Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

9 articles on this Page




GLAMORGAN SHIRK. SPECIAL COMMISSION. In tnefirst edi'ion of the MERLIN, last week, we gave a re- port of the opening of the Special Commission at Cardiff, and the Judge's charge to the grand jury. On Monday we pub- lished a second edition, in which we gave a full report of tht- important proceedings up to Saturday night. We now re-pub- lish Saturday's proceedings, together with the report of wh:¡1 took place up to the closing of the commission on Monday forenoon. CALENDAR OF THE PRISONERS. I Margaret Morgan, aged 25, single woman, t? Morgan Mm-17an, aged 57, farmer, ■3 Esther Morgan, aged 63, wife of Morgan Morgan, 4 Bees Morgan, aged 23,labourer,-and 5 John Morgan were charged upon the olths of Chaile- Frederick Napier, of Swansea, gen ¡]eman, and others, lor 11, 1 she, the said Margaret Morgan, maliciously did cut and woun<! the said C. F. Napier, with intent in so doing to prevent thu lawfnl apprehension of one Hentv Morgan itnd for that they *.he said Morgan Morgan, Esther Morgan, Rees Morgan, and John Morgan, feloniously were present, aiding and assisting the said Margaret Morgan to do and commit the said felony. 6 Griffith Vait!>h& innkeeper 7 William Morgan, firmer, 8 David Jones, yeoman,—and 9 Daniel Lewis, weaver, were charge*! upon the oaths of John Jones, of Llang\felach. labourer, and another, with unlawfully and maliciously ibrowin! down, levelling, and destroying a certain turnpike g<!e. 10 Matthew Morgan, aged —, labourer,-and 11 Henry Morgan, aged 27, labourer—charged upon lh <oaths of John Jones, of Llangyfeladi, labourer, with unlaw- fully and maliciously throwing down, levelling, aud destroying a certaIn turnpike gale. 12 David Lewis, sged 34, labourer, charged upon thcoa'.ii tr 1\lal"garet Arnold, of the hamlet of Saint Thomas, single woman wiih feloniously and maliciously cutting and wounding the said Margaret Arnold, with intent to do her some grievous bodiiv haTm. 13 John Hughes, aged 25, labourer, u David Jones, aged 21, labourer,—and 15 John Hr,h aged 26, labourer-charged upon Iheoallis of Charles Frederick Napier, of Swansea, gentleman, an-i •thers, with having u nl aw fully, riotously, and tuoiuliuously assem- bled together, to the disturbance of the public peace; rind felo- niously, unlawfully, and with force, began to demolish and pu!: down the dwelling-house of one William Lewis, at the parish of Llandilo-talybont. i The said John Hughes is also charged wiih shooting at tilt. said Charles Frederick Napier, with indent feloniously, ami ",ilh mahc-e aforethought, 10 kill and murder him; and tlleSdid David Jones and John Hugh aie also charged with feloniously being present, aiding, assisting, and abetiing the Sct:d John Hughes, in the said felony. 16 William Hughes, aged 14, labourer,-and 17 [ewis Davies, aged 31, L,ouuiér-cilarged upon liieoatli- of William Chambers, the younger, of Uanelly, in the couut\ of Carmarthen, gentleman, and another, with unlawfully and maliciounly throwing down and destroying a certain lurnpikt gate, at the parish of l.Undilo-talybont. FRIDA Y. Their lordship3 took their seats upon the bench at nine c'octock. The court was densely crowded in every part. Th. Marquess of Bute sat on the right of the Jud-es, wearing ilu uniform of lord-lieutenant, with the star of the Order o*f ihe Garter. The first trial proceeded with wi > that of John Hughrs, wl; was indicted for hiving on the tiih Sopt. unlawfully, riouuslv. and tumultuously assembled, with fit y or more persons, to ih, disturbance of the public peace: and feloniously, un!avtl'u'l\. and with force of arms, began to demolish and pull do" n thr dwelling house of one William Lewis, at the parish of L'^a dilo-ialyboot. There were other counts, in one of wlntii tht house was laid ns the property of Thomas Bullen, the coniractor for the tollj, and in th<; other as the property of 'he trustees. The prisoner pleaded Not Guilty. the prosec^(10n wa3 conducted by the Attorney• General, the Soltcllor'JeneraJ, Mr. Chitton, Q. C., Mr. John Evans, Q. C and ^»ir. Vaughan Williams. Mr. Hill, Q. C., and -Mr. Montague Chambers appeared a- Counsel, and Mr. Hugh Williams as attorney for the ori»oner. Mr. Hill rose and addressed the Bench, as follows :—1 han I the honour to attend your lordships as counsel for the prisoner, and I tender to your lordships a challenge of the anay c( jurors. Your loidships know that, in point of form, when ;> challenge is reduced to writing, and engrossed upon parchment it becomes part of the record. It supposes, therefore, the tt-forc to be drawn up. I thiok that 1 cannot do better than read the wordsofthechaHenge, which will put my learned friends in possession of what they hive to meet. The learned gent, ihen read the challenge as follows :—" And therefore the said John Hughes dolh challenge the array of the jurors aforesaid, because he says the said panel « as arrayed by one John ilonJiay, hi be;oj» at the time Sheriff of ihe tounty ot Glamorgan, and that tbe said sheriff, or his depuiy, did not choose the said pa'1tl indifferently and impartially, as he ought to have done ac cording to the law of the realm, and that the said panel is not an indifferent and impartial panel of the said comity of Gla- morgan. Whereby he prays judgmeni, and that the said pine; may be quashed. The Attorney.General-I presume that my friend intends to give IJS some evidence. Mr. Hill-There is 00 issue joined as yet. Mr. Justice Gurney- You do not ask us to stop the trial without some verification 1 Mr. Hill—I appiehend, my lord, that my learned friends, 00 the parI of the crown, must either demur or rounter-ph-a, 01 traverse. As yet there is no iisue. I can refer your louUbip to a caU3e In which your lordship was of counsel, and in which 1 myself distinctly recollect having seen your lordship si;n the counter plea. That was a challenge in the array—I'he Kif" Dolby. Mr. Chambers—I submit to your lordships that the course is this the prisoner challenges the array, and alleges certain grounds of challenge, and the crown must then do one of two things-must either traverse the challenge, or del1.Jr to the challenge. Then there is an issue raised, either of 1 uv or fact. If the issue be of fact, then it must be tried by triers ^eneralK two, appointed by the court. If the issue be of law, it rou,t be decided by the court itself. I apprehend that there ran be no difficulty in at once trying the issue upon the facts of the law, if the learned Attorney-General and Solicitor-Genei J1 will de- mar, or traverse the challenge. Air. Justice Cresswell-You will filld that the mailer had been much discussed lately in the Court of Exchequer. Mr. ( h ambers—In the trial perpais it is fully laid down. Mr. HIlI-So far from my wishingfor any unnecessary ..el iy, I will stllte that, if this challenge comes by surprise upon Ill., learned friends (and I do nol wonder Ihat it should, being- by no means an ordinary occurrence) I am ready, if my fiiends will say whether they will demur or traverse, to allow the case to proceed. The Attorney.General-I confess that it has come upon mt by surprise, and I hope their lordships will allow me a few minutes for consideration. After holding a consultation with the Solicitor General, The Attorney-General said, after duly considering the mat- ter, his learned friend and himself had determined upon de- murring to the challenge, and in stating the giounds of his so doing he should not occupy muchot their Lordships'time. The first matter which presented Jlsellto his consideration, W,tS the entire novelty of the course of proceeding. Certainly lie re ■ collected no such chall-ngc, couched in such general terms, in the course otbts experience or reading and if it were held to be sufficient, then the defendant, in every criminal case, mi(;ht challenge the array upon such genenl groands. as that the sheriff had not chosen the panel indifferently and it was quite clear that the proceedings of every criminal court might be obstructed-the administration of justice impeded —and criminallrials postponed to he knew not what extent —for the ciown would be placed in tins position, having to join issue upon it and to go to trial—and to try what"1 Whether the sheriff had chosen impartially and indifferently And if there were sixty persons in the panel-and there might be more—an issue might be tried with leference to every name upon the panel. The most extreme inconvenience would result were such the taw but he could harcllv believe that his learned friend had any authority upon which he could say that n challenge was sufficicnt. which merely stated that the sherin had nOI chosen the panel indifferently, without alleging the manner, the instance, the particular juror or jurors, or some circumstances which would enable the crowo lù know rbe na- ture of the objection it would have to meet. the learned Attorney-General then stated, at some length, the law as affecting the cnallenges of jurois, and quoted from Burns' •Justice and other wcrks. He continued—It appeared ti) him that upon every principle of pleading winch could be applied to the case, the present was not a go<;d challenge, inasmuch as it did not give the crowr, sufficient notice 01 the grounds 011 which it was based, and he therefore Imped that their Lordships would not allow it to prevail. The Solicitor-Gener.1i tollowed on Ihe sameside in a length- ened and able address, and contended that, if the challenge welc disallowed. there would be no fear of the prisoner not haviu; a fair tnal, al; he had a right peremptorily to ch,1!lelJge a number of the oersons on the panel and he might challenge, for cause, the whole. Mr. Hill replied with much ability, contending fur the suffi- ciency of the challenge. The law gave the rinht ofchattenge to prisoners, and although hec-uid produce no specific precedent for the form ot challenge in question, yet upon the general prin- ciples which regulatedtue laws of pleadIng. he maintained thai it was a sufficient challenge. Where the sherif f.vas of affinity with any of the paities interested, it gave a sufficient giouml upon which to challenge the array, not because the law consi- dered that the sheriff could not do his duty impartially under such circumstances, but because it would not rppose ontHeno- ID any officer who possibility, be inHuencfd unfairly. Surely, if it were sufficient to allege that the sheritrwas 01 at finity with the parties, upon the mere presumption ihat he Slight 80l act impartially and indifTeiently, it was a higher and a surer challenge to allege that he had not so acted. His learned friend had dwelt at some length upon the great incon- Vititnoe and lrlutbl, that would re"dl to courts gf justice from the right of chaiU-nge, He wai suic that that consideration would receive nu attention at the hands of then lonhlllp>. All the proceeding at law, which the wisdom of our ancestors had tranred as the security of the crown and the safeguaid of the subject, were full of trouble;—all our proceedings tor the pro- tection ol the innoceut were '"ull of trouble, let them, a^ legis- lators, exert themselves to change the cumbevous machinery of Ulltish jurisprudence, and substitute for it the easy and cer- tain jurisprudence of A ustria and Turkey. The learned gent. then went on to contend that, if it were examined by the ) ui- s of common sense, or by analogy wiih the other parts of plead- ing, the challenge wouid be found to be sufficiently explicit. I Mr. Montague Chambers followed, at considerable length. The Attorney General was about to reply, when Mr. Jaron Gurney said—I am of opinion that the demurrer ought to be allowed. The challenge should have set forth some facts; as it stood, it is impossible that the crown could know the ground of challenge. Mr. Justice Cresswell fully concurred. It was not enogh to allege that the panel was not chosen impartially and indif- ferently. It should have stated the grounds. Mr. Hill applied for a copy of the demurrer. Air. Baron Gurney—Certainly. You are entitled to a writ of error. The panel was then called over, and following persons were objected to either on behalf of the prisoner or tne Crown, and set aside:— John Kent, Cardiff, coach maker Griffith Phillips, Cardiff, druggist Henry H. fariy, Cardiff, ship broker David Vaughan. Honviiston, architect John Wa'kins. Hirwaun, gent. John B Hopkins, Cardiff, grocer John Randul, of Old Caslle, gent. W. Williams, Merihvr, watcii maker Henry Moxley, Caidiff, sail maker Joseph Rees, Cardiff, flour dealer John Geak, Cardiff, veterinary surgeon Lewis Williams, Cardiff, ship owner !\> Williams, Aberdare, gent., (did not appear) William Price, Cardiff, draper H Uliam Griffiths, Cardiff, malster R. Lambert, Meithyr, ironmonger George Roach, Merthyr,innkeeper J ames Hemmingham, Cardiff, factor Benjamin .Martin, Penydarren, agent Thomas Rees, Landough farm Thomas Rees, Cardiff, carpenter Thomas II. Lowder, Cardiff, saddler Edward Purchase, Merthyr, farmer W illiam Lougher, Great House farm James Brooks, St. Nicholas, sdhoolmasfer Thomas Williams, Canton, clothiei James Powell, MelingrufHth U iiliam Andrews, Llandaff, brewer J Henry Jones, Green Hill, (dId not appear) Thomas Davies, Merthyr, innkeeper David Rowland, Reola Castle John Evans, Cardiff, spirit merchant Edward Sant, Ely, innkeeper John Hooper Davies, Merthyr, grocer Edward Morgan, Merthyr, shopkeeper Thomas Morgan, Mon Mill, miller The following gentlemen were finally sworn as the jury — Wiliiarcl Jones, CardifF, gent Thomas Wiiliams, Meithyr, grocer David Jones, Meithyr, draper David druggist Samuel Davies, .Merthyr, clothier !hom?s ¡Ierne, Cuditf, draper J acob Jacobs Cardiff, maltster William Williams, East Village, cordwainer W illiam Richards, Cardiff, timber merchant Philip Taylor, Hirwaun, shopkeeper George Price, Car :itf, ,;e!Jt, now tot :t. NidlOlas r John llowe, Cardit! 1 He calling over of the panel and the swearing of the jury occnpiui the court upwards of an hour. llie Attorney-General then rose, and said that it became his duty to state to the jury the ciicumstauces under which they had been called together at this unusual season of Hie year, for the purpose of trying the prisoner at the bar. and other piisoners, for offences arising oul of the disturbances whicli have existed in this and the adjoining counties. He would also have existed in this and the adjoining counties. He would alsl) state to them the circumstances undei which the charge against the prisoner at ihe bar ai rse, and he earnestfyexhortedthen) o direct ttieir best attenriou to the evidence which would be laid before them. In stating the charge against the prisoner at 'fie bar, he would forbear to rernaik upon the state of the ad- joining counties, except so far as il was connected with the otfence with which the prisoner stood charged. The disturbed stale of this and the adjoining counties of the Principality, im- oo-sed upon those whose duty it is to ailvise the Ciown to re commend that the law should be vindicated- The offences ■Ci cli have marked the piogrtss of this distuibance, have in- creased so in number and magnitude that it became necessary 'o interfere for the piotection of property, Ti.ectiargeagatnst rhe prisoner at tiie bar, is founded on an act of George 1\ which enacts, that if any persons uulawhilly, riotously, and tumultuously should assemble together, should witntorceand violence begin to demolish, pullllown and destroy, anychurct), cllapel, house, warehouse, stabie, outhouse, shop, mill, or any building or erection for trade or manufacture, &c. &c. should be; guilty offelony. The pumshmenl tur olferices under this act, was originally capital, but it was so no longer, andany persons who may be now convicted under it are liable to a minoI ..unishment. 11.a 0bject 0f that statute is apparent, it was t0 utect ail buildings necessary for the use of her Majesty's subjects, and beginning to demolish was by that act made a felony. The right honourable gentleman proceeded to detail tue ciicumstances under whIch the charge against the prbùncl On tiI" night of the Gth 01 September, 0' rather on tbe morning of theTth. a msb of persons fiom one hundred to two hundred in nUlouer, came to the Pontardulais gale, from the direction of Carmarthenshire, the boundary between which and .Pamcrganshire is near to it. Numbers of these persons were Hllcd and canied various implements adilpted to the de. ruction of toll gates and houses, they were also disguised in uinus modes,but principally in grotesque female ani re, and had :ue'.r faces btackcued, many of them also were provided with ided fire arms, and a great number of shots were fired. riley t'ue ovei the bridge from the Catmarthenshire side and at- tacked the gate and toli-iiouse, which ihey began to demolish with great force and violence, until they were interrupted by the arrival of a force under Captain Napier. After their dis- ,'ersion, the gate was found to have been torn down, the gate- posthaifs-twn through, the windows and doors of the luuse mashed and driven in, and a patt of the pine end of the house io ihe extent or two feet destroyed, the stones having been re- moved. I here were also vaiious implements of destruction 'jiind upoa the spot, such as pickaxes, sledges, tammers, and v a nous other implements calculated fur the deduction 01 such buildings and erections. Under'hese ci.cuuis'-ances it would ■<e idle on his part to suggest a douh t¡,at an unlawful riotous and tumultuous assemble, such he had described, came directly v.ithm the meaning o* the act at George IY, There remains but one further enquiry, and that is, what par- ticipation, if any, the prisoner at the bar had in that unlawful assembly. He believed it wrtild be laid down by the bench as undoubted law, that where an unlawful assembly of persons have met and proceeded t" violence and outrage, that every in- dividual win by his presence swells that assembly, and by an addition to its force II;11ds to promote its felonious purposes, is ■ esponsible for all its acts. If lie be there by accident or for MI lunocelIt purpose, ir is incumbent on him to prove it, other- wise he is held by Jaw accountable for the acts ot the assembly. iere the prisoner at the bar was taken into custody at the mo- ment, disguised ia female apparel, with his face blackened. !nd uudtit-circumstauces which would enable the jury to uraw their conclusion as to the part he took. It would appear by the evidence which would be laid before the jury, that Captain Napier, chief of the Glamorganshire constabulary having re- ceived information that an attack would be made on thIs gate, proceeded thither, accompanied by two or three magistrates, a superintendent of police, and five or six po.icemen, in ali numbering eleven or twelve. In their progress to Pontaidulais i'e they avoided the main road, taking their way prinoi- pally along country roads, and in their progress ihey heard shots fired, and sounds of horns. which they understood to be signals from narties of people, also a foot. Having arrivec. at a held within a few hundred yards ot the gate, they halted, aud while there thev heaid sounds id iioms and shots. and also a t.amping of horses' feet. Captain Napier Mien ordered his men to fail in3, and'placing himself at their head, they advanced to the gate,'wheie they saw a great mob, led on by three persons on horsback. Captain Napier called out to the party "Stop, stop," when the horsemen rushed at them to ride them down, and one of them, dressed in a whitish female dress, and a large straw hat on bis head, turned round and fired a shot at captalo Napier, who thereupon called out to his own party to "mark tllat man." He then ran at him, and tired his pistol at the dorse, which being wounded,nung the rider, who having gained his feet, on the ground, was immediately encountered by Capt. Napier. They struggled for some time, when the man so strug- gling with Captain Napier, was wounded in the arm from be- hind, and Capt. Napier having also received a blow in the head :!ie man got away. but being brought back in custody by one of • is officers in a very few minutes, he instantly recognised mm hy the peculiarity of his dress. and the wound in the arm, as the prisoner at the bar. After the filst shot was tired by the man on hoisehack, a volley was tiled by the mob at the officers, who returned i» bv another v-lley, when imrndiately a general cuntiict took place, in which the individuals on each side fought nand to hand, and during the conflict many shots were ex- changed. When the prisoner was taken into custody, he was brought into the toll-house and searched, when a powder flask, shot belt, two or three charges of shot, and some copper caps, were found upon him, and also a paper wilting in the Welsh language, directed to a man named Daniel J ones, as follows- Daniel Jones, Brynhyr,—Come with your armour (or co- veritij) to LI an Ty 1-sa, to assist us, on Wednesday night next, "•r else you shall nut ha-.e a;i ther (or lurther) notice.— BECCA." 1here was another rnpcr, partially torn, hut with some writing upon it bul as it was SD loin, he would not say 10 the jury what tite purport of the composition was-it would be handed to them, and lie would leave it to their judgment, lie was not prepared to prove every act. (It every individual, but he ibought, without desiring to provoke any legal argument, that h« was entitled lO give III evidence any act ot any individual of t'le assembly, to prove the nature of the assembly, and the oh- ject of those present. He was glad that the prisoner had the benefit of the great learning and experience of his learned friends who defended him, as it would make the enquiry more -olerrm, and would give him the benefit of every point of Jaw, or any construction of tacts which might tend to favour him. He was desirous that the prisoner should have the benefit of t".cry privilege to which, by the law of this countiy, he was entitled, and which would ensure a fair trial. The right hon. gf-ntleman concluded bv impressing on the jury the importance LJr the present enquiry, and conjuring tiiem to di-cnarge the duly committed to triem with ifrmness and impartiality. Charles fiederick Napier, examined by the Solicitor-Gene rdl: 1 am chief conslable ol ihe Glamorganshire constabulary. tin Ihe 6tb ot September I received information which induccd me to go to the Pontardulais turnpike gale. 1 was accompanied hv two county nugisirates, Mr. J D Llewelyn and Mr. L. IUwya, Mr. Moggridge, a superintendent ot potict, aod six constables we started about 10 o'clock, and went across the country. As we went on, I heard guns fired, and hoin-. blown, -is if for signals, in different parts oi the country. We halted n a field wiihin 600 yards of the gale; while rbere I heard vmces, horns sounded, guns fned, t.nd ihe sound of horses tram- ping, on the Carmarthenshire side of the river they apoeaied to move in ibe direction of the Red I.ion Inn at Pon'ndulais. nen near the inn, I beard a voice say Cun.e, come they rc-eede.t, and I heard some one cali out, "Gate." I then reard soundfi, as of the si-ashing of the gate I then ordered men to follow, and went into the main rond: 1 saw three "en mannted and disguised, with their hurst: heads towards •oe gate. There were about 100 persons .here, and the men on oiseba. k weie directing. 1 then ordered my men io fall in, -ml we went towards the g»te, 1 eallingout" Stop, stop." Ont of the men on horseback turned round and fired at u,e I then rired at :he horse and wounded it, and ihe rider fell; 1 pro •■■eded towards the gate, and encountered a man whom I be evcd io be tiie person who fired at me 1 thought to take him mo custody, ar.d we stinggled-. while so struogling the man •'as wounded in tbe arm from behind and I was at the sarm ••oraent struck m the h-a*) from behind, in consequence of ifrir'h tne man « b v. oom WdS struggling passc-d 011-, nut was a".erwards bitm-Jit b;»c% o me in custody by one ot my men. Finally they re realed ovvr ihe budge into Carmarthenshire: • be piisoner at tiie bar was taken into custody, andbroughttti ■ iie in two or three minutes after. 1 was struggling with him ire was wounded in the arm, and complained much of the pain • f'.« <vrs diuguiasd, nnd bis facs blmksnnd. Aftctthtrnobhft) y rot r e i ted, I fuund the toll gate aad houia broken: about two leet of the gable end of the house hurl been taken down, tie stones having been removed. When 1 first came up to the gate, the mob were enguged in destroying the ;(ate and house; aim after their retreat, several sledges, picks, hummers, Cxc., were found 00 the spot. While on our way to the place, we saw blue-lights thrown up, as for signals. The papers which tnow produce 1 received from the superintendent of police who ac. companied me. f Cross-examined bv Mr. Hill: It was about 10 o'clock at night when we started. We were all on toot the way we took was about 10 or 11 miles. hen the man on horseback fired at me I was within a yard or two of him. About a week belore this occasion, I had given general directions to my men as to how they should act in case they should come in conlact with a mob such as this: but I had given no special directions as to their conduct, or bow liiey should fire on this occasion. Mr. Llewelyn Ddwyn corroborated the evidence of Captain Napier. Sergeant Willinm Jenkins also corroborated Capt. Napier's testimony, and positively identified the prisoner as the person who fired at Captain Napier: he also stated that it was he (the witness) who wounded the prisoner in the arm, by a pistol shot. It was hy the prisoner's dress, which was white, and a straw hat, that he knew him. He was the only one of the mob that witness saw dressed in white he never saw prisoner belorethat night. George Jones, sergeant of the Glamorganshire police, was next examined by Mr. Chilton, and corroborated the evidence of Capt. Xapier: he also identified ihe prisoner. Thomas Jones, another officer of the Glamorganshire police, was examined by Mr. Evans: Was with Captain Napier and his party at the Pontardulais gate, on the night of the 6111 of September. Saw prisoner, who was on hoiseback, ifre at Capt Napier, and heard one of the mob cry out, Fight (ill death." Saw prisoner fall off his horse, and went up and seized him, when he said, Oh, do not take me you have broke my arm already." I said I had not broken his arm I as*ed him where he had got the wound, and he replied, Over at the gate." John Price, constable, deposed that he was at the gate, and heard a man, after Captain Napier had been fired at, cry Fight till death several shots were then fired. The horse of the man who fiied at Napier turned round and staggered, and the man fell off afterwards assisted in taking the piisoner, and am quite certain that he was the person I saw fire at Captain Napier. Peter Wiight, a constable, and Evans, a blacksmith, also spoke to thc facts of the outrage. Several papers were put tn, Doe of which was a ,Dote. from Becca," io Welsh, of which the following is a tianslation You come with your 8rmour or covering from Bryndu, to assist me, on Wednesday nighi next, olhei^i-e you shall have no further warning. "BECCA." It being now nearly six o'clock, the court was adjourned. The grand jury iluriug the day found true bills against six teen prisoners, and ignored one preferred against Wm. Hughes. SATURDAY. Their lordships took their scats on the bench this morning 300n after nille o'clock. The jury, who bad been locked up all night in the grand jury room, and supplied, by direction of their lordships with all necessary accommodation, took their seats in the jury box. and the list of their names having oeen called on, the trial of John Hugheswasprocecdedwith. William Lewis, the keeper of the Pontardulais gate, was the first witness called, and he described the situation and internal arrangement of the toll house, previous to the attack, and also the state of dilapidation in which he found it on his return, after the mob had been dispersed. John Morgan, surveyor of roads in the employment of the trustees, was next called. He produced apian of the toll- house, ar d the approaches. He had inspected the house on the day befoie the day of the attack, and found it in its usual con- dition, and had also surveyed it on the day after, upon which latter occasion he found the doors and windows demolished, the floor of the room upstairs burst up by implements used in the lower part, the mantelpiece torn down and smashed in pieces, which were lying about the floor of the house, and other dilapidations. On the outside of the house he found a consi- derable poition of the wall at the corner removed, so that if the dilapidation in this part had proceeded a little further, the house would have fallen by its own weight. The most effec- tual mode of demolishing the house altogether, was to begin where the stones had been removed at the corner. Mr. Thomas Walter Powell, interpreter of the Welsh lan- guage, was next sworn to translate the fragment of the paper writing, which had been alluded to by the Attorney-General in his opening. He gave a translation of it, but it was uniu. telligible, from its want of connexion. Mr. William Cox, governor of the Swansea House of Cor- rection, was then examined. He "tated that oa the mornIng "f the 7th of September the prisoner at the bar, was delivered with two other prisoners, into his custody that he immediately searched him, and found upon him one half-sovereign, and a considerable number of half-crowns also some gunpowder, copper caps, and other articles. He also found a paper, sIgned Becca, and directed to one David Jones, requiring him to come to Llan Ty Issa, on Wednesday night, and that he should have no further notice; and also another paper, containing two hal'ciovjns. On this paper was writing, purporting that one Thomas had before given 5s., besides 5s. now, and it was di- rected to Mrs. Rebecca. This being the case for the prosecution, Mr. Hill rose to make an objection, that the piop?rty in the house which had been vaiiously laid in the different counts of theindictment, had not been sufficiently proved by the evidence. Mr. Chambers followed on the same side. Jir. Justice Cresswell said the property had been properly laid in each of the cOllnts-tirst, as that of William Lewis, for he resided in it secondly, as that of Thomas Bullen, the con- tractor, for he occupied it by his servant, William Lewis; and thirdly, as the property of the trustees. The objection having Leen over-ruled, Mr. Hill rose to address the jury for the defence. He com- menced by saying that he deeply felt the responsibility of the duty he had to perform. The objections on points of law which had been made by himself and his learned friend, though they had been over. ruled by their lordships, yet they would not ple- judice the defence which it would be his duty to lay hefore them on behalf of his client. In making these objections, they had done no more than their duty to the prisoner at the bar. Their lordships, who now presided on the bench, themselves once oc- cupied the position of counsel, and they knew it was the duty of every counsel to avail himself of every point which in his opinion might prove of service to their lellow-man, whom they were called on to defend, when charged with a highly penal offence and they also knew, that nothing could be more dis- graceful than to neglect urging any objection which might be beneficial to his client, if hethouglitit well founded. The case had been opened by the Attorney-General, and he (Mr. Hill) would be replied to by the Solicitor-General. Those who had felt the power of the latter learned gentleman, as he had often an opportunity of feeling it, might well feel anxiety upon the subject. Indeed, any advocate might well feel anxious under such circumstances, however strong he might eonsider his case to be. it was impossible that a case could be sla ed with greater candour or fairness than had been done by the Attorney- General. He had evinced a sincere wish that all the cir- cumstances of the case should have a fair considera- tion, and that upon the evidence, the jury should exercise an unbiassed judgment. This candour was not affected—it was with him the ha'nt of his life, but it was the more dangerous to the prisoner, for if another course hid been adopted, the sense of the jury would revolt, and they would view with sus- picion the whole of the evidence which would be laid before them. The Attorney-General, in his opening address, had alluded to the unusual peiiod of the year at which they had been called together for the purpose of this special commission. He had likewise said that the cases to be biought before them '•'■'ere few in number, and being s.otev. it was totally inexplica- ble to him why this special commission had been issued— why it had been sent into this county for the trial of persons for offences connected with disturbances which had their origin —and whicli were eitl ¡ i'd to greater lengths in other counties. 1 Ire jury had had no explanation on this point, nor did he say it was the duty of the Attorney-General to give the explana- tion but if the intention was, that a great public example should be made of the power and majesty of the law, he could not but fear that the effect would not be that intended, unless a clear and satisfactory explanation were given of the grounds why this county w as stigmatised, while other counties in which this disturbances had tlieirorigin, and in which a greater num- ber of offences had been committed, were passed by. He wished most sincerely that that the law would put an end these dis- turbances, which all good men must deplore. But history in- formed us that the execution of penal laws would not suppress disturbances, which are grounded on public grievances and if there are such, tranquillity is not to be restored by the terror of punishment. He did not state this on his own opinion alone —it was also the opinion of one of the greatest and wisest men — Edmund Burke, a maH whose walks ale the richest store- house of political wisdom. In the immortal speech in favour of conciliation towards our American colonies, and it would be happy for this country if the sage counsels contained in that speech, had been adapted and acted upon—in this speech he laid down that doctrine, and illustrated it by an allusion to the history of the Principality. He said that in former times, when the complainis of the people we e aosweled, not by redress. hut by puni<hment, an Englishman eo Hid not venture five yards from the public road without a chance of being murdered. The wisdom or our ancestors had, however, prompted anotfier course, which had been successful beyond the most sanguine hopes of even those who had tbe most unlimited faith in justice, to pro- duce tranquillity. That other course was adopted, and Burke says that it was attended by an effect almost miraculous, in stilling the storm which had prevailed, and restoring public tranquillity, instead of the turbulence which had afflicted the country. Instating this, therefore, he was broaching no novel doctrine, and he trusted if did exist, it would never enter into the heads of our rulers to suppose that spccial com- missions were die real remedy foi such grievances. Having stated thus much, he would now heg to call the attention of the jury to the chaige aga.nst the unfortunate young man at the bar. It they had not heard the indictment read, but judged of the charge merely from the evidcuce which had been laid before them, would they not suppose that the charge against the pri- sonei was one for shootiug at Captain Napier1-for full nine- tenths of the notes before their lordships had reference to that circumstance, and not to the charge on which the prisoner was indicted. From hence he concluded that the counsel for the Crown considered the main charge ot so frivolous a nature that it was neces-ary to eke it out with collateral ones to secure a conviction fur the Crown. He was well aware that it was mainly attributable to the exertions in parliament of his learned friend, the Attorney-GaneraI, that he had now the privilege of addressing them on behalf of the prisoner; for it was not until lately that the counsel of a prisoner charged with felony could addiess the jury in reply to the counsel for the prosecution.— !Ie was therefore unwilling to find fault withhislearncd fliend for the manner in which he had conducted t'niecase. Never- theless, he must say that he could not understand why all the theatrical parade Ahich bad taken place was thought necessary — why the great cows' horns had been introduced—or why a man sh, uid be called upon to account why be was in one dress —why in another, and tor what reason he had turned his coat; for, indeed, ihere were instances enough in the present day to show that a man mav turn his coat quiie inside out,sleeves and all. lie wondered, indeed, that the propcrly luan who had got up the present performance, had not pioduced the stones which were alleged to have been removed from the wall. Why was he prisoner put. on his tiial tor this offence 1 There was at that moment a hill before the grand jury against the prisoner, for .Hooting at Captain Napier. He will have to take his trial foi that offence, and he .1S ready toaieet the charge, whenever it is brought forward against him. Why was not the major charge :.ii ought fOlward against him first'! The minor charge is the first charufc brought foiward, and the major kept behind, be sup- posed, as -an army ot reserve, to prevent a total defeat. The iiifijor part afLcts tiie liie uf the prisoner, and he should r.ot no inquired to meet the charge incidentally—it should not have nee" brought forward until he had an opportunity of putting io his fu l answei. What was the evidence given yesterday with j respect 10 the firing by the people .'—that many reporis wen- heard—that ihey were firing away in the air, but yet not a sin- eh; policeman was wounded—not. a bullet was found on anv ot the persons apprehended. There was, indeed, some small shot found, but could it be supposed that it was their intention '0 kill, when after w many shots as ale said to have occn fired, not a single fJüliceman was \Vüllnded-I"ot a single shot is even alleged to have penetrated the dress of a single policeman. fins conduct on the part of the people may well be contrasted •villi that of the police. Caplain Napier received information of th.? intended attack, at about four o'clock in the afternoon— according to his own account. He remained idle for several heurs, and then set out, accompanied by men armed to the teeth, with weapons fatal io human lite. ell, they proceeded by unfrequented paths across the country, and reached a field near to the Pontardulais gate, and also near to a biidge, over which lay the road into Carmarthenshire. lie (Mr. Hill) was not much acquainted with the Military Act, but he knew that if it were the intention of Captain Napier and his party to pro- vent the intended outrage, he would have taken possession of the bridge, iust, ad of remaining in the field. Whatever was his intention, it appeared to form no part of it to prevent the people from destroying the gate, because the party stopped in the field until the attack had began. Tills was, indeed, a strange doctrine, and not a happy modeot removing the angry feel- ing which prevail sin the country, It was much more likely to provoke a spirit which all must deplore—that a party con- sisting of magistrates and police, having an opportunity to prevent a great outrage against the law, should advisedly re- main quiescent untilth,w knew that the oifence had been com- mitted. Why did they go forward then? Not, surely, to pre- vent an ouirage against the law, but to apprehend the offenders when it had been committed. He (Mr. Hill) was not prepared to say that this fell in with his view of the law of England, that persons in authority should so act. It was new to him that life was to be sacrificed rather than that people should for a time escape justice. This savours too much of a sanguinary spirit, which is no part of the law of England it belongs to other nations, where other maxims of Jurisprudence prevail; it is no part of the law of England, which is one of benevolence, the leading principles ot which are, not to secure offenders (though this be important, yet it is not paramount) but to cast the greatest amount of protection round the persons of the sub- ject, so that the innocent should not suffer. He fervently prayed that this new spirit which appeared to actuate some of those in authority in this county might not prevail throughout the country generally. One of the policemen had sworn that his party had fired a second volley after the first had caused all who weie eible, to fly, when, in fact, there was no longer any resistance. This avowal was made in the presence of the Attorney and Solicitor-General, that British subjects are to be fired at while they are endeavouring to make their escape He (Mr. Hill), during a long professional life, had never heard such an avowal before and while the prisoner has to complain of such a grievance as this, he is placed at the bar on the charge contained in the indictment. He expected to hear the learned Solicitor-General, in the address which he would make to the jury, calling upon them to forget this part of the case but he hoped his learned friend would give a satisfactory explanation, and not resort to quirks and quibbles. Why, the case had taken that course. If another course had been adopted the case would not have occupied the attention of the jury for more than a couple of hours. The prisoner is charged with beginning to (temotish, and in order to sustain this it must be shown that he did so with a determination to complete that purpose. On this point the evidenje is anything but satisfactoiy. Part of the case, and an important part, relates 10 the identity of the pri- soner. The jury would recollect the coutradictory evidence which had been given with respect to the number of horsemen, the first witness stating there weie three, which was reduced to two by another, until at length another policeman swore there was but one, thus growing small by degrees and beautifully less," completely leversing the plan of Shakshpere's men in buckram. Therefore, when they had heard such flagrant con- tradictions on one point they could not credit the evidence on others. Mr. Hill then proceeded to review in detail the evi- dence of each witness, and concluded by an earnest exhortation to the jury, to discharge, with impartiality, the duty which had been imposed upon them for on their verdict would depend whether or not the unfortunate prisoner at the bar would be consigned to a punishment worse than death. At the conclusion of Mr. Hill's address, the Court adjourned for hatf-an hour, to allow the Jury time to partake of some re- freshment. their lordships having taken their seats on the bench, Mr. Hill proceeded to call witnesses to character on behalf of the prisoner. The tiist witness called was John Jones, who was examined through Mr. T. W. Powell: he stated, that he was a farmer living in the parish of Llanon, and knew the piisoner there for ten years; he resided with his parents at Ty-Issa, and always bore a good character for peaceableness and obedience to the law». In his cross-examination, by the Attorney-General, he said he knew a place called Llan Ty-Issa, within a quarter of a mile of Ty-Issa, where the prisoner lived. John Rees, a farmer, residing within five miles of the pri- soner, has known him all his tife and he has always borne a good character for obedience to the laws. John Jones, living at the Mansel Arms Inn, wilhin three miles of prisoner's residence, has known him all his life; he has ever maintained a good character for peaceable conduct and submission to the laws. Joshua Jenkins, a farmer, living within half-a-mile of where prisoner lived, has known him since he was a child, and he has alway borne a good character Robert Jones, a farmer, living in the neighbourhood of pri- soner's residence, haa known him for many years, and he has always borne a good character. In his cross-examination by the Solicitor-General he said he knew a place called Bryn Hyr, about two or three miles from Ty-hsa there is a man, named Daniel Jones, a farmer, living there. William Thomas, David Richards, and Damel J enkms. all farmers, living in the neighbourhood of prisoner s residence, and knowing him from his childhood, gave him an excellent character for peaceableness of conduct and obedience to the laws. The case for the defence having closed, The Solicitor-General, in rising to address the jury, said, he would best discharge his duty to the Crown by calling the at- tention of the jury to the charge on which the prisoner at the bar stood indicted, and to the evidence which had been pro- duced to support the charge. The jury had heard the powerful and eloquent address of his learned friend, Mr. Hill, and he was glad that the prisoner had engaged the advantage of being defended by sucif able council. This was a case of great i.a. portance to the prisonerand to the pubhc, and it was well that he had had the benciitof everything legal learning and ability could do for him. The learned gentleman had indulged in a variety of topics, through allot' which he would uot follow him. Some of these topics the learned gentleman hud much better omitted; many were irrelevant, and some of them tended to make the duty of the jury more painful than it otherwise would be but from the discharge of their duty, painful though it might be, he knew they would not shrink. The learned gen- tleman had told them that although the life of the prisoner was nut in jeopardy, yet that their verdict, if adverse to the prisoner, would send him into an exile which was worse than death. Their verdict might do so, it was nut for them, however, to a ward the punishment, that would be the province of their lordships, who would discharge it conscientiously it was for them to pronounce on the facts of the case brought before them in evidence. He (the Solicitor-General) had not so much ex- perience in criminal law as his learned friend, the council for the prisoner, but he knew that no one could take part in the administration of it without feeling the duty a painful one but we shonld all be unfit for the performance of our respective duties if we shrank from their discharge because we felt it pain- ful. Everything we possess that is valuable depends on the firmness and integrity of juries—property, reputation, and life, and it would be one of the greatest calamities that could hefal us if the public confidence were shaken in the integrity of the juries He h id said that he would not follow his learned friend through all the topics he had introduced; he thought it better to confine himself to the charge against the prisoner than to go into these topics. If in the opinion ot the jury the evidence which had been submitted was sulhcient to sustain that charge, thev would -give a verdict accordingly if they were of opinion that it was not sufficient they would return a verdict of acquit- tal. His learned friend, the Attorney-General, had said, that from the notoriety and extent ot the offences which had been cmmiiit.ed during these disturbances, it was time that the law should be vindicated. It is not to be tolerated m this country that bands of men, armed or unaimed, should go about excit- iug ten or, and by means of that terror subjecting the people to the domination of their will. Itwastimcatsoin mercy to tlte deluded men who take paitin thein, before they go to greater lengths that u mast not be so. In ihe commencement of those disturbances there is, perhaps, not an individual who joins in them who would not shudder at the shedding of blood, but when they are permitted to proceed unheeded and unpunished, they go from one offence to another, till they are guilty of the greatest crimes. This county was not invidiously selected for issuing the special commission if his learned friend Mr. Hill would look at the commitments, he would see why it had been issued here the parties to be tried were to be tiled for offences committed in this county. There was another charge of the learned gentleman wholly unfounded. He had said that the prisoner was tried on a minor charge, while there was another against him which would put his life <n peril. Did he think that his learned friend the Attorney-General or himself would act in the manner imputed to them 1 There was no charge af- fecting his lifs. I he one for which the prisoner was now on his trial was the greatest offence, and the most prevalent, and the penalty of dealh hbd been attached 10 it for many years later than 10 offences of the other description alluded 10 by his learned friend, Mr. Hill. He (ti.e Solicitor General) was sorry that in a case of this sort such topics had been alluded to justice would be better administered if their minds weie applied to the charge against the prisoner and to the evidence. The prisoner was indicted for being one of a rioious and tumultuous assem- bly, who began to demolish a certain turnpike gate in this county. What is necessary to prove is, was there, on the day named and at the place specified, a riotous and tumultuous as- sembly. Of this the evidence, in his opiniou, left no doubt. Information of the intention to hold such a meeting was com- municated to Cdplain N dpier. In pursuance of this information Captain Napier obtained the assistance of two county magis- tiates, and proceeded towards Pontardulais. On the way thither ihey heard horns sounding, shots firing, and saw blue lighis thrown up into the air, and subsequently they came into colli- sion with the mob, who were engaged in the demolition of the toll house, when a conflict ensued. The riotous nature of the assembly being proved, eyery person present foiming part of that assembly, and adding by his presence to the force by which they carried their objects into effect, was equally guilty of every act commuted by any person in the assembly, although he might not be the actual person by whom the act was committed. It was only necessary to prove, then, that the pri500H was present forming a part of this riotous and tumultuous assembly. On this point the evidence which had been adduced islt no doubt: not only that he was present, but that he look an active and leading part. That he was present wa3 not attempted to be contradicted it was not disputed it could not be doubted. 1 hat he was disguined in female appaiel, with his face black- ened, was also proved if he were there innocently, why was he di guised, why armed ? When he was apprehended, he was found provided with powder, shot, and caps, which altogether left no doubt of the purpose for which he was present. Bu', more than this, the evidence which had been brought forward left no doubt that he was a leader. There was a paper found on his person, signed Becca," directed to a man named David Jones, requiring him (Jones) to come, with all his assistance. to Llan ly Issa, on Wednesday night, the t>"h Sept., this Llan Ty Issa bting within a short distance of the piisonei's residence. On the same eduesday night the attack on the Pontardulais bouse was made, and the naob who committed u came to Pont- ardulais from the dirt etion of Llanou, near where prisoner lived. These facts are undisputed. There was also another paper iound on piisoner, which was important. On it was writing, directed to Mrs. leoecca, to the effect that 5s had been paid at some time before by a person named Thomas, and that he now paid another os, and two half-crowns were found wrapped liD in this raper. It Will berecottected that on the person of the prisoner, when appre ended, there was a laige number 01 hall crowns, besides other monies, and hence it would appear thai he had been collecting sabscriptions for some purpose. Willi respect to the conduct 01 Captain Napier and the magistrates— irom the elldenee it appeared thllt tliey halted, not only with great courage and firmness, but a|so wilh great humanity. The earned gentleman here rtad Captain Napier's evidence, from which it appeared that t ley ad refrained fiom firing at the men, bsing desiious only ,0f !d 1 into custody. When tbty found two gentlemen o. rank and tortune jn lhe' county, comiog foiward as ihey had done, and exposing themselves to peril fm be sake ol the public peace, he thought it was a poor return for such conduct to he and observations ot his learned friend, iMf- at gentleman Hkd expressed fonder why the circumstance ot the prisoner shooting at Capt. iVapier had been brought forward, the prisoner not being on tiial for that charge. He appealed to the learned judges on tha bench, wh«th«r it wU pflUlbl, ht iUts the cucum« stances of the case without introducing that fact. Whenj he was told that the police ought nOI to have taken pis. tols, powder and ball, he wcutd ask. would it not be madnesp, heing not more than eleven in number, to go out for the purpose of interrupting a mob consisting of 150 or more, without being provided with the necessary means of defence. His learned friend had expressed horror that the police should have fired a second volley. It was easy for those in perfect securiiy to make objections lo the conduct of those who have engaged in such a fray. but If the objectors wculd suppose themselves in the position of Captain Napier's perty, they might be able 10 form a juster opinion. The firing however, forming no part of the charge, he (the Solicitor.Genelal) thought that his learned fiiend, Mr. Hill, might well have spared the observation* in which he had indulged. The next point of evidence to which he would beg to call the attention of the jury was this, whether the mob so riotously and tumultuously assembled, had began to demolish the house. The learned gentleman here read from the evidence of several of the witnesses which bore upon this point, showing the extent of injury done, and that the mob were only prevented|jfrom completing the destruction of the house, (which by the testimony of the surveyor would have been effected by a very lillle more) but for the interruption with which they had met. Thistben was the evidence which had been brought forwardby the crown, in supportof the charge hidsgainsttheprisoner. He had said in the opening of his address, that he should not follow his learned friend, Mr. Hill, through all the topics he had introduced, and he would not. The law would be laid down by the learned judge on the bench as applicable to the facts if they thought the evidence sufficient, they would honestly and fearlessly discharge their duty by finding a verdict against the prisoner, but if they enter- tained a doubt that there was a riotous assembly, or that they did begin to demolish, ihey would give the prisoner the benefit of If. They would not regard what had been so eloquently said by his learned friend, Mr. Hill, on topics not connected with the charge they were there to administer the law, without reference to the consequence of their verdict, and from the at- tention Ihey had paid to the evidence throughout that long trial, he had no doubt ihey would give a conscientious verdict. Mr. Baron Gurney theu. proceeded to charge the jury, after congratulating them on being called together to enquire into the present charge, in a part of the county where people's minds were not so much excited as in other parts, and where they could dispassionately consider all the circumstances of the case, proceeeded to state that the indictment charged that prisoner with others, on the night of the 6th of September last, riotously and tumultuously assembled and began to demolish a certain house, laid as the property of Wm. Lewis, and in the other count as the property of Thomas Buller, and of the trustees. His Lordship stated that the property had been correctly laid. Mr. Chambers reminded his Lordship that in all the counts, the act was laid as felonious. His Lordship proceeded to state, that the prisoner was charged with feloniously proceeding to pull down. and demolish, Stc. If the intention had stopped short of the determination to pull down and demolish, it would not be felonious, but if they began to pull down with the intention to demolish, it would be felonious. That there was an untawfu) assembly there was no doubt, but whether the assembly was of the na'ure charged, it would be for the jury to decide. The questions for the jury were, was there 1\ riolous and tumultuous alisembly ? Did they intend to demolish the house, and did they begin to carry their intention into effect 1 If they did, it was felonious. The other part of the question was, was the prisoner present, forming parI of that assembly, aiding and abetting in carrying their intention into effect 1 Although they may have begun to pull down, yet, if ihey do not intend to go through with it, it does not come within Ihe meaning of the act. It would, therefore, be for the jury to consider whether they left off of their own accord, or in consequence of the interruption with which they had met. The jury retired to consider their verdict about a quarter to five o'clock, and remained in about three quarters of an hour. They then came into court, and a breathless silence prevailed while their names were being called over. Having answered to their names, thecterk of assize asked the jury whether they had agreed to a verdict, and being answered in the affirmative, he asked, is the prisoner guilty or not guilty.—Foreman. Guilty. The foreman, then on behalf of the jury, recommended the prisoner to the merciful consideration of their lordships. Sentence was not passed on the prisoner, who conducted himself throughout the trial, with great decorum. The Court then adjourned t. nine o'clock on Monday morning. (Continued in our Second page.)


'-------The Earl of Aberdeen's…

[No title]