those who are careless of their political rights will always be sure
to suffer and be imposed upon in their domestic rights. Those who have
robbed the people of their political liberty, will not fail to rob them
of that proportion of their earnings, to enjoy which, can alone make
life worth preserving. The people who do not endeavour to possess and
enforce the power of appointing those who are to make the laws, by which
they are to be governed, have but little right to complain, if laws are
made to enrich the few at the expense of the many. They must not be
surprised at combination acts, corn laws, and banishment acts. They must
not be surprised, if a _select few_ have the privilege of choosing
those who are to make laws; and if the laws that are made by persons so
appointed tend to benefit those select few to the injury of the whole
community. The mechanics and artizans, if they have no voice in electing
Members of Parliament, must not be surprised if, under the title of
combination laws, they see laws made to prevent them from obtaining the
fair market price for their labour, while their masters are permitted,
nay, encouraged, to combine and conspire together to keep down the price
of their wages. Again let me impress on the mind of the reader, that a
people who are careless and negligent of their political rights, are
always sure of being plundered of a great portion of what they earn by
the sweat of their brows; they imperceptibly become slaves of the
basest cast; and, like slaves, when they become infuriated with their
oppressions, they commit the most wanton and brutal acts of cruelty, in
their fits of desperation.
Britain had, as I have already stated, made peace with the Spanish
Patriots, whose devotion to the cause of their country excited the most
lively interest in the bosom of every friend of freedom throughout the
civilised world; and the people of England, as well as the English
Government, felt a sincere desire to render them every assistance in
their power. I am induced to notice the affairs of Spain particularly,
because it is delightful to behold a bigotted and enslaved people
struggling to free themselves from the galling yoke of religious as well
as political slavery. In pursuance of the resolution of the Government
to give vigorous assistance, an army was sent by England, to attack the
French in Portugal. This army was placed under the command of Sir Hugh
Dalrymple. On the 21st of August 1808, the French troops under General
Junot were routed by the English, at the battle of _Vimiera_. So
complete was this victory that it was expected the French general must
have surrendered the remains of his army as prisoners of war; but, while
the people of England were looking with anxiety for this event, their
hopes were suddenly blasted, with the news of the _Convention of
Cintra_; by which Junot had prevailed upon the English Commander, Sir
Arthur Wellesley, who negociated the terms of the Convention, not only
to permit the French troops to retire from Portugal with all the honours
of war, but actually to engage to provide a passage for them in _English
ships_. This news caused a universal expression of disapprobation of the
conduct of the English Commander, and meetings were held to petition the
King, for an inquiry into this disgraceful transaction.
The disgrace of General Whitlocke, which had been inflicted upon him so
recently, by the following sentence, it was hoped would have so operated
upon British military officers as to have prevented the recurrence of
such infamous conduct. His sentence was delivered on the 18th of March,
in the following terms: "The Court adjudge that the said Lieutenant
General Whitlocke be cashiered, and declared totally unfit and unworthy
to serve his Majesty in any military capacity whatever." The principle
upon which the law inflicts punishments is an example to deter others
from committing the same offences. But it is a melancholy fact, that
even capital punishments will not deter the hardened thief. As it is
frequently the case that pickpockets are detected in the act of robbing
at the very moment that one of their own fraternity is being launched
into eternity, at the Old Bailey; so it appears that the punishment
of General Whitlocke had very little effect upon the conduct of these
heroes of Cintra.
The Lord Mayor and Common Council met and petitioned the King for an
immediate and rigid inquiry into the conduct of those who made what was
generally considered a disgraceful treaty; a compromise of the honour
and character of the country. The King returned an equivocal answer. A
public county meeting of the freeholders of Hampshire was also held, at
Winchester, called by the High Sheriff, in consequence of a requisition
signed by the aristocratical Whigs of that county, to address the King,
upon the same subject. Mr. Cobbett, who had bought an estate and lived
at Botley, attended this meeting, and in an address, replete with good
sense, sound argument, and correct principles, moved an amendment to the
resolutions proposed by Lord Northesk, and seconded by Mr. Portal, of
Frifolk, two of the old Whig faction. The address to the King, which Mr.
Cobbett moved, was seconded by the _Reverend Mr. Baker_, (quere, is this
the Parson Baker of Botley?) A Parson Poulter, one of the Winchester
"_cormorants_," moved an adjournment; arguing that the address was not
necessary, as the King had given an answer to the Corporation of London.
This amendment was scouted by an immense majority, not above ten hands
being held up in its support. Upon a show of hands upon Mr. Cobbett's
amendment to Lord Northesk's resolution, the Sheriff declared it to be
so equally balanced that he could not decide which had the majority,
and a shuffle was resorted to; Mr. Cobbett, being a young hand at these
meetings, was not aware of the tricks of the Whigs. The Sheriff proposed
that all parties should proceed into the open Hall _for a division_;
but, as soon as a considerable number of those who had voted for Mr.
Cobbett's amendment had retired into the open Hall, the cunning Sheriff
caused another division in the Court, and declared the question to be
carried by a majority in favour of Lord Northesk's address, which was
accordingly presented to the King. This appears to have been the first
effort of Mr. Cobbett at a public county meeting, and a very successful
effort it was, as far as it consisted in ascertaining the real opinion
of the freeholders of the county of Hants. At this meeting Mr. Cobbett
proved that he was not only a good writer, but that he was also a very
eloquent speaker; and a great majority of those who listened to him were
evidently in favour of his address, which was much more to the purpose
than that proposed by Lord Northesk. I had read the Weekly Political
Register from its commencement with great pleasure, but the account of
this meeting caused me to feel an increased desire to become better
acquainted with the author. No occasion, however, of that sort offered
for some time to come.
Previously to this period I had been living alternately at Bath and Sans
Souci Cottage, in Wiltshire. When I was at the latter place I enjoyed
incessantly the sports of the field. When at Bath, I frequently met and
encouraged the young freemen of Bristol, to take up their freedom by
means of weekly subscriptions, a considerable number having already
procured their copies as certificates, in this way. The authorities, as
they are called, or, in more intelligible terms, the leaders of both
factions in the Corporation, the Whigs and the Tories, had their eye
constantly upon me. I was regarded as a very suspicious personage, for
meddling at all in their affairs; but I kept quite clear of both sides,
and only mixed occasionally with the people; for I had promised the
young freemen that, whenever there was a dissolution of Parliament, or a
vacancy, I would offer myself as a Candidate for the representation of
their city, unless some more eligible person could be found, who would
honestly oppose the intrigues of both the juggling parties--the White
Lion and Talbot clubs, the former of which supported the ministerial,
and the latter the opposition faction.
Some time in the month of September the Emperors Napoleon and Alexander
met at Erfurth, where they jointly offered to treat for peace with
England; but these pacific overtures were, as usual, rejected by the
British ministers. The whole force of Great Britain appeared to be
directed to assist the Spaniards for the purpose of driving the French
troops out of Spain, to accomplish which object a British army, under
Generals Moore and Baird, was sent to that country, which now began to
be devastated by a war between the partizans of England and France.
On one side, that of the English, were ranged the pride of the old
grandees, the arts and prejudices of a cunning and intelligent
priesthood, and the intolerable stupid superstition of the most ignorant
and priest-ridden part of the people. On the other side, there was
a small party of the more liberal minded, who supported the French,
because they had abolished the Inquisition, and all the old monastic
humbug with which the country had been cursed for so many ages. Joseph
Buonaparte, who had been made King of Spain, but who had been obliged to
retreat from Madrid, was now restored by Napoleon, who entered Spain at
the head of the French army, defeated the Spaniards in many engagements,
and finally became once more master of the Spanish capital, where
he reinstated his brother Joseph as Sovereign, that monarch having
transferred to Murat, his brother-in-law, the throne of Naples. The
Parliament of England had voted an army of 200,000 men for the land
service, besides 30,000 for the marine; and _fifty-four millions_ were
voted out of John Bull's pocket for the supplies; and a subscription to
the amount of 50,000_1_. to assist the Spaniards, was raised in London,
in addition to the formidable regular force. The militia consisted of
upwards of 100,000 men.
In the midst of this mad career and profligate expenditure, trade
continued to decline, and the manufacturers were in the greatest
distress. To appease the enraged nation, a sham court of inquiry was
ordered by the King to assemble at Chelsea, under the pretence of an
investigation into the Convention of Cintra; but this was so barefaced a
job that it deceived nobody.
I have given a brief outline of the political state of the country, in
the year 1808, before I enter more immediately upon my own domestic
history, which, at this period, was become considerably mingled with
politics and public affairs. I had quitted the large farm which I
occupied at Chisenbury, and had built myself a sporting cottage upon my
own estate at Littlecot, in the parish of Enford, which I called _Sans
Souci Cottage_, from its situation resembling the description given of
_Sans Souci_, the retreat of Frederick the Great, King of Prussia. Here,
as I have already hinted, I devoted the summer and autumn to the sports
of the field, particularly shooting, of which I was passionately fond,
and which this country afforded in the greatest perfection. Having a
house at Bath, which was occupied, I furnished it from the house which
I had quitted at Clifton, and at Bath I spent the winter months. The
liberal principles which I at all times evinced, were by this time too
notorious to escape the attention and hatred of the Tory gentlemen of
that part of the county of Wilts in which I resided. There had, in fact,
always been amongst them a conspiracy against me, ever since I had
quitted the Wiltshire regiment of yeomanry cavalry, and challenged Lord
Bruce, the Colonel. But my calling on the county members to explain
their parliamentary conduct; and my doing this publicly, when, on
the dissolution of Parliament, they offered themselves for the
representation, had greatly added to the antipathy which the Tories had
before evinced against me; and it was determined that I should be _put
down,_ by the lords of the soil, who surrounded my property at Enford.
My old friend Astley, of Everly, was at the head of this worthy band,
and he was the first to commence operations, by bringing an action of
trespass against me in the name of one of his tenants. This was, in
truth, his second trick of the kind; he having, soon after I quitted his
troop, brought a similar action against me, in the name of one of his
tenants, who keeps the Crown Inn at Everly, and who rented a farm of
him. I defended that action, and pleaded in justification a _licence_;
meaning, that I had leave of his tenant to sport over his land; but his
attorney, who was a _flat_, carried this suit into Court, under the
idea, that I justified upon the ground of having taken out a game
licence. The fact was, that this was a _quibbling plea_, suggested by my
attorney, and it succeeded; the bait took. When we came into Court they
easily proved the trespass; and when they had gravely done this, I
called two witnesses, who proved that the tenant had not only given me
leave to go over his land, but had even invited me to do so, as his
adjoining neighbour. Upon this the plaintiff, my worthy neighbour
Astley, was nonsuited. I believe that I employed Mr. Pell, the present
Mr. Sergeant Pell, and I believe, too, this was the first single brief
he ever had upon the western circuit.
To beat my rich and powerful neighbour Astley, in a court of justice,
although he had got a rare packed jury for the occasion, I considered as
a great victory. On the next occasion, however, his attorney took care
to be safe; for he brought the action in the name of one of the squire's
mere vassals, a farmer of the name of Simpkins, who at that time was
obliged to say or do any thing and every thing that he was ordered. I
suffered judgment to go by default, and a writ of inquiry was executed
at Warminster, to assess the damages. One witness was called, merely to
prove the trespass; and he swore that I had been six yards off my own
open down land, upon that of his master, Simpkins, which adjoined it.
When the writ of inquiry was executed, I attended at Warminster in
person, and this I did in consequence of having discovered, that there
was a conspiracy against me amongst the neighbouring aristocrats, who,
as I had ascertained, had made a _common stock purse_, in order to
defray whatever expenses might be incurred in carrying on actions or
prosecutions against me. I became acquainted with this fact in a very
curious way. This junto of conspirators against the quiet and fortune of
an individual had given a general retainer to Mr. Burrough, the
counsel, the present Judge Burrough, who had, _over the bottle_, to an
acquaintance of mine, who had been dining with him, slipped out this
curious secret, intimating that his clients were so rich that they were
sure to ruin me with expenses, even if I gained two out of three of
the causes against me. My acquaintance having communicated to me this
detestable plot, I made a solemn resolution to become my own advocate,
let whatever actions might be brought against me. And now, for the first
time in my life, I began to cross-examine a witness. That witness was
Simpkins's shepherd, the only witness called by Astley's attorney. Upon
his being asked by me, whether there was any boundary between Simpkins's
down and mine? he answered, _no;_ that there might be some old
_bound-balls_ at the distance of half a mile apart, bound-balls that
might have been thrown up many hundred years back. He admitted that, at
the time when the trespass to which he swore was committed by me, from
two to three hundred of his master's sheep were grazing over the mark
upon _my down;_ that this was frequently the case either way between
neighbours' sheep on the open downs in Wiltshire, and that it could not
be well avoided. Upon my asking him what damage I had committed upon his
master's land, the fellow grinned, and replied, "damage, Sir! why, none
at all, to be sure:" being still further examined, he said that I had
not done sixpenny worth of damage, that I had not done a farthing's
worth, nor the _thousandth part of a farthing's worth_ of damage, for it
was impossible to do any damage if I had walked there for a month.
This the fellow stuck to in his re-examination; and he being the only
witness, and that witness called by the plaintiff, it struck me that it
would be impossible for honest jurymen to give _any damage_, they being
bound upon their oaths to assess the damages agreeable to the evidence.
It was an intelligent jury, and in my address to them, I appealed to
their honour, as men of character, whether they could conscientiously
give a verdict of any damage, when the only witness called swore that
there was not a _thousandth part_ of a farthing damage done? I told
them, that I believed a verdict of _no damages_ would bring an
additional expense upon me, as the Courts might set it aside; yet I
would on no account wish them to violate their oaths to save me an
expense; and I called upon them to discharge their duty conscientiously
and manfully, let the expense fall on whom it would. The Under Sheriff,
before whom the inquest was held, did every thing that man could do
to prevail upon the jury to return a verdict of a _farthing damages_,
contending that they must return a verdict of some damage. The foreman
very sensibly remarked, "if you have called a witness who has sworn that
there was not the _smallest particle_ of damage done, how can we, upon
our oath, say there was some damage?" The jury retired for half an hour,
and returned a special verdict of "_no damages_."
This verdict I considered as another victory over the leader of the
stock purse subscription. A motion was, however, made in the Court of
King's Bench, for a rule to shew cause why this verdict should not be
set aside, and a new writ of inquiry held to assess the damages. This
rule was instantly granted by Lord Ellenborough. Upon my receiving
notice to shew cause, as it was a mere point of law to be argued, I
gave instructions to my attorney to employ my friend Henry Clifford,
to oppose the rule. The motion came on in the Court, and Mr. Clifford
argued that unless they had violated their oath, the jurors could not
possibly come to any other conclusion. As they were sworn to assess the
damages agreeable to the evidence, and as the only witness called had
sworn that there was not the _thousandth part of a farthing_ damage
done, how could a conscientious jury give any damage? It was merely
contended, on the other side, that I had admitted the trespass, by
suffering judgment to go by default; and therefore the jury were bound
to give some damage. In this wise and just doctrine Lord Ellenborough,
and his brethren upon the bench, fully and unequivocally concurred; and
his lordship was quite severe upon Mr. Clifford, and wondered how, as
a lawyer, he could have the face to argue to the contrary. The Court
consequently ruled, that a new writ of inquiry should be issued to
assess the damages; the plaintiff first paying the costs of the former
writ of inquiry, and this application to the Court.
I was now served with a notice, that the writ would be executed at
Devizes, at seven o'clock in the evening, on the third day of the
sessions, and that counsel would attend. I merely said to the attorney,
who served me with the notice, "well! if the Court of King's Bench has
so ruled it, so it must be." The sessions arrived; the third day came;
and, as I did not appear in the town, it was generally understood,
amongst the barristers and attorneys, that there would be no sport, as I
should make no attempt to obtain another verdict, in opposition to the
opinion of the Court of King's Bench.
The magistrates, counsel, and attornies had all taken their dinner and
were sitting very snugly enjoying their wine, when the Under-Sheriff,
with an attorney of the name of Tinney, of Salisbury, whom he had
employed to preside for him, retired to the Court, to hold the inquiry,
intimating at the same time to their guzzling companions, whom they left
enjoying their good cheer, that they should very soon rejoin them, as
they should dispatch the affair in about half an hour. They sent word
to Mr. Casberd, their counsel, that they would send for him as soon as
their jury were sworn; Mr. Tinney informing him that his attendance
would be required only for a few minutes, as it would be a matter of
form, merely to prove the fact, and direct the jury to give a shilling
nominal damages.
This was the Michaelmas sessions, 1807. I was residing at Bath at that
period, and having taken an early dinner I got into my carriage, at
half past four o'clock, with my son, then about seven years of age, and
desired the post boy to drive to Devizes. When he came to the turnpike,
at the entrance of the town, he inquired if he should drive to the Bear?
I told him to drive me to the Town Hall. When I reached that building, I
stepped out of the carriage, and, with my son in my hand, I walked into
the Court, to the great astonishment of as snug a little band as ever
assembled to perform such a little job, to assess damages upon a writ of
inquiry. The Sheriffs deputy's deputy, Mr. Tinney, had taken his seat
upon the bench; the jury were in the box, and the last man of the jury
was just about to kiss the book, when I begged the officer to repeat the
oath once more, deliberately, before the juryman was sworn. He did so,
as follows--"You shall well and truly try, &c. &c. and a true verdict
give _according to the evidence_." Mr. Casberd, the counsel, had arrived
in the interim, and was adjusting his wig. These, together with the
plaintiff's attorney, and about a score of the inhabitants who lived in
the immediate vicinity of the Hall, formed as pretty a select party for
such a job, as ever was assembled upon any occasion.
The execution of this new writ of inquiry had created a considerable
sensation in the town, and the rehearing of the famous cause, which had
produced a discussion in the Court above, had excited a considerable
interest amongst the gentry of the profession; but as it was understood
that I should not attend, and that it would go off, as a matter of
course, undefended, or at least unresisted by me, the interest that it
had at first excited had completely subsided, and if I had not come it
would have been, as Mr. Tinney had anticipated, over in ten minutes. But
the news of my arrival spread like wildfire, and the bench was instantly
crowded with magistrates, the green table with counsel and attorneys,
and the whole Court was crammed as full as it could hold.
Instead of the usual course being followed, by the counsel for the
plaintiff opening his case, the Jury and the Court were favoured with an
address from the chair, by Mr. Tinney, who acted as sheriff. In the most
unfair and unjustifiable manner he informed them, that the same writ
of inquiry had been executed once before, and that the defendant had
prevailed upon the jury to give a verdict which was not warranted by
law; that the Court of King's Bench had set that verdict aside, and Lord
Ellenborough had ruled, that, as the defendant had suffered judgment to
go by default, he had admitted the trespass, and therefore the jury were
bound to give some damage; and he cautioned them not to listen to any
thing I might say to the contrary, and told them that when they had
heard Mr. Casberd, they would give nominal damages.
I listened to this pretty prelude with great unconcern, and without
offering the least interruption to the speaker. Mr. Casberd now began to
address them, and very properly said, that the sheriff had _left him but
little to do,_ as he had explained to them the nature of the duty they
had to perform. He, however, went over the same ground, and strongly
urged them not to be warped from their duty, by any thing I might say.
At this period I strongly suspected I should have no defence to make,
that they had been advised not to call any witnesses, that they meant to
rely upon my having suffered judgment to pass by default, and, on that
ground, to call on the jury to give merely nominal damages. But my
suspicions were soon removed by the learned counsel saying, that he
should call one witness, merely to prove the fact of the trespass, and
that he should then claim a verdict of some damages from their hands,
as it had been ruled by the Court above, that the jury must give some
damages, the defendant having suffered judgment to go by default, and by
so doing admitted the trespass.
My old friend, the shepherd, was now called, and sworn; and having
deposed to the fact, that on such a day of the month, he saw me six
yards upon the down of his master, Mr. Simpkins, he was told that he
might withdraw. This he was hastily doing, when I hailed him, and
desired him to honour us with his company a few minutes longer, as I
wished just to ask him a question or two. The impartial judge, Mr.
Tinney, said he should protect the witness from answering any improper
questions. In reply to this very acute remark, I observed, that it would
be quite in good time to do that when any improper question was put.
After a great deal of squabbling with the worthy judge upon this
occasion, I got the worthy witness, although he had been well drilled,
to admit that he had sworn at Warminster, that there was not the
_thousandth part of a farthing damage_ done by me in walking six yards
over his master's down. This, he at length admitted to be the fact, and
that no damage whatever was done.