+ 
APPENDIX to the CHRONICLE. 
ed from the house. ‘This was the 
substance of the evidence for the 
crown. 
Mr. Serjeant Best, on behalf of 
the prisoner, addressed the court, 
and acknowledged the enormity of 
the crime with which his client was 
charged, but contended, that, the 
faéts urged were not made out by 
clear and satisfactory testimony, and 
that the law required, as a proof of 
guilt, that the treason should be 
made out by printing or writing, 
or some oyert act or deed, and that 
the evidence of witnesses was not 
alone sufficient. In support of this 
opinion, he cited an apposite pas- 
sage from Montesquieu. He allowed 
that co]. Despard had attended the 
before-mentioned meetings, and that 
it is swgrn that he had spoken ob- 
noxious words—but it had not been 
proved that he knew it was a trea- 
sonable meeting, or that he attend- 
edit for treasonable purposes ;— that 
there was no testimony to shew that 
the prisoner was in any shape con- 
nected with the printed cards which 
had been distributed, except the 
testimony of one witness, who was 
acknowledged to be one of the most 
infamous men living. He contended, 
that the case was totally unlike any 
other case which had been decided 
since the revolution. He next con- 
tended, that it was a most important 
rule of evidence, that the case should 
be made out by credible witnesses ; 
_and being, itself, a most improbable 
one, it required the most cogent and 
decisive evidence. The case was, 
fourteen or fifteen men, at acommon 
tap-room, with no fire-arms but 
their tobacco-pipes; men of the 
Jowest order, without mind or intel- 
ligence ; were to seize the king, the 
bank, the tower, and the members 
of both houses of parliament. Their 
597 
means were an exchequer of fifteen 
shillings and \ sixpence—without a 
pike, pistol, or rusty ‘musket. The 
tower, defended by a brigade of 
guards, was to be taken ; the king’s 
person seized, in the midst of his 
guards; which ‘last aétion was’ to 
be performed by therprisoner him- 
self, if the witnessesrwere to be be- 
lieved. The witnesses were; ‘he 
said, most infamous charatters: one 
of them, Windsor, had: once, as a 
soldier, taken the oath of allegiance 
to his king, and afterwards had 
taken another to bind himself in a 
conspiracy to destroy him: he again 
swore against those whom he had 
himself seduced. With respeét to 
Francis, he was the most infamous 
and incredible of mankind. He 
had sworn that, ‘‘ refusing to be a 
member of that nefarious society, he 
told col. Despard that his principles 
were opposite; yet, that, witha rash- 
ness and madness incredible, notwith- 
standing col. Despard told him all their 
plans, persuaded him to join them, 
and wondered how he could have 
principles so opposite from those of 
his brother.” He finally concluded 
with a hope, that, for the true in- 
terest of the country, the jury 
woud, by lenity, endeavour to at- 
tach men, rather than by fear. 
Lord Nelson, on the part of the 
prisoner, bore the most honourable 
testimony to his character. ,They 
were on the Spanish main together, 
in 1799; together in the enemy’s 
trenches, and had slept in the same 
tent ; that he was a loyal man anda 
brave officer. 
Sir Alured Clarke gave nearly 
the same evidence in favour of col. 
Despard. After My. Gurney, the 
other counsel for the prisoner, had 
spoken at some length, lord Ellen- 
borough asked col. Despard if he 
Qq3s would 
