"the Treasonable Oath." But observe how these confessedly innocent men were treated. "I was," says Mr. M'Tear, in a letter published by him in the newspapers at the time, complaining of the cruelty he had suffered, "I was apprehended about midnight of Saturday the 22d February, on a warrant from the Sheriff of the county, charged with crimes of a treasonable nature. I was taken to a cell on the ground floor, known in the precincts of the prison by No. 4. There was an iron bed-stead, but without sheet or blanket, and which had a remarkable heavy and loathsome smell. About three o'clock on Sabbath morning, the turnkey brought in three new carpet coverlets, but they were so short they did not reach below my knees. Placing one below, and another above me, I lay down, but the bed was so hard, and so ill smelled, and so damp, I could not sleep. There was a small fire in the cell, nearly covered with ashes, but the coals were so scarce I had to use considerable economy to keep it in. Ignorant of the rules of the prison, my wife did not arrive with my breakfast till a few minutes after the time on Sabbath morning and the jailor refused to take or let it in till five o'clock in the afternoon. All the time of our confinement they were extremely tardy in bringing in our victuals. Our breakfast, which was brought to the prison at nine, did not reach our apartment till one o'clock-dinner, which arrived at two, was not received by us till five o'clock-and tea, which was brought in at seven, was not conveyed to our apartment till ten o'clock at night, so that in consequence our food was always quite cold before it reached us. About six o'clock on Sabbath evening I was conducted to another apartment, where there was also an iron bed-stead, with an old, dirty sack, containing some substance resembling saw-dust, and an old patched blanket and coverlet, all of which were so dirty, that nothing short of absolute necessity could have made me lie down on it. It was a bed scarcely fit for a hog to rest on. Here I passed the time without fire or candle till Tuesday, when I received some candles from my own house, which were permitted to be brought in as a great favour."

Mr. John Weir also published a letter about the same time in the newspapers, stating, "that he was apprehended at eight o'clock on Sunday morning, the 23d February, on a warrant which did not mention his christian name, and lodged in a felon's low cell, partly covered with water, without any thing to rest upon, till seven o'clock that evening. There he remained till two o'clock on Tuesday, when, at the request of his friends, he was conveyed to a more comfortable apartment, and, after five hours, reconveyed to a cell similar to that he was first put into, and only a bed on the bare stone floor. Here he continued till Wednesday at mid-day, when he was brought up for examination, and as he had no knowledge of any of the circumstances with which he was charged, he was recommitted to his former lodging till five o'clock on Thursday evening, when he and Mr. M'Tear were discharged."

The treatment the other prisoners received for some time was fully We question whether the emissaries of Don Miguel, a tyrant

worse.

now we trust in the last stage of his career, ever treated his victims with so much refined cruelty. "We were (says Hugh Dickson, p. 41,) neither allowed fire, light, nor a bed to lie on; and, as far as I ever yet knew, not one of us had ever been in prison prior to this for auy crime."

"Warrants (says Richmond, p. 89,) were issued for the apprehension of a great number more; but so little attention was paid to the accuracy of the information, and so much anxiety was shown to increase the apparent magnitude of the confederacy, that in the confusion of the first few days, several were arrested who had no connexion whatever with it. I prevented a number from being taken into custody, which also caused an investigation into the cases of those who had been wrongfully accused, and they were immediately set at liberty. The Sheriff-Depute of the county had nominally the management, but Mr. Reddie virtually conducted the whole official details."

"I was for two or three weeks constantly occupied in endeavouring to prevent the apprehension of others, or interceding for those to be set at liberty whom they caused to be taken into custody."-Richmond's Narrative, p. 91.

He interceding to set them at liberty!!

The villain should rather have stated, "I was for two or three months constantly occupied in endeavouring to lead the thoughtless or the unwary into the trap laid for them, or I was doing every thing I could to rivet the chains on my fellow countrymen-to prevent them from making the slightest effort in obtaining their constitutional rights."

Be so good as notice the fact, that the apprehension of the individuals in Hunter's change-house in the Old Wynd, took place on Saturday evening, the 22d of February, an evening when tradesmen are more frequently inclined than any other during the week, to be social and free. But we do not refer to it for that reason, but for the purpose of pointing out to the public this other fact, that Messrs. Kirkman Finlay, James Reddie, and Alexander Richmond, met together in consequence of a prior agreement among themselves, on the evening after, being Sunday; which only proves that these gentlemen were so intent and eager to discharge their respective duties in relation to the "important State Secret" committed to them, that they found it necessary to invade the sanctity of the Sabbath evening! Oh! if it had been an act of charity; if it had been some humane, generous enterprise, committed to them, with the view of ameliorating the condition of their distressed and helpless fellow creatures, would they have felt it necessary to associate together on that evening in the way they did? And when we hear the changes rung in our ears day after day, by a parcel of canting hypocrites, that infidelity is stalking through our land;-that the "lower orders" are all on the road to ruin for their sins and their iniquities, we are filled with loathing and disgust that men in "high places" with deeds

-"damnation, deep,"

have had a mantle thrown over them, which has heretofore protected

them from the slightest reproach, unless it be the upbraidings of their own conscience.

Henry Home Drummond, Ex-Member of Parliament for the County of Stirling, but who, in 1817, was one of the Lord Advocate's Deputies, came to Glasgow soon after the apprehensions, to superintend the judicial examinations of the prisoners, and the precognitions to be taken against them. This gentleman will cut a pretty figure by and by. In all other cases, the declarations of the accused, and the precognitions against the accused, are implicitly entrusted to the Sheriff or Judge Ordinary, and to the Procurator Fiscal of the bounds. But in this "important State" affair, a more than usual quantity of skill and nicety was required, and we have certainly no reason to complain that it was administered, since it enables us to make some of our exposures a little more complete than they would otherwise have been. "The Crown Lawyers," listen to the admission of Richmond himself, which we are now quoting, p. 90 of his Narrative, “The Crown Lawyers (says he) had NO EVIDENCE to bring any one to Trial, BUT WHAT COULD BE ELICITED FROM ACCESSARIES." And then Richmond goes on to state, "that they (the Crown Lawyers) were exceedingly anxious to get John Campbell, one of the individuals apprehended, to become a witness. Every method they could think of was resorted to, to induce him to confess-(What? Their own nefarious plans.) But although he was aware several others had made disclosures, he would make no admission whatever; and in this situation he was sent to Edinburgh Castle with those they intended to bring to trial. As the circumstances (continues Richmond) connected with this man's becoming a witness for the Crown are both curious and important, I shall distinctly relate what came within my knowledge, which in a great measure confirms the statement he (Campbell) made before the High Court of Justiciary. It was believed he had a knowledge of some particular facts which they had not arrived at, which, together with his general character and deportment, made them attach great importance to the evidence they believed he could give. They kept him ignorant of my having secured him from being brought to trial, and the Sheriff of the County, and Mr. Salmond, then temporarily acting as Procurator Fiscal, plied him in various ways. This gentleman, Mr. Salmond, (says Richmond in a note, p. 92,) had been partially intrusted in the preliminary part of the proceedings, in consequence of my suggesting him as the medium for employing another person. For his share in the business he got confirmed in the situation (worth £1000 a year,) which he still holds, which appointment would otherwise not have taken place. But neither a threatened trial, nor general promises, had any effect on Campbell. After the prisoners were removed to Edinburgh, Campbell remained for some time equally inflexible and unbending, and repeated references were made to me for my opinion and assistance to overcome his scruples. I, however, positively refused to interfere,* informing them, from all I had seen, they

* Richmond acted prudently in this respect, because, if he had intruded himself

might depend upon any thing he did communicate, but that I would do nothing to influence him. I was then asked what effect I considered offering him a situation under government was likely to produce, but I could only refer to the general character I had given, and was told they would try that experiment. I had no means of knowing personally the manner in which they ultimately succeeded, but Mr. Drummond informed me, a considerable time before Campbell made his statement, that they had offered him a place in the Excise, which he rejected; and that he at last consented on their agreeing to furnish him with the means of going to the Continent. The account which Mr. Drummond gave me varied in no essential particular from that given (afterwards) by Campbell, which, I believe, was substantially correct, and from other circumstances, within my own knowledge, the statement he made respecting Mr. Salmond threatening him at Glasgow, I believe to be equally true. I cannot state positively whether Campbell did or did not contemplate, in the first instance, to deceive the Crown Lawyers by entering into this agreement, for the purpose of invalidating his evidence; but I am rather inclined to believe it was an after-thought, arising out of the long delay, and the opportunity he had of communicating indirectly with his associates who were to be tried.

"The Crown Lawyers," says Richmond, p. 94, "believing they had got sufficient evidence to establish their case, two of the parties were indicted to stand trial on the 10th of April."

Here we must stop to make one or two short observations. The Crown Lawyers, of a piece with the "Conspiracy" itself, had tampered with Campbell to get him to give false evidence against his fellow criminals. Yes! we say, and what is more, we shall prove that the then Crown Lawyers of Scotland, to their everlasting disgrace, attempted to pollute the sacred streams of Justice, in the which, if they had succeeded, the blood of innocent men would, in all probability, have been shed, (to extinguish, if possible, the cries of Reform,) long before Andrew Hardie and his companion, John Baird, suffered at Stirling.

The Executive Members of the Government, thinking that they had now every thing their own way-for since they had prevailed on a vast majority of both Houses of Parliament to believe their statements about the existance of this awful Conspiracy, and to countenance the measures they proposed for suppressing it, by the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, &c.--it never, we presume, entered their heads that there would be any difficulty in managing the minor details of the business, or that servile witnesses and juries could not be found, as easily as in the days of Thomas Muir, to do any thing which the Members of the Government wished, to save their own credit; thinking that they had now secured Campbell, a socis criminis—and, let us remark, that a person in that situation is, by superficial minds, consi

on the notice of Campbell or any of the others, for such a purpose, they would probably have torn him to pieces.

dered the best witness, or the best evidence that could be adduced to bring home the guilty charge to his companions; thinking, in short, that their plans and their stratagems were all snugly laid, they singled out, by their instruments, the Crown Lawyers at Edinburgh, the two individuals alluded to by Richmond, whose names we now quote, viz. John Keith and William Edgar, who were gravely indicted to stand trial before the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh, for the heinous crime of HIGH TREASON.

The indictment was laid on an Act passed in the 52d year of the Reign of George the Third, which inter alia declares, "that every person who shall in any manner or form whatever, administer, or cause to be administered, or be aiding or assisting at the administering of any oath or engagement, purporting or intending to bind the person taking the same to commit any Treason or Murder, or any Felony punishable by law with death, shall on conviction thereof, by due course of law, be adjudged guilty of Felony, and suffer death as a Felon, without benefit of Clergy." And then the indictment charges, "that you the said William Edgar, did upon the 1st day of January, 1817, &c. at a secret meeting held in the house of William Legat, change-keeper, in King-street, Tradeston, wickedly, maliciously, and traitorously, administer, or cause to be administered, an oath or obligation, in the terms above set forth, or to the same import, to Peter Gibson, John McLauchlane, John Campbell, and Hugh Dickson, all present prisoners in the Castle of Edinburgh, which oath, or engagement, or obligation to the foregoing purport, did bind, or did purport, or intend to bind the persons taking the same to commit Treason, by effecting, by physical strength, the subversion of the established government, laws, and constitution of this kingdom," &c.

To the honour of the Scottish bar, the ablest men at it generously came forward to defend these parties from this formidable accusation against them. For when the Court met on the 9th of April, to proceed with the trial-there appeared on the part of the prosecution, the Lord Advocate, the Solicitor-General, Henry Home Drummond, John Hope, Duncan M'Neil, &c.; and, on the other hand, there appeared for the prisoners, John Clerk, James Moncrieff, George Cranstoun, Francis Jeffrey, Henry Cockburn, and J. P. Grant. There never, indeed, was such a brilliant attendance of Counsel for any prisoner at the bar of the High Court of Justiciary, since that Court existed.

Mr. Cranstoun, in an eloquent and powerful speech, first objected to the relevancy of the indictment. And a long legal discussion ensued, the result of which was, that the Court were divided in opinion about it. Lords Gillies and Reston thought the objection good. The Lord Justice Clerk, Hermand, and Pitmilly, thought it bad. Long pleadings on different other occasions took place, all about the relevancy of this indictment. But it is quite unnecessary for us to go into these pleadings, and the more especially since the Crown Lawyers were virtually driven from their indictment, that is to say, they did not afterwards venture, in consequence of the exposures which came out, to proceed against Keith or Edgar.