upon, and several fell. The shutters being removed, the men directed their pieces from the window; they then had a complete command of the space on which the insurgents had been drawn up. They fired into the street, and several were there wounded and fell. There was a speedy dispersion-they all fled in every direction.

Mr. Frost was not seen after the time when the firing first began. Zephaniah Williams was about ten minutes too late. He did arrive at last with the Nantyglo men—a band, nearly as numerous as those that were led on by Frost in person. William Jones, from Pontypool, did not get nearer than the neighbourhood of Malpas; he was proceeding down a lane to meet the other party, when he heard of the disaster that had taken place to his associates in Newport. He likewise fled, and his men dispersed. I should have mentioned to you, Gentlemen, that all these three parties, as they came down, scoured the country, and pressed into their service various persons who were unwilling to attend them, but who were compelled by them to march, and at the same time they seized all the arms and ammunition they could discover. Frost himself was observed, after the action was over, retreating up Commercial-street; he was afterwards seen in Tredegar Park, about two miles from Newport, making his escape into a wood, and he was apprehended in the town of Newport on the Monday evening, at the house of a person of the name of Partridge, with loaded pistols and ammunition upon him.

Gentlemen, it will be for you to say, if these facts are proved, whether there can be any reasonable doubt in your minds of the guilt of the prisoner at the bar. How are these facts to be proved? With regard to the main circumstances of the case, no doubt can possibly be entertained. I shall prove the facts by witnesses above all exception, wholly unconnected with these disturbances, who were trying to establish peace and to restore tranquillity.

With regard to particular declarations made by Mr. Frost, which for the present I avoid detailing to you, those most undoubtedly will much depend upon the evidence of persons who were more or less concerned with him in the insurrection. My learned Friend

will, no doubt, make comments upon their testimony, as he will be fully justified in doing,—and he will call them accomplices. Gentlemen, whether they were there voluntarily, or by compulsion, there can be no doubt that their evidence is to be received with suspicion; it is to be weighed with caution; but if you do sift their evidence, and if you do see no reason to question their veracity, then, Gentlemen, you will not hesitate to believe the evidence they give. Such evidence in such a case must be laid before a jury. It is quite clear that treasonable consultations never will be held in public. How then are they to be proved? It must be either by the employment of spies and informers, whose evidence has always been condemned, and very often disbelieved, or it must be by the evidence of those who were actually, to a certain degree, associated in the enterprise. In this case I propose to call before you no spy or informer, for none such were employed; but I do propose to call before you several who were concerned in this insurrection, and who, I submit to you, may be safely trusted if their evidence shall be consistent, and if they shall be corroborated in the main facts to which they speak. Upon that evidence, Gentlemen, if you shall believe it, little doubt can exist in your minds with regard to the guilt of the prisoner.

It gives me the most sincere satisfaction to find that he is defended by Gentlemen of the first eminence and the first talents at the bar of England. Every thing that zeal, every thing that learning, every thing that eloquence can accomplish, will be brought forward in his cause. I own, Gentlemen, that it seems to me that my Learned Friends, upon the proof of these facts, must have a very difficult task to perform. I think they will hardly deny the law of High Treason, as it is laid down by Mr. Justice Foster and by Lord Tenterden. Well, then, Gentlemen, according to the evidence that will be laid before you, there was an armed insurrection, very formidable in numbers, with a public purpose. There was actually a conflict with the Queen's troops-not accidental-not on any sudden affray--but with premeditation and design. Will my Learned Friends then say, that there was some private object which

the prisoner sought to obtain? What that could be I am wholly at a loss to conjecture. I hear nothing of any private revenge; I hear nothing of any private grievance; this was not a meeting for discussion; it was not a meeting for petitioning the Queen or either House of Parliament; it was not a meeting arising out of any dispute between masters and servants in the coal trade or in the iron trade; it was not any sudden outbreak from want of employment, or from want of food; for I believe it will turn out that the coal and iron trade have seldom been more prosperous, that employment was easily obtained, that wages were high, and that those who were engaged in this insurrection had no pretended private grievance to be redressed. Then, Gentlemen, what is the conclusion to be drawn?-That the witnesses whom I call before you speak the truth-that there was this public object—by armed force to change the law and constitution of the country.

Unless the offence is clearly brought home to the prisoner, gentlemen, it will be your duty to acquit him, and you will have pleasure in doing so. But if the case should be satisfactorily established, you will act a manly part,-you will not shrink from your duty, whatever may be the consequences. Gentlemen, it imports us all, in whatever situation of life we may be, that the law should be respected and obeyed. Whether landed proprietors, or farmers, or merchants, or tradesmen, or labourers,-whatever our position in society,-high or humble,-it equally imports us all that such efforts should be effectually suppressed; it equally imports us all, for the sake of example, that punishment should follow crime.

Gentlemen, I have given you a short outline of the facts that are to be laid before you. I have avoided the statement to you of par

ticular expressions, which you will hear much better from the witnesses, whom I will now proceed to call before you.

An intimation has been given on the part of the counsel for the prisoner, that the proper forms of law have not been observed. If that should turn out to be the case, by all means let the prisoner have the benefit of the irregularity. But I believe it will be found, that the forms of law have been most strictly pursued, and that any

deviation from the usual course has proceeded from a desire that those who are accused should have the most ample opportunity for preparing their defence and vindicating their innocence. After the witnesses for the Crown shall have been called and examined, and you shall have listened with all attention to the arguments and observations that may be urged on the part of the prisoner, and to any evidence he may adduce, then your important duty must be performed, to pronounce the prisoner guilty or not guilty; and I am sure, that your verdict will be satisfactory to the public justice of the country.

NOTE.-After a very able defence of the prisoner, by Sir Frederick Pollock and Mr. Kelly, he was found guilty, and the usual sentence in cases of High Treason, was passed upon him,-subject to a point reserved for the opinion of the Judges, as to the sufficiency of the service of a copy of the indictment, the Jury panel, and a list of the witnesses before the trial. A majority of the Judges were of opinion that the conviction was proper. The sentence was commuted to transportation for life.

PROSECUTION FOR BLASPHEMY.

SPEECH for the CROWN on the trial of J. HETHERINGTON, for Blasphemous Libel, in the Court of Queen's Bench, before LORD DENMAN, on the 8th of December, 1840.

INTRODUCTION.

I PUBLISH the following opening Speech and Reply, as containing my deliberate sentiments on the delicate and difficult subject of prosecutions for blasphemy. Notwithstanding my attachment to free inquiry as conducive to the interests of truth, and the spread of rational piety, I entertain no doubt, that there are occasions when the civil magistrate not only may, but is bound to interfere to check the circulation of publications which assail the foundations of morality, or vilify the national religion. In each particular case the persons intrusted with the power to put the law in force, must determine whether, on balancing evils, it is expedient to prosecute or to forbear.