“In conclusion, the learned gentleman said, he would proceed to call a witness to prove that Adams, who had been called for the Crown, together with an accomplice of the name of Edwards, who had not been called, were the persons who had conveyed the arms and ammunition to the house of Tidd on the very morning they had been found there by the Bow-street officers.”

Mr. Adolphus then proceeded to call the

EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENCE.

Mary Parker examined.—I am the daughter of Richard Tidd; I live with my father; I remember the police officers coming and finding some boxes and things in our lodgings; they came about half-past eight; those things had been in the house when they came, about a quarter of an hour; they were brought that morning; among them were the pike staves; it was no person in my father’s employment who brought them; he had been taken into custody the night before; I know a person of the name of Adams; I have seen him at my father’s; I know a person of the name of Edwards; I have also seen him there; he has been there often; I have seen similar things before the officers came; I believe these to be the same things; Edwards took part away; I do not know who took the rest; he took them away on Wednesday; my father did not take them away; Edwards did not take away the box; he only took away some things that I have since heard were used; the box was brought a day or two before my father was taken; it never was uncorded; Adams brought a large grenade; I do not know what Edwards was.

The Attorney-general declined asking this witness any question.

Edward Hucklestone examined by Mr. Curwood.—I know a man of the name of Dwyer. I have known him for some years. Latterly I have known him intimately. I used the same public-house. I do not think he is to be believed on his oath.

Cross-examined by the Attorney-General.—I saw him with plenty of money, and knowing that he had little or no work, I was surprised. I was in distress. He told me he would put me in the way to make plenty of money, if I would go with him. I agreed; and he proposed that we should charge gentlemen with an unnatural offence. That he was to go up first, and then I was to join him. I left him quite shocked. This was about three months ago. He said he had got ten pounds at a time from a gentleman in St. James’s-street, by only catching him by the collar, and accusing him. I met him the next night at the Rodney’s-head, and he called me a coward. I told him of the danger, and reminded him that his brother had been transported for the same thing. He said he knew better how to general it than his brother. I ought to have communicated it to a magistrate; but I was afraid of falling a “wictim” to the Irishmen who lived in the neighbourhood. I have spoken to him since. I was a shoemaker, but am now articled to a cow-doctor in Newman-mews. I first communicated this to my brother, about a week ago. I did not mention it before, lest I might be ill-treated, as I had to go so much about among the cows. Some of the Irishmen have gone away from the neighbourhood now, and that induced me to summon up courage to mention it to my brother. I did go with Dwyer to the Park, but I was always struck with the horror of the thing. When I saw the names of the witnesses in this case in the paper, I made the communication to my brother.

(The witness was desired not to go out of Court.)

Mr. Joseph Doane examined by Mr. Adolphus.—I am called the Court Reporter; I prepare for the newspapers an account of the movements of the Court, the cabinet dinners, &c. I send the same accounts to six papers, among others to The New Times, [Looked at the announcement in the New Times, of the cabinet dinner, on Tuesday the 22d of February.] The intelligence respecting the Court in this paper I sent. The paragraph respecting the cabinet dinner, from the wording, I think I did not send. I think so from the use of the word “grand;” cabinet dinners are always alike, and I do not think I used the word “grand.”

Andrew Mitchell: I am printer of The New Times; I produce the original of the paragraph respecting the cabinet dinner, announced in The New Times on the 22d of February.