, from the
circumstance of his having been lately married to his wife, then about
twenty years of age, with an infant at her breast, and who had been
waiting for him at St. Petersburgh, in order that she might accompany
him to England,--a prey to all those anxieties which the unexpected and
cruel incarceration of her husband, without any just grounds, was
calculated to excite. (He was here much affected.) He also described his
feelings at a subsequent period, when his wife, from an anxiety to reach
her native country (England) when in a state of pregnancy, and looking
to the improbability of his liberation, was obliged to quit Petersburgh
unprotected, and undertake the voyage at the peril of her life; while
Lord L. Gower and Sir S. Shairp suffered him to remain in a situation
worse than death. "My God! my God!" he exclaimed, "what heart could bear
such excruciating tortures, without bursting with indignation at conduct
so diametrically opposite to justice and to humanity. I appeal to you,
gentlemen of the jury, as men--I appeal to you as brothers--I appeal to
you as Christians--whether, under such circumstances of persecution, it
was possible to regard the actions of the ambassador and consul of my
own country with any other feelings but those of detestation and horror!
In using language thus strong, I feel that I commit an error; yet does
my heart tell me, that towards men who lent themselves thus to bolster
up the basest acts of persecution, there are no observations, however
strong, which the strict justice of the case would not excuse my using.
Had I been so fortunate as to have met Lord Leveson Gower instead of
that truly amiable and highly-lamented individual, Mr. Perceval, he is
the man who should have received the ball!"
The prisoner then went on to state that on his coming to England he had
represented his hardships to the Marquis Wellesley, from whose secretary
he received the following answer:--
"Foreign Office, January 31, 1810.
"SIR,--I am directed by the Marquis Wellesley to transmit to you
the papers which you sent to this office, accompanied by your
letter of the 27th of last month; and I am to inform you, that his
majesty's government is precluded from interfering in the support
of your case, in some measure, by the circumstances of the case
itself, and entirely so at the present moment by the suspension of
intercourse with the court of St. Petersburgh.
"I am, &c.
(Signed) "CULLING CHARLES SMITH."
"I would beg to know (he continued) what course it was possible for me,
after receiving this letter, to pursue? If his majesty's government thus
refused me redress, what must be my next step? The only thing I could do
was, to bring a serious charge against Sir Stephen Shairp and Lord
Leveson Gower; which I accordingly did, by addressing a complete
statement of my case to the privy council, from whom I received the
following answer:--
"'Council Office, Whitehall, May 16, 1810.
"'Sir,--I am directed by the lords of the council to acquaint you,
that their lordships having taken into consideration your petition
on the subject of your arrest in Russia, do not find that it is a
matter in which their Lordships can, in any manner, interfere.
'I am, Sir, &c.
'W. FAWKNER.'
"Having then understood that any remuneration which I might conceive
myself entitled to, I could only procure through the medium of
parliament, I applied myself to several members of parliament, to
ascertain what line of conduct I ought to pursue in order to obtain that
desirable end. These gentlemen told me, that I should make application
to the chancellor of the exchequer--thus petitioning for leave to bring
in a petition upon a subject which, being well founded, became a matter
of right, and not of favour. In consequence, however, of this advice, I
did write a letter to Mr. Perceval, from whom I received an answer dated
Downing Street, 27th May 1810, as follows:--
"'SIR,--I am desired by Mr. Perceval to state to you, in reply to
your letter of yesterday, that the time for presenting private
petitions has long since passed; and that Mr. Perceval cannot
encourage you to expect his sanction in introducing into the house
a petition which Mr. Perceval thinks is not of a nature for the
consideration of parliament.
'I am, &c.
'THOMAS BROOKSBANK.'
"I apprehend, however, that this information is not founded in fact: if
I am wrong, I see several gentlemen round me, connected with the house
of commons, who will set me right. That there is no particular time
limited for the presentation of private petitions, and that they might
be brought forward at any period of the session, I am inclined to think
the usages of the house will permit. The latter clause of Mr. Perceval's
letter, which states that my claims are not of a nature for the
consideration of parliament, appears to me inexplicable. If they are not
referred to that branch of the legislature, to whose consideration then
ought they to be submitted? Yet thus was I bandied about from man to
man, and from place to place. Suppose this had been the case with either
of you, gentlemen of the jury, and that your sufferings had been equal
to mine, what would have been your feelings? It is the duty of every
individual to apply through the proper channel for redress, and through
what other channel ought you to apply but through the heads of
government? Upon this occasion, however, those whose duty it was to have
redressed my grievances treated them with indifference, and were deaf to
the dictated of justice. In consequence of this denial on the part of
Mr. Perceval to investigate a business in which the national honour was
concerned, I was left at a loss how to act, or what course to pursue:
I, therefore, returned home, and remained inactive for nearly eighteen
months, when, finding that I could no longer hold up against the ruinous
effects of those failures which were the consequence of the injustice
with which I had been treated, every one coming upon me for that which I
was unable to pay, and my family borne down by the deepest affliction at
the distresses to which they were exposed, I found it necessary to renew
my applications, which I did to the treasury, and submitted to them a
petition, reiterating those claims I had so unsuccessfully made before.
To this application I received for answer--
"'Treasury Chambers, Feb. 24, 1810.
"'SIR,--Having laid before the lords commissioners of his majesty's
treasury your petition of the 16th instant, submitting a statement
of losses sustained by you in Russia, and praying relief, I am
commanded by their lordships to return to you the documents
transmitted therewith, and to acquaint you that my lords are not
able to afford you any relief.
'I am, &c.
'GEO. HARRISON.'
"I next made application to his royal highness the Prince Regent to have
my affairs laid before parliament, explaining anew the disgraceful
conduct of the consul and ambassador at Russia, who, by suffering me to
be so persecuted, had been guilty of an act which brought eternal
disgrace on the country. (Here he read documents similar to the former,
and repeated all the statements respecting the manner in which he had
been treated in Russia.) The answer I received was as follows:
"'Whitehall, Feb. 18, 1812.
"'SIR,--I am directed by Mr. Secretary Ryder to acquaint you that
your petition to his royal highness the Prince Regent has been
referred, by the command of his royal highness, for the
consideration of the lords of his majesty's most honourable privy
council.
'I am, &c.
'J. BECKETT.'
"After this I made application to the privy council office, and had
communications with Lord Chetwynd and Mr. Duller, the two clerks of that
council, who informed me that I had nothing to expect from their
decision. I then applied to know the reason in writing, why the privy
council declined to act in obedience to the instructions of his royal
highness the Prince Regent; which request I was informed by Mr.
Litchfield could not be complied with.
"Under these circumstances, I communicated the whole to his royal
highness, and enclosed to him a petition to be laid before parliament.
(The petition was here read, and the answer of Mr. Beckett, dated March
9, 1812, stating that his royal highness had signified no commands
thereupon, and returning the petition accordingly.) So baffled (he
pursued), what could a man do? Reduced to the last extremity of distress
without having been guilty of a single political crime which could call
for reprehension, here I was forced to the commission of that melancholy
act (bursting into tears) which I, as well as my country, have so
sincerely to regret. My wife and my poor children crying for the means
of existence, what alternative had I but to seek redress by some such
dreadful act as that for which I have now to answer? His majesty's
ministers, referring me backwards and forwards like a shuttlecock,
without showing the slightest disposition even to regard my wrongs as
deserving of the smallest consideration, in duty to myself, I was forced
to seek justice, and avenge my own cause. I was told I could not get my
case before parliament without the sanction of his majesty's ministers.
To General Gascoigne, for the politeness and attention with which he
heard my statement, and the disposition he evinced to relieve me were it
in his power, I have to express my gratitude. He informed me, if any of
his majesty's ministers would sanction my claims, and that I was able to
authenticate the particulars I had related, he should be happy to meet
my wishes by laying my petition before the house. Supposing now that I
should feel little difficulty in obtaining such sanction, and satisfied
that by a journey to Liverpool I should be able to produce documents
which would fully establish the truth of every word I had uttered, I
began to hope that the goal of my long-hoped-for wishes was now in view.
I, therefore, directed a letter to Mr. Ryder, requesting the permission
I understood to be essential to my purpose. Here, however, my
expectations were again blasted, and those flattering dreams of success
which had filled my mind with joy were dashed for ever from my reach;
and this letter at once showed me that I had no justice to look for."
Here he read the letter as follows:--
"Whitehall, March 20, 1812.
"SIR,--I am directed by Mr. Secretary Ryder to acknowledge the
receipt of your letter of the 17th instant, requesting permission,
on the part of his majesty's ministers, to present your petition to
the house of commons; and in reply I am to acquaint you, that you
should address your application to the right hon. the chancellor of
the exchequer.
"I am, &c.
"J. BECKETT."
"At last, then, I was told I had nothing to expect, and was forced
reluctantly to notice in a more determined manner the ill-treatment I
had received. To this end I enclosed the particulars of my case to the
magistrates of Bow Street. (The prisoner then read the letter which we
have already given.)
"In the course of two days I called again at Bow Street for an answer to
this letter, when I received a little memorandum, in Mr. Reid's writing,
in which he states that he cannot interfere in my affairs, and that he
had felt it his duty to communicate the contents of my packet to the
secretary of state. Had he done otherwise he would have been extremely
reprehensible, as events have turned out so calamitously--events which
go to my heart to allude to. (Much affected.) At last, in reply to a
letter of the 18th of April, I received a final and direct answer, which
at once convinced me that I had no reason to expect any adjustment
whatever of those claims which I had on his majesty's government, for my
criminal detention in Russia. It was in these terms:--
"'Whitehall, April 18, 1812.