“Good God!—what must that man be whose heart would not revolt with horror from such a proposal? But this person expressed no disgust at the plan with which he was thus made acquainted. Was this man then more worthy of belief, than one who would join with another to extort money?
“Was this, to use the words of the Solicitor-General, a man worthy of belief in a court of justice? The answer that his learned friend would feel disposed to give must be, that he was not. Then what confirmation could his evidence supply to that of Adams? It was not necessary for him to go through all the details of the conversations between this witness and Adams, but he must remark, that of these not one word went to confirm the facts that would amount to the crime of high treason, though they all tended to establish a plot to assassinate his Majesty’s ministers.
“It was true, that something was stated to have been said of seizing the cannon in the Artillery-Ground, and of retreating to the Mansion House. All this proved that a great riot was in contemplation, but it evinced no intention of committing high treason. This witness described himself to have joined in the plan, and to have told the conspirators that he would be with them.
“The next witness was Monument. He had sworn that he was told by Thistlewood he ought to get arms, as all his (Thistlewood’s) friends were armed. At that period it could not be denied, that there was a great ferment in the public mind, in consequence of the transactions which had taken place at Manchester but a short time before.
“Many of the warmest friends to the measures of government were of opinion, that an inquiry into those transactions ought to be instituted; while others, without reserve, termed what had occurred at Manchester ‘a massacre,’ and declared that since they were liable to be so dispersed at public meetings, they would attend them armed, that they might be prepared to defend themselves. Thistlewood had used words to this effect. He (Mr. Curwood) would not deny that to go armed to such meetings, was a desperate resistance of the law; but he would maintain that it did not amount to high treason, and he entreated the Jury never to dismiss from their minds that it was for high treason, and for high treason only, that they were trying the prisoner at the bar, and not for disobedience to the law in other respects; and therefore if the facts proved did not amount to high treason, it would be their duty to return a verdict of Not Guilty.
“The witness, Monument, had confirmed the evidence given of the existence of a plan for the assassination of his Majesty’s Ministers, and for creating a riot; but he proved nothing respecting that proclamation which was said to have been prepared by Thistlewood, and which alone went to give the conspiracy the character imputed to it in the present indictment. But the witness, Monument, he contended, had shewn himself during this trial to be the same unfeeling villain he had set out with being; yet, from the aggregate of infamy brought forward on this occasion, there resulted no proof of high treason.
“Palin and Cook, who might be able to give evidence in favour of the defence, he shewed that he had no means of bringing forward, as, if they were to offer that testimony which might acquit the prisoner of high treason, they would bring themselves into peril, as the Attorney-General well knew that if they were to appear in the witness’s box, they would not be suffered to depart with impunity. Eleanor Walker and Mary Rogers had only proved the taking of the room in which the consultations of the conspirators were held. This was not denied. It was admitted that they held consultations, and for a nefarious purpose; but the question for the Jury to try was, whether or not these consultations related to high treason. Hale had also proved the room and the purchasing of some sheets of cartridge paper. This he (Mr. C.) contended, was wanting for their cartridges. Adams said it was for their proclamations, but of this there was no proof, and the fragments of cartridge paper that had been found were not written upon.
“The three next witnesses proved various facts connected with the plan of assassination, but nothing that amounted to high treason; and what was proved to have taken place in Cato-street, though murder and riot appeared to have been in contemplation, he could discover nothing like ‘a levying of war.’ If they had not ‘levied war against the King,’ conspiring to do that which had been done, could not be ‘conspiring to levy war against the King.’
“This was a question which must be left to the understandings of the Jury. They all knew what war was between different states. It was carried on by large bodies of men, formed into companies, under the direction of proper officers, and accompanied by all the materiel of war. A civil war was the same, but that one part of a state in a civil war was opposed to another part of the same state. It would be for them to determine whether enough had been proved to shew that any thing like war had been levied. It had been laid down by Sir Matthew Hale, that any disturbance was not necessarily a ‘levying of war;’ for in that case every riot would be high treason. To constitute a levying of war, there must be something worse than a common riot or outrage; ‘there must be a species belli?’
“Could the Jury find this on the present occasion? The utmost force that had been mentioned consisted of forty men. These forty men were to be marched with unfurled banners through the city, to take two cannon in Gray’s Inn-lane, and six in the Artillery Ground, and they were to possess themselves of the Mansion-house. Was this a levying of war? That the conspirators had been formed into companies was more than he had ever heard, and where was the money that was to carry on the war? In what holes and corners had they hidden themselves that nothing was known of them?