1824. J 



Dill tliey agree to your proposilion 

 for the advance on the several kinds of 

 work? — Tliey did not. 



Tlicy did not agree to your demand 

 for an increase ; but, on the contrary, 

 agreed to certain prices, which reduced 

 those demands? — Yes. 



What increase had you demanded ? — 

 A penny a iiat on some sorts, and two- 

 pence oil others. 



Instead of being raised a shilling a 

 dozen, the price was reduced a shilling 

 a dozen ? — Yes, 



Did they strike?— They left their 

 work. 



What took place after that? — I was 

 then secretary; I had not been in the 

 situation three months; I was taken to 

 Union Hall. 



What evidence was brought against 

 3«u? — The masters all appeared to say, 

 that the men had struck work, and that 

 we were allowing tJie men so much a 

 week for standing out. This paper Mr. 

 Harris produced, and I was asked 

 ■whether it was my writing; I said it 

 Was. Then the niagislratcs said, "We 

 shall send you to Brixton for two 

 months." I said to Mr. Chambers, 

 " Are we to go to prison without being 

 heard." He said, if we had any thing 

 to say, we might say i(, but we were 

 convicted. Tliere were some letters, 

 which were coming from tiic country, 

 for the aflair had been about a month's 

 standing ; and some letters, which were 

 coming from tlie country to us, were 

 stopped by the masters, and taken from 

 the postman, and paid for at the door, 

 and brought in to Union Hall; those 

 letters were opened by the masters at 

 Union Hall. 



Was it not the case, that tiie men who 

 liad struck work were actually then 

 receiving an allowance from the club ? 

 — They were. 



Did you attempt to put in the paper 

 which the masters bad issued, fixing the 

 'rate of wages, to show that the masters 

 also had been doing tiiat which you had ? 

 — We did not ; we were taken and con- 

 victed, without the opportunity of 

 doing so. 



Did you not stale to the magis- 

 trates, that the masters had done that ? 

 — We were not asked. 



What was the result of the appeal? — 

 Our appeal was not heard, in conse- 

 quence of some informality in the pro- 

 ceedings at Union Hall ; the recog- 

 nizances did not agree with the con- 

 vicliim; and I rather think, but not 

 lieariii^ distinctly what was said, that 



OH Artizans and IMach'mery. 325 



the bail which we had given was tiiore 

 than was required by the Act; tlio 

 magistrates refused to hear th.3 ajjpeal. 



Was the conviction tiuaslied ? — It 

 was not ; we got out of the way, for 

 fear of going to pri.son ; and, in llic 

 course of a fortnight or tliree weeks, on 

 tlie 23d of October following, 1 think, 

 tliey preferred an itulictment against 

 me, and the three named there in t'le 

 conviction, with twenty-one others, for 

 a conspiracy. 



What was the result of that prosecu- 

 tion? — The result was, liiut wo had to 

 attend on the 4th of April, 1821, at 

 Kingston. 



Do you know under what Act you 

 were consmitted by the magistrates at 

 Union Hall? — I understood the Com- 

 bination Acts. 



None of them were stated ? — No, we 

 did not know any tiling about it. 



You were present? — Yes. 



What fullowcd ] — V/e were tljcn 

 brought to Kingston, and entered into 

 our own recognizances to keep the 

 peace for three years. 



W^erc you aware, before this trial 

 took place at Kingston, to what extent 

 you were acting against the existing 

 laws? — No; we knew very little of tlie 

 law. 



As you belonged to the committee, 

 can you state whether it was proposed 

 at any of your meetings to prosecute 

 the masters, for having combined to 

 lower the wages? — No, I cannot say 

 tiiat ever I heard of such a thing. 



Had you any idea that the law 

 applied equally against tlie masters as 

 tlie men? — We had afterwards; but I 

 did not understand the law previously- 

 I had never seen the act, and therefore I 

 could not say any thing about if. 



Are you able to state what is the 

 opinion of the men in general, in respect 

 of the operation of those laws ; do they 

 consider them as bearing hard against 

 them ? — They do, they liiink they bear 

 harder against them than they do 

 against their masters, for that, if they 

 are sent to prison witii a family, they 

 arc ruined ; while the masters, for some 

 sort of fine, might be excused. If I 

 had gone to prison, wit!i a wife and live 

 children depending upon rac, it would 

 have been a sad thing for me. I believe, 

 for fifty years, there has been only an 

 advance of 2s. a dozen on hats of the 

 same kind, that is, with low crowns ; 

 when every thing is bearing a double 

 proportion, or treble, it comes to no 

 more to the workmen. 



Are 



