The witnesses to support the case thus described were then called;
but much of their testimony was similar to that given in the trial of
Thistlewood. We, therefore, confine ourselves as much as possible to
the new facts which came out, and which applied immediately to the
conduct of the prisoner.
ROBERT ADAMS was first called, and examined by the Attorney-General.
His testimony was almost in all respects similar to that on the former
trial. He added, that he heard that the pike-staves which he saw in the
room in Fox-court were quite green; he understood they had been brought
from over the water; Ings said he had brought them. The same evening
Ings drew a pistol from his pocket. There was a conversation about the
illness of the present King; Thistlewood said he would rather the new
King lived a little while longer, but it was not their intention he
should ever wear the crown.
On this occasion Ings said, that the day the Prince Regent last went to
Parliament, he himself went to the Park with a pistol in his pocket,
with the sole intention to shoot him; and as a test of his sincerity,
he said, “there’s the pistol I took with me,” alluding to the pistol
he had previously produced. He regretted he had not done it, and if he
had, he should not have cared a farthing for his own life. Witness saw
Ings at all the subsequent meetings.
On the meeting held about the time of the King’s funeral, when the
plan for a rising was talked of, during the absence of the horse and
foot guards, it was Ings and Brunt that said, nothing short of the
assassination of the King’s ministers would satisfy them. Ings said,
with his blood all of a boil, “that he must have them, (the ministers,)
if possible, before the parliament was dissolved.”
On the meeting held on Saturday the 20th of February, at which Tidd
took the chair, with a pike in his hand, and at which Thistlewood
proposed the murder of the ministers in detail, Ings was present, and
said, “whoever has the lot to murder Lord Castlereagh, I am the man to
turn out to murder that thief!”
On the Tuesday, at the meeting at Brunt’s, witness saw Ings pull three
daggers from out of his pocket: he was asked what was the purpose of
pulling out these daggers? When he seized one, and making a sort of a
rush, and a motion with his arm, said, with an exclamation, to “run
into their ---- bodies.” After Edwards had communicated the paragraph
in _The New Times_, respecting the cabinet dinner on the Wednesday,
and after Brunt declared his belief in a God, from his prayers being
answered in bringing the ministers together, Ings exclaimed with
exultation, that “he should have a better opportunity of cutting off
Lord Castlereagh’s head.”
“It was subsequently arranged, that Ings should head the party to go
into the room in which the ministers were assembled. He was to cut off
Lord Castlereagh’s and Lord Sidmouth’s heads, and to bring them away.
He was also to cut off Lord Castlereagh’s hand, which he was to cure
(pickle), as it would be thought a great deal of at a future day.” He
was to be armed with a pair of pistols and a butcher’s knife.
The same afternoon, Ings was employed in making fire-balls to set fire
to the different buildings; Edwards was making fusees to the grenades.
On Wednesday evening, February the 23d, the proclamation, written by
Thistlewood, was signed “James Ings, Secretary.”
Witness then described Ings’s preparation for action, his brandishing
his knife, and his sanguinary declarations that he would cut off the
heads of his Majesty’s ministers, and bring away the heads of Lord
Castlereagh and Lord Sidmouth in his bags. The handle of his knife, he
said, he had bound round with wax-end, “in order to prevent his hand
from slipping while he was at work.”
The witness then proceeded to detail the well-known occurrences in
Cato-street, and the part which Ings took therein. He swore he would
rather die or hang himself than not do the job that night.
In cross-examination by Mr. Adolphus, witness said, I was born at
Ipswich; I am now a Christian; there was a time when I was not a
Christian; I was then a man in the same form as now. I was what
they termed a Deist. I believed in God. I renounced Christianity
and believed only in God. I re-commenced Christian after the 23d of
February. I renounced my faith as a Christian last August. I never
pronounced my disbelief in God--nor ever denied Christ, till I read
that cursed work of Paine’s! I never was an Atheist, but always
believed in a God. I have no pension.
The paper produced is my hand-writing; I was examined here on Monday,
and have since been in Coldbath-fields. I have had no communication
with any body. I have had a room in the house of the Governor; I have
seen nobody that has told me any part of the proceedings in this Court.
During the days when I was here, I was kept in a room by myself. Heard
nothing of the progress of the proceedings, except the conviction of
Thistlewood. I had known Edwards from the first part of January. From
the time I joined Brunt and the others, I never intended to commit
murder, nor to give information; I intended to wait for an opportunity
to see if any thing enabled me to creep out of it; I was prevented
from creeping out, from threats that had been held out; I was not
disposed to plunder the shops, although I was in a society that were so
disposed.
Before I went into prison, I was asking Brunt what was the plan that
was first drawn out? Brunt said that nothing would be communicated till
the day of action, and then the men would be called together, receive a
treat, and be told what was to be done; after which they would not be
lost sight of. Brunt said, if he had any suspicion of any one giving
information, he would run him through. This was on the 16th of January.
When I was examined on Monday, it did not come to my recollection about
Ings telling of shooting the Prince Regent.
Mr. GURNEY: We studiously passed over certain points of the evidence
for the purpose of shortening it.
The Witness: I can tell many things, if I am asked, that I did not tell
on Monday. If any thing fresh comes to my mind as I stand here I’ll
tell it. There were things that transpired that I did not state last
Monday, and that I have not stated to-day. I had no personal knowledge
of Monument. I can be answerable, that there was one candle in the room.
I did not see more than one a-light. If a man spoke the truth, he could
not say there were eight candles in the room. If any man said there
was, I should say he was a false man. I cannot be answerable for every
word which passed.
I always found Mr. Edwards very deep, and very deep in conversation
with Brunt and Thistlewood.
There was a shot-hole in my coat from a pistol that was fired from the
window, when I was escaping from the stable.
I do not know a man of the name of Chambers. I never called upon a
person of that name in company with Edwards. I did call with Edwards
upon a woman at Pimlico, to buy a pair of boots. On that day I did not
call upon any man of the name of Chambers to solicit him to kill his
Majesty’s ministers. I never said I would kill his Majesty’s ministers,
and have blood and wine for my supper. I never had any conversation
with any body to use Cashman as a watchword.
After the affair at Cato-street I did not take any ammunition away
with me from Cato-street. Hall gave me a pistol and live rounds of
ball-cartridges. I loaded the pistol, and laid it on the bench; I did
not touch it again; and threw the four ball-cartridges away in the room.
I never carried the large hand-grenade. I cannot say that I can charge
my memory with a score of words which Edwards ever said; whatever he
said was always in a side-winded way amongst themselves.
ELEANOR WALKER, on being examined by Mr. Gurney, gave similar evidence
to that given by her on the former occasion.
MARY ROGERS, Joseph Hale (apprentice to Brunt), Thomas Smart (watchman
in Grosvenor-square), C. Bissex (also a watchman for the same place),
Frederick Gillan, John Hector Morrison (journeyman to Mr. Underwood,
the cutler, in Drury-lane), Edward Simpson (corporal-major of the 2d
Life-Guards), and James Aldous (pawnbroker), also detailed the same
facts to which they before deposed.
THOMAS HYDEN, the man who gave the information to Lord Harrowby,
recapitulated the facts proved on the former trial.
In cross-examination, he said, he had been formerly a gentleman’s
servant; that was six years ago. He lived with Colonel Bridges last. He
might have lived with him a month or more. He could not certainly say.
He had lived in Manchester-mews for five years. He had not been there
all the time himself. He was away two or three months.
He was now in the Marshalsea; he was not ashamed of the place. It was
for a debt of eighteen pounds, and due to Mr. Powell, a milkman. He
went into prison last Saturday, on execution. He had been sued at the
beginning of last summer. I was at home at different times in June,
July, and August, at Manchester-mews. My family were there till last
Saturday. I said on Tuesday last I lived in Manchester-mews. I am
living now at this place where I stand. My family goes there now two or
three times a day. I have known Davidson three or four months. I do not
know Mr. Edwards.
I know a person of the name of Edwards. I know a good many persons two
hundred miles in the country. I have been to the Scotch Arms, in some
small court somewhere down by the Strand. I was there twice, to the
shoemakers’ club, with a friend of the name of Clarke, a master-tailor.
It was reported to be a shoemakers’ club. I am not able to say whether
politics and the affairs of the State were the topics of discussion.
I never was at any of the meetings in Fox-court. I knew nothing of the
affair in Cato-street till told by Wilson; I was to get the cream for
a family in Princes-street, Cavendish-square. I have served them about
three years, but I do not know their name. My wife brought home the
order for the cream. I have been at the house, but I do not know when.
It was the first time I saw Wilson; he said to me that I need not be
alarmed, for a gentleman’s servant furnished money. He said this more
than twice.
Re-examined: My family continued to carry on my business in
Manchester-mews till Saturday last, when I was arrested. As far as I
know my family have possession of the premises now. I believe the
house in Princes-street is No. 6. My wife serves the family sometimes;
I have been there; I believe the house to be the front door going from
Cavendish-square towards Oxford-street.
LORD HARROWBY appeared on the right of the Bench, and spoke to the
interruption of cabinet dinners, and the issuing of cards of invitation
for the 23d. His Lordship named the company who were to be present.
His Lordship then stated the receipt of Hyden’s communication, and the
change of arrangements adopted in consequence.
His Lordship, in cross-examination by Mr. Curwood, said, he had not
personally known any thing of it before; but he had heard a long time
antecedently, that something of this nature was to be attempted.
JOHN BAKER corroborated the testimony of Lord Harrowby as to the
intended cabinet dinner.
JOHN MONUMENT was next examined, and was again conducted into Court in
the charge of two of the yeomen warders of the Court. His evidence in
chief was precisely the same as that which he gave on Thistlewood’s
trial.
In cross-examination, witness said, that Thistlewood remarked, that
every man would have equal honour with myself. I went to Cato-street
for fear. I was foolish, for I certainly went there without knowing
what I was to do. I thought they were going to the House of Commons.
When I was told by Brunt they were going to a cabinet dinner, I fully
thought they were going to destroy the ministers, and yet I went. I
went to Tidd’s, because I was afraid. I cannot tell why I did not go to
a magistrate to tell my fears. My intention was, when I got into the
room and found out what they were going about, to run away.
THOMAS MONUMENT confirmed the last witness in every particular.
RUTHVEN repeated his former testimony. In cross-examination, he said,
he had no doubt there were four or five lights in the loft, and others
in the little room.
James Ellis, William Westcott, Luke Nixon, Joseph Champion, John
Wright, and William Charles Brooks, police officers, likewise repeated
their former testimony.
CAPT. FITZCLARENCE.--The first thing he saw was a police officer, who
cried out, “Soldiers, soldiers; stable door, stable door!” He was
met by two men at the door, one having a pistol, another a sword. He
followed one of them into the stable, and took him.
Serjeant WILLIAM LEGG, of the 2d regiment of Coldstream Guards, was
at Cato-street; saw the pistol levelled at Captain Fitzclarence, and
seized it, when it went off. It was Tidd who levelled it. He took him
into custody. He saw above on the loft, Cooper, Gilchrist, and Monument.
HERCULES TAUNTON gave evidence of the seizures made at Brunt’s and
Tidd’s.
Cross-examined by Mr. Adolphus.--A reward had been offered for the
apprehension of Palin. He was not apprehended, nor Potter, nor Cook.
DANIEL BISHOP was called, but not being in attendance, his examination
and the production of the various articles seized was postponed till
to-morrow morning, and the Court adjourned at eight o’clock.
The Jury were then, as in the former case of Thistlewood’s trial,
placed in a room by themselves, and not permitted to have conversation
with any person whatever.
Ings in the course of the day revived in spirits, as he became
interested in the evidence; but he frequently reverted to a state of
gloomy sullenness.
The other prisoners were anxious to keep the witnesses out of Court,
when not under examination, and repeatedly called on those who
accidentally made their appearance to withdraw.
SECOND DAY.--SATURDAY, _April 22_.
At a quarter before nine the Jury were conducted to the box by the
sheriff’s officers.
Shortly after this the guns, pistols, swords, pikes, grenades,
ammunition, and other materials of war, seized in Cato-street, were
brought into court, and placed on the table.
At nine the same learned Judges who presided the day before, took their
seats.
Ings and the other prisoners were then put to the bar.
_Evidence for the Crown continued._
DANIEL BISHOP was now put in the box, and described the circumstances
attending the apprehension of Thistlewood, which were detailed in his
former evidence.
In cross-examination by Mr. Adolphus: Witness said he had apprehended
the prisoner from private information, not received from an officer; he
did not know a man of the name of Edwards.
RUTHVEN was next called, and said there were now placed on the table
the arms and ammunition taken in Cato-street; he then proceeded to
select each article separately, and to exhibit it to the Jury; the
pikes and grenades were minutely inspected. A pike blade was placed in
one of the handles in order to show the manner in which it was to be
used. When thus presented it had a most terrific appearance. The knife
stated to have been found on the person of Ings was next produced, and
exhibited to the Jury. While they were examining it, Ings exclaimed,
“It was not found upon me, my Lord.”
HECTOR MORRISON, servant to Mr. Underwood the cutler, identified the
two swords which he ground for Ings. They were made extremely sharp
from heel to point. The prisoner directed that they should be made as
sharp as a needle at the point, and that they should be made to cut
both at the back and front; this was done. The swords seemed since to
have been rubbed on a stone to make them keener.
SAMUEL TAUNTON selected the articles found in Tidd’s lodgings, as well
as those found in the back room of the house in which Brunt resided.
Serjeant HANSON, of the Royal Artillery, described the formation of
the fire-balls and hand-grenades, and opened one of the latter, as in
Thistlewood’s case, for the information of the Jury. He also looked at
the flannel bags found in Tidd’s lodgings. They were what are termed
flannel cartridges for a 6-pounder. They were the same as those used by
the Royal Artillery, only that those produced were formed of flannel,
whereas those used by the artillery were composed of serge.
It was now announced that the other prisoners might retire, and they
were re-conducted to their apartments.
Serjeant HANSON, examination by one of the Jury, said, that the
grenades found in Cato-street were not made exactly in the same
manner as those made for the use of the artillery, although they were
calculated to produce similar destructive consequences. The cart-nails
would be propelled with irresistible force by the explosion of the tin
carcase, and would scatter death around. There was rather more powder
in the case than was sufficient to burst a nine inch shell.
The Attorney-General: That is the case on the part of the Crown.