APPENDIX 
‘the latter the learned serjeant: en- 
tered into a long and accurate dis- 
cussion, ina very elaborate, feeling, 
and interesting manner. He be- 
gan by observing, that the jury 
were called upon to discharge a 
most important, sacred, and awfal 
‘duty. They were entrusted, on the 
one hand, with the vindication of 
the laws of their country, and the 
safety of the community, of which 
they themselves formed a part; 
while the fortune, the chara¢ter, 
and the life of a fellow-subjeét, were 
eommitted to their deliberation on 
the other. The dearest interests 
of the unfortunate man at the bar 
were in their hands! He must call 
him unfortunate, for whether guilty 
or innocent of the crime with 
which he was charged, no man in 
his situation, and having submitted 
to the sufferings to which he had 
been subjeét, let the innocence of 
his heart be as pure as it might, 
could be called fortunate. The 
verdict of the jury might put his 
life out of danger, and restore to him 
that liberty to which he had long 
been a stranger; but no verdict of 
their’s could place him in the situ- 
ation he was in on the day before he 
was apprehended. 
After endeavouring to explain 
the motives which might proba- 
bly actuate the prisoner, as arising 
from vanity or affectation of con- 
sequence, Mr. serjeant Adair pro- 
‘ceeded to state what he considered 
as the outline of the facts of the 
case, in the following close and 
| ingenious way—‘‘ A person of the 
name of Jacksén came over from 
France by the way of Hull, in the 
character of an American mer- 
| chant, with letters of recommend- 
) ation from Mr. J. H. Stone, to Mr. 
W. Stone, the prisoner. Mr. Stone, 
' Vor. XXXVIIF. 
to the CHRONICLE. 
firs 
during. his® residence in London, 
shewed him some civilities, and 
advanced him money on his brother's 
account. + ‘ 
“« Soon Jafter he went dver _to 
Ireland}? 'wliere he was tried and 
convitted of high treason, and died; 
and during his Tesidence i in Ireland, 
Mr. Stone furnished him with 
some statements of the internal si- 
tuation of this kingdom. The 
question for the decision of the 
jury then was, whether, © under 
these facts, they were persuaded, 
from what Stone knew of Jackson, 
that he gave Jackson these state- 
ments as information for the ene- 
my, with the criminal intention 
stated in the indictment; or for the 
purpose of averting an impending 
calamity from his country? The 
facts were clear as sunshine, and 
this was the only question that 
arose upon them. He called upon 
them, therefore, to consider, whe- 
ther there was sufficient evidence 
ef an overt act of treason, and if 
there was, it was not the encourag- 
ing of an invasion, but the preven. 
tion of that event, from which so 
much evil would have been conse- 
quent. Jackson was convicted of 
high treason, in persuading the 
French to invade this country ; 
whereas the prisoner was accused 
of high treason, and the overt act 
with which he was charged was pre- 
venting an invasjon. But if the mo= 
tive for causing an invasion was cri-~ 
minal, how could the motive for 
preventing an invasion be criminal 
also? 
|The learned serjeant then went 
at length into the evidence pro 
duced ; and concluded by calling 
several witnesses to prove the pub- 
licity with which’ Mr, Stone com- 
i municated 
] 
