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

“He would now come to a part of the statement made by the Attorney-General in his address to the Jury. He had said, that he supposed a part of the defence would be, that the Jury should discredit the whole of this story, from its great improbability. He (Mr. Adolphus) had never any such intention, nor did he think, that the youngest advocate at the bar would have attempted such a line of defence.

“To deny the existence of a plan, however wild and visionary, on the ground that it was improbable, would be to go in the face of the most authentic historic authority. He would take as an example one of the most familiar cases on record. The Earl of Essex, it was known, in a moment of moody displeasure with Queen Elizabeth, did not contrive a regular plan for displacing her from the throne, but in the instant he rushed forth into the streets, at the head of some few of his followers, and endeavoured to stir up the citizens to rebellion; imagining that the people might be induced to second his scheme, and effect in a moment that which he had madly fancied.

“This was a most wild and visionary plan; but, if we were reject it on the ground of its improbability, we should be blotting a page from our history, the truth of which was never before doubted. No, it was not his intention to deny the existence of the present plan, on the ground of its improbability, but he wished the Jury to disbelieve the witness, on the ground of the improbability of the plot as he had described it. When, in the course of yesterday, they saw the pikes, and swords, and pistols and guns, and hand-grenades, which were taken from the prisoners, or at their houses, no doubt they might have felt some alarm.

“They might have participated in the feelings of some persons who were near him at that moment; one of whom said, he should not like to have one of those instruments presented to his breast. No doubt; nobody would like it: but let the Jury seriously consider, how those instruments were to be applied. If they took the twelve hundred rounds of ball-cartridge which were said to have been taken, and divided them by twenty-four, they would find that they had just ammunition enough only for fifty men; but where were those fifty men—or if they were in existence, where were the arms to use this ammunition with? They had only seen a few guns and pistols, and putting them together, there was not sufficient for a party to commit more than an ordinary highway robbery with. Could it be supposed that it was ever intended to upset a government, and dethrone a sovereign, by such means? Was there, taking the evidence of those who appeared before them, recollecting that others who might have been called were kept out of the way; was there, he would ask, sufficient to shew that the object of the prisoners was to upset the government and constitution of this country? He thought he could shew, that their object was quite of another description.

“Let the Jury look at the situation in which the prisoner at the bar stood. They had, as was stated by the Attorney General, often before heard of him. He had, not very long before the present transaction, been released from Horsemonger-lane prison, where he had been confined in consequence of a letter sent to my Lord Sidmouth. He came forth from that prison with rancorous feelings against that noble lord, and probably against others of his Majesty’s ministers; would not such a man be a fit subject to work upon, in proposing an attack upon the lives of those ministers? Must not the Jury suppose that the other prisoners would have heated feelings, after the transaction which took place at Manchester? He would not offer any comments upon that transaction, further than to say, that all which was said and written upon it, was not without an effect; and, on the minds of the prisoners, would it be strange, that an artful and cunning man might work such an effect as to excite them to the murder of his Majesty’s ministers, which would not of itself amount to high treason? With their feelings worked up, some of them with strong personal enmity against some of those ministers, they had determined upon making an attack upon several of them at their houses.

“They were in this state, when forth came the never-to-be-forgotten announcement in The New Times, placed there by the hand that was to betray them, that a Cabinet dinner was to take place on the Wednesday following at Lord Harrowby’s. Did not the whole of their conduct shew that it was against the ministers themselves that the attack was intended, and not against the government, or with a view of effecting a revolution? and was there not proof, that this personal feeling was excited by some of the recent transactions at Manchester to which he had alluded? What was the speech which Ings was to have made on the arrival of the party at Lord Harrowby’s house, where the ministers were expected to be assembled? ‘My lords, you see we have got men as good as the Manchester yeomanry;’ and then, turning to his associates, ‘Citizens, advance, and do your duty!’

“During the whole of these proceedings, nothing was heard of any intended attack upon Carlton-House, or upon any of the branches of the illustrious family of Brunswick. There was no such thing. The whole which their preparations and intentions embraced, were—first, the murder of his Majesty’s ministers, and then robbery. This was the object of setting fire to some houses, that plunder might be obtained in the confusion which might be thereby created.

“These, to be sure, were heinous crimes, but they did not amount to the charge of high treason against the prisoners. The setting fire to buildings, with the intention of robbing in the confusion which the fire would create, was not, unfortunately, a novel case. He was old enough to remember, and perhaps some of the jury might also recollect the circumstance of the setting fire to the premises of a timber-merchant, in order to rob a pawn-broker’s shop, which was close by it. Indeed, the manner in which some of the prisoners had spoken of the shopkeepers of London, shewed that their object was plunder, and it appeared that bags were made for the purpose of holding such plunder.

“He had now gone through the whole of the points on which it was his intention to trouble the Jury. He had done so, perhaps, imperfectly, but he would not apologize for the time which he had delayed them. He had not, on this occasion, all the preparation which was desirable. On the contrary, he had but a very short notice of the duty which he was to perform; and, he remembered, on a former occasion, that one of the most learned Counsel at the bar expressed his inadequacy to a similar task, though he stated, that he had occupied a month in preparing for the defence.

“In pleading for the life of the unfortunate man at the bar, and, after him, of the other prisoners, it was not too much for him to ask the Jury to consider well the nature of the evidence which had been given in support of the charge of high treason. He now, however, left the case entirely with the Jury. If they thought, under all the circumstances, that there was evidence sufficient to prove the charge, then he should submit; but if, on the other hand, they were of opinion that the case was not made out, or that it was not proved to their satisfaction, they would, he was confident, acquit the prisoner.