An Authentic History of the Cato-Street Conspiracy / With the trials at large of the conspirators, for high treason and murder, a description of their weapons and combustible machines, and every particular connected with the rise, progress, discovery, and termination of the horrid plot

by George Theodore Wilkinson

“You will observe, gentlemen, that in each of the description of offences that I have enumerated, except the levying of war, which is in the ancient statute that I have alluded to, the words are, “imagination and intention,” which are words of the same meaning, and the actual perpetration of the crime is not mentioned. But it is further required by an ancient statute, that the party accused shall be provably attainted; and by a latter statute it is mentioned, that if the party shall express, utter, or declare his intention by any printing or writing, that is an overt act of such intention. The law has wisely provided for the public safety, that in cases of this kind, which involve the most extensive public mischief, the intention shall be adjudged the crime; but, at the same time, for the safety of the individual charged, it is required that such intention shall be manifested by some act tending towards the accomplishment of the criminal object charged.

“It may be proper to mention, that, before the passing of a late statute, it was settled by several cases, and the opinions of the first text writers, that all attempts to depose the king from his royal state, to restrain his person, or to levy war against him, were high treason; and all conspiracies, consultations, and agreements for those purposes, were overt acts of compassing and imagining the death of the king. By the late statute, all these things are made substantive treasons, and thereby the law is made more clear to those who are bound to obey it, and to those who may be engaged in the administration of it.

“It may be also proper to remark, that all the pomp and circumstances of military array are not necessary to the first levying of war. Insurrections for the purpose of accomplishing the designs I have mentioned to you by force, however ill arranged, if they are to accomplish an innovation in public affairs, in which the parties have no special or particular interest, are an actual levying of war. Rebellion at its first commencement is rarely found in military discipline or array, although a little success may soon lead it to assume those appearances. Any act manifesting a criminal intention, and tending towards the accomplishment of the criminal object, is, in the language of the law, an overt act. Overt acts may be committed openly and manifestly; but there are other overt acts, such as meetings and consultations, and contrivances, agreements and promises of mutual support and assistance, and incitements to others to engage in the same scheme, are also overt acts. Assenting to the designed purpose, assisting in the preparation of weapons, or any other thing necessary to the general design, are all overt acts of the particular kind of treason, of the particular compassing and imagination to which they may happen to apply; and in this crime of high treason the law acknowledges no accessories,—all are principals. All who participate in the design and object, whether they enter into them early or late, are equally guilty; for it will be found in conspiracies of a treasonable nature, as well as all other conspiracies, that each is engaged in accomplishing some particular object, which is a part of the general design. Some are more zealous and ardent, others are more close and reserved; but, as they are all acting in pursuance of the same view and object, all are equally guilty. Overt acts are most important matters for your investigation. It is necessary that the proof be set forth in the indictment, in order that the accused may be prepared for his defence; but it is not necessary that all the circumstances of proof should be detailed. It is also required, in cases of high treason, that there should be two witnesses to the overt acts. It is not necessary that there should be two witnesses to every overt act; but if there be one witness to one overt act, and another to another, that is sufficient. Some one overt act must be proved to have taken place in the county in which the trial takes place, as in the present case, in Middlesex.

“Having said thus much upon the law, as it applies to high treason, I shall now address myself to the cases likely to be brought before you, in order that you may apply that law. But in any thing I may say, with reference to the inquiry in which you are likely to be engaged, I request you will consider it all as supposition.

“It has been supposed that a conspiracy was formed to assassinate certain persons engaged in the administration of the government of the country, when they were assembled at a dinner at the house of one of them, on February 23d: and it is supposed that a treasonable hostility to the government dictated that act, for the abolition of that government would follow this assassination. In furtherance of this design, seven persons were found almost in the act of immediate preparation, in a stable, with arms and offensive weapons, suitable to the accomplishment of such a traitorous purpose. Those persons, when attempted to be arrested by the peace-officers and the military, in their endeavours to escape, which many of them effected, killed one Richard Smithers. Pistols were discharged—weapons of death were used—and some or all of the persons named were wounded.

“Of these matters all of you have, no doubt, read and heard; therefore I take the liberty most earnestly to entreat you to confine your attention to the evidence laid before you, and to banish from your minds such information as you may have previously received as to the motive or object of this supposed conspiracy, or as to the conduct of the particular individuals supposed to be engaged in it.

“I should tell you that a conspiracy to murder public persons, however important their situations may be, if arising from private malice, and not intended to bring about any other object, does not constitute the crime of high treason. But if the assassination of such persons is meant as the first step of a general design to attack and destroy by force the government of the country, or to compel the sovereign to adopt such measures as they may think fit, then that assassination assumes a different complexion, and may be considered an overt act of one or both of those species of treason which I have mentioned. If, therefore, a conspiracy to take away the lives of his Majesty’s ministers should be proved, you will look to the object about to be obtained by that assassination, and also to the number and rank of the persons intended to be assassinated; for the crime increases not only with the number of the conspirators, but with the number of the persons intended to be assassinated.

“It is, indeed, difficult to conceive that persons could from private malice alone, and without having a public object in view, conspire together to assassinate a number of individuals of whom they could have no knowledge but from the public situations which they filled. But the difficulty of the supposition must not supply the place of evidence. We well know that all attempts to subvert the government of this country must, in the calm and sober eye of reason, appear wild and hopeless; but you will consider that the mad persons who indulge such views are led to diminish the difficulties and to magnify the success and the benefit attending their schemes. It is natural for the vicious to think that there are others as wicked as themselves, and that they shall gain numerous adherents if they succeed in their first attempt. It is this belief that often leads them to a premature disclosure of their purposes to those whom they think likely to participate in their guilt, and that thus furnishes evidence of their dangerous designs; but dark and deep designs are seldom developed but through those who have joined in them. The evidence of accomplices, however, is always to be received with caution, and the conviction arising from such evidence should rest on circumstances of credibility rather than on the personal characters of the witnesses themselves. If such testimony were on all occasions to be rejected, one of the greatest securities to the honest part of society would be annihilated—namely, the want of mutual confidence in those engaged in wicked schemes.

“The next subject which is likely to come under your observation is misprision of treason, which consists in the concealment of treason, when it is within the knowledge of the parties by whom it might be divulged, and whose duty it would be to go before the first magistrate, and make known the evil purposes which they know to be contemplated.

“The third subject to which your attention may be directed is the murder of Richard Smithers, and any other offence touching the death of that person, who lost his life on the occasion of the attempt made to arrest those persons now in custody. It will be material to take into your consideration the place, the time, and the circumstances, where, when, and under which, that attempt to arrest them was made.