Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2019 with funding from 
 Duke University Libraries 
 
 https://archive.org/details/trialofwilliamskOOskir 
 
THE 
 
 TRIA L 
 
 OF 
 
 WILLIAM S K IRVING, 
 
 SECRETARY TO THE BRITISH CONVENTION, 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 HIGH COURT OF JUSTICIARY, 
 
 AT EDINBURGH, 
 
 ON THE 6th AND 1th JANUARY, 1794, 
 
 FOR SEDITION; 
 
 WITH 
 
 AN ORIGINAL MEMOIR, AND NOTES. 
 
 “A TRIED PATRIOT AND AN HONEST MAN." 
 
 Inscription on his Portrait , by J. Kay 
 
 GLASGOW: 
 
 PUBLISHED BY MUIR, GOWANS, & CO. 
 
 42, ARGYLL-STREET ; 
 
 SOLD BY A. RUTHERGLEN & CO. 84, TRONGATE; 
 
 AND WM. TAIT, EDINBURGH. 
 
 1836 . 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
MEMOIR OF WILLIAM SKIRVING. 
 
 Mr. William Skirving was the son of a respectable farmer at Lib- 
 berton, in the neighbourhood of Edinburgh. At an early period of 
 his life, he formed a strong attachment to the religious principles and 
 practices of that respectable portion of the Secession Church, then 
 known by the denomination of Burghers, and to the public services 
 of this church, he at one time resolved to devote his life. With this 
 view, having finished his classical education at the College of Edin¬ 
 burgh, he commenced the study of divinity, under the tuition of the 
 learned and pious Mr. John Brown of Haddington, who then filled the 
 Professor’s chair of the Burgher Academy. In this seminary, he 
 prosecuted his studies with assiduity and success : securing to himself 
 the approbation of his instructor, and the respect and friendship of 
 his fellow-students. For reasons, however, which, at this distance 
 of time, cannot be accurately ascertained, Mr. Skirving abandoned 
 theology, and betook himself to agricultural pursuits, much to the 
 regret of Mr. Brown, and in opposition to the opinion of a number of 
 his religious friends. During the time he studied at Haddington, he 
 lived in the family of Sir Alexander Dick of Prestonfield, as private 
 tutor to his children: and from this gentleman he received many at¬ 
 tentions, which, to a young man in his situation, were of the utmost 
 advantage. He took a lease of the farm of Damhead, and soon after 
 married Miss Rachel Abercrombie, daughter of Mr. Andrew Aber¬ 
 crombie, late merchant in Kirkaldy, who had, at his death, left Miss- 
 Abercrombie, his only surviving child, in possession of all his property. 
 
 Mr. Skirving having now commenced farmer, devoted his whole 
 attention to the duties of that occupation. He cultivated his farm 
 with much care, and on the most improved principles then known in 
 the practice of husbandry. His success, however, was not what might 
 have been expected ; and he therefore found it necessary to give up 
 his lease in favour of a relation of his own, and take possession of the 
 farm of Strathruddie, in Fife, which he enjoyed by his wife. 
 
 Besides attending to the practical duties of the farmer, Mr. S. had 
 accustomed himself to study agriculture as a science, and in this branch 
 of knowledge had, in the opinion of many eminent agriculturists, made 
 great proficiency. When, therefore, it was agreed to instal a professor 
 of agriculture in the University of Edinburgh, he, by the advice of 
 his friends, offered himself as a candidate for that situation, along with 
 the late Dr. Coventry, a gentleman with whom he ever afterwards 
 lived on the most intimate and friendly terms. But, though unsuc¬ 
 cessful in his endeavours to obtain this honourable situation, which 
 was conferred upon his competitor, he still pursued those studies 
 which, had he obtained the professorship, would have become the 
 business of his life, and accordingly he purposed to give to the world 
 
 a 2 
 
4 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 a work on the subject of agriculture, whicli he had for several years 
 been preparing for the press. Finding his distance from town a great 
 hindrance to his proceeding with the work, he left the country with 
 his family, and came to Edinburgh, where, in the spring of 1792, he 
 published the first volume of “The Husbandman’s Assistant.” Of 
 this work, a second volume was written out, but never published. 
 
 At this period, the public mind was much agitated by political dis¬ 
 cussions. The imperfect representation of the people in the Com¬ 
 mons House of Parliament, together with the corruptions which such 
 a state of the representative assembly naturally produced, were sub¬ 
 jects which, although they had frequently occupied the attention of 
 many intelligent individuals, who saw and lamented the evils which 
 their country suffered, were yet, in some measure at least, new to the 
 great body of the people. The time, however, had now arrived, when 
 the occurrence of political events of the most extraordinary kind, 
 forced, as it were, these subjects on the attention of men the least ob¬ 
 servant of what was passing around them. The French Revolution, 
 with all the circumstances attending it, could not fail to produce this 
 effect: and it did produce it in no ordinary degree, by exhibiting to 
 the world what a nation was capable of effecting, when roused by a 
 sense of its wrongs to assert its rights, besides presenting an awful 
 specimen of the evils attending changes, effected by intestine v'ars, in 
 the political institutions of a nation. The accounts daily published, 
 respecting the progress of the people of France in political science, 
 with the enlightened and liberal views of many of their leaders, made a 
 deep impression on the minds of the great mass of the inhabitants of 
 Britain, and led them to view the corruptions w'hich had crept into 
 their own political institutions as a subject of grave consideration. 
 Many, therefore, of the most enlightened friends of the constitution, 
 perceiving the bent of the public mind, had recourse to the only 
 remedy for allaying the agitation now so general, which was evidently 
 that of assembling in a constitutional manner, to express their 
 grievances, and petition for redress. 
 
 Mr. Skirving s mind was far from being partially informed on these 
 important subjects. He perceived, at once, the necessity and utility 
 of the measures proposed by the friends of reform ; and he w'as pos¬ 
 sessed of too much patriotism and public spirit, to allow him to stand 
 aloof from the enlightened and respectable associations of his coun¬ 
 trymen, which were now found in every part of the country, under 
 the designation of the Societies of the Friends of the People. He, 
 therefore, connected himself w'ith one of these societies, and soon 
 proved an active and zealous promoter of the great object they had 
 in view. He regularly attended their meetings, assisted at all their 
 deliberations, and, by the mildness of his manners, and straightfor¬ 
 wardness of his conduct, soon gained the confidence of all with whom 
 he associated. To him, accordingly, much of their business was left 
 to be transacted. He acted as Secretary to the General Association 
 of the Friends of the People, and also to the different Conventions 
 which met in Edinburgh during the years 1792 and 1793 ; the last of 
 which was the famous British Convention, which called forth so much 
 acrimonious animadversion from the enemies of Reform. 
 
 The first Convention, in which, we believe, Colonel M‘Leod acted 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 5 
 
 as president, assembled in December 1792, and was honoured by the 
 presence of Lord Daer, Colonel Dalrymple, Mr. Muir, and other 
 distinguished individuals, in the capacity of delegates from different 
 societies of the Friends of the People. The resolutions of this meet¬ 
 ing, which were afterwards published, exhibited, in a clear and dis¬ 
 tinct manner, the sentiments of the Friends of the People on the great 
 question of Parliamentary Reform, and their inviolable attachment 
 to the institutions of their country, as well as the anxiety they felt to 
 avoid, in their conduct, every thing which, in the least degree, might 
 tend to alarm the public mind. As a proof that such was their anxious 
 wish, we may here mention, that, when Mr. Muir proposed that an 
 Address from the Society of United Irishmen in Dublin to the Dele¬ 
 gates for promoting Reform in Scotland, with which he had been 
 entrusted, and which he presented and read, should be answered, 
 so desirous were they to avoid giving offence, that the address, al¬ 
 though exhibiting the most enlightened views of the political state 
 of the country, combined with the most ardent patriotism, was 
 allowed to remain unreplied to. These, indeed, were ticklish times ; 
 but we cannot help thinking, that the friends of Reform, when they 
 afterwards found that one of the charges brought against their revered 
 friend, Mr. Muir, was his having read this manly address in the Con¬ 
 vention, must have regretted that they did not adopt his proposal to 
 answer it, as their not doing so might have made it be believed that 
 they disapproved of the sentiments it contained, and of the conduct 
 of Mr. Muir in presenting it. Another occurrence in the proceed¬ 
 ings of this Convention deserves particularly to be noticed, as it strik¬ 
 ingly tends to illustrate the state of party feeling at this period. A 
 society had, for some time, existed in Edinburgh, known commonly 
 by the name of the Goldsmiths’-hall Association. It was composed, 
 generally, of all the Aristocracy, the timid portion of the community, 
 and those who hoped to reap advantage from subserviency to the 
 views of the existing administration. This association assumed to 
 itself the high-sounding title of the Friends of the Constitution, united 
 to support it against those M'hom they were pleased to call republi¬ 
 cans and levellers, and expressing their zeal to suppress tumult and 
 sedition. The object of this society could not be mistaken by the 
 Reformers ; and as it had at this time a declaration of adherence to 
 the constitution lying for signature in Goldsmiths’-hall, it was resolved 
 by the Convention, that certain individuals of their number should 
 repair to the hall, and attach their names to the declaration, as an 
 evidence that the Friends of the People cordially acquiesced in the 
 desire of supporting the constitution, and suppressing tumult and 
 sedition. Messrs. Muir, Skirving, and some others, were accordingly 
 appointed to perform this service. The society, however, with those 
 feelings of inveterate opposition against Reformers which it uni¬ 
 formly displayed, erased their names, and published their proceed¬ 
 ing in the papers of the day. It is certainly doing no injustice to 
 the Goldsmiths’-hall Association to remark here, that the services 
 which that society, at this period, rendered to the administration, 
 did secure, to a certain portion of the inhabitants of Edinburgh, 
 under the especial patronage of Sir Henry Dundas, afterwards 
 Lord Melville, a rich harvest of all the good things which it is 
 
6 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 in the power of a minister of the crown to bestow ; and in grateful 
 remembrance of which, we presume, one of the finest columns that 
 adorn that splendid city has been erected,—a monument to posterity 
 of the unblushing impudence of ministerial favourites. 
 
 Another Convention of the Friends of the People assembled in 
 Edinburgh in the month of May 1793. The proceedings of this 
 meeting manifested the same regard to public tranquillity as the first, 
 and, at the same time, an increased conviction of the absolute neces¬ 
 sity of a Reform in Parliament as the only means of saving the country 
 from ruin. Reformers now, however, began to be exposed to perse¬ 
 cution in every shape. The policy of the Pitt administration was 
 now in full operation in every part of the country. It was dangerous 
 to utter a liberal sentiment on the subject of politics, even in the 
 meetings of friends ; and to keep company with a Reformer, was, by 
 many, found to be very detrimental in its effects. We have known 
 tradesmen nearly ruined from being connected with societies of the 
 Friends of the People, and workmen deprived of employment, merely 
 because they dared to think and act for themselves in these matters. 
 To enable a person, therefore, to be a consistent Reformer in such 
 circumstances, he required to have a deep conviction in his mind of 
 the importance of the object sought after, and also a high degree of 
 public spirit. It cannot, then, be matter of wonder, that numbers, 
 particularly of the higher classes, withdrew from attending the meet¬ 
 ing of these men, and every other public demonstration of attach¬ 
 ment to the cause of Reform. But it is, nevertheless, astonishing, 
 and it shews, in a striking manner, the power of principle in the 
 regulation of their conduct, that such anumber of persons, someof them 
 occupying the most useful and respectable situations in mercantile 
 life, and distinguished alike for their religious and moral worth (for 
 such was really the character of many of those who composed the 
 associations of the Friends of the People), should have been found 
 ill circumstances so disadvantageous, and presenting so little hope of 
 success, boldly contending for their country’s rights. The Reformers 
 of this period, and all who have followed in the same path up to the 
 present hour, were distinguished also, notwithstanding the attempts 
 industriously made to mix them up with persons harbouring designs 
 against the political constitution of the country, for the calm and 
 constitutional manner of their proceedings. 
 
 But to return to the subject of this memoir :—Mr. Skirving, though 
 he frequently had occasion to observe that his conduct was narrowly 
 watched, and notwithstanding the prominent situation he occupied 
 amongst the Friends of the People, was fortunate in not having, as 
 yet, afforded his enemies a plea against him. He had, indeed, suf¬ 
 fered much from the loss of friends, and the malice of some who had 
 the power of injuring him, but, up to this period, nothing from the 
 arm of power. This, however, was not long the case. The prin¬ 
 ciple of the war in which the country was now engaged with France 
 was detested by the Reformers, and its real object, though not the 
 avowed one, abhorred. Its effects having begun to be severely 
 felt on the commerce of the country, together with the arbitrary 
 manner in which the House of Cohunons acted in rejecting petitions 
 for reform, naturally enough led some of the Reformers to write and 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 7 
 
 speak on politics with more freedom than was consistent with a due 
 regard to their own safety and that of their friends. At a general 
 meeting of a Society of the Friends of the People in Dundee, held in 
 the month of July, a member brought forward an address, which the 
 meeting approved of, and ordered to be printed. Mr. Palmer, then 
 residing in Dundee, and a member of the Society, sent this address 
 to a Mr. Morren, in Edinburgh, to be printed, with the request that 
 Mr. Skirving should be given as many copies as he might desire. 
 On receiving this document, Mr. Morren shewed it to Mr. Skirving, 
 who, as stated by the former, did not approve of it. Without think¬ 
 ing more of the matter, Mr. S. received the copies sent to him by the 
 printer, and gave some of them to such of his friends as happened to 
 call upon him. This address was by the Sheriff considered as sedi¬ 
 tious and inflammatory, and Mr. Skirving, into whose hands it had 
 come so unsolicitedly on his part, was thrown into prison, had his 
 house searched, and a number of papers found in his possession taken 
 from him. He might, however, have been liberated on finding bail, 
 but this he refused to give, conceiving that he was wrongously im¬ 
 prisoned, and he therefore petitioned the Lords of Justiciary, insist¬ 
 ing on his immediate liberation. As might have been expected, his 
 prayer was refused, and he was ultimately under the necessity of giv¬ 
 ing bail to a large amount. In the petition which he presented, Mr. 
 Skirving expresses his opinion of the address from Dundee thus :— 
 “ He considered the paper complained of as merely the strong effu¬ 
 sions of honest hearts, alarmed by the measures of those in adminis¬ 
 tration, judging the constitution in the utmost danger, and catching at 
 the first grounds of alarm which presented themselves to their view 
 and then justifies his own conduct in distributing it on the following 
 grounds:—“ The chief business of the Friends of the People, as pre¬ 
 paratory to the Reform in Parliament which they sought, was the 
 information of the public as to the grounds of Parliamentary Reform, 
 its importance, and immediate necessity. He therefore judged it to 
 be his duty, as secretary, to submit every information to the public 
 which he received, and thought calculated to illustrate these points ; 
 and the individuals and societies who had it in their power to give 
 such information, naturally transmitted the same to him as secretary.” 
 We quote these sentences to shew the opinion Mr. Skirving enter¬ 
 tained of the paper which had occasioned him so much trouble, and 
 the view he took of the duties which devolved upon him as secretary 
 to the societies of the Friends of the People. We would now laugh 
 at the idea of a man being held guilty of a crime for either printing or 
 publishing such a paper as the one referred to ; but times are altered. 
 The sequel will shew what importance continued to be attached to 
 this production, and how much Mr. Skirving and Mr. Palmer suf¬ 
 fered on account of it. But, to proceed with our narrative. Convic¬ 
 tions for political offences had not unfrequently taken place previous 
 to this period; but the punishments inflicted never exceeded a few 
 months’ imprisonment, w'hich, though sufficiently severe for the nature 
 of the offences, were not generally considered rigorous. The com¬ 
 parative mildness of these punishments did not, however, prevent 
 public manifestations of sympathy for the sufferers, to the great 
 chagrin of the enemies of popular rights. But severer punishments 
 
8 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 were now meditated. The Lord Advocate, then Robert Dundas, Esq. 
 of Arniston, actuated by a spirit of hostility to the Reformers, which 
 he frequently exhibited in a manner highly unbecoming the important 
 situation he occupied, and anxious to increase the punishment for 
 political offences, conceived that he was warranted to raise up a part 
 of the law which, by his own confession, “ had slept in peace for a 
 century.” Having chosen this new ground, untenable as it was 
 viewed by many of the most eminent lawyers, and having nothing to 
 dread on the score of responsibility, he proceeded coolly to select his 
 victims. The first of these was Thomas Muir, Esq. younger of Hun- 
 tershill. This gentleman had early identified himself with the cause of 
 Reform. His political creed was, perhaps, the most unsophisticated 
 which had ever been adopted by any Reformer; and this was daily 
 illustrated by the magnanimity of his own conduct. In it no ground 
 could be found to suspect him as actuated either by a petulant wish 
 for power, or by the pride of aristocracy. Unlike many who talk 
 finely and feelingly of the rights of the people, when they only mean 
 the rights of certain classes, he viewed with pleasure the artisans, 
 mechanics, and labourers, standing forward, and claiming the resti¬ 
 tution of rights, the possession of which, he justly conceived, was of 
 greater importance to them than even to the rich ; because, from their 
 rank in society, they were much more exposed to the grasp of arbi¬ 
 trary power, and had much less the means of protecting themselves 
 against its merciless exercise. “ He has stepped from his pedestal,” 
 said an eminent Whig, when speaking of him. Yes, we answer ; he 
 stepped from that pedestal which, from his rank in life, aristocratic 
 pride would have allowed him to have occupied : but such an eleva¬ 
 tion was abhorrent to his feelings, and unsuitable to his genius ; and 
 when he made this sacrifice, he planted his foot on the altar of Liberty, 
 round which, when the yet unborn millions shall assemble, they will 
 hail the name of Muir, and gratefully remember his exertions and 
 sufferings in the cause of man. 
 
 Mr. Muir was tried before the High Court of Justiciary on the 30th 
 August. He conducted his own defence: and, as might be expected 
 from the great talents he possessed, with admirable spirit and energy. 
 But it availed him nothing. In those days, “ to accuse was to con¬ 
 vict.” The verdict of “guilty,” therefore, pronounced by his jury, 
 was not a matter of surprise; but the conduct of the court, in recording 
 a sentence of fourteen years' transportation, excited both indignation 
 and alarm. 
 
 The next Reformer who was doomed to suffer from this new and 
 hitherto unheard of application of the law, was the Reverend Thomas 
 Fyshe Palmer. This gentleman, as we have already stated, was a 
 member of the Society of the Friends of the People in Dundee, and 
 had taken on himself the charge of getting printed for the society the 
 address, for which Mr. Skirving had been apprehended. This publi¬ 
 cation gave offence, and was held to be seditious. Mr. Palmer was 
 accused of being the author of it; and, although Mr. George Meal- 
 maker, another member of the Society, acknowledged that he wrote 
 the paper, and that Mr. Palmer only revised it, and, in fact, softened 
 several of the expressions, still the latter was indicted for printing and 
 publishing the offensive document,—tried at the Circuit Court at 
 
WM. SKIKV1NG. 
 
 9 
 
 Perth, 13th September,—brought in guilty, and sentenced to seven 
 years’ transportation. The severity of these proceedings created a 
 great sensation in every part of the country. Men of liberal minds 
 on the subject of politics, perceived that the object of ministers, in 
 having recourse to such extraordinary means at the extremity of the 
 empire, to put down Reformers, was to pave the way for the exercise 
 of the same arbitrary power at its centre, and thus at once to pre¬ 
 vent all liberal discussion of the measures of government. This 
 opinion was afterwards shewn to be well-founded, in the attempt made, 
 in the end of the following year, to convict Hardie and others of 
 high treason. 
 
 From the result of Mr. Palmer’s trial, Mr. Skirving saw plainly the 
 fate that awaited himself. As we have already stated, he had been 
 imprisoned on the ground of having circulated the address from the 
 society in Dundee, and was liberated on bail. And having been cited 
 as a witness on Mr. Palmer’s trial, but not examined, no doubt was 
 left on his mind as to its now being the intention of the public prose¬ 
 cutor to bring him to trial. Notwithstanding, however, of this, he 
 continued to discharge the duties of his office as Secretary to the 
 Friends of the People, in which he was encouraged by the spirit dis¬ 
 played, at this trying period, by that body of his fellow-citizens. Far 
 from being intimidated by the severity of the treatment of their 
 friends, or the aspersions cast upon them from the bench, they boldly 
 stood forward and declared their opinion of the measures employed 
 against them, and their determination, by every constitutional means 
 in their power, to obtain what they conscientiously believed to be 
 essential to the salvation of their country—a more equal representa¬ 
 tion of the people in the Commons House of Parliament. Accord¬ 
 ingly, a numerous and respectable meeting was held in Edinburgh in 
 the month of October, and in the published proceedings of this meet¬ 
 ing, they declared that, “ Conscious of the purity of their motives, 
 and the legality of all their proceedings, which have been solely con¬ 
 fined to that great object of national justice—a Parliamentary Re¬ 
 form, the Friends of the People have heard, with mingled astonish¬ 
 ment and contempt, the false and injurious aspersions bestowed upon 
 them, in the course of Mr. Muir’s trial. In their own vindication, 
 and to shew the world that neither the imbecile ridicule of a crown 
 lawyer, nor the unconstitutional opinions of a judge, can make them 
 desert the great and important cause in which they are embarked,” 
 and they therefore resolved, “ That this society is determined to ad¬ 
 here to the original principles of its institution, 4 an equal represen¬ 
 tation of the people, and a shorter duration of parliamentary delega¬ 
 tion,’ and calls upon the people of Scotland to unite in assisting to 
 obtain a reform in the Commons House of Parliament, the only 
 measure that can secure to them, and to their posterity, the inestima¬ 
 ble blessings of peace, check an increasing and oppressive system of 
 taxation, and prevent the baneful influence of that corruption, which 
 has proved so inimical to public virtue, and so destructive to private 
 morals.” Such, then, were the sentiments of the Reformers of this 
 period with regard to the evils arising out of the state of the repre¬ 
 sentation, and surely the experience of the last thirty years affords 
 ample illustration of their truth. 
 
10 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 This meeting was followed by that of the General Convention, 
 which took place in the end of the same month; but as delegates 
 which were expected from the societies in England had not arrived, 
 they adjourned to the 19th of the following month, when they again 
 met. The circumstances in which this association assembled, were 
 the most inauspicious for the cause of Reform which could possibly 
 have occurred. A servile and venal press, entirely subservient to 
 the views of administration, had succeeded, to a great extent, in fill¬ 
 ing the public mind with the most unreasonable fears respecting 
 republican principles. The atrocities of the French Revolution were 
 their constant theme. These they endeavoured to show were the 
 natural effects of the principles of government adopted by the people 
 of France; and, by the basest insinuations, and the grossest misre¬ 
 presentations of the conduct of the Friends of the People, they at¬ 
 tempted to induce the belief, that their principles were also republican, 
 and all their proceedings highly' - inimical to the civil institutions of 
 their country. Besides, the measures of government clearly indicated 
 that the severest steps were about to be taken to put down every pub¬ 
 lic expression of liberal opinions. In Ireland, a convention bill had 
 received the sanction of Parliament, and become the law in that ill- 
 fated portion of the empire. Of this bill it may with truth be af¬ 
 firmed, that several of its enactments would have disgraced the state 
 policy of a grand seignor or Russian autocrat. 
 
 Such being the circumstances in which the delegates of the Friends 
 of the People met, it was quite natural that, in the course of their 
 deliberations, the alarming prospects before them should form a pro¬ 
 minent subject of consideration. The idea of the people being 
 deprived of their constitutional right of assembling to state their 
 grievances, with a view to obtain redress, was an extent of political 
 degradation which could not be contemplated with indifference by any 
 class of men but the veriest slaves of a heartless despotism. The 
 insidious manner in which a measure to effect this object might be 
 introduced into Parliament did not escape the notice of the Conven¬ 
 tion ; and, accordingly, they resolved that the different societies with 
 which they were connected should appoint delegates, who should hold 
 themselves in readiness to meet on the shortest notice, for the purpose 
 of remonstrating, by petition, against the adoption, by Parliament, of 
 any measure hostile to the liberties of the people. The time and place 
 of meeting of this convention of emergency, as it was called, were to 
 be fixed by a committee, consisting of the secretary, and three other 
 members of the Convention then assembled. By this arrangement, 
 the first notice given of the introduction of a convention bill, or a 
 bill for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, or the Act for Pre¬ 
 venting Wrongous Imprisonment, and undue delays in Trials in North 
 Britain, or the Admission of Foreign Troops,—all or any of these 
 bills being introduced, should be a signal to the different societies 
 to repair to the place of meeting appointed by the secret committee. 
 Certain resolutions were also adopted for the purpose of rendering 
 the union formed with the societies in England more efficient for pro¬ 
 moting the cause of Parliamentary Reform. In the Convention, the 
 discussion of these and other topics frequently gave rise to debates 
 which called forth, on the part of its members, a display of extensive 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 11 
 
 political information, combined with ardent feelings of patriotism. 
 These displays of political acumen and feeling, while they were highly 
 gratifying to the friends of Reform, had a very opposite effect on the 
 minds of those opposed to that truly national measure. They con¬ 
 sidered it the height of presumption in the Convention to expose the 
 imperfect state of the representation, and the tendency of the corrup¬ 
 tions which had crept into it; but still more were they incensed at 
 the measures now adopted, by which the Reformers publicly declared 
 their conviction, that, under the influence of that corruption, there 
 was reason to apprehend the exercise of a power destructive of every 
 vestige of their remaining rights. As, however, the proceedings of 
 the Convention were perfectly legal and constitutional, those who 
 opposed them (thus deprived of a more direct way of injuring their 
 cause) had recourse to calumny and misrepresentation for the pur¬ 
 pose of ruining their credit with the public ; and it is to be regretted 
 that, in one instance, they unfortunately were afforded an opportu¬ 
 nity of employing these vile arts with effect. The French National 
 Convention was, at this time, an object of the greatest attraction, both 
 on account of the wonderful talents displayed by its members, and 
 the peculiar and extraordinary circumstances in which they were 
 placed, as called to legislate for their country, which had recently 
 thrown off the yoke of despotism, and on account of which all the 
 powers of Europe had declared war against her. This assembly was, 
 consequently, considered, by all the abettors and supporters of des¬ 
 potic power, as the very crater of revolution. It was, therefore, 
 rather unfortunate that the delegates of the Friends of the People 
 should have assumed the name of the British Convention , and still 
 more so, that they should have used a number of other names, such 
 as, secret committee and convention of emergency , which, in the then 
 state of the public mind, were considered as words peculiar to the 
 vocabulary of the French republic. The impropriety, and even dan¬ 
 ger of this practice, we think, might at once have struck the minds of 
 such an intelligent body of men, especially as they must have been 
 aware of the extreme sensitiveness, on all political points, of the power¬ 
 ful aristocracy, against whose principles and practices their efforts in 
 the cause of Reform were now directed. It was, indeed, the case, 
 that a number of the members of the Convention considered the using 
 of French names as extremely foolish, although a still greater number, 
 owing, no doubt, to their minds being occupied by more important 
 matters, evidently looked upon it as a matter of entire indifference. 
 To use French names was, besides, a practice neither new nor un¬ 
 common in this country; and when we add to this, what we know to 
 have been the case, that the terms were first introduced into the Con¬ 
 vention through mere playfulness of disposition on the part of one of 
 its most distinguished members, it is extremely probable that they 
 were continued, either from a conviction that they expressed, more 
 properly than any others they could have used, the nature of the 
 things to which they applied them, or from a regard to the French 
 Convention, whose noble efforts, at this period, in the cause of their 
 country, astonished all Europe. We are, therefore, persuaded, that 
 the obloquy which has been thrown on the association on account of 
 this practice has been most unmerited ; although we repeat our sur- 
 
12 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 prise, that the Convention should thus have given the opposers of 
 Reform the means of injuring them and the cause they espoused. 
 
 Of the means thus afforded, their enemies were not slack in taking 
 advantage. The aristocracy, the avowed and determined opposers of 
 all reform, and in whose minds reform and revolution appear to have 
 been terms of similar import, either were or pretended to be greatly 
 alarmed at the existence of a body of men, whose purpose, they un¬ 
 hesitatingly insinuated, could be nothing else than to subvert the go¬ 
 vernment ; and as nothing was wanting on the part of those in power 
 to put a stop to the meetings of that Assembty but a pretext however 
 hollow, this charge was deemed perfectly sufficient for this purpose. 
 Accordingly, on the 5th December, while the Convention were calmly 
 discussing a petition to Parliament, the Lord Provost, accompanied by 
 a number of constables, entered the hall, and commanded them im¬ 
 mediately to dismiss. In reply to this mandate, the President and 
 several members told his Lordship that they were exercising a con¬ 
 stitutional right of which, in their opinion, he had no authority to 
 deprive them. The Provost, however, persisted, and taking the Pre¬ 
 sident by the hand, pulled him out of the chair, upon which the meet¬ 
 ing immediatel} 7 and quietly broke up. Determined to maintain their 
 right so far as in their power, and consistent with the public peace, 
 the Convention met next day beyond the jurisdiction of the Magis¬ 
 trates, but were dismissed by the Sheriff-substitute of the county, in 
 the same manner as they had been by the Provost the preceding 
 evening. The interdict of the authorities being, however, understood 
 to apply only to the British Convention, Mr. Skirving called a meeting 
 of the General Committee of the Friends of the People; but, on reach¬ 
 ing the place of meetiug, accompanied by a friend, he found the en¬ 
 trance to the house in possession of a number of the town-guard, who 
 refused to permit any person to enter it. As a number of persons 
 were, by this time, assembled on the street, with a view to attend the 
 meeting, Mr. S. considered it to be his duty to intimate to them, “ that, 
 in consequence of what had taken place, it was judged proper to ad¬ 
 journ the meeting, and to lay the business of it before the several 
 societies for their separate determination." Having made this inti¬ 
 mation, he retired with his friend; but, while proceeding along the 
 street, they were apprehended by the constables, and taken before the 
 Magistrates: after being examined, thej 7 were dismissed without any 
 breach of the peace having been laid to their charge. These occur¬ 
 rences, however, placed Mr. S. in a painful situation, and were shortly 
 after followed by that which led to his final ruin, and for ever blasted 
 his worldly prospects. On the dispersion of the British Convention, 
 he was imprisoned on a warrant from the Sheriff, had his house 
 searched, and all his papers taken from him. 
 
 His prosecutors, now, as well as previous to his imprisonment, acted 
 the part of inquisitors in all their attempts to criminate the subject of 
 our memoir, distinguishing themselves alike by their disingenuousness 
 and cruelty. The most harassing uncertainty existed as to the na¬ 
 ture of the charges which it might be the intention of the public pro¬ 
 secutor to prefer against him. Experience had fully shewn, as we 
 have before observed, that at this time “ to accuse was to convict,” 
 and from the harshness with which the reformers were treated, there 
 
13 
 
 WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 was no length to which their persecutors might not be induced to pro¬ 
 ceed against them, while no confidence could be placed in any jury, 
 which, at this time, to the disgrace of those who were selected as jurors, 
 could be viewed in no other light than as the tool of a faction. In 
 the manner in which Mr. Skirving was treated, there was much to 
 induce the belief in the minds of those little acquainted with the po¬ 
 litical proceedings of the day, that he must have committed an offence, 
 of a very aggravated nature, of which the circumstance of those with 
 whom he acted being denounced as men unworthy to enjoy the com¬ 
 mon privileges of citizens, would, to their minds, appear sufficient 
 proof; while those who had formed their opinion of the Friends of the 
 People from the misrepresentations and false statements industriously 
 circulated against them by their enemies, were not likely to sympa¬ 
 thise with him in the sufferings to which he was now exposed. Con¬ 
 scious, however, of the legal and constitutional nature of all the poli¬ 
 tical proceedings in which he had participated, he looked forward, 
 with confidence, to the period when the conduct of himself and the 
 friends with whom he acted, should be submitted to the investigation 
 of a discerning public, whose acquittal he was much more anxious to 
 obtain than that of a jury. 
 
 After having been incarcerated for several weeks, Mr. S. was libe¬ 
 rated on high bail, and on the 20th of December, 1793, he was served 
 with an indictment to stand trial on the 6th of January following, be¬ 
 fore the High Court of Justiciary, for the crime of sedition. The 
 unusually short space of sixteen days only was thus allowed him to 
 prepare for his defence, and much of this limited time was necessarily 
 occupied in attention to personal and family matters. He, however, 
 resolved to conduct his own defence—such being the apprehension of 
 gentlemen of the legal profession of the unreasonable prejudices of the 
 court against the Friends of the People, that it became a matter of 
 delicacy to request the assistance of any of them on such an occasion. 
 There was, besides, nothing in the nature of the charges preferred 
 against Mr. Skirving, which, in the mind of any reasonable person, 
 could be considered as requiring the superior advocacy of counsel; 
 but the object of the prosecution was too obvious to be mistaken, and, 
 against the determination of the prosecutor, in existing circumstances, 
 the most powerful defence could have availed nothing. 
 
 The interest felt by the public in the fate of the reformers w r as strik¬ 
 ingly manifested on the occasion of Mr. Skirving’s trial. On the 
 morning of the day of trial, some time previous to the sitting of the 
 court, an immense crowd of persons assembled in front of his house, 
 who, on his leaving it on his way to the court, received him with loud 
 cheers; which were repeated by many thousands as he and his friends 
 passed up the High-street. The reception of the Lords of Justiciary 
 was of a very different description. No sooner did any of their Lord- 
 ships arrive, than they were received with hissing, and every mark of 
 popular disapprobation. 
 
 Referring the reader to the account of this extraordinary trial, we 
 consider it superfluous here to do more than make a few remarks. 
 The proceedings in this case afford an astounding view of the despo¬ 
 tism then exercised by those in power in this country. In these it 
 will be perceived that the principles of the constitution which are in- 
 
MEMOIR OF 
 
 14. 
 
 tended to secure the liberty of the subject, were grossly violated ; and 
 a court of justice was, to subserve the purposes of a wicked and ty¬ 
 rannical minister of the crown, rendered an engine of oppression the 
 most intolerable to which it is possible to men to be subjected, even 
 under the sway of an iron-handed despot. The powers with which 
 the Lord Advocate of Scotland is by law invested are, we believe, very 
 extensive; but we are convinced that no officer of government, if he 
 knew that he were responsible, would dare to assume the authority 
 exercised at this time by Dundas of Arniston. To meet for political 
 purposes or for any other constitutional object was a right secured to 
 the people by the law of the land, and to attend a political meeting 
 was never considered by them an offence. The meetings of the Friends 
 of the People were therefore attended by citizens of every grade, and 
 without reserve. Now, however, the people were deprived of this right; 
 and we blush to state the fact, that the Magistrates of an enlightened 
 capital should have so far degraded themselves as to pander to the 
 wishes'of a political apostate, however exalted in rank, by taking upon 
 themselves to disperse by force the Convention of the Friends of the 
 People. This act of disgraceful political subserviency, afforded the 
 Lord Advocate a fine opportunity of subjecting to his arbitrary power 
 all who had in any measure given offence by their political conduct; 
 and of this he was not slow in taking advantage. The Secretary of 
 the Convention was the first who was made to feel the exercise of 
 this unconstitutional power; and he was accordingly summoned to the 
 bar of the High Court of Justiciary, charged with the crime of sedition. 
 
 From the manner in which the public mind had been abused re¬ 
 specting the associations of the Friends of the People, and particu¬ 
 larly the proceedings of the British Convention, it was naturally 
 expected that some extraordinary disclosures would, in this case, have 
 been made, of the revolutionary designs with which these associations 
 had so long been stigmatized. But what was the fact? The criminal 
 letters which were served, proved to every unprejudiced mind the Re¬ 
 formers’ innocency of all the malicious charges brought against them 
 by their enemies. With regard to the individual subjected to trial, it 
 must appear obvious to every one who examines with candour the ju¬ 
 dicial proceedings, that he had, while actively engaged as a leader in 
 the cause of Reform, passed through a period of uncommon politi¬ 
 cal excitement, without either in word or action having given the least 
 ground to suspect his attachment to the institutions of his country, or, 
 in any instance, having allowed himself to be betrayed into either ar¬ 
 rogance or presumption, in advocating the cause of his country. This 
 much we conceive we have a right to assume from the proceedings on 
 the trial. The charges laid in the indictment, so far as they relate to 
 the personal conduct of the accused, are so extremely futile, that every 
 person of discernment must be convinced, that the Public Prosecutor 
 must have calculated on other means of conviction, even though the 
 personal charges had been proved by evidence to the very letter, espe¬ 
 cially when the fact is kept in view, that from all legal responsibility 
 respecting the actions libelled, Mr. Skirving had been previously as¬ 
 soilzied by the local authorities. Yes, the means the public prosecutor 
 relied on, were doubtless the effect of the base calumnies circulated 
 respecting the political designs of the Friends of the People; by 
 
WM, SKIIlVINfi. 
 
 15 
 
 which a degree of terror was excited in the minds of many of the most 
 influential classes, of which it would be very difficult now to conceive. 
 In addition to this, he found, among those in office, such a strong 
 inclination to yield to the dictates of those above them, that their sub¬ 
 serviency to promote the views of Pitt, might in all cases be calculated 
 on, of which the conduct of the Magistrates, as already noticed, was 
 a striking proof. On the bench, in the Court of Justiciary, he found 
 men who were not only willing to go all the lengths which he himself 
 was inclined to go in circumscribing the rights of the people, but even 
 to outrun him. Before a tribunal, therefore, so constituted, there 
 could be no opposition dreaded, however unconstitutional the doctrines 
 which he might think proper to enforce. It is to these circumstances, 
 we apprehend, that we must attribute the extraordinary presump¬ 
 tion of the Lord Advocate, when he, at this time, denounced the 
 associations of the Friends of the People illegal and seditious,—thus 
 putting beyond the pale of the law, a numerous and respectable body 
 of citizens, who had, for a long time previous to this period, been in 
 the habit of meeting for political purposes, without in one instance 
 having been accused of any thing in their conduct opposed to the 
 peace and well-being of the community. The intelligent reader of the 
 proceedings in the case of Mr. Skirving, as indeed of those of all the 
 Reformers at that period, will therefore readily perceive, that it was 
 not their personal offences which subjected them to exile from their 
 native country, but their having connected themselves with men, whose 
 object was to obtain a reform in the representation of the people. Of 
 this the case before us affords a convincing proof. 
 
 It will be observed, as a curious circumstance connected with this 
 case, that the Bench, when called on to give a legal definition of the 
 crime of sedition, shewed themselves quite incompetent to the task. 
 All that the accused could obtain from them on this important point, 
 was a reference to former decisions, and expressions of surprise that 
 any definitions should be considered necessary. In fact, it appears 
 throughout the proceedings to have been the object of their Lord- 
 ships to make the law subservient to their malicious opposition to the 
 friends of Reform. In his defence, however, Mr. Skirving, we think, 
 distinctly shewed that the overt act charged in the minor proposition 
 of the indictment, did not constitute the crime of sedition ; that 
 though proved to have been committed, they constituted only the 
 crime of leasing-making,—a crime very different in its nature from 
 sedition, and to which, on conviction, a much more lenient punish¬ 
 ment was by law affixed. It would be an easy task to shew, that in 
 this, as well as all the other trials of this time, there was manifested, on 
 the part of the Bench, a determination to convict, regardless of the 
 many well-founded legal objections presented for their consideration. 
 We have, however, no wish at present to enter into any details re¬ 
 specting the conduct and demeanour of the Court during the progress 
 of these trials ; but it is a well-ascertained fact, that in the minds of 
 the public, arising from what had been witnessed of the Court of 
 Justiciary, when any Reformer was brought up for trial, his sentence 
 was familiarly talked of as a matter of course, and without a single 
 mistake as to the length of time he would have to remain in exile. 
 
 The cruel treatment which the Reformers experienced at the hands 
 
16 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 of the law authorities, naturally excited a deep feeling of interest 
 among the people, to which they took the opportunity of giving ex¬ 
 pression, as they had done in the case of Mr. Skirving, by accompany¬ 
 ing them from their lodgings on the days of trial to the court-room. 
 But. this they were not permitted to do without interruption. The ma¬ 
 gistrates, aware that such a display of popular feeling was intended, com¬ 
 pelled them, at the risk of the peace of the city, to desist,—a specimen 
 this of the kind of rule exercised at this time by the minions of the 
 tyrant Pitt, under whom, in the government of the people, force was 
 more frequently had recourse to than the dictates of either law or 
 reason. To this system the Friends of the People now found them¬ 
 selves exposed in all its rigour. The consequences were, that to take 
 any part in the management of their societies, was sure to expose the 
 individual who did so to much personal suffering, if not total ruin. 
 For some time, indeed, after the proceedings we have been noticing 
 occurred, societies of the Friends of the People continued to meet 
 without making any movement publicly in behalf of the cause of 
 Reform; but the ever-active malevolence of their enemies soon sug¬ 
 gested a scheme by which the most innocent individuals among them, 
 had it succeeded to the extent intended by those who contrived it, 
 might have been dragged forth and executed as traitors. We here 
 refer to the government plot entrusted to the management of Robert 
 Watt, the object of which, was to ruin the cause of F Torrn by the 
 sacrifice of a number of its most enlightened supporters. Happily, 
 however, the base .machination succeeded only to a very limited ex¬ 
 tent ; for although it was the cause of much unhappiness and suffer¬ 
 ing to a number of the most active Reformers, still none of them were 
 convicted of having had the slightest connection with, or of having 
 given countenance to the Judas thus so insidiously sent amongst 
 them. From the year 1794*, until near the close of the late war, the 
 excitement occasioned by war, the dread of invasion, and its attendant 
 evils, drove from the public mind every thought respecting the in¬ 
 ternal state of the country. 
 
 During the short time that Mr. Skirving remained in the Jail of 
 Edinburgh, after receiving sentence, he was joined in that prison by 
 Mr. Margarot, who also had received sentence of fourteen years' trans¬ 
 portation .—a term of years for which the Court of Justiciary seemed 
 at this tim'e^o have had a peculiar predeliction, when a Reformer was 
 the subject of punishment. Here after remaining a short time, they 
 were carried to London, and having been confined some time in New¬ 
 gate, were, by an order from the Secretary of State’s Office, removed 
 from that prison, and put on board of the Surprise transport, then 
 lying in the river receiving convicts for New South Wales. On board 
 of this vessel, Mr. Skirving found his compatriots, Messrs. Muir and 
 Palmer. The treatment these gentlemen had experienced while in 
 England, affords a striking proof of the vindictive feelings exercised 
 towards the Reformers by those in power at this period. In the 
 Hulks they were placed on a level with the common felons; and so 
 strict were the orders given respecting them, to the officers of these 
 dreadful prisons, that not the slightest difference durst be made in 
 their mode of treating them. The master of the transport also re¬ 
 ceived instructions from the Secretary of State's Office, to treat all 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 17 
 
 under his care as common felons. And for some time after being 
 put on board, the suffering patriots were compelled to live with the 
 convicts : the officers of the ship, however, most generously requested 
 the captain to have them removed from the felons’ hold, and with this 
 request he complied. 
 
 During the time the ship lay on the coast of England, which was 
 from the early part of the month of February until the first of May, 
 Mr. Skirving’s correspondence with his family and friends shews that 
 he had enjoyed an uninterrupted composure of mind, arising from a 
 conviction of the justness of the cause in which he suffered, and the 
 importance, to his country, of the rights he had sought to obtain for 
 her. 
 
 In the ship, he and his friends were visited by several of the most 
 distinguished politicians of this period, who honoured them with every 
 mark of attention, while some of the most popular political institutions 
 of the time addressed them in the language of condolence, and the 
 warmest approbation. But, with these marks of attention, their friends 
 did not rest satisfied. They sent on board, for their use, every 
 article which they thought might be of use to them during the long 
 voyage on which they were about to proceed, or that could minister 
 to their comfort; and they also bargained with the captain to allow 
 them separate apartments in the ship, for which they paid him a 
 handsome sum. 
 
 On the 1st of May, 1794, the Surprise sailed from St. Helen's, in 
 company with a number of Indiamen, and on the 4th of July reached 
 Rio de Janeiro. The vessel having touched at the port, afforded Mr. 
 Skirving an opportunity of writing his family, and other friends. For 
 some time previous to the receipt of these letters, it had been confi¬ 
 dently reported that a mutiny, attended with fatal consequences, had 
 broken out in the ship. The arrival, therefore, of these letters tended 
 greatly to relieve the painful anxiety of mind which the report had 
 occasioned to the friends of the exiled Patriots. The following ex¬ 
 tract, however, from Mr. Skirving’s letter to Mrs. Skirving, will shew 
 that the report, though false, was not without foundation. 
 
 “ Rio de Janeiro, 5th July, 1794. 
 
 “ My Dear, 
 
 “I wrote you by the West India Fleet, when they parted with our 
 convoy; which letter I hope you have received. We arrived at this 
 port yesterday, in safety. My increasing love for you constrains me 
 already to begin writing to you, but I shall keep mydetter open while 
 I may not lose the first opportunity of transmitting it. My unshaken 
 faith in God our Saviour, that he is and will continue to be the hus¬ 
 band of my widow and the father of my fatherless, while the designs 
 of his providence requires the continuation of our separation, conti¬ 
 nues my support in this very unpleasant voyage. I trust your expe¬ 
 rience of this grace supports your comfort, and invigorates your faith 
 and hope in the same Almighty power and love. 
 
 “I will not write you the particulars of our voyage till we are arrived 
 at our destined port. Indeed, an intervening disagreable occurrence 
 renders it imprudent to write particulars. It has caused me much 
 trouble and vexation, but the abounding, the superabounding consola¬ 
 tions of divine truth, and conscious innocence, have been my shield, 
 
 b No. 2. 
 
18 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 and will ere long turn the counsel of the froward headlong. A man 
 of the name of Draper, who was condemned to be shot for mutiny 
 against the King’s son at Quebec, but was pardoned, though the 
 chief in the plot, on condition of entering the regiment of New South 
 Wales, a part of which are with us as our guard, had been sent to join 
 the party on board of this ship, and the sufferings he had undergone 
 excited my feelings, and being a tailor to business, I resolved to give 
 him employment after his iron9 were knocked off, some short time be¬ 
 fore we left Portsmouth, especially, as his officer recommended him 
 as deserving, and kept him off duty that he might procure by his trade 
 some necessaries for so long a voyage. But our stay at Portsmouth 
 being uncertain, his extreme necessities made him apply to me for 
 some advance money. I proposed that each of us four should ad¬ 
 vance half-a-guinea. Each of us, however, having many similar ap¬ 
 plications, I resolved to supply him myself; and accordingly caused 
 him give me a list of the necessaries he wanted, and requested my 
 friends that articles might be furnished to him, and charged to my 
 account. 
 
 “ Whether this man, from his restless disposition, had really 
 plotted to seize the ship, or had merely been sounding his confidents, 
 as making himself chief among them, I know not. I do not believe 
 that any serious plot was laid, unless in his own vindictive breast; but 
 he certainly had conversed with some of the convicts, and they, desi¬ 
 rous of liberty, must have said they would accept the first opportunity 
 to regain it. Some conversation to this effect having been overheard, 
 the persons accused were immediately confined and put in irons. 
 Draper, conscious that he would be found chief, and knowing what 
 influence his former conduct would have in fixing a conviction of 
 guilt against him, judged his safety depended on turning King’s evi¬ 
 dence; and, to make his information appear better, added Mr. Palmer 
 and me to the number of those he accused ; thinking, I suppose, that 
 as nothing could be proved against us, we would get off with little 
 trouble, and he would get a pardon for his information. Circum¬ 
 stances favoured his hellish ingenuity, but it would be imprudent to 
 write particulars at present. Both the captain and his lady are very 
 indulgent, and, I believe, are convinced that I am incapable of the 
 folly and wickedness of such an attempt. I have been much favoured 
 to bear w'itli equanimity this unprovoked attack. Let our friends, 
 every where, know that v r e will do nothing to disgrace the cause of 
 truth and righteousness, for which we suffer.” 
 
 From the above extract it is evident that Mr. Skirving, at the time 
 he wrote, was suffering much anxiety of mind respecting the probable 
 issue of the wicked machinations of which he was so cruelly made the 
 victim; and that this should be the case, is not to be wondered at, 
 considering the very peculiar circumstances in which he was then 
 placed. But it is extremely pleasant to observe the influence of re¬ 
 ligious principle and conscious innocence supporting his mind under 
 such accumulated suffering. It will also be observed, that he con¬ 
 sidered it prudent, at the time, not to write the particulars of what 
 had occurred; and, as we have no doubt, that the account he gives of 
 his situation is one (while true in every particular) intended to soothe, 
 as much as possible, the mind of the dear relative to whom it was ad- 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 19 
 
 dressed, we have felt some anxiety to obtain a perusal of the letters 
 we knew he wrote at the same time to other friends, but without suc¬ 
 cess. The following account, therefore, of the pretended mutiny, 
 with the circumstances attending it, are taken from a letter addressed 
 by Mr. Skirving to Governor Hunter; a letter written evidently 
 with a view to gratify the Governor with a circumstantial account of 
 what had occurred on board of the transport, and, therefore, containing 
 much which would not now be interesting to the reader. 
 
 “ For some weeks after the Surprise left England, every thing on 
 board of her was conducted with the greatest regularity; owing to 
 the judicious management of Mr. M‘Pherson, who was well qualified 
 to fill the situation of first mate, in a vessel of her description. Un¬ 
 fortunately, however, he was not a favourite of Captain Campbell’s, 
 the master, who, on all occasions, seemed desirous of quarrelling and 
 finding fault with him. One day, M‘Pherson and Baker, the super¬ 
 intendent of the ship, had a difference about some trifling affair, when 
 Campbell, very improperly, interfered on the part of the latter ; words 
 ensued, and Campbell came on deck calling out that his mate had 
 mutinied against him, in his own cabin, and ordered the serjeant of 
 the guard to put him in irons, and, at the same time, ordering the 
 flag to be hoisted, and a gun fired as a signal to the other ships. 
 These orders were instantly obeyed, and, on one of the ships bearing 
 down on the transport, the captain, to the astonishment of all on board, 
 called out I have discovered a mutiny in the ship, in which some of my 
 principal officers are concerned 
 
 In the circumstances in which Mr. Skirving, and his companions 
 in exile, were now placed, this event was calculated to excite in their 
 minds the most lively^ apprehensions for their personal "safety and 
 reputation; which to them, from the cause in which they were now 
 suffering, was, perhaps, more dear than even life itself. And, from 
 what they had witnessed in the conduct of their enemies, they had 
 reason to think, that they would not feel the least hesitation in making 
 them the victims of a pretended conspiracy; while, in their present 
 circumstances, the clearest proof of their innocence would avail them 
 nothing. The impression that such an advantage would be taken of 
 them, had strongly impressed Mr. Skirving’s mind from the com¬ 
 mencement of the voyage, and had led him, on all occasions, to avoid 
 conversing with any of the convicts, and to keep himself as much as 
 possible within the observation of the officer in command of the ship. 
 Before leaving England, when they were removed from the felons’ 
 hold, a convict of the name of Grant was removed along with them ; 
 and, though this man’s conduct was offensive to the officers, and 
 though he kept a girl, in violation of a strict regulation respecting 
 convicts, still he was allowed to continue in the part of the ship al¬ 
 lotted them; an indulgence which, it is presumed, would not have been 
 extended to a person in his circumstances, without a special reason 
 for it. Besides this individual, there were others in the ship who 
 appeared to be confidents of. the captain’s, but whose conduct gave 
 them no title to that distinction. But we now proceed to state what 
 occurred on board, after the astounding announcement of the existence 
 of a mutiny in the ship. As there appeared no reason to conclude 
 that such a state of things existed, as that announced by Captain 
 Campbell, it was supposed, that in the heat of passion he had done it, 
 
 b 2 
 
20 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 and that, on reflection, he would see the impropriety of having so acted. 
 The character of the mate, also, who, as yet, was the only person im¬ 
 plicated, placed him beyond the suspicion of guilt. It was, therefore, 
 suggested that he should apologise to the captain for his conduct, and, 
 with a view to this, Mr. Muir wrote a letter, addressed to Campbell, 
 and requested M‘Pherson to sign it. This M‘Pherson refused to do, 
 on the ground that he himself was the injured party. By those who 
 supported the captain's statement, it was affirmed, that the object of 
 the mutineers was to seize the ship, and, having done so, to kill him, 
 and throw overboard all who should oppose them. After remaining 
 in irons for some days, the mate was sent on board the Commodore’s 
 ship, and Campbell went in the boat along with him. Mr. Skirving, 
 therefore, felt the greatest anxiety respecting the nature of the report 
 he would make to the Commodore, of the state of the ship ; as that 
 report would be sent home, and if he, or his friends, were represented 
 by it, as connected with the mutiny, it would prove a triumph to 
 their enemies, and a cause of grief and unhappiness to their friends. 
 On his return on board, therefore, he waited on him, and expressed 
 his anxiety, with regard to the nature of the report he had made to 
 the Commodore. Campbell assured him that he might feel at ease on 
 that point, as, in the report he had made, he distinctly stated “ that 
 none of you four gentlemen are connected with the mutiny.” As he had 
 lived on terms of intimacy with the captain, that gentleman now seemed 
 to consider it a matter of some importance to gain him over to the 
 belief of the existence of a conspirac}' to seize the ship. This he had 
 repeatedly attempted, and, on one occasion, when Mr. Skirving was 
 stating his reasons for not believing it, he got into a passion, and ex¬ 
 claimed, “ but it is true, and I don’t care a d—n whether you believe it 
 or not!” Some time after this, the serjeant who commanded the party 
 of military on board, came into Mr. Skirving’s cabin ; a visit which, 
 he believed, that gentleman made him by the desire of the captain. 
 He entered at once on the subject of the mutiny, expressing his con¬ 
 viction of the truth of the statements respecting it, and added, one of 
 you is connected with it. But, at the same time, said, it is not you. 
 To this Mr. Skirving replied, with respect to the last I am certain, 
 but who is the first person of whom you speak? To this he answered, 
 he was not permitted to give that information; but, being pressed to 
 name the individual, he said it was Muir, and that they were in pos¬ 
 session of a letter, written by him, which fully established his guilt. 
 Immediately on the Serjeant’s leaving him, Mr. Skirving went in quest 
 of Mr. Muir, that he might apprise him of the information he had 
 thus obtained. Having stepped on deck, he found the captain and a 
 Mr. Boston, warmly engaged in conversation, and soon perceived that 
 it related to Muir. The serjeant having communicated to Mr. Bos¬ 
 ton the story of the letter, that gentleman had learned that the letter 
 which was represented as containing a proof of Mr. Muir's guilt, was 
 no other than the letter written by Mr. Muir, which the mate refused 
 to sign ; the copy of which had fallen into the hands of Campbell, and 
 he was base enough to employ it for the purpose of getting those in 
 the ship, whom he knew, from the influence he had over them, were 
 not likely to make inquiries respecting its contents; and, at the time 
 Mr. Skirving came on deck, he (Mr. Boston) was representing to him 
 the impropriety of his conduct in making such a use of that letter. 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 21 
 
 Having listened for some time to their conversation, and perceiving 
 an opportunity of introducing himself, he stepped forward, and said, 
 that he was bound, in duty, to declare, that Serjeant Raddish had 
 given him the same information. Mr. Muir, on being made acquainted 
 with this insidious conduct of Captain Campbell, instantly demanded 
 that the letter should be produced, and publicly read,—a demand 
 with which the captain showed the greatest reluctance to comply; 
 and it required not a little firmness, on the part of Muir, to obtain 
 for himself this simple act of justice; but he succeeded, to the deep 
 mortification of his enemy. 
 
 This incident affords the most convincing proof, that, notwithstand¬ 
 ing Campbell’s professions with regard to the report he had made to 
 the Commodore, as noticed above, that it was really his intention to 
 involve in the odium of being connected with the mutiny some of 
 the four gentlemen whom he, but a short time before, had professed 
 to absolve from all connection with it; but in what we have yet to 
 record, the duplicity and cunning of this man will be more fully illus¬ 
 trated. At his desire, Mr. Skirving had led the worship in the ship ; 
 and, on the Sunday morning after what we have now related oc¬ 
 curred, he came to him, and, in the most courteous manner, requested 
 him to direct his thoughts to a subject suited for the occasion, as no 
 interruption would be given to the usual practice in that matter. The 
 day was, therefore, solemnized by the observance of Divine worship. 
 Next morning, while Mr. Skirving was taking the air on deck, he 
 walked up to him, and, after conversing a little, requested him to go 
 down and take breakfast with him, assigning as his reason for the 
 invitation, that, having obtained every information respecting the 
 mutiny, he was anxious to inform him of it. Accordingly, after 
 breakfast, he said that he had discovered the whole plot, and took 
 great credit to himself for having saved the ship. He affirmed, that 
 the intention of the mutineers was to have killed him and Mr. Baker, 
 and having seized the ship, to have thrown overboard any who made 
 resistance ; but added, he having employed a number of the convicts 
 as spies, and assured them, that if they acted faithfully, they should 
 be set at liberty on the ship’s arriving at Sidney, I have obtained, 
 through them, an account of the whole affair. In making these state¬ 
 ments, he spoke with so much apparent feeling and concern respect¬ 
 ing the mutiny, as perfectly astonished Mr. Skirving. But during the 
 whole of the conversation, he never once uttered a word, or employed 
 a mode of expression, which even, in the most distant manner, was 
 suited to convey to his mind the idea that he was in the number of 
 those implicated. In the course of the forenoon, a boat from the 
 Commodore came alongside, and an officer came on board. Mr. 
 Skirving had retired to his cabin, but had not remained long there, 
 when he was ordered to come on deck in rather a formal manner. 
 He immediately went up, and the reader may judge his surprise, 
 when he heard the surgeon of the ship reading a list of the names of 
 those accused of being connected in the mutiny, including Mr. Pal¬ 
 mer and himself; and they were all instantly ordered into close con¬ 
 finement. The place assigned to Messrs. Skirving and Palmer was 
 a hole in the steerage, the dimensions of which were only 6 feet by 
 5. The steerage, it is well known, is that part of the ship to which 
 all have access. To be confined in such a narrow space, and night 
 
22 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 and day placed within the hearing of the most unbecoming conversa¬ 
 tion, with the corresponding conduct of the ruthless beings who gene¬ 
 rally resorted to the steerage, were to these gentlemen very painful 
 additions to the restraint of confinement. They had reason also to 
 believe, that this place was allotted them for the very purpose of 
 allowing their enemies an opportunity of finding something in their 
 conduct which might be made a ground of accusation, as they ob¬ 
 served, that, on one pretence or another, some of the captain's spies 
 remained close by their place of confinement almost night and day. 
 The orders issued by Campbell shows that it was the object of this 
 petty tyrant to impress all with the belief, that their offence was one 
 of great magnitude. A sentinel was placed at the door of their cabin ; 
 none were permitted to speak with them: and so rigorously was this 
 order enforced, that Mr. Muir having requested the loan of a book 
 from Mr. Skirving, was barbarously knocked down. They were de¬ 
 nied the use of liquor, on pretence of having given the sentry drink. - 
 These orders were written on a board, and hung over their cabin- 
 door, and, what appears rather ominous, concluded with these words : 
 “ Will any now dare to believe them innocent ?” 
 
 To obtain evidence to convict the accused, appears now to have 
 been the object of Campbell in all his movements. But we shall not 
 here harrow up the feelings of the reader by a detail of the atrocities 
 which he perpetrated on the unfortunate victims of his power in order 
 to compass his object; we shall only state, that having employed both 
 promises and threatenings to induce the convicts to give evidence 
 against the accused, and failing even with these persons, who seem to 
 have had sufficient virtue remaining in them as made them shudder 
 at the foul offence they were thus incited to commit, he had recourse 
 to the most unjustifiable cruelties. The persons accused along with 
 Messrs. Palmer and Skirving he exposed night and day on the poop; 
 and having fixed on certain of the convicts, both male and female, 
 he accused them with being acquainted with the designs of the pre¬ 
 tended conspirators, and had them severely flogged to extort a con¬ 
 fession. To such an extent does he appear to have carried this ini¬ 
 quitous proceeding, that had he persisted a little longer, it is more 
 than probable he would have produced a mutiny, the existence of 
 which it would have been no difficult matter to prove. But all his 
 attempts to procure evidence were unsuccessful. 
 
 After remaining for several weeks confined in the manner described, 
 a kind of trial or investigation took place, and as no evidence could 
 be produced to implicate Messrs. Palmer and Skirving, they were re¬ 
 lieved from the painful situation in which the malignity of their ene¬ 
 mies had placed them. 
 
 To avoid extending this memoir to an inconvenient length, we have, 
 in the preceding account of the pretended mutiny, confined ourselves 
 to a narrative merely of the circumstances which more immediately 
 relate to the subject of it, and Mr. Palmer. We are convinced, how¬ 
 ever, that in stating these, our readers will at once perceive that the 
 object of Campbell, was to have involved the sufferers, in the cause 
 of reform, in the odium of having connected themselves with a con¬ 
 spiracy. Of this, his insidious conduct in the case of Mr. Muir, who 
 was evidently the intended victim, and whose place Mr. Skirving after¬ 
 wards supplied, is a convincing proof. There is, besides, in Mr. Skir- 
 
WM, SKIRVING. 
 
 23 
 
 ving’s letter to Governor Hunter, many things stated, with regard to 
 Campbell’s conduct, and that of his creatures in the ship, which, for 
 the reason we have assigned, could not be introduced into the nar¬ 
 rative. We shall, however, here state a circumstance which should 
 not be omitted. It will be observed, that the first person who dis¬ 
 covered the treachery of Campbell, in the case of Muir, was a Mr. 
 Boston. This gentleman had received an appointment, in the civil 
 department, in New South Wales, and was on his way to that colony. 
 Campbell seems to have calculated on his support, in prosecuting his 
 nefarious design, from the circumstance of the appointment he had 
 received. But the conviction Mr. Boston had of the innocence of 
 Muir, and the abhorrence he felt at the base disingenuity displayed 
 by Campbell, did not allow him to rest satisfied, until he had exposed 
 the odious machinations. For this piece of service, in the cause of 
 humanity, and common honesty, Campbell had the assurance to chide 
 him, and intimate, that the kindness of government , in granting him the 
 appointment he now held, should have prevented him from interfering 
 in the manner he had done; and, we may add, that during the re¬ 
 mainder of the voyage, he did not fail to make Mr. Boston feel the 
 effects of his displeasure. 
 
 Mr. Skirving, in his letter to Governor Hunter, considers Camp¬ 
 bell's conduct towards him, and his fellow sufferers in the cause of 
 Reform, as arising from a desire to ingratiate himself with those in 
 power; and the reasons he gives for this opinion are:—Campbell knew, 
 that to these persons, they were, from their political principles and 
 conduct, particularly obnoxious; he knew, also, that their greatest 
 enemies had never dared to charge them with any thing, in conduct, 
 approaching to moral turpitude; and that, in consequence of the se¬ 
 verity exercised in their case, the public feeling was now becoming 
 more and more strong in their favour, and the cause in which they 
 suffered. And hence, he supposed him to have concluded, that by 
 convicting them of a real act of sedition, he would secure to himself 
 the favour of ministers. These, we admit, are forcible reasons in sup¬ 
 port of the opinion, but are inclined to think, taking all the circum¬ 
 stances into consideration, that Campbell was merely the executor of 
 a plan, concocted and arranged previous to his leaving England; which 
 had for its object, to destroy the reputation, if not to deprive of their 
 lives, these unfortunate victims of a cruel and relentless despotism. 
 And, in taking this view of the matter, we are supported, most assur¬ 
 edly, by every incident in the history of the policy of the Pitt admin¬ 
 istration, with respect to the friends of liberty, at that period. 
 
 The Surprise arrived at Port Jackson on the 25th of October, 
 having been nearly six months on her passage from England. After 
 being so long on ship-board, it afforded the exiled Patriots great plea¬ 
 sure again to set foot on terra firma, though in the land where they 
 were destined to remain far from home, and all its endearments. On 
 landing, they were accommodated with houses, in the camp, and, as 
 these were contiguous, they enjoyed the pleasure of frequent inter¬ 
 course; which to persons in their peculiarly distressing circumstances, 
 tended greatly to ameliorate the miseries inseparable from a state of 
 exile. 
 
 The first object to which Messrs. Palmer and Skirving directed 
 their attention, after their arrival in the colony, was to obtain an in- 
 
24 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 quiry respecting the treatment to which they had been subjected 
 while on board of the transport; and, having stated the circumstances 
 of their case to the Governor, his Excellency ordered an investi¬ 
 gation into the whole of the transactions relating to the pretended 
 mutiny on board of the Surprise: the result of which was a complete 
 exculpation of these gentlemen from the charge of insubordination 
 while on board of the transport; and, at the same time, furnishing 
 them with evidence to enable them to prosecute the master and su¬ 
 perintendent of that ship. This they resolved to do, and accordingly 
 had their case thrown into a legal form, and sent home to a legal 
 practitioner, with instructions to proceed against Campbell and Baker, 
 on their return to England; but we suppose they did not return. 
 
 The subject of this memoir, from that equanimity of mind which, 
 throughout all his sufferings, had never deserted him, was enabled to 
 take a calm and unprejudiced view of this distant country, and to 
 act with that prudence which became a person situated as he now 
 unfortunately was. In all newly-settled countries, the occupation of 
 a farmer is, of all employments, at once the most useful and most 
 easily got at; and, having past the greater part of his life in the prac¬ 
 tice of agricultural employments, for which he always felt a strong 
 predilection, he fixed on this as an occupation, which would enable 
 him, if successful, to pass a lengthened residence in the colony, with 
 advantage to himself and his family. He therefore, with this view, 
 purchased a farm; and, of this transaction, he thus writes to Mrs. 
 Skirving, under date the 12th of December, 1794:—“ I am already 
 an heritor and freeholder in New South Wales; I have purchased 
 a farm, crop, and work, already done upon it, valued above £80; 
 I have also got all upon it, man, woman, and beast. I am not, how¬ 
 ever, in the slave trade, be assured, but shall treat them as brethren, 
 if they behave well: I have also the servant allowed me by the Go¬ 
 vernor, and a lad of the name of Moor, belonging to Edinburgh, a 
 free man, who was left here by accident some time ago, whom I found 
 in a very destitute condition. In remembrance of you, I have given 
 the name of New Strathruddie to this far away farm, and, I trust, if I 
 get any tolerable assistance sent me, to make it soon of more value 
 than the old.” 
 
 This farm Mr. Skirving commenced cultivating with every pros¬ 
 pect of success; and, had lie lived and received a little assistance, sent 
 out in articles of commerce, which, from the exhorbitant prices paid 
 in the colony for every article of European produce, would have yielded 
 him a large profit, it is not to be doubted, that the hope he expresses 
 of soon rendering it a valuable possession, would soon have been re¬ 
 alized ; but it pleased a wise and inscrutible Providence to order it 
 otherwise. He was seized with dysentery, a very fatal disease in that 
 climate, and, for the purpose of obtaining medical aid, left the country, 
 and went in to his house in the camp, where he died on the 16th of 
 March, 1796. We give the following copy of Mr. Palmer’s letter to 
 Mrs. Skirving, communicating the melancholy event; only premising, 
 that excepting the information contained in it, Mrs. Skirving never 
 received, from that quarter, any further account of her lamented hus¬ 
 band’s decease, nor any information in what manner the property he 
 left was disposed of. 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 25 
 
 “ My dear Madam, 
 
 “ It is with infinite concern that I am obliged to send you intelli¬ 
 gence the most afflicting. Prepare, my dear madam, before you read 
 farther, for the worst. Your excellent husband is at rest from his 
 persecutors; he has fallen a sacrifice for the good of others. He told 
 me, on his death-bed, that he never recovered the want of proper 
 sustenance during the time of the short allowance, or more properly 
 famine; but this he carefully concealed from his friends, so that Mr. 
 Muir, who used to go into the country to see him, thought he lived 
 in great plenty. 
 
 “ He was seized with a dysentery, fatal in this country if neglected. 
 Alas ! he most imprudently concealed it from us for one month ; he 
 then came into camp to his house, next door to ours, for the sake of 
 better attendance and medical advice. Mr. Balmain, the principal 
 surgeon of the settlement, and the only one at that time for this dis¬ 
 trict, never paid him a single visit, but our excellent friend Mr. Ross, 
 surgeon of the Reliance, in spite of all the obloquy attending it, or 
 the prejudice it might do his interest, attended him twice a-day. Be 
 assured that every possible care and attention was paid him by me, 
 Mr. and Mrs. Boston, and Ellis, who lives with me. Pie had soups, 
 wine, spirits, tea, and every comfort, which friends, money, and this 
 island could afford. 
 
 “ Three days before him, died the accomplished Mr. Gerrald, of the 
 same disorder. In the month of February preceding, Mr. Muir went 
 off in the Otter, Captain Dart, of Boston, New England. 
 
 “ My dear Madam, I must leave you to the consolation of religion, 
 and the well-grounded hope your excellent life affords, of seeing him 
 again. Wishing you every blessing, 
 
 “ I am yours most truly, 
 
 “ Thomas Fyshe Palmer.” 
 
 In this memoir it has been our object, faithfully to detail the part 
 Mr. Skirving acted in the political transactions of 1793, and for some 
 time previous to that period, and the sufferings to which he was most 
 unjustly exposed on that account. We have, therefore, in the course 
 of writing, studiously avoided saying anything respecting his moral 
 or religious character. We feel persuaded, however, that the intelli¬ 
 gent reader, in perusing this imperfect sketch of his political career, 
 will not fail to admit the justness of the character given of him by his 
 contemporaries, “a tried patriot, and an honest man'' In his disposi¬ 
 tion, he was unassuming, social, and kind-hearted. Under the influ¬ 
 ence of the purest benevolence, he, with ardour, pursued every object 
 which appeared calculated to promote the happiness of his fellow-men. 
 And under the influence of the same principle, guided by a thorough 
 conviction of the importance of the end to be attained, he proceeded 
 calmly, and firmly, in the course he had marked out for himself; en¬ 
 couraging those who, with himself, sought the attainment of the same 
 object; yet modestly retiring to give scope for the exercise of the ta¬ 
 lents of others. As a Christian, he was distinguished for sincerity and 
 uprightness, affording to all who knew him a pleasing proof of the 
 influence on his mind of the all-important truths of divine revelation, 
 to the study of which he regularly devoted a portion of his time; and 
 in consequence of the attainments acquired by the study of divine 
 truth, he was recognised by those with whom he walked in religious 
 
26 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 fellowship, as a person well qualified to manage their religious con¬ 
 cerns ; and we have no doubt that there are still living, some who can 
 bear testimony to the services he rendered to the Secession Church, 
 as well as to the esteem and respect in which he was held by many 
 of her most eminent teachers, and other distinguished members of 
 that connection. But, while he held consistently the principles of the 
 Secession Church, he did so with the utmost liberality of mind to¬ 
 wards all who differed from him. The circumstance of a doctrine 
 being popular was, with him, no proof of its truth, nor its being re¬ 
 garded as a novelty, a proof that it must be false. “Try all things, 
 bold fast that which is good,” was the rule by which he was uniformly 
 guided in these matters. 
 
 In concluding the view we have now given of Mr. Skirving’s char¬ 
 acter, we cannot deny ourselves the pleasure of quoting the high 
 compliment, paid to him by his friend and fellow martyr in the cause 
 of reform, Mr. Palmer, and especially as it expresses most eloquently 
 what we have yet to add on the subject. He says, “Indeed, one 
 would think it impossible for any man, with the least remains of virtue, 
 to be an enemy to Skirving; his benevolence is ever active, no injuries 
 can restrain it, he cannot deny the most worthless suitor: very few 
 people more successfully form themselves according to the maxims of 
 Jesus of Nazareth.” 
 
 Soon after her husband went abroad, Mrs. Skirving left Edinburgh, 
 and took up her residence in her native place, Kirkaldy, where she 
 lived in the greatest seclusion, and at last, in the month of October, 
 1801, fell a prey to disease, induced, there is every reason to believe, 
 by the sufferings she had endured. 
 
 The following letter, addressed to Charles Grey, Esq. (the present 
 Earl Grey) contains a good account of the Convention in Edinburgh, 
 and of its correspondence with the Friends of the People, in London : 
 
 Frith Street, Soho, 
 
 Wednesday Evening, June 11th, 1794. 
 
 Sir, 
 
 In compliance with your desire of being accurately informed what 
 correspondence the Friends of the People in London have had with 
 the Convention in Scotland, or with Mr. Skirving, its Secretary, I send 
 you the following particulars, which contain not only the substance 
 of the communications with the Society, but also of those I have per¬ 
 sonally made, and of the whole subject, as far as it has come within 
 my knowledge. 
 
 The first Convention at Edinburgh, in favour of Parliamentary 
 Reform, consisted exclusively of Delegates from the different Societies 
 of the Friends of the People in Scotland. By their minutes they ap¬ 
 pear to have declined communicating with any society which did not 
 take that title. They first met on the lltli of December, 1792, and 
 sat only three days. Their name of “ Convention " was familiar to 
 meetings in Scotland ; and they stated the object of their institution 
 to have been to consolidate the common strength of the Friends of 
 Reform in that part of the country; which is the very same reason 
 given for the establishment of a similar body, for a similar purpose, 
 in London, in 1780. 
 
 In their last sitting, on the 13th of December, they voted that cer¬ 
 tain resolutions should be sent to the Friends of the People in London: 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 21 
 
 which, together with the letter inclosing them, I herewith transmit. 
 This was the only communication made with that body. The answer 
 to it stated, that by some accident the resolutions mentioned in the 
 letter were not inclosed; but that the Society had seen them in the 
 newspapers: it also assured them of the approbation and concurrence 
 of the Friends of the People in London, according to the terms of 
 their several declarations. I afterwards received printed copies of its 
 proceedings, in December 1792 and May 1793, and could not per¬ 
 ceive any thing in them that was not strictly confined to a reasonable 
 Parliamentary Reform. 
 
 On the 2d of May 1793, after having sat three days, it adjourned 
 till October. Many gentlemen of great respectability and of large 
 property were members of it. The Magistrates of Edinburgh did not 
 molest, or, far as ever I could learn, even blame it. And when, in the 
 House of Commons, the question of parliamentary reform was so fully 
 discussed, on the 6th and 7th of May 1793, in which the subject of a 
 national convention was introduced and reprobated, the slightest no¬ 
 tice was not taken of the convention at Edinburgh, though it had as¬ 
 sembled in the preceding December and published its proceedings, 
 and had again assembled, seven days before that debate, for the pur¬ 
 pose of collecting and forwarding many of the very petitions in favour 
 of reform, which were then under discussion;—a business which it 
 publicly avowed, and which many days prior to the debate was pub¬ 
 lished in the London newspapers. 
 
 The next letter received from Mr. Skirving, so far as I recollect, 
 was in the middle of October 1793 ; it was signed by him, as secretary 
 to the society of the Friends of the People in Edinburgh, and not as 
 secretary to the convention. It solicited the society of the Friends of 
 the People in London to send delegates to the ensuing convention of 
 the Friends of the People at Edinburgh, appointed for the 29th of the 
 same month. F shewed the letter to two or three members who hap¬ 
 pened to be then in town, and they agreed with me that I ought to 
 send an answer to the following effect;—Acquainting Mr. Skirving, 
 that on a subject so important as that of sending delegates to the con¬ 
 vention at Edinburgh, it would be necessary to consult the society; 
 but that the shortness of the time rendered it impossible to give proper 
 notice, first for calling the committee, (which was not then sitting, 
 and which alone could assemble the society,) and then for calling a 
 general meeting; the shortness of the time I represented as the more 
 objectionable in that season of the year, when very few members were 
 in town. I, however, told him that I had consulted some members on 
 the subject, and they had agreed with me, without deciding on the 
 propriety of the measure, that the notice was insufficient, and that 
 therefore Iris request could not be complied with. I added, that it was 
 highly probable some members of the Society, then in Scotland, would 
 be present, and that whatever they agreed to I had no doubt the So¬ 
 ciety would confirm. I said Lord Lauderdale might perhaps attend. 
 No person in London saw this answer after it was drawn up. It was 
 entirely of my own writing ; and I think it was stated in it that it was 
 merely a private personal communication from myself. 
 
 I afterwards understood that the Convention of Delegates from the 
 Friends of the People in Scotland assembled accordingly on the 29th 
 of October, and sat. as they had done at their former meetings, two 
 or three days. They confined themselves strictly, and I believe sin- 
 
28 
 
 MEMOIR OF 
 
 cerely, to the business of Parliamentary Reform, and then adjourned 
 for several months. Soon after their adjournment, however, the De¬ 
 legates from the Societies in London and other parts of England ar¬ 
 rived. The Convention then re-assembled on the 19th of November; 
 and it was not till after this period that it assumed the name of The 
 British Convention instituted for the purpose of obtaining Universal 
 Suffrage and Annual Parliaments, or adopted any part of the language 
 or conduct which (with what justice I do not pretend to determine) 
 have exposed it to so much animadversion and censure. 
 
 This is the whole of the correspondence, as far as I can recollect, 
 that passed between the Friends of the People in London and the 
 Convention, or Mr. Skirving, at Edinburgh. The correspondence 
 that took place between Mr. Skirving and myself could not, from cir¬ 
 cumstances which occur in my mind, be very important. He sent me 
 the printed minutes of the Convention, and I sent him the publications 
 of the Friends of the People in London. The last time I wrote to 
 him was about the end of October, acknowledging the receipt of some 
 copies of Mr. Muir’s Trial; and I perfectly remember concluding my 
 letter with a hope that the Delegates from the Societies in London, 
 who had then just departed to meet the Convention in Edinburgh, 
 would not import into Scotland any of that intemperate spirit which 
 had brought blame on the moderate and sincere Friends of Reform in 
 England: 1 hoped that the Friends of the People in Scotland would 
 continue to persevere with that prudence and moderation in the cause 
 of Parliameutarj' Reform, which had so justly obtained them the ap¬ 
 probation of the Friends to the measure in England.—This letter, I 
 suppose, displeased Mr. Skirving, for he never after wrote to me, nor 
 did I write to him. 
 
 Having now detailed the whole of the correspondence, to the best 
 of my remembrance, between the Convention and the Friends of the 
 People in London, and between Mr. Skirving and myself, I think it 
 my duty to observe, without presuming to give my opinion on the 
 conduct of the British Convention, that a material distinction ought 
 to be drawn between it and the Convention of the Friends of the 
 People. The proceedings of the latter, at their meetings in Decem¬ 
 ber 1792 and May 1793, appear to me to have been such as the most 
 timid Friend to Parliamentary Reform could not object to. Their 
 proceedings at their meeting in October were, I believe, of the same 
 description. When they assembled with the delegates from England, 
 indeed, another system seems to have been pursued. Their meetings 
 had always sat only three days at a time, and they were settled to be 
 held only twice a-year. But after it became the British Convention, 
 they then, and not till then, entered into all those measures at which 
 the Magistrates and Government have expressed so much alarm; and 
 it was not till then that they even declared decisively in favour of 
 Universal Suffrage and Annual Parliaments; it is therefore extremely 
 material to remark, that no blame has yet been thrown on the Con¬ 
 vention of the Friends of the People at Edinburgh; and that between 
 the British Convention and the Friends of the People in London no 
 correspondence of any kind ever took place, nor even any sort of 
 communication between Mr. Skirving and myself after this institution. 
 
 I have the honour to be, Sir, your most humble obedt. servant, 
 
 Daniel Stuart. 
 
 To Charles Grey, Esq. M. P. 
 
TRIAL 
 
 OF 
 
 WILLIAM SKIRVING, 
 
 FOR SEDITION. 
 
 The members of the Court of Justiciary 
 assembled precisely at ten o’clock in the 
 forenoon of the 6th January, 1794. Mr. 
 Skirving appeared, and placed himself at 
 the bar. His Majesty’s advocate, for his 
 Majesty’s interest, was then, in the usual 
 form, called against the pannel. Mr. 
 Skirving was desired by the Lord Justice 
 Clerk to listen to the indictment against 
 him, which was to be read immediately 
 by the Clerk of the Court. The indict¬ 
 ment charged Mr. Skirving with circulat¬ 
 ing seditious and inflammatory handbills, 
 composed by Thomas Fyshe Palmer, 
 and printed at Dundee, and of being a 
 member of illegal associations, styled, 
 “ Friends of the People,” and “ British 
 Convention.” On its being read, 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _What do you 
 
 say to this, Mr. Skirving; are you guilty 
 or not ? 
 
 Mr. Skirving. —I am conscious of no 
 guilt, my lord. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _Have you any 
 
 counsel for you ? 
 
 Mr. Skirving _No, my lord, I have 
 
 the misfortune to have no counsel what¬ 
 ever. 
 
 Lord Eskgrove. —Mr. Skirving very 
 well knows that if he had wished for coun¬ 
 sel, and had applied to the Court, he 
 might have had counsel. 
 
 Mr. Skirving _Such is the apprehen¬ 
 
 sion of your prejudice against the Friends 
 of the People that is gone forth, that an 
 agent before the court said, it was almost 
 giving up his business to be seen doing 
 any thing for the Friends of the People ; 
 and therefore, I thought I would trust to 
 the court, and do as well as I could with¬ 
 out counsel_It is very unfortunate that 
 
 I have had so little time to prepare for 
 my defence ; however, conscious of in¬ 
 nocence, I must trust myself in the hands 
 of the court, and make the best defence 
 1 can. 
 
 Lord Eskgrove _We know very well, 
 
 that both the agents and the court have 
 so much compassion, that they never re¬ 
 fuse to assist any pannel. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _The meanest 
 
 subject that comes to this court, may have 
 counsel if he applies for it. Do you wish 
 to have counsel now ? 
 
 Mr. Skirving _I should be very glad 
 
 of the assistance of counsel, but it would 
 now be taking any gentleman at unawares. 
 
 Mr. Solicitor-General —My lords, 
 as the pannel has slated no particular ob¬ 
 jections to the relevancy, or to the form 
 of the criminal libel exhibited against 
 him, perhaps in point of form the public 
 prosecutor might dispense with saying 
 any thing at all upon the subject; at the 
 same time, in this case, I judge it may 
 not be improper, for the sake of the jury 
 who are to try this case, before the proof 
 is adduced before them, to make some 
 observations upon the nature of the charge 
 contained in this indictment. And, my 
 lords, I would the rather at this period of 
 the cause, because I speak under the cor¬ 
 rection of your lordships ; because, if I 
 state any thing improperly, if I draw any 
 thing out of this indictment that is not 
 agreeable to law, your lordships, I know, 
 will correct me. 
 
 My lords, the general nature of the 
 charge, exhibited against this pannel, is 
 a charge of sedition, with regard to which, 
 my lord, it is unnecessary to say anything. 
 My lord, unfortunately we live in times 
 when it is unnecessary, in this criminal 
 court, after what has passed, to say a single 
 word, either with regard to the nature of 
 sedition, or with regard to the mischievous 
 tendency of it. Your lordships have re¬ 
 peatedly delivered opinions upon that 
 subject, and therefore it is unnecessary to 
 say anything upon it. The particular 
 acts of sedition, charged in this libel, con¬ 
 sist of two branches:—The first is a 
 charge of circulating, and distributing a 
 seditious libel: it is not necessary to 
 trouble your lordships upon this libel; 
 it will be before the jury ; and, I think 
 it is impossible for any person to have 
 a doubt, that it is seditious, and seditious 
 in the highest degree; and it is only 
 necessary to add, that this paper, the cir¬ 
 culation of which is charged upon this 
 pannel, has been already adjudged by 
 
30 
 
 TRIAL OT 
 
 * 
 
 two of your lordships to be highly cri¬ 
 minal ; which was followed up by the 
 conviction and judgment of Fyshe Pal¬ 
 mer, who was charged with being the au¬ 
 thor of it, this pannel being charged with 
 the publication of it. 
 
 My lord, the second branch of the 
 charge relates to the proceedings of what 
 is termed a British Convention, in which 
 this gentleman is charged with taking a 
 very principal part. Now, with respect 
 to this, taking the facts as they are stated 
 upon the face of the indictment, I say, 
 that the meeting itself,—that the whole 
 proceedings of that meeting were, from 
 first to last, illegal, seditious, and such as 
 cannot be tolerated in any established 
 government. My lords, this will appear, 
 by taking a view of those parts of their 
 proceedings, and operations, which are 
 stated upon the face of the libel. 
 
 Let us begin, in the first place, with 
 the manner in which this meeting is 
 called together. The libel states, that it 
 was called together by an advertise¬ 
 ment published by this gentleman, Mr. 
 Skirving : in the indictment it is en¬ 
 grossed, and has been read to your lord- 
 ships. There are two things in it of which 
 I beg leave to take notice. In the first 
 place, the people are called upon, to de¬ 
 mand with the firm and energetic voice of 
 justice, the peaceful restitution of their 
 rights,—which is just, in other words, tell¬ 
 ing the people that they had been de¬ 
 prived of their natural rights ; and that 
 they are now called upon to meet in this 
 Convention, to obtain the restitution of 
 that which had been unfairly taken from 
 them : it further contains a menace held 
 out to the most respectable inhabitants of 
 this country; a menace is held out to 
 those gentlemen who a twelvemonth ago 
 associated themselves to maintain the 
 lawful possession of the government, in 
 opposition to these illegal associations. 
 “ Had certain gentlemen countenanced 
 this association last year, instead of pledg¬ 
 ing their lives and fortunes to prompt a 
 corrupt and ambitious ministry to engage 
 in a war, which could only bring guilt and 
 ruin on the nation, we might have been 
 still enjoying uncommon prosperity, and 
 a happy understanding amongst our¬ 
 selves as brethren : and now, if they will 
 not manfully retract that very impolitic 
 step, and immediately join their influence 
 to the only measure which can prevent 
 further calamity, if not anarchy and ruin, 
 their pledge may be forfeited, and the 
 Friends of the People will be blameless." 
 Their pledge may be forfeited—that is to 
 
 say, their lives are to be forfeited, and the 
 Friends of the People will be innocent 
 This is the manner in which the meeting 
 is called together, and a menace held out 
 to nine-tenths of the inhabitants of Great 
 Britain ; a menace held out to all the re¬ 
 spectable people, who had anything to 
 lose by scenes of anarchy and confusion. 
 Upon this advertisement, the libel states 
 “ that a meeting did assemble, and that 
 the parties having at first assumed the 
 name of the General Convention of the 
 Friends of the People, and having there¬ 
 after presumptuously and seditiously ar¬ 
 rogated to themselves the name of The 
 British Convention of the People associated 
 to obtain Universal Suffrage and Annual 
 Parliaments British Convention of the 
 Delegates of the People ; thereby hold¬ 
 ing out that they were the representatives 
 of the inhabitants of Great Britain—no¬ 
 thing more false,—nothing more sedi¬ 
 tious ; the people of Great Britain, we 
 have reason to be thankful, are represent¬ 
 ed in Parliament. The very name of 
 British Convention carries sedition along 
 with it; it is assuming a title which none 
 but the members of the established go¬ 
 vernment have a right to assume. And 
 the British Convention, associated for 
 what ? for the purpose of obtaining uni¬ 
 versal suffrage; in other words, for the 
 purpose of subverting the government of 
 Great Britain ; because, I will take it 
 upon me to affirm, that universal suffrage 
 is an idea that never entered the head of 
 those who framed the constitution, those 
 who laid the foundation of that happy 
 constitution under which we live ; nor 
 was it ever maintained, or ever thought 
 of, by any body else. 
 
 My lord, I say it would be Such an idea, 
 that, if it was once adopted, would be at 
 once declaring that the constitution of 
 Great Britain is at an end ; an idea that 
 our ancestors never thought of, and never 
 was adopted in any country, ancient or 
 modern, at least in any government of 
 the extent of Great Britain it was never 
 tried, except, indeed, in one instance — 
 a. modern experiment, and one, which I 
 should have thought, that no nation in the 
 world would choose to repeat. I mean 
 the experiment made by France. 
 
 Mv lord, having assumed this name, 
 which I say carries sedition upon the face 
 of it, they proceed, as is stated in the in- ! 
 dictment, and in the whole of their pro- I 
 ccedings they assume the names, and the 
 language of the French convention ; they 
 have a convention ; they have primary as¬ 
 semblies, they have the name of citizens. 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 31 
 
 which the members of the society com¬ 
 monly pass by,—they have committees of 
 finance, of instruction, of organization ; 
 and they date their proceedings, in the 
 first year not of the republic indeed, but 
 of the British Convention. In short, we 
 find them constantly departing from the 
 language of this country, and adopting 
 foreign language; which, when connected 
 with those scenes that it has produced, 
 shew a wish to adopt a model which I am 
 not a little surprised that any person in 
 this country could have thought of. In¬ 
 deed, this very circumstance, connected 
 with what has happened in another coun¬ 
 try, appears to me so strong, that, had not 
 our information been most strong and 
 pointed, I should not have believed it 
 possible, that any set of men could have 
 held meetings that rvere, if I may use the 
 expression, consecrated to mischief; using 
 a phraseology which laid the foundation 
 of those scenes of anarchy,—those scenes 
 of rapine,—those scenes of bloodshed, of 
 cruelty, and barbarity hitherto unknown 
 in the world; which have desolated that 
 unhappy country, and disgraced it among 
 the nations of the earth. I say, I could 
 not have believed, that, in this country, 
 any man, or set of men, with those scenes 
 before their eyes, for, I say, not one of 
 them can be ignorant of what is going on 
 in France,—I say, with this awful me¬ 
 mento before their eyes, that they should, 
 notwithstanding, have chosen to form 
 themselves upon that wicked model. I 
 can only see one excuse, and the pannel 
 may plead that, and satisfy the jury of it, 
 that it was done with a good and benefi¬ 
 cial purpose ; that he and his -associates, 
 desirous to check that tide of sedition in 
 this country tending to alarm the sober- 
 minded people, that they, on purpose, as¬ 
 sumed this language, in order to shew, 
 that they had now thrown off the mask, 
 to shew plainly what they were pointing 
 at, thereby to disgust and alarm every so¬ 
 ber, every thinking, rational person ; if 
 the pannel can prove that this was his in¬ 
 tention, that may be a very good excuse ; 
 but I say it is impossible that any other 
 apology, or any other excuse, can be 
 framed for it. 
 
 Then, my lord, the libel states some 
 particular motions and proceedings of this 
 assembly, particularly a motion made by 
 citizen Callendar, directed to an event 
 which they saw might happen ; namely, 
 proceedings in parliament to put a stop to 
 their meetings. Citizen Calendar’s mo¬ 
 tion was, that notice should be imme¬ 
 diately given to the delegates ; well, what 
 
 follows ?—a resolution that they shall be 
 called a convention of emergency. When 
 the proof comes before the Court, they 
 will see what those emergencies w-ere ; 
 one of the emergencies was in case a con¬ 
 vention-bill should be brought into par¬ 
 liament ; and another, that of a French 
 invasion happening. In either of these 
 cases, this convention of emergencies was 
 to take place, to assemble together; and 
 what is more extraordinary, the place of 
 meeting is to be a secret among them¬ 
 selves ; a committee of secrecy is to be 
 appointed, of which Mr. Skirving is a 
 member; which is to be kept secret from 
 the world and everybody else but the com¬ 
 mittee. Does it need language to ex¬ 
 press what this means, that this conven¬ 
 tion is to meet together, and in a place 
 where no person is to know where they 
 meet ?—is it possible for any construction 
 to be put upon this, but that it was in or¬ 
 der to prevent any measures being taken 
 to stop their meeting, which were con¬ 
 trary to law, and could not be tolerated 
 in any country ? And why should this 
 matter be kept a secret if it was only to 
 petition parliament for a reform ? What 
 occasion was there for secrecy and hiding 
 themselves in holes and corners? I say 
 this committee of secrecy and this con¬ 
 vention of emergencies stamps sedition 
 upon the whole of the-proceedings. 
 
 My lords, I shall have only one other 
 motion to take notice-of, a motion made 
 by Mr. Skirving himself. “ That the de¬ 
 legates from the country, who may run 
 short of money by the prolongation of the 
 business of the convention, shall be sup¬ 
 plied by the treasurer. That all the mem¬ 
 bers, both of the convention and of the 
 primary societies, should subscribe a so¬ 
 lemn league and covenant.” I am sure 
 no words are necessary to satisfy your 
 lordships that this was most illegal and 
 most seditious. 
 
 My lord, those are the principal acts of 
 this seditious meeting, which are stated in 
 the libel, and to which the attention of 
 the jury will be particularly attracted. 
 
 My iord, the indictment next goes on 
 to state some particulars, with regard to 
 the dispersion of this meeting, when the 
 magistrate and sheriff found it their duty 
 to disperse them ; and you will find that 
 after being so dispersed, they met again ; 
 another meeting is held at the cockpit, 
 and there the magistrates also declared, 
 they mustnotmeet; upon which Mr. Skir¬ 
 ving reads a paper, which is of a very in¬ 
 vidious nature; it takes care to mention 
 every thing that can put them in a passion; 
 
32 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 it is just as if I had said every thing I could 
 to put a man in a passion, and then desired 
 him to be calm; telling the people, that 
 to prevent them from assembling was an 
 act of violence on the part of the magis¬ 
 trates. Such are the acts charged against 
 this pannel, and which, I have no difficulty 
 in contending, are most illegal and sedi¬ 
 tious. 
 
 1 might plead before your lordships, 
 that a meeting of this kind was seditious, 
 illegal, subversive of government, at every 
 period whatever; had such a meeting been 
 held five years ago, when every thing was 
 quiet in this country, I should have had 
 no difficulty to prove it was seditious : but 
 you will attend to the time at which this 
 meeting was held, the law is always the 
 same, immutable, but the crime is of that 
 nature, that the circumstances of the time 
 must operate very strongly; and what is 
 a slight thing at one period, may be a very 
 atrocious act at another; for example, 
 to draw an illustration from what some 
 of us may remember, supposing five or 
 six years ago it had happened, that a few 
 persons in Edinburgh, had assembled, 
 put on white cockades, marched to the 
 castle-hill, and fired a shot or two, I pre¬ 
 sume nobody would have thought at that 
 period, that that was high treason, it would 
 have been deemed a riot, and not high 
 treason ; but suppose the very same facts 
 had happened in the year 1745, they 
 would have amounted to high treason, and 
 the persons would have been tried, found 
 guilty, and suffered death as traitors; there¬ 
 fore I say, the complexion of the times 
 speaks the intention of the parties, and if 
 ever there was a period when a man was 
 called upon to abstain from seditious prac¬ 
 tices, it is the present, when he has seen 
 the misfortunes of a neighbouring coun¬ 
 try, when he has been warned by the king, 
 in whom he has vested the execution of 
 the law, having been warned by procla¬ 
 mations, warned by proceedings in every 
 penal court in Great Britain, to abstain 
 from every thing that looks like the ap¬ 
 pearance of sedition. I say, if at these 
 times men are so perversely obstinate as 
 to assemble such a meeting, it denotes a 
 criminal intention much greater, than if 
 the same things had happened at another 
 period. 
 
 My lord, it is in vain for these gentle¬ 
 men to say, (which is the language osten¬ 
 sibly held by these persons,) that their 
 purpose was to petition parliament. 1 
 have no difficulty in admitting, what it is 
 impossible to dispute, that every subject 
 has a right to petition the king, has a right 
 
 to petition parliament, and God forbid it 
 it should ever be violated; but we all 
 know, that a petition to parliament may 
 be made a colour for much mischief; we 
 all know what happened in our own 
 times, about twelve or thirteen years ago, 
 when a set of persons assembled in St. 
 George’s fields in London, what was their 
 object? The ostensible language was to 
 petition parliament for a reform of grie¬ 
 vances, or for something not so bad, to 
 prevent parliament from altering the law; 
 they assembled as petitioners; and they 
 concluded, with besieging the legislature, 
 with insulting the members, and, in a few 
 days, spread fire and bloodshed through 
 the British empire. God be praised, 
 there is now no danger, I hope, of any 
 thing of this kind; but I mention it, to 
 show your lordships what crimes may be 
 committed under this pretence. I trust 
 in God, that here there is no danger; 
 and I trust that, at present, notwithstand¬ 
 ing the spirit of sedition, which has gone 
 forth, and been propagated industriously 
 among the uninformed part of the com¬ 
 munity, the constitution is too firmly es¬ 
 tablished upon the great basis of natural 
 justice, of the common good and of li¬ 
 berty,—that rational liberty, which is-com- 
 patible with a regal government, I say, it 
 is too firmly established, and too strongly’ 
 fixed upon the hearts of the people, to be 
 shaken by such instruments as these. 
 Although the government is not in dan¬ 
 ger, the attempt to shake it, though im¬ 
 potent, I trust, is not the less criminal,_ 
 
 is not the less libellous. 
 
 I have made these observations, in or¬ 
 der that the jury, when the cause must go 
 to proof, as no objection has been made 
 to the relevancy, that they may be able to 
 fix their minds upon those parts, which 
 are the essence of the charge; and if I 
 have misstated any thing, I am under 
 your lordships’ correction. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _You have 
 
 given us a very good commentary upon 
 the indictment; but there is one part 
 which you have not read, and I want to 
 hear your commentary upon the words of 
 it. “ And now if they will not manfully 
 retract that very’ impolitic step, and im¬ 
 mediately join their influence to the only 
 measure which can prevent further cala¬ 
 mity, if not anarchy and ruin, their pledge 
 may be forfeited; and the Friends of the 
 People will be blameless.” 
 
 Mr. Solicitor - General. — That, 
 whatever mischief happens, the blame is 
 not to be laid upon the Friends of the Peo¬ 
 ple, because they have so good a cause. 
 
WM. SKIKVING. 
 
 33 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _I suppose the 
 
 Friends of the People might cut our 
 throats with impunity ; they would not 
 be blameable. 
 
 Mr. Skirving.— I should have been 
 happy if the pleadings of relevancy had 
 been before the jury. I think the jury 
 are entitled to hear the relevancy, because 
 the relevancy is a matter for the jury to 
 consider ; and the jury ought to be pre¬ 
 sent, in order that no'part of my cause be 
 prejudged. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _They are all 
 
 present in court. 
 
 Mr. Skirving.- —But, they are not in 
 court, my lord, nor upon oath ; I am very 
 willing, however, to say anything that I 
 have to observe upon the relevancy, be¬ 
 fore your lordships; but, I certainly 
 think myself bound to go over it again 
 before the jury, after the oath of God is 
 upon them. Not being accustomed to 
 speak in public, I am not able to follow 
 the Solicitor-General in-the long speech 
 that he has made; but I have thrown my 
 thoughts together, and shall beg leave to 
 read them to your lordships, from the 
 paper in my hand, if I am permitted. 
 In the meantime, I would observe, that 
 I am not accountable for the acts of the 
 convention; I am summoned before your 
 lordships as an individual, and I dare say, 
 the convention are able to justify them¬ 
 selves for what they have done, when 
 called before your lordships, and will cer¬ 
 tainly justify themselves. In that point 
 of view, everything that the Solicitor- 
 General has said falls to the ground— 
 Anything that respects me, in this con¬ 
 vention, I am ready to answer for; but 
 I apprehend there is nothing laid against 
 me, in particular, that is worth the no¬ 
 ticing. The Solicitor-General thought it 
 Was unnecessary to say anything with re¬ 
 gard to the major of the proposition in the 
 indictment. I have a very different idea 
 of it; because, I suppose no indictment 
 is properly laid, unless the major of the 
 proposition in the indictment answers to 
 the major part of the proposition in the 
 statute, upon which it is founded. In my 
 indictment, the crime laid is sedition— 
 what this transgression is, we are left to 
 discover by an investigation of the several 
 articles in the minor part of the proposi¬ 
 tion laid in the libel—that is to say, from 
 the overt acts charged against me in it, 
 so far as the pannel has observed in the 
 indictment before this court. But, surely 
 the prosecutor ought to have specified the 
 crime as defined, in some one or other of 
 the statutes to which he refers, and which 
 c 
 
 are presently cognizable in this court; 
 and in the transgression of which he 
 wishes to prove that I have been 
 guilty. 
 
 In the indictment, I am charged to 
 compear in a court of justiciary, to answer 
 for the crimes specified, &c. 
 
 Now, in the major proposition of the 
 indictment, only one crime is laid, namely, 
 sedition. Here you see crimes, not one 
 crime, but crimes are said to be specified. 
 Does the prosecutor intend to bring for¬ 
 ward more than he has given me warning 
 to provide my defence against ? The 
 court surely will never permit him to do 
 any such thing. They will not permit 
 him to take me at unawares with a single 
 charge, more than what is laid in his in¬ 
 dictment Now, this is sedition: and 
 there is not a single thing more than se¬ 
 dition charged against me. 
 
 Sedition ! I know not what the prose¬ 
 cutor means by sedition ; for he does not 
 attribute a single quality either of mind 
 or action to it. I am not called on to 
 declare any opinion of it; he only says 
 
 “ Whereas,” &c_and he says no more; 
 
 surely whatever idea he has of sedition, 
 yet after describing it as a crime so hein¬ 
 ous, and so severely punishable, he never 
 could intend, that the things charged in 
 the minor proposition went to make up 
 any such heinous crime, or indeed any 
 crime whatever. Would it ever enter 
 into any person’s mind to suppose, that, 
 acting in the capacity of secretary to a 
 number of societies, my receiving a par¬ 
 cel of papers, according to the first charge 
 in the libel, from one of these societies, 
 and shewing them to a few of the persons 
 entrusted with the business of the whole, 
 in order that they might be able to 
 give their opinion of them, when submit¬ 
 ted to a meeting, was in any degree re¬ 
 prehensible ? When the Fiscal, upon in¬ 
 formation of the Dundee address, got a 
 warrant to apprehend me for my concern 
 in it, I narrated to the Sheriff my whole 
 concern in the matter, and he assoilzied 
 me at ouce. But allowing that I had 
 really been chargeable in the matter of 
 the Dundee address, would it not be both 
 ungenerous and unjust, after citing me as 
 a witness on the part of the crown, car¬ 
 rying me to Perth, and inclosing me with 
 the other witnesses a whole day, and after 
 all, to bring me in as a party, upon the evi¬ 
 dence of the very witnesses with whom I 
 was so shut up, and consequently exposed 
 to converse freely with them on the sub¬ 
 ject, being made to believe, that nothing 
 I might then reveal, supposing I had been 
 
 No. 3. 
 
34 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 criminally concerned, could ever come 
 against myself? 
 
 It would be unjust in the court to ad¬ 
 mit such an unprecedented attack on any 
 man ; and it is hoped they will not in¬ 
 dulge the public prosecutor in this—the 
 more so as the whole of this business is 
 to be brought under the review of parlia¬ 
 ment. 
 
 As to the next thing, the hand-bill by 
 which some General Convention is said 
 to have been called, though I know of 
 no such meeting called by that bill: the 
 prosecutor knows well, that he can neither 
 instruct that l was the author, nor, in any 
 degree, the publisher of it. And though 
 I had been both, it is not possible for him 
 to prove that I could he guilty of any 
 crime in giving warning to my country 
 of its danger, or in calling them, to de¬ 
 mand, in a constitutional manner, rights 
 which, it cannot be denied, have been 
 wrested from them. 
 
 Much is averred in the indictment, with 
 the design of criminating the convention ; 
 but upon the most vague grounds, I am 
 ready to answer for the Association of the 
 Friends of the People, and for all their 
 proceedings from first to last; but at pre¬ 
 sent I am indicted only as an individual. 
 Let me be fairly indicted, as responsible 
 for that convention, and I shall not decline 
 to answer to any indictment; knowing 
 well that the British Convention is fully 
 able to justify its proceedings through 
 me, or any other person charged in their 
 name. But, upon no principle of equity, 
 or justice, can any body of men, regularly 
 associated, be condemned, in any court, if 
 not legally present The public prose¬ 
 cutor, as usual of late, has frequently, in 
 this indictment, termed the Friends of 
 the People, collectively and individually, 
 seditious and evil-disposed persons ; hav¬ 
 ing purposes inimical to the happiness of 
 the people, and to the peace and happi¬ 
 ness as well as to the constitution of the 
 country, and too plainly indicating the 
 same rebellious maxims which have go¬ 
 verned, and do still govern, the proceed¬ 
 ings of the Convention of France. 
 
 That the British Convention, however, 
 is a seditious and unconstitutional meet¬ 
 ing, remains to be proved; and cannot 
 be proved till the legislature declare them 
 such ; or until they shall be cited, tried, 
 and condemned, according to law. Till 
 one or other of these events, they are to 
 be held, in this court, and in the opinion 
 of the public, as a Constitutional So¬ 
 ciety, whatever the Lord Advocate may 
 allege to the contrary. And, therefore, 
 
 as the Friends of the People must be con¬ 
 sidered in this court a constitutional, le¬ 
 gal, or allowable society, equally as any 
 other society, ( presenting responsible per¬ 
 sons of their number amenable to the laws 
 of their country, for all their proceedings ,) 
 everything averred against the British 
 Convention, or their delegates, in my in¬ 
 dictment, must go for nought in the pre¬ 
 sent prosecution. For this same reason, 
 and upon the same principle of justice, 
 everything laid to my charge in this in¬ 
 dictment, as said or done by me in the 
 meetings of that society, falls also to go 
 for nought, unless it could be proven that 
 I did things unwarranted by the Associa¬ 
 tion. In such case, if anything so done 
 by me in their meeting, could be proven 
 to be contrary to law, then, as in justice, 
 I would be liable singly; but not till then. 
 
 To go into the prosecutor’s views in this 
 indictment, would be to unhinge the very 
 constitution of the country, and nothing 
 but the most palpable inattention to the 
 fundamental principles of the British Con¬ 
 stitution, or a seditious design to overturn 
 it, could have dictated an indictment such 
 as this which I new hold in my hand. 
 Should such a proceeding be allowed, 
 there is an end of liberty':—it would be 
 a revival of the conventicle prosecutions 
 with a vengeance. The Lord Advocate 
 would only have to declare any association 
 of the people a number of seditious and 
 evil-disposed persons ; and to get a jury 
 to find some obnoxious person among 
 them guilty ; and then every meeting of 
 the kind would be deemed illegal, and 
 might be dragooned, as in the days of our 
 fathers, without the round-about way of 
 obtaining a declaratory Act of Parliament. 
 He might next, for instance, declare dis¬ 
 senting meetings illegal, and of a sedi¬ 
 tious tendency. 
 
 If then, my lords, everything in this 
 indictment, founded on the insidious and 
 false assertions against the British Con¬ 
 vention, falls necessarily to be expunged, 
 and it must be expunged, unless you 
 are determined to condemn me, at the 
 expense of that very constitution, by 
 authority of which you sit there this 
 day ; and which proposition I chal¬ 
 lenge all mv prosecutors to impugn— 
 What remains in the indictment against 
 me ? Little, indeed, against me, but much 
 to my credit and honour. These matters 
 being left out, which it concerns the con¬ 
 vention to vindicate, there remains no¬ 
 thing more charged against me, that I 
 need to waste your time in animadverting 
 on. No idea of guilt, or even of fault, 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 35 
 
 can arise in any man’s mind on my con¬ 
 duct towards the civil magistrate, in the 
 case referred to. 
 
 If the officer of a civil magistrate shall 
 come to me and desire me to go out of 
 my own house, I have a right to ask the 
 reason ; and if he can shew me no war¬ 
 rant, I may turn him to the door as an 
 officious intruder. If his master shall 
 deign to come himself, and make the same 
 demand, I have a right to ask him his au¬ 
 thority likewise, and to treat him worse 
 than his servant, if he shew no authority ; 
 for no magistrate has any power but what 
 the law gives him ; and even that power, 
 which the law does give him, he must 
 likewise exercise, not as he chooses, but 
 only as the law directs. The king’s pro¬ 
 clamation itself would be of no more force 
 against me, than one from the provost of 
 Edinburgh, and that would be nothing at 
 all, unless warranted by law. Neverthe¬ 
 less, it is false, and altogether unfounded, 
 that I any way contravened the proclama¬ 
 tion of the sheriff and provost; though 
 indeed I did consider it an unwarrantable, 
 unconstitutional, and oppressive act, and 
 
 which they had no authority to emit_ 
 
 When apprehended by the warrant of the 
 provost, and carried before the council, 
 for, I knew not what, though I afterwards 
 found that it was for my advertisement of 
 the 10th, they were satisfied that my ad¬ 
 vertisement was for calling a different 
 meeting altogether, from the meeting 
 which they had taken upon themselves to 
 proscribe; and they dismissed me, after 
 
 giving me my dinner for my trouble_ 
 
 The advertisement was as follows : 
 
 “ Friends of the People. The General 
 Committee of your Societies here, which 
 should have met, as usual, on Thursday 
 last, was necessarilly postponed till Thurs¬ 
 day first, by reason of the sittings of the 
 Convention. The British Convention 
 being now constrained to adjourn to the 
 place appointed for its meetings of emer¬ 
 gency, the General Committee of the 
 Friends of the People in and about Edin¬ 
 burgh, are requested to assemble in a 
 house belonging to Mr. Skirving, their 
 Secretary, formerly denominated the 
 Cock Pit. As our meetings are perfectly 
 constitutional, and our proceedings such 
 as we dare avow, the Meeting will be held 
 at 12 o’clock, noon. A full Meeting is 
 entreated, for the purpose of adopting 
 measures for defraying the expenses of 
 the delegates while attending their duty 
 in the Convention. 
 
 “ W. Skirving. 
 
 “Edinburgh, Dec. 10, 1793.” 
 e 2 
 
 Before coming away, the sitting Ma¬ 
 gistrate did indeed signify, that they ex¬ 
 tended their act of supremacy against that 
 meeting, as well as against the British 
 Convention ; and this new declaration I 
 promised to read to the meeting when as¬ 
 sembled, and leave it to themselves to 
 judge what regard was due to it. I went, 
 accordingly, next day, to fulfil my pro¬ 
 mise. And, knowing the irritation of the 
 people’s minds at the bashaw-like treat¬ 
 ment which had been given to the British 
 Convention; and that they would not re¬ 
 ceive with respect the message I had re¬ 
 ceived for them, in a hurry, before leav¬ 
 ing my own house, I wrote the motion 
 and proposal, which is narrated in the in¬ 
 dictment, and which every person, not 
 altogether blind with prejudice, must con¬ 
 sider as a prudent proposal; and intended 
 solely to prevent the collision of animo¬ 
 sity, betwixt citizens and their magis¬ 
 trates. 
 
 When I came with my worthy friend 
 Mr. Charles Brown, from Sheffield, with 
 whom I had met accidentally, I found 
 the meeting-house blocked up with an 
 armed force ; and seeing the people ga¬ 
 thering fast, we made haste, for fear of 
 tumult, which extraordinary measures never 
 fail to produce in a populous city, to read, 
 first the declaration of the magistrates, 
 and then the above proposal. Upon the 
 same being forced from me violently, but 
 by whose orders I know not, we left them 
 with it and set off. It was very fortunate 
 we came off so soon ; for the people were 
 assembling from all parts so quickly, that 
 their number would in a few minutes have 
 been so great, as to embolden them to in¬ 
 quire and judge who were right and who 
 were wrong in so shameful an affray. For 
 this service to the magistrates, a number 
 of town officers and soldiers were hurried 
 after us, and seizing us, walking upon the 
 street peaceably, and led us as condemned 
 criminals, through the most public street, 
 which, by the tumultuous running of the 
 people from all quarters was completely 
 alarmed, for every window was crowded 
 with heads, the same as during the execu¬ 
 tion of a criminal. They were conduct¬ 
 ing us to the guard house, when Mr. 
 James Laing, one of the town clerks, 
 countermanded the procession to the coun¬ 
 cil chamber. And after a consultation 
 of the magistrates held with the sheriff, 
 crown officers, and the assessors, we were 
 dismissed simpliciter. 
 
 Now upon what data can guilt be 
 charged against me from any part of the 
 whole oflthis procedure ? It is impossible. 
 
TRIAL OF 
 
 3(i 
 
 Was the Lord Advocate ever so anxious 
 to affix criminality upon me in these trans¬ 
 actions, he would not be able. But al¬ 
 though my guiltiness might be evident, 
 what right has he now to establish it, after 
 the magistrates have judged and acquitted 
 me? 
 
 Upon the whole, then, if the matters 
 charged in the libel, taking in the circum¬ 
 stances attending them, or taking them 
 up simply in themselves, as laid in the 
 indictment, amount to the crime of sedi¬ 
 tion, then sedition must be a very inno¬ 
 cent thing indeed. Nay, if my conduct 
 from beginning to end in this business is 
 sedition, I glory in it, as the highest ser¬ 
 vice of my life ; and judge such sedition 
 the lushest virtue, because disinterestedly 
 pursued to promote the public welfare. 
 But in regard your lordships have again, 
 and again, determined sedition to be the 
 worst of all crimes, and including every 
 crime destructive of society, and have 
 again and again for this very crime inflicted 
 punishments, in the eye of some even 
 worse than death itself, I must insist, that 
 as neither the crime itself, nor the law 
 defining it and declaring its penalty are 
 stated in my indictment, it is illegal, and 
 ought therefore to be discharged—and, 
 especially, in regard that possibly my jury, 
 taking up the crime of sedition, as being 
 merely the imprudently blaming the mea¬ 
 sures of administration, may think it very 
 expedient and necessary to find me guilty, 
 with a view, in the present circumstances 
 of the country, to strengthen the execu¬ 
 tive government, and to cast the balance 
 of power into the hands of those, whom 
 possibly on other occasions they would 
 check, but at present judge it proper to 
 trust to their prudent and merciful ex¬ 
 ercise of discretionary power. Some ju¬ 
 ries of late are said to have acted from 
 such motives; and we trust, for the sake 
 of justice, they have repented that they 
 left to others the judgment which they 
 were bound, by the oath of God, to render 
 to the accused themselves. And finally, 
 in regard this high crime of sedition is 
 said to be punishable by acts of parlia¬ 
 ment, as in the charge upon the indict¬ 
 ment (and indeed no punishment can be 
 inflicted by any other authority) ; it is 
 therefore indispensiblvjust and necessary 
 that these should be precisely specified • 
 or that the libel, as so laid, cannot be pro¬ 
 ceeded on, but is altogether futile and 
 irrelevant. 
 
 If the term Sedition be in any statute of 
 our Law, then it will speak for itself. It 
 will be the major of the proposition in 
 
 the statute ; and the act or acts of the 
 minor, will sufficiently illustrate what the 
 Legislature intended by the crime so term¬ 
 ed ; and if the acts, with the criminating 
 circumstances of intention, described in 
 the statute, or statutes, be the same as 
 those with which the Prosecutor has charg¬ 
 ed me, I will necessarily be condemned. 
 But if no such law is stated upon the au¬ 
 thority of which alone this Court has 
 power to act, and the’Public Prosecutor 
 will not point out any, in this case this 
 indictment must be declared without 
 foundation ; for no libel is relevant, which 
 is not a transcript of some statute, and 
 that both of its major and minor. For, 
 where no law is, there is no transgression. 
 That is to say, the libel ought to state 
 the crime generally — the law which makes 
 it a crime — and then the overt acts, which 
 being proved are the transgression of that 
 law, or laws, and which therefore consti¬ 
 tutes the general crime libelled. 
 
 None of these are done in this indict¬ 
 ment ; and indeed it must be evident to 
 the meanest capacity, that this very un¬ 
 precedented libel could not have any le¬ 
 gal statute for its data and pattern ; for 
 what Legislature possessed of any political 
 wisdom, could be so weak as afford a mo¬ 
 del for such a performance ? 
 
 It would appear, that the Lord Advo¬ 
 cate by one blow would cut off all com¬ 
 munication of sentiment among the peo¬ 
 ple. But surely your lordships will not 
 support the doctrine, that exchange of 
 sentiment among the people, or mutual 
 discussion of argument in society, the 
 natural exercise and employment of those 
 powers bestowed by the Creator, is sedi¬ 
 tion, or any sort of crime 1 Asscciation 
 is the natural inheritance of the brute 
 creation ; and would the Lord Advocate 
 deny the blessing to his fellow-citizens? 
 And if this privilege cannot be denied 
 to any, why would he affix guilt to that 
 mode of exercising the privilege, which 
 his brethren think best adapted for the 
 purposes, for which it is vouchsafed by 
 the Creator? It is an observation which 
 I shall never cease to make, when I have 
 opportunity,.that the grand political con¬ 
 sequences of the state of slavery, and that 
 of liberty, or native effects of their oppo¬ 
 site principles, are these : namely, That 
 arbitrary tyrannical power separates the 
 man from his brother, and infuses the 
 selfish, unfeeling principle more and 
 more in the heart; but the principle of 
 liberty, that true principle which Christi¬ 
 anity implants in the soul; the principle 
 of liberty which Christ has restored, and 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 by which he makes men free, is the load¬ 
 stone which draws souls together ; and 
 establishes the social bond which is the 
 source of all morality. And accordingly 
 we are assured, by a testimony which can¬ 
 not deceive, that, as a certain token of the 
 approach of those halcyon days, which we 
 hope for, the influence of the uniting 
 principle shall be remarkable. It was 
 the signal and the mean of our fathers’ de¬ 
 liverance from popish domination. Its 
 effects are now more wonderful; and, 
 being in the present case altogether vo¬ 
 luntary, and less constrained by party in¬ 
 fluence, promises a still more glorious 
 deliverance : a deliverance, not from one 
 tyranny to embrace another, but a deliv¬ 
 erance from the principle of tyranny it¬ 
 self ; and which will establish the love of 
 mankind. You would do well therefore 
 not to be found counteracting the work 
 of Christ in the earth. It may be the 
 day of his coming, which was to be thus 
 ushered in : “ Then they that feared the 
 Lord spake often one to another, and a 
 book of remembrance was wrote for them 
 that feared the Lord, and thought upon 
 his name.”—It may be the day, the aw¬ 
 ful “ day that shall burn as an oven ; and 
 all the proud, and they that do wickedly, 
 shall be stubble.” Have they not been 
 stubble in a neighbouring country ? And 
 should not you be instructed by the strik¬ 
 ing lesson before your eyes? If the Pub¬ 
 lic Prosecutor, then, cannot invalidate 
 these objections rvhich I have stated a- 
 gainst the relevancy of the libel, and you 
 are satisfied in your own minds, 1st, That 
 as I cannot be tried upon accusations made 
 against a long allowed Society, which has 
 not as yet been tried, and legally convict¬ 
 ed, unless I had been cited before you 
 as the proper and ostensible representative 
 of that Society; therefore the present in¬ 
 dictment against me is illegal, and must 
 be dismissed. 2d, That it ought to be 
 laid aside ; because neither the crime, in 
 the major proposition of the indictment, 
 nor the acts charged against me in the 
 minor, are instructed to be referable to 
 any statute, cognizable by this the Court 
 of Justiciary. And, 3dly, That though 
 you might think the Jury intitled to pro¬ 
 ceed in this trial, upon the idea which 
 ’hey must have, in their own minds, of the 
 word Sedition ; yet, as they know not the 
 dea which the Law Judges have in their 
 ninds of this crime, no statute being 
 ibelled on, therefore by proceeding they 
 night be guilty of the grossest injustice; 
 lecause they might find me guilty of what 
 hey would call sedition ; and their idea 
 
 3Tf 
 
 of sedition being very different from 
 that which the Lords of Justiciary have 
 affixed to it in their minds, viz. that it is 
 the worst of all crimes, and including all 
 other crimes whatever, they might adjudge 
 me to the utmost rigour of punishment; 
 while they only intended to say, that I 
 deserved some small check, to make me 
 act more wisely for the time to come. 
 
 If it is true, what has been affirmed of 
 the citizens upon some late juries, that 
 they sought to petition for a mitigation of 
 the sentence inflicted in consequence of 
 the verdicts which had in this manner 
 been given, because they judged them 
 altogether disproportioned to any idea 
 which they had formed of the crime sub¬ 
 mitted to their cognizance; it follows 
 that they injured their suffering brethren 
 most unjustly; and it can be no rational 
 salvo to their mind, that they acted ac¬ 
 cording to their light at the time ; and 
 that the extreme rigour of the sentences 
 is chargeable not against them, but against 
 the Judges; and that for this obvious rea¬ 
 son, that, in effect, they actually and le¬ 
 gally adjudged their brother to be possi¬ 
 bly ten times more guilty than they be¬ 
 lieved him in their conscience to be, since 
 they exposed him to ten times more suf¬ 
 fering than they thought he merited. Had 
 they made a point to have the, same idea 
 of the crime charged that the law and 
 the judges of the law would have of it, and 
 this is the first duty of every juryman, 
 they would then have found a very dif¬ 
 ferent verdict; they would have found 
 that he did not merit such a degree of 
 punishment; that is to say, they would 
 have found that he was not guilty of the 
 crime libelled, as meriting such punish¬ 
 ment. 
 
 This, therefore, I trust, will be both a 
 warning and a lesson to juries, that they 
 wisely consider first, what is the nature of 
 the crime indicted, and the punishment 
 that will be inflicted, if the same shall be 
 proven. And then whatever number of 
 smaller crimes may be proven against the 
 pannel, if the whole of these together 
 do not merit, in their judgment, the pun¬ 
 ishment to be inflicted, they must find the 
 pannel at their bar not guilty of the crime 
 indicted; that is to say, not deserving of 
 the punishment adjudged to the crime 
 charged in the indictment. 
 
 “ The original intention of trials by 
 jury was to guard against the partiality 
 and injustice of magistrates and judges. 
 The county courts, the members of which 
 were the ancient judges of this country, 
 became so exceedingly corrupt, that ju- 
 
38 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 ries were invented to remedy the many 
 enormities and oppressions daily com¬ 
 mitted by these courts. Formerly, the 
 juries of Scotland were impannelled in 
 civil as well as in criminal actions. They 
 are now limited to the trial of high crimes 
 and misdemeanours. 
 
 “ It is a common notion, that jurymen 
 are judges of the fact only, and not of 
 the law. 
 
 “ It has, perhaps, been too much fos¬ 
 tered by the injunctions of judges and 
 magistrates. It is exceedingly natural, 
 that plain simple jurymen should look up 
 with veneration to the high rank, and su¬ 
 perior abilities of those men who are ap¬ 
 pointed by their sovereign to dispense 
 justice over the nation. For this reason 
 it is, that the English judges are so ex¬ 
 tremely solicitous not to inculcate their 
 own opinions on the minds of jurymen, 
 but to leave their determinations solely 
 to the dictates of their own consciences.” 
 
 “ To what end,” said Lord Chief Justice 
 Vaughan, “are the jurors challenged so 
 scrupulously to the array and poll? To 
 what end must they have such a certain 
 freehold, and be probi et legates homines, 
 (good and honest men,) and not of affinity 
 with the parties concerned ? To what 
 end must they have, in many cases the 
 view, for their exacter information chiefly ? 
 if, after all this, they implicitly give a ver¬ 
 dict by the dictates and authority of ano¬ 
 ther man, when sworn to do it according 
 to the best of their own knowledge ? A 
 man cannot see by another man’s eye, 
 nor hear by another man’s ear; no more 
 can a man conclude or infer the thing to 
 be resolved by another’s understanding or 
 reasoning; and, though the verdict be 
 right, which the jury give, yet they, being 
 not assured it is so from their own under¬ 
 standing, ar e forsworn.” 
 
 Sir Matthew Hale, in his Pleas of the 
 Crow n, remarks, “ That it is the con¬ 
 science of the jury that must pronounce 
 the prisoner guilty or not guilty ; for, to 
 say the truth, it were the most unhappy 
 case that could be to the judge, if he, at 
 his peril, must take upon him the guilt or 
 innocence of the prisoner; unhappy also 
 for the prisoner; for, if theyW^e’s opinion 
 must rule the verdict, the trial by jury 
 would be useless.” 
 
 “ Though the proper business of a jury 
 be to inquire into the truth of facts, it is 
 certain, that, in many cases, they judge of 
 matters also of law or relevancy. Thus, 
 though an objection against a witness 
 should be repelled by the court, the jury 
 are under no necessity of laying greater 
 
 stress on his testimony than they think 
 just and, in trials of art and part, where 
 special facts need not be libelled, the jury, 
 if they return a general verdict, thereby 
 make themselves truly judges of the rele¬ 
 vancy, as well as of the truth of the facts 
 deposed upon by the witnesses. A ge¬ 
 neral verdict is that which, without de¬ 
 scending to particular facts, finds, in gene¬ 
 ral terms, that the pannel is guilty or not 
 guilty.” (Ersk. Inst. p. 741, § 101.) 
 The same author remarks, that M’Kenzie 
 “ disapproves of this institution of juries, 
 because it is hardly possible, in many cases, 
 to separate the proof of facts from their 
 relevancy, the last of which is frequently 
 of too high a disquisition for such as are 
 not learned in the law. But no man’s 
 life or fortune ought to depend upon too 
 refined reasoning; and, if decerning the 
 nature of crimes be beyond the reach of 
 juries, which are presumed to consist of 
 men of common understanding, how can 
 our criminal law be accounted a rule by 
 which every artificer and farmer ought to 
 square his conduct?” Ibid. p. 738. 
 
 From these most respectable authori¬ 
 ties, and many others that might, if neces¬ 
 sary, be produced, it is evident, that jury¬ 
 men, by the laws of their country, are 
 expressly constituted judges, in all crimi¬ 
 nal trials, both of the law and of the fact. 
 
 I shall, however, hazard a few arguments, 
 derived from the nature and intention of 
 trials by jury. 
 
 To prevent the misapplication of law 
 by judges and magistrates, was one of the 
 great ends for which trials by jury were 
 originally devised by the w'isdom of the 
 legislature. If, therefore, the power of 
 judging of the law, as well as of the fact, 
 were annihilated, the very intention of 
 the legislature would be defeated; because 
 the courts, and not the jury, would then 
 be the sole judges. Intention is the es¬ 
 sence of crimes. The facts libelled may 
 be distinctly proved. But if from par¬ 
 ticular circumstances, the jury are con¬ 
 vinced in their own minds, that the pannel 
 either had no intention to commit a crime, 
 or that the. crime is not of so heinous a 
 nature as to merit the punishment con¬ 
 cluded for in the indictment, in all cases 
 of this kind, the jury have not only aright, 
 but they are bound, by the spirit of their 
 oaths, and by the laws of God and man, i 
 to find the pannel A T ot Guilty of the crime 
 | laid to his charge. When a pannel is li-l 
 belled for murder, and the actual slaugh¬ 
 ter is proved against him ; yet, if the jury 
 are satisfied that he had no design to com¬ 
 mit the crime, it is their duty to acquit^ 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 39 
 
 him; because, on this supposition, the in¬ 
 tention is wanting, and, of course, the 
 crime of murder has no existence. Again, 
 suppose a culprit to be indicted for rob¬ 
 bery, or any other capital offence, and 
 that the facts are clearly proved; still, as 
 Mr. Erskine judiciously remarks, if the 
 jury are convinced in their consciences, 
 that the chief witnesses are eitherperjured, 
 or that their evidences should not have 
 been admitted, their testimonies ought to 
 be entirely disregarded. 
 
 Besides, if the powers of jurymen 
 were limited to facts alone, why are excul¬ 
 patory evidences permitted? The facts 
 libelled may be fully proved. But the 
 pannel, in alleviation of his guilt, may 
 bring such evidence as will either alter 
 the species of his crime, or convince the 
 jury of his innocence. When a jury are 
 judging in a case of this nature, they not 
 only deliberate concerning the two kinds 
 of evidence, but they consider the nature 
 of the crime, and the punishment that 
 ought, or ought not to be inflicted. In 
 all such cases, the jury must necessarily 
 determine both the law and the fact. 
 
 I know it to be the opinion of many 
 jurymen, that, after the court admit a re¬ 
 levancy, they are bound by their oaths to 
 find the libel either proved or not proved. 
 But these gentlemen should consider, that 
 their business is to give a verdict of a very 
 different kind. They are to judge both 
 of the criminality of the culprit, and of 
 his exculpatory evidence. The words, 
 proved or not proved, should be for ever 
 banished from the verdicts of juries. A 
 relevancy may be found, when the jury¬ 
 men, who hear the indictment impugned, 
 are of an opposite opinion from the court. 
 A crime may be libelled, when the facts 
 related in the indictment, though com¬ 
 pletely proved, do not constitute the es¬ 
 sence of the crime charged. Hence, 
 whenever the minds of jurymen are con¬ 
 vinced that a relevancy has been impro¬ 
 perly found, their verdict, however the 
 proof may stand, should be Not Guilty. 
 Indeed, the expressions, Guilty or Not 
 Guilty, ought alone to be employed in 
 verdicts. They are liable to no ambi¬ 
 guity, and never can embarrass a court. 
 
 It is generally thought, and the max¬ 
 im has received great support from prac¬ 
 tice, that, when a jury find a pannel guilty, 
 but recommend him to the mercy of their 
 sovereign, the culprit must either be par¬ 
 doned, or receive a milder punishment 
 than death. The unhappy fate, however, 
 of James Andrew, who was lately hanged 
 in Edinburgh, though he had, in the 
 
 strongest manner, been recommended to 
 mercy, by the unanimous suffrage of his 
 jury, must tend to remove this prejudice, 
 and make jurymen very cautious of their 
 conduct. When a majority of a jury be¬ 
 lieve in their consciences, that a culprit, 
 though the crime libelled shouldbe proved, 
 does not deserve to be cut off from human 
 society, by the ultimate punishment of 
 the law, they should uniformly give a ver¬ 
 dict finding the pannel Not Guilty. This 
 is a high privilege, intrusted to you by the 
 laws of your country, and you cannot be 
 too anxious to prevent its infringement 
 or violation. Consider, the moment you 
 desert a pannel by an indecisive verdict, 
 youf powers are at an end. Bestow, 
 therefore, that mercy which you recom¬ 
 mend, and which you think the culprit 
 deserves, while it is in your power. Ne¬ 
 ver trust to future contingencies of any 
 kind; for, the highest orders of men may 
 have prejudices; a thousand fatal accidents 
 may happen; misrepresentations may be 
 given"; the opinion of courts may not al¬ 
 ways coincide with that of the jury; even 
 negligence of office has deprived men of 
 existence after the mercy of the sovereign 
 had been obtained. 
 
 It was for this reason that I objected to 
 the trial of the relevancy till my Jury was 
 impannelled, and that I shall yet bring 
 the previous question under their review, 
 if you shall at present give an unfavour¬ 
 able judgment, because I shall consider 
 your doing so as prejudging my cause, in 
 the most important article, and in all of 
 which my jury alone are entitled to judge. 
 
 If then, Gentlemen of the Jury, you 
 are of opinion with me, that with regard 
 to the first article charged, the Dundee 
 paper, I have already been judged, and 
 at any rate retained a witness against the 
 person condemned for it, and which crime, 
 in the opinion of all the world, is now also 
 sufficiently atoned for, by the punishment 
 already inflicted. If you are of opinion, 
 as you must be, that I cannot be crimi¬ 
 nated, merely for being a member of the 
 British Convention, unless that Conven¬ 
 tion was found guilty, which cannot be 
 found in this present trial, because I am 
 not before the Court as responsible for 
 the charges brought against it. And 
 lastly, my lords, as the charges respect¬ 
 ing the contravening the authority of the 
 Magistrates of this city, is a matter entirely 
 betwixt them and me; and as they have 
 not joined the Public Prosecutor in this 
 indictment, and indeed could not have 
 done so, the matter having been already 
 fully compromised betwixt us, you cannot 
 
TRIAL OF 
 
 40 
 
 avoid assoilzieing me from the present 
 charge. There not being a single thing 
 more in the indictment against me, you 
 are my sole and independent judges, my 
 country. No Court can restrict or con¬ 
 trol you. The Lords of Justiciary them¬ 
 selves are bound to declare that to be law 
 which you finally determine as your ver¬ 
 dict. 
 
 If, however, on the other hand, you are 
 of opinion, that the indictment as laid is 
 relevant, I am ready to enter upon a dis¬ 
 cussion of every charge against me. Let 
 us just now proceed to make up before 
 you the defect, the constitutional defect 
 of the indictment. Let the Prosecutor 
 state in Court, his meaning of the word 
 sedition; his idea of that crime, as laid to 
 my charge ; what statutes is it a breach 
 of; and the idea of criminality which the 
 Legislature has affixed to this crime, by 
 the punishment annexed to it; or as the 
 charge at the instance of the Prosecutor 
 states it, the pains contained, in the Acts of 
 Parliament. I am far from wishing to 
 escape trial. I rejoice to think, I will 
 now have an opportunity to remove the 
 public prejudices entertained against me, 
 and that now my country shall recognise 
 me to be, what my heart tells me I am, 
 its disinterested well-wisher. 
 
 Permit me then, Gentlemen of the 
 Jury,* to lay before you my own private 
 opinion of the crime of sedition, the opi¬ 
 nion which was expressed from the Bench, 
 and to entreat you to fix some precise idea 
 of the same as the standard by which to 
 measure the degree of criminality in the 
 actions, with the circumstances attending 
 them, which are charged in the indictment. 
 
 All crimes against the state may be 
 divided into three classes; Treason, Sedi¬ 
 tion, and Petty Misdemeanour. But in 
 orderto fix guiltonthe acts comprehended 
 under these several heads, two things must 
 enter into the description of them. 1st, 
 Acts comprehended in the term of mis¬ 
 demeanour must, in their consequences, 
 or immediate effects, tend to stir up sedi¬ 
 tion. Those, again, under the descrip¬ 
 tion of sedition, must in like manner run 
 into treason. 2d, These overt-acts must 
 severally appear to be performed, with 
 the evil intention to promotehigher crimes 
 against the state. For example, a person 
 may be bound in duty to say and do things 
 directly contrary to the present govern¬ 
 ment of his country, and which, in their 
 immediate consequences and native ten¬ 
 
 * I*art of this pleading was delivered before the 
 Jury alone ; but the whole is given here, that it 
 may be seen at one view. 
 
 dencies, are evidently calculated to with¬ 
 draw the affections of the governed from 
 their governors. But here it will be ad¬ 
 mitted, by a Christian court at any rate, 
 that one must obey God, rather than man. 
 And consequently it must necessarily fol¬ 
 low that, as a person, so situated, could 
 not be indicted for any criminal intention, 
 whatever tendency the things which he 
 did conscientiously, might have to alien¬ 
 ate the affections of the people from their 
 rulers, no crime could, in justice, be fixed 
 on him. Would the Prosecutor say, that 
 the following anecdotes of duty and pa¬ 
 triotism, which have been preserved as 
 examples of that liberty wherewith Christ 
 hath made his servants free were sedition ? 
 I shall read a few of them ; instance the 
 Prophet Isaiah, chap. ix. ver. 13. “ For 
 the people turneth not unto him that smit- 
 eth them, neither do they seek the Lord 
 of hosts :—14. Therefore the Lord will 
 cut off from Israel head and tail, branch 
 and rush, in one day. 15. The ancient 
 and honourable, he is the head ; and the 
 prophet that teacheth lies, he is the tail. 
 16. For the leaders of this people cause 
 them to err ; and they that are led of them 
 are destroyed.” Chap. iii. ver. 12. “ As 
 for my people, children are their oppres¬ 
 sors, and women rule over them. O my 
 people, they which lead thee cause thee 
 to err, and destroy the way of thy paths. 
 13. The Lord standeth up to plead, and 
 standeth to judge the people. 14. The 
 Lord will enter into judgment with the 
 ancients of his people, and the princes 
 thereof; for ye have eaten up the vine¬ 
 yard ; the spoil of the poor, is in your 
 houses. 15. What mean ye Mat ye beat 
 my people to pieces, and grind the faces 
 of the poor? saith the Lord God of hosts.” 
 Chap. i. 21. “ How is the faithful city be¬ 
 come an harlot! it was full of judgment; 
 righteousness lodged in it; but now mur¬ 
 derers. 22. Thy silver is become dross, 
 thy wine mixed with water. 23. Thy 
 princes are rebellious, and companions of 
 thieves : every one loveth gifts, and fol- 
 loweth after rewards . they judge not the 
 fatherless, neither doth the cause of the 
 widow come unto them. 24. Therefore 
 saith the Lord, the Lord of hosts, the 
 mighty One of Israel, Ah, I will ease me 
 of mine adversaries, and avenge me of 
 mine enemies : 25. And I will turn my 
 hand upon thee, and purely purge away 
 thy dross, and take away all thy tin: 26. 
 And I will restore thy judges as at the first, 
 and thy counsellors as at the beginning : 
 afterward thou shalt be called, The city 
 of righteousness, The faithful city. 27. 
 
WJI. SKIRVING. 41 
 
 Zion shall be redeemed with judgment, 
 and her converts with righteousness.” 
 Ezekiel, chap, xxxiv. ver. 9. “ Therefore, 
 O ye shepherds, hear the word of the 
 Lord ; 10. Thus saith the Lord God, 
 
 Behold I am against the shepherds ; and 
 I will require my flock at their hand, and 
 cause them to cease from feeding the 
 flock ; neither shall the shepherds feed 
 themselves any more ; for I will deliver 
 my flock from their mouth, that they may 
 not be meat for them. 20. Behold I, even 
 I, will judge between the fat cattle and 
 between the lean cattle. 21. Because ye 
 have thrust with side and with shoulder, 
 and pushed all the diseased with your 
 horns, till ye have scattered them abroad; 
 22. Therefore will I save my flock, and 
 they shall no more be a prey ; and I will 
 judge between cattle and cattle. 23. 
 And I will set up one shepherd over them, 
 and he shall feed them, even my servant 
 David.” 
 
 Would the Lord Advocate take upon 
 him to characterise these passages as sedi¬ 
 tion ? Would he impeach the Servants 
 of the Most High with this crime? This 
 would be to impeach our Lord Jesus Christ 
 himself, who not only commanded his ser¬ 
 vants to testify such things against the evil 
 rulers of the' day, but corroborated what 
 they had done by his own personal deed, 
 
 as we read in John_ John, chap. x. ver. 
 
 7. “ Then said Jesus unto them again. Ve¬ 
 rily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door 
 of the sheep. 8. All that ever-came be¬ 
 fore me are thieves and robbers; but the 
 sheep did not hear them. 11. I am the 
 good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth 
 his life for the sheep. 12. But he that, 
 is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose 
 own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf com¬ 
 ing, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth ; 
 and the wolf catcheth them, and scatter- 
 eth the sheep.”* 
 
 The true definition of sedition then 
 must be, that which our own Scots statutes 
 give under the head, of leasing-making 
 against the government of the country, 
 with a bad intention. Speaking the truth 
 can never be sedition ; for truth, you 
 know, is no libel. If his lordship means 
 and indicts, in the word sedition, a higher 
 crime than that in our statutes under the 
 head of leasing-making, he ought now to 
 declare candidly what he intends by it; 
 and the court ought to fix him down to 
 
 * The precedingpassages.in which Mr.Skirving 
 brings forward the Bible in support of his politi¬ 
 cal doctrines, must have been somewhat startling 
 to the Church and King Tories, who usually hold 
 a reformer to be equivalent to an infidel — Ed. 
 
 such precise definition ; and they must 
 also declare the precise statute, or statutes, 
 of which his crime, so defined, is a breach ; 
 for without stating the precise standard, 
 by which the jury are to try my conduct, 
 how can they judge whether I have trans¬ 
 gressed ? and how far ? and how am I to 
 justify my conduct, against the charge of 
 having transgressed ? 
 
 I know no law, either of God or man, 
 that I have transgressed, in the matter of 
 reform. What is the law which his lord- 
 ship thinks I have transgressed ? let him 
 now declare it, if 1 have ; and 1 will yet 
 pass over the informality of its not being 
 stated in the indictment; though, as I am 
 no lawyer, it would be taking me rather 
 upon too short warning. But if his lord- 
 ship has no law by which to try my con¬ 
 duct, except his own opinions, and has 
 raised this process against me, trusting 
 that a jury in his sentiments will have the 
 same opinion of my conduct, that he has 
 formed, I will protest solemnly, that I can¬ 
 not be tried but by the laws of my coun¬ 
 try ; and as no law nor statute is stated 
 in the indictment as transgressed by me, 
 I protest that my jury may not proceed 
 to find a law in their own breast by which 
 to try my conduct; because I hold it a 
 privilege, of which a free man can never 
 be deprived, that he may do any and every 
 thing not proscribed by the laws of his 
 country. I cannot know the private sen¬ 
 timents of my judges, by which I would, 
 in that case, be obliged to regulate my 
 conduct, if his opinion was my law. And 
 what is slavery but this ? 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _There is one 
 
 thing I want to know—he says, he was 
 called as a witness;—was he examined? 
 
 Lord Advocate —Palmer was brought 
 to trial at Perth, and Skirving was includ¬ 
 ed in the list of witnesses; but it was ex¬ 
 pressly directed, that he should not be 
 called as a witness, unless it was found 
 absolutely necessary to the conviction of 
 Palmer. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk —That satisfies 
 me;—I always understood, that examin¬ 
 ing a man as a witness, was an absolute 
 preventative against his being called up¬ 
 on afterwards, by a criminal prosecution : 
 but he was not examined, and therefore 
 that satisfies me. 
 
 Lord Eskgrove —The pannel at the 
 bar is charged with sedition, and he has 
 declined to take the benefit which the laws 
 of his country afford to every criminal; he 
 did not think proper to apply for counsel; 
 if he had, he would have received that in¬ 
 dulgence ; he is now brought before a 
 
42 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 jury of his country, and he will be al¬ 
 lowed to bring any evidence he thinks fit, 
 to alleviate the charges against him. My 
 lord, I cannot think there is the least 
 ground to doubt of the relevancy of the 
 indictment. The gentleman says, it does 
 not mention any particular act upon which 
 it is founded—it is very true it does not, 
 but he certainly does know, or may know, 
 that the law of Scotland is founded on 
 many grounds besides that of Acts of 
 Parliament; there are many things in it 
 which are established by usage,—by the 
 laws of God,—by the dictates of the con¬ 
 sciences of men ; and, I believe, if there 
 is a crime apparent to the sense of every 
 man, this crime, under the name of se¬ 
 dition, is as well understood by every one 
 in this assembly, as by any one of your 
 Lordships. I don’t know what sort of go¬ 
 vernment this gentleman would wish to 
 establish in his new generation of govern¬ 
 ment ; but, I believe, never any govern¬ 
 ment existed, which did not think it ne¬ 
 cessary to punish sedition among the peo¬ 
 ple, which might perhaps go the length 
 of overturning the government, which it 
 does not always do ;—it may have the 
 tendency of an attackupon government 
 itself, according to the nature of the par¬ 
 ticular charges; but to say, that an in¬ 
 dictment charging sedition, is not rele¬ 
 vant without an Act of Parliament, is con¬ 
 trary to usage, and contrary to law. The 
 first charge is, that of accession to the 
 publication of Palmer’s hand-bill. As 
 to that, a jury of the country did find, 
 that it was a seditious libel. Had this 
 gentleman been admitted a witness there, 
 I certainly would not have allowed him 
 to be libelled at the bar for that offence; 
 but he was not examined, though he was 
 cited as a witness. The gentleman says, 
 it is necessary that the British Convention 
 should be first tried, and convicted, be¬ 
 fore he can be charged, as an individual, 
 with the acts charged to have been done 
 in that Convention. I don’t understand 
 that the Convention is a body corporate, 
 but a Convention of individuals; we shall 
 hear whether it was a Convention met for 
 bad purposes or not; and wither this 
 gentleman was one of them. Suppose 
 a meeting of persons assembled under any 
 name, and they should resolve amongst 
 themselves, that they would set fire to the 
 city of Edinburgh; if the Public Prose¬ 
 cutor lays hold of one of the persons that 
 are present at that resolution, would it be 
 consistent to common sense, that he would 
 have a right to say, I am not the repre¬ 
 sentative of that meeting ? you must 
 
 bring them and try them, before 1 can be 
 tried. My lords, it is not necessary that 
 that should be done ; if he gave concur¬ 
 rence to what was done in that assembly, 
 that is sufficient. These people have 
 chosen to follow the example of the 
 French Convention—the resolutions that 
 were come to, in their Society, by order 
 of the same Convention, of which this 
 gentleman acted as Secretary ;—those 
 motions, those resolutions, and those 
 speeches, were published in a newspaper, 
 by order of the Convention, with the con¬ 
 currence of the pannel. That is a circum¬ 
 stance that will merit the consideration of 
 the Jury and the Court. In cases of for¬ 
 gery, which is one of those crimes that we 
 punish every day with capital punish¬ 
 ments, is one of those things, which is of 
 itself, in its nature a crime; if an hun¬ 
 dred, or a thousand persons meet together, 
 they may be able to make the forgery bet¬ 
 ter, but if they use what they forge, if 
 they publish it, and carry it into the world, 
 then it becomes a capital crime at once, 
 though it was innocent while it remained 
 in their chambers. Those gentlemen 
 meet, and resolve to do this and that, and 
 the other thing, but they did not rest sa¬ 
 tisfied with that, but they choose a Gazette 
 of their own, by which means they gain 
 an influence upon the minds of the peo¬ 
 ple ; and they order it to be published. 
 My lords, taking all the circumstances to¬ 
 gether, it is, in the first place, for the jury 
 to decide, whether the acts are proved ; 
 or how far they are proved. And, 2dly, 
 w hether it proceeded from a seditious in¬ 
 tention, or an innocent intention. I should 
 be very happy if this gentleman can bring 
 evidence to vindicate himself. I am very 
 sorry to see this gentleman at that bar, 
 after the example of that trial at Perth, 
 and another, which are the only two that 
 have come within my knowledge. I arn 
 always extremely sorry when my fellow 
 subjects are charged with crimes ; but it 
 is my duty, and my country calls upon 
 me to sit here in judgment, upon such 
 offences. 1 should be very glad, if this 
 pannel can prove himself to be innocent; 
 but, if he be guilty, whether it is occa¬ 
 sioned by a disorder of mind, (for there 
 arc public insanities as well as private I 
 ones,) or whatever it may, I pity the sub- | 
 jects of it; but, as a judge, I must con¬ 
 form to the law; every thing will come j 
 before the jury; and the pannel will have j 
 the verdict of his country. 
 
 Lord Swinton _If there is any wicked - 
 
 and malicious attempt, by violence, to over¬ 
 turn or disturb the present peace of the 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 43 
 
 country, or hurt the present government, 
 that I understand to be sedition: as to 
 the necessity of founding it upon any Act 
 of Parliament, it is not necessary, though 
 it is necessary for Acts of Parliament to 
 try crimes at common law. As to whether 
 the facts in the minor proposition come 
 up to the offence stated in the major, I 
 am of opinion, that all these charges come 
 up, nay, go beyond the crime of sedition. 
 My lords, this handbill calls upon the 
 landholder “ to coalesce with the Friends 
 of the People, lest his property be soon 
 left untenanted; the merchant, lest the 
 commerce of the country be annihilated ; 
 the manufacturer, whose laudable indus¬ 
 try has been arrested in its progress ; the 
 unemployed citizen; the great mass of 
 labouring and now starving poor; and, 
 finally, all the rabble are called upon, by 
 the remembrance of their patriotic ances¬ 
 tors, who shed their blood in the cause of 
 freedom.”.—.Calling upon the rabble !— 
 How are the rabble to do it ? Can they 
 do it in any manner but by outrage and 
 violence ? Is there any other instrument 
 in their hands, but that of outrage and 
 violence? My lords, I cannot help taking 
 notice of another thing. “ Had certain 
 gentlemen countenanced this association 
 last year, instead of pledging their lives 
 and fortunes to prompt a corrupt and am¬ 
 bitious Ministry to engage in a war which 
 could only bring guilt and ruin on the 
 nation, we might have been still enjoying 
 uncommon prosperity, and a happy un¬ 
 derstanding amongst ourselves as breth¬ 
 ren. And now, if they will not manfully 
 retract that very impolitic step, and imme¬ 
 diately join their influence to the only 
 measure which can prevent further cala¬ 
 mity, if not anarchy and ruin, their pledge 
 maybe forfeited.”.—My lords, what was 
 their pledge ? Their pledge was their 
 lives and fortunes. If that is forfeited, 
 that is to say, they have forfeited their 
 lives and fortunes, and the Friends of the 
 People will be innocent:—innocent! of 
 what ?—innocent of taking their lives and 
 fortunes from them : that is the clear lan¬ 
 guage of this paper, and sad language it 
 is. If that does not breathe sedition, I 
 don’t know what does. I am of opinion 
 that the libel is relevant. 
 
 Lord Dunsinnan- —The facts stated 
 in the minor proposition do, in my appre¬ 
 hension, amount, in a most aggravated de¬ 
 gree, to the crime of sedition ; and there 
 can be no doubt but this libel is relevant; 
 and therefore it must of course go to the 
 jury. It is unnecessary to add any thing 
 farther. 
 
 Lord Abercrombie. —It is the pro¬ 
 vince of the jury, and of the jury alone, 
 to judge whether the facts charged in the 
 libel be true or not. The single point 
 now before us is, whether those facts do 
 sufficiently imply the charge ? My lord, 
 upon this point, I should be sorry indeed 
 to have the least hesitation. I believe, 
 there is not now present one man pos¬ 
 sessed of common understanding, who 
 does not concur in the opinions which 
 have been delivered by your lordships, 
 that these charges do amount to sedition, 
 and sedition of a most dangerous and ag¬ 
 gravated nature. My lord, before the 
 alteration of the law of Scotland with re¬ 
 gard to treason, I think that the facts 
 charged in this indictment might have 
 been laid as treason. Nay, my lord, if a 
 fact which the Solicitor-General stated 
 should come out in evidence, that the Bri¬ 
 tish Convention, as it is called, determined 
 and resolved, that in the case of a French 
 invasion, a Convention of emergencies 
 was to be called of course to assist that in¬ 
 vasion ; I think, if that he a fact, the pub¬ 
 lic prosecutor might have laid his charge 
 as high treason : but that is not the charge 
 before us ; it is a charge of sedition only, 
 and I am of opinion it is perfectly relevant. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk —My lords, af¬ 
 ter what I have heard, it is impossible to 
 doubt, that the fact charged in the major 
 proposition is sedition. I am sure, after 
 the preceding trials, and the convictions 
 following upon them, it would be unne¬ 
 cessary forme to use words to satisfy your 
 lordships, that sedition is a crime by the 
 law of Scotland ; and, as to whether the 
 facts in the minor proposition come up to 
 the major proposition, I think this crime 
 might have been laid as high treason. I 
 am very clear it might before the Union. 
 I will not say, by the law of England, it 
 would have been tried as treason ; but I 
 am sure it is sedition both in Scotland 
 and in England. 
 
 [The interlocutor of relevancy read.] 
 
 Mr. Skirving _-I hold that the jury 
 
 are judges of the relevancy, that they are 
 equally judges of the law as of the fact. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk was beginning to 
 name the jury, when Mr. Skirving rose 
 again to object. 
 
 Mr. Skirving. —The objections which 
 I am to make, being of a general nature, 
 and not personal, I wish to state them be¬ 
 fore any of the jury are named. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk proceeded to no¬ 
 minate the first five of the jury. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _Have you any 
 
 objection to these five gentlemen ? 
 
44 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 Mr. Skirving_I object, in general, to 
 
 all those who are members of the Gold¬ 
 smiths’ Hall Association. And, in the 
 second place, I would object to all those 
 who hold places under government; be¬ 
 cause it is a prosecution by government 
 against me : and therefore, 1 apprehend, 
 they cannot, with freedom of mind, judge 
 in a case where they are materially parties. 
 
 Lord Eskgrovf. _This gentleman’s 
 
 objection is, that his Jury aught to consist 
 of the Convention of the Friends of the 
 People ; that every person wishing to sup¬ 
 port government is incapable of passing 
 upon his assize : and by making this ob¬ 
 jection, the pannel is avowing, that it was 
 their purpose to overturn the govern¬ 
 ment. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk—D oes any of 
 your Lordships think otherwise ? I dare 
 say not. 
 
 Mr. Skirving _The ground of mv 
 
 objection to these gentlemen was, not 
 that they belonged to that Association, bv 
 no means, but because they have pre¬ 
 judged me, in striking my name out of 
 their Society. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _I remember 
 
 the same objection was stated by Mr. 
 Muir, and was over-ruled. 
 
 Fames of the Jury. 
 
 Sir Andrew Lauder Lick, of Fountainhail, 
 Bart. 
 
 Sir Hew Dalrymple, of North Berwick, Bart. 
 
 William NisWet, of Dirleton, Esq. 
 
 Alexander Mackenzie of Seaton. 
 
 David Anderson of St. Germains. 
 
 John Caddell of Cockenzie. 
 
 James Craig of Setonhill. 
 
 Francis Buchan Sydserf of Ruchlaw. 
 
 John Miller, Ironmonger in Edinburgh. 
 
 William Lamb, Upholsterer there. 
 
 Walter Brunton, Saddler there. 
 
 Andrew Boog, Cutler there. 
 
 Thomas Armstrong, Coppersmith there. 
 
 David Milne, Merchant there. 
 
 Edward Innes, Coufectioner there. 
 
 EVIDENCE FOR THE CROWN. 
 
 Alexander Morren sworn_Examined 
 
 by Mr. Burnett _Do you remember, 
 
 in the course of last summer, receiving 
 any paper or address from the town of 
 Dundee ? Yes, it was addressed to Friends 
 and Fellow-citizens, from the Dundee Be- 
 rean Meeting-house; I got it from the 
 Post-office, with a letter from Mr. Pal¬ 
 mer, desiring me to get it printed—Who 
 did you employ to print it ? My brother, 
 John Morren, printed it; there were, I 
 believe, a thousand copies thrown off, but 
 I am not positive. 1 was desired to give 
 a few to Mr. Skirving; and 1 gave a par¬ 
 cel of them to a servant girl that asked 
 for them in his name.—How many were 
 there in that parcel ? I did not count 
 
 them, but I believe there were two quires, 
 or two half hundreds. 
 
 Lord Eskgrove—T hey were printed 
 in half sheets, were they ? Yes. 
 
 Mr. Burnett _Had you any conver¬ 
 
 sation with him before or after you sent 
 this parcel ? 1 heard that he had received 
 
 it, but I did not ask him_Did you see 
 
 him after you received Mr. Palmer’s let¬ 
 ter ? Yes, I called upon him, and did not 
 see him ; and he then called upon me, 
 and I shewed him a copy of the address : 
 he said he would see if some friends of his 
 would approve of it ; he would let me 
 know how many I was to keep: and a man 
 called afterwards and told me I was to 
 keep a hundred copies for the Society. I 
 was to have sent them ; but the girl came 
 for them, and I gave her two half hun¬ 
 dreds. 
 
 Loud Justice Clerk _Was the par¬ 
 
 cel directed to Skirving ? No, it was not 
 directed. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirving.— 
 Does it consist with your knowledge, that 
 I knew any thing of that paper before you 
 mentioned it ? Was you desired by the 
 author of it to take my advice in any re¬ 
 spect ? No, I was not. I was uneasy that 
 Mr. Skirving did not call upon me ; and 
 therefore I called upon him. I was af¬ 
 fronted that he did not approve of them ; 
 for I approved of them very much my¬ 
 self.—How do you know that that girl and 
 that man were sent by me ? I don’t know; 
 the)' came in your name. 
 
 James Kidd sworn_Examined by Mr. 
 
 Burnett _Are yon acquainted with Mr. 
 
 Skirving? Yes.— Did you receive any 
 paper from him in the course of last sum¬ 
 mer ? Yes_[The paper being produced] 
 
 Was that the paper ? 1 cannot recollect, 
 it was about that size ; after reading the 
 
 first two paragraphs, I destroyed it_For 
 
 what ? Because I thought the language 
 was too strong; and 1 did not like it. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk—W as it to that 
 effect ? I don’t recollect one word of it. 
 
 Mr. Solicitor-Generai _Do you 
 
 recollect the substance of it ? No_You 
 
 recollect nothing earthly about it? No. 
 
 Lord Eskgrove _You say it was too 
 
 strong; what was the Kature of it ? As 
 well as my memory serves me now, it was 
 something about the Friends of the Peo¬ 
 ple, expressed in such language that I did 
 not like it. 
 
 Lord Advocate—S ince this indict¬ 
 ment was served upon the pannel, have 
 you had any conversation with him, with 
 any of his friends, or with any of the other 
 witnesses, with regard to what you would 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 say upon the subject ? I have had no con¬ 
 versation with him, nor no person has in¬ 
 structed me what to say upon this subject. 
 —I ask you again, have you had any con¬ 
 versation with any of the other witnesses 
 with regard to the subject of this trial ? 
 
 No_Were you ever called upon, within 
 
 this week, to attend a meeting of the wit¬ 
 nesses upon this trial ? Upon my word I 
 
 never was_Do you know a man of the 
 
 name of Robb that lives upon tbe South 
 Bridge ? I know the man by sights I 
 was in his house about eighteen months 
 
 ago_Were you there last Wednesday ? 
 
 No, I was not. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirving— 
 Did l give you this paper, or did you 
 come and get it from me? I went up to 
 ask the pannel how he did, and he asked 
 me if I had seen that; I asked what it 
 was, and he said I might take it home and 
 read it_You said you destroyed it be¬ 
 
 cause you did not like the language, and 
 that you only read the two first para¬ 
 graphs. 1 shall read as far as that, and 
 then ask you a question, [reads them.] I 
 want to bring to his recollection that this 
 was not the paper. Is there any part of 
 what I have read that you think objec¬ 
 tionable ? All I can say is, that as far as 
 I read, I did not like the language of it. 
 —Were you a member of one of the 
 societies of fhe Friends of the People? 
 Yes, I was once. 
 
 Joseph Mack sworn. — Examined by 
 
 Mr. Burnett _[The witness proved the 
 
 declarations of the pannel.]—Were you 
 employed in the execution of a warrant 
 issued, the beginning of December last, 
 by the sheriff of Edinburgh, against the 
 pannel ? Yes, I accompanied Frazer and 
 Dingwall to his house early in the morn¬ 
 ing, and found him in bed ; it was a war- 
 raut for seizing the pannel, and such pa¬ 
 pers as we should find ; we put the papers 
 in two bags, sealed them, and carried 
 them to the sheriff-clerk’s office.—Were 
 they sealed up in the presence of Mr. 
 Skirving ? Yes, and they were produced 
 before him in the sheriff-clerk’s office.— 
 Were you present when the bag was 
 opened ? Yes, I am sure of that. The 
 papers that were thought material were 
 put into an inventory, and those that were 
 not, were returned to Skirving; the in¬ 
 ventory and declaration is contained in 
 one. Mr. Dingwall wrote part of it, and 
 
 I wrote part of it_Look at that ? This 
 
 is the general inventory in my hand¬ 
 writing, and this is the declaration that 
 was made at the same time. —Did you 
 identify those different documents in any 
 
 45 
 
 way ? Yes, myself, the Sheriff, and Mr. 
 Dingwall, put our initials upon them; 
 and upon those that were the most par¬ 
 ticular ones, we put our names at full 
 length. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirving_ 
 
 When this declaration, 31st July, was 
 
 given in, you was present ? Yes, I was_ 
 
 Was I at that time dismissed simpliciter? 
 Yes, you was not laid under bail at that 
 time_Was I apprehended under a war¬ 
 rant ? I believe you was_Y T ou said you 
 
 was present at the opening of the bags? 
 
 I cannot speak positively to the bags be¬ 
 ing opened, before I came, or after. 
 
 John Dingwall corroborated the pre¬ 
 vious witness. 
 
 Mr. William Scott sworn, examined by 
 
 Mr. Burnett _Was you present when 
 
 these declarations were emitted by the 
 pannel? Y’es, they were free and volun¬ 
 tary, he was sober and in his senses.— 
 Were you present when the bags were 
 opened ? Yes, and the pannel was pre¬ 
 sent : an inventory was made out of 
 them, and authenticated by the persons 
 present. 
 
 [The witness examines them with the 
 inventory.] 
 
 Lord Advocate _Had you occasion 
 
 to attend the sheriff and magistrates upon 
 the 5th and 6th of December last? Yes, 
 on the evening of Friday the 6th, we 
 having heard that the British Convention 
 had a meeting somewhere on this side of 
 the town,—I went with the sheriff and 
 magistrates, and found them assembled in 
 Lady Lawson’s garden, about 7 or 8 
 o’clock; I went in, and I observed the 
 pannel and several others whom I knew ; 
 the chair was then empty, whoever had 
 been in it before, and there was a call to 
 the chair. Mr. Margarot took the chair. 
 The magistrates called them to be dis¬ 
 persed—Margarot and others said they 
 were met for legal and constitutional pur¬ 
 poses, and they would not disperse rill 
 they were compelled by force ; and de¬ 
 sired us to hear Mr. Gerrald's speech, who 
 had been speaking before we came in, 
 and the magistrates told them that nothing 
 of the kind would take place. There was 
 then a general call for Mr. Margarot to 
 take the chair, and Mr. Gerrald to go on. 
 Mr. Margarot said he would not leave the 
 chair till he was compelled. Mr. David¬ 
 son took him by the hand, and he then 
 left the chair ; upon this there was a call 
 for Gerrald to take the chair, which he 
 accordingly did ; wRen Mr. Davidson re¬ 
 quired he would leave it, and insisted up¬ 
 on their dispersing —Did you hear what 
 
46 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 they were met for ? Yes, that they were 
 met upon some business relative to peti¬ 
 tioning the king upon some subject. Ger- 
 rald likewise refused to leave the chair, 
 till he was compelled; Mr. Davidson said, 
 he supposed the same compulsion would 
 serve him, as had done Mr. Margarot— 
 he took him by the hand, and he left the 
 chair. Then Mr. Skirving called upon 
 some one to take a protest against the 
 sheriff;—he called for a notary—but no 
 notary appeared : somebody put them in 
 mind that they were permanent; and said, 
 they would keep this in view though they 
 were dismissed now—they would remem¬ 
 ber, that they were a permanent conven¬ 
 tion, or words to that effect_Do you 
 
 know the house ? Yes, it was at Mr. 
 Laing’s, wright, in a work-shop belonging 
 to him. The pannel had been appre¬ 
 hended the day before—was examined by 
 the sheriff, and had been admitted to bail; 
 he was apprehended as being a member 
 of that convention. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirting. — 
 Did not you obtain a warrant from the 
 sheriff to apprehend me, upon a petition 
 given in by you, upon 31st July, relative 
 to a paper published from Dundee ? Yes. 
 —Did not your petition request the she¬ 
 riff to commit me to prison ? It was the 
 
 very purpose of the application _Was I 
 
 not dismissed simpliciter on examination, 
 and was not committed to prison till 8 or 
 10 days after, when I attended again up¬ 
 on a citation of your own ? No, he was 
 taken, but it not appearing that he was the 
 author of it, he was let to pass, but upon 
 finding that there was a correspondence 
 carried on between him and Palmer, he 
 was again taken up and examined ; and 
 a letter of Palmer’s being found in his 
 pocket, he was committed as a party to 
 the publication of that paper, of which 
 he received so many copies from Morren. 
 —At what time was this ? In the Declar¬ 
 ation emitted 31st July. 
 
 Mr. Skirving—I beg that my decla¬ 
 ration at that time may be read_[It is 
 
 read.] 
 
 Mr. Skirving _You see I took a 
 
 knowledge of the letter at the very first; 
 I acknowledged every thing that was laid 
 against me, and more. Was I not dis¬ 
 missed simpliciter at that time ? and was 
 again taken up upon a new petition, though 
 no new matter was brought against me ? 
 We suspected he was possessed of that 
 letter, and a warrant was issued to search 
 his house, and the letter was found.—Did 
 I not give up all the Dundee papers, and 
 tell you 1 could not find the letter, but 
 
 when I did, I would give it up ? Yes; 
 but you never did, though it was found in 
 your possession afterwards. — Was I not 
 at that time dismissed simpliciter, that is, 
 without being desired to come again ? 
 You was only allowed to go and search 
 for that letter_The witness will recol¬ 
 
 lect that he is upon his oath ; and I ask 
 him if there were any such conditions ? 
 There certainly was; you went away to 
 find that letter. 
 
 Harry Davidson, Esq. sworn. 
 
 [In his examination on the part of the 
 Crown, confirmed the last three witnesses 
 in every particular, except the last part of 
 Mr. Scott’s.] 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirving.— 
 Were you informed that we were met that 
 night particularly about a petition to Par¬ 
 liament ? Yes, I think it was Margarot 
 who said that they were then discussing a 
 
 petition_Was I not apprehended by a 
 
 warrant issued by you upon the 31st July 
 
 last ? I believe you was_Granted upon 
 
 the petition of the Fiscal, requesting me 
 to be incarcerated? I think it is more 
 than probable that it was so, but I do not 
 recollect.—Was I not dismissed upon the 
 declaration I then made, without finding 
 bail? Yes. — Only eight days after, did 
 I not appear before you again upon the 
 
 same subject? Yes_And you granted 
 
 a warrant to search my house ? I certainly 
 did grant a warrant to search your house, 
 
 and to incarcerate you_And of course 
 
 this was on a new petition from the Fis¬ 
 cal ? I believe it was. 
 
 Right Hon. Thomas Elder, Lord Pro¬ 
 vost,* sworn.—Examined by the Lord 
 Advocate —Had you ever any occasion, 
 in the course of your duty, to disperse 
 any persons in the month of December ? 
 I had. I went with some of the magis¬ 
 trates and peace-officers to a mason lodge 
 in Blackfriars’-wynd, on Thursday the 5th 
 of December; we went up to what I un¬ 
 derstood to be the chair, and asked, “ if 
 that w T as the meeting of the Delegates of 
 the Friends of the People?” Mr. Skir¬ 
 ving answered, I think, and said, “ Yes, 
 they were and so did Mr. Paterson who 
 
 » It may interest the reader to know, that a 
 Mr. Baird, a raw young clergyman from the 
 Highlands, married the daughter of this gentle¬ 
 man ; and the result was, that when the situation 
 of Principal of the University of Edinburgh be¬ 
 came vacant by the death of the celebrated Dr. 
 Robertson the historian, this raw young clergy¬ 
 man, of whom nobody knew any thing, was pro¬ 
 moted to that high office, through the mere in¬ 
 fluence of his father-in-law the provost, although 
 one of his competitors was the distinguished Dr. 
 Hugh Blair. This flagrant Tory job gave great 
 offence to the country, and Principal Baird 
 preached for many a year, and we believe still 
 continues to preach, to' empty benches. 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 47 
 
 was in the chair. Mr. Paterson soon af¬ 
 ter walked out, and the meeting called, 
 from all quarters, for Mr. Browne to take 
 the chair, who took it accordingly; and 
 being desired to leave it, said, he had been 
 placed there by the authority of the Con¬ 
 vention, and could not leave it till he was 
 compelled by force. I went accordingly 
 to the chair to hand Mr. Browne out: 
 there were three constables in the room 
 at the time..—-Did you see the pannel 
 there that night ? Yes, he said they were 
 a legal and a constitutional meeting ; and 
 that they were upon business that was for 
 the good of the country, drawing up an 
 address to the king, or parliament, or 
 something of that kind ; they dismissed 
 peaceably soon after; and I took the 
 key away with me : I heard one of the 
 members in a corner of the room say, 
 that they would adjourn to some place 
 in the Canongate; upon that account, 
 we sent down some officers to see if 
 they did so, and were informed, that it 
 was a meeting of a society for some 
 charitable purpose, and not of these peo¬ 
 ple, who call themselves “The Friends of 
 the People.” I was informed that the 
 Friends of the People waited till that 
 meeting was dismissed, and then they took 
 possession of the place_Had you infor¬ 
 
 mation of any meeting subsequent to this? 
 Yes, we had people placed through the 
 town to prevent their meeting again : and 
 we heard that there was to be a meeting 
 the next evening; but it being out of my 
 jurisdiction, it lay more with the sheriff; 
 and I went with the sheriff-substitute to 
 disperse them;—it was in a carpenter’s 
 shop. I saw several people there, whom 
 I had seen the evening before, particularly 
 Mr. Skirving, and, 1 think, Mr. Callan¬ 
 der_Did they call themselves “ The 
 
 British Convention?” Yes_Did they 
 
 instantly disperse? Yes; only as the even¬ 
 ing before, desiring some force to be used 
 
 by way of etiquette_And Skirving was 
 
 there that second night? Yes_Was anj'- 
 
 thing said of their meeting being per¬ 
 manent? Not that I remember_Did any 
 
 body speak of a protest, and call for a no¬ 
 tary ? I heard Skirving offer to take a pro¬ 
 test both nights. In consequence of this 
 second attempt, I issued a proclamation 
 with the sheriff, to prevent their meetings 
 the next day..—.Was that proclamation at¬ 
 tended to, or disobeyed? It was disobeyed 
 so far, that an advertisement appeared in 
 the Gazetteer, on Tuesday following, the 
 10th, signed by Skirving, “calling a meet¬ 
 ing of the Friends of the People, on the 
 12th ;” in consequence of which, I issued 
 
 a warrant against Skirving on Wednesday, 
 the day after the advertisement appeared, 
 when he emitted a declaration. I then 
 issued an order prohibiting him from call¬ 
 ing that meeting at the cockpit_Did you 
 
 give him a copy of it ? He might have 
 had it if he desired it; it was read over 
 to him, and I think he said, he would read 
 it the next day. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirving_ 
 
 My lord, when you came to disperse the 
 meeting in Blackfriars’-wynd, was it not 
 given as a reason, why we did not disperse 
 voluntarily, that it was a meeting of dele¬ 
 gates sent there by other people upon im¬ 
 portant business ? Yes, I believe you did 
 say so.—That the business we were en¬ 
 gaged in, and which was appointed for 
 that night, some days before, was about 
 petitioning the House of Commons? I 
 believe words to that purpose might have 
 
 passed, but I cannot be positive_Upon 
 
 your saying that you must use force, did 
 I not move that, as we had neither in¬ 
 clination nor ability to oppose force, any 
 sign, such as your going up to the chair, 
 should be considered as force ? As I did 
 not hear any such thing : I know, both 
 you and Mr. Browne said, you would not 
 go without force—You must recollect 
 that the motion came from me, that we 
 should disperse peaceably ? No, I believe 
 Mr. Aitchison was the person; he said it 
 .was the same thing whether they went 
 out, or whether they were compelled to 
 go out—Do you recollect saying, that 
 you had jurisdiction over a public-house, 
 but not a private-house ; and I said, we 
 considered this as a private-house ? I be¬ 
 lieve you, or some other body, did say 
 something to that purpose.—Was I not 
 apprehended upon a petition of the Fiscal; 
 which petition prayed a warrant of com¬ 
 mitment? Yes.—Was there an order given 
 by the Magistrates, not to shew the war¬ 
 rant ? I know nothing of such an order; 
 
 I should rather think the order would be 
 to shew it. I really don’t know_A de¬ 
 
 claration was taken from me at that time, 
 and the affair at the cockpit was after¬ 
 wards ? That at the cockpit, was taken by 
 some other magistrate—And I was dis¬ 
 missed simpliciter? You certainly was, 
 that evening.—And there was no action 
 since commenced against me, at the in¬ 
 stance of the Town-Council? Not that I 
 know of. 
 
 Neil M‘ Vicar, a brother magistrate (of 
 course), corroborates Provost Elder. 
 
 William Coulter, Esq.* sworn_Ex- 
 
 * This gentleman was a hosier in Edinburgh, 
 and, being a Tory of the first water, succeeded in 
 
48 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 amined by Mr. Burnett. — Does it con¬ 
 sist with your knowledge, that a procla¬ 
 mation was issued against the people 
 calling themselves “ The British Conven¬ 
 tion ?” Yes, on the 1 1th of December, 
 and on Thursday the 12th, soon after 
 twelve o’clock, 1 went to the Grassmar- 
 ket, where there was a great crowd assem¬ 
 bled at the entry of a close leading to the 
 cockpit; and Mr. Skirving was reading 
 to the people a paper which he had in his 
 hand ;— when I got into the heart of the 
 crowd, I begged that he would desist, 
 which he did; and some of the peace- 
 officers began to take the paper from him 
 by force. I waved my hand, and desired 
 them not to use any force against Mr. 
 Skirving, unless he chose to give it up, 
 which I believe he did. Mr. Skirving was, 
 at my desire, brought before me, in the 
 council chamber, and examined ; and 
 was afterwards carried to Goldsmiths’ 
 
 Hall _ Was that declaration made in 
 
 your presence ? Yes, this is my subscrip¬ 
 tion to it; it was freely and voluntarily 
 emitted, and he was sober and in his 
 
 senses _ [Shews him a paper] Was that 
 
 the paper you took from the pannel ? I 
 believe it is. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirving _ 
 
 Was I apprehended upon a warrant on 
 the Wednesday, and sent to the council 
 chamber ? I don’t know upon what war¬ 
 rant you was apprehended ; 1 did not see 
 the warrant; I was present at your de¬ 
 claration _ And I was dismissed without 
 
 bail, or any new process of law instituted 
 against me ? 1 know of no other process. 
 
 James Laing sworn. — Examined by 
 Mr. Burnett. —-Did you attend the ma¬ 
 gistrates to the Grassmarket at any time ? 
 Yes, to disperse an illegal meeting on 
 Thursday the 12th December; they were 
 assembled in a close that leads up to the 
 cockpit. I saw Mr. Skirving reading a 
 paper ; Mr. Browne was on his left hand, 
 and a magistrate came forward and spoke 
 to Mr. Skirving, took hold of his hand, 
 and he put the paper in his waistcoat 
 pocket • he had read one side, and had 
 turned it to read the other. — Was he af¬ 
 terwards apprehended ? Yes _ Were you 
 
 present at his examination ? No, I was 
 not. 
 
 [The paper produced in Court.] 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirving _ 
 
 raising himself to be Lord Provost of Edinburgh, 
 in which situation, he died in 1809. He was 
 buried at the public expense, in the most extra¬ 
 vagant manner: the whole city shutting shop, 
 and displaying as much “ outward show of grief ” 
 as if royalty itself had expired. These were the 
 halcyon days of Toryism ! 
 
 Do you remember the first day that 1 was 
 examined ; after you came in, I desired 
 a copy of it, that 1 might read it? I do. 
 
 -—Does it consist with your knowledge 
 that I did not read it ? No, I did not see 
 you read it. 
 
 William Ross sworn_Examined by 
 
 Mr. Burnett — Were you, or are you a 
 member of the meeting of the Friends of 
 the People ? I am _ What is your pro¬ 
 
 fession ? A clerk in the Gazetteer Office. 
 — Look at that paper, 4th October, 1793. 
 Who is the author of that handbill? I 
 am the author of the first column, or half 
 of it _ By whose directions did you com¬ 
 pose it ? By no person’s directions _ To 
 
 whom was you to submit that composi¬ 
 tion ? To the Friends of the People, in 
 the mason lodge, Blackfriars’-wynd, at a 
 general meeting at which I attended ; I 
 gave it to my brother to read it. — Was 
 the pannel a member of that meeting ? 
 
 I believe he was secretary _ Do you know 
 
 who composed the second part of this pa¬ 
 per? I don’t know. — Don’t it consist with 
 your knowledge, that that handbill was 
 circulated ? I have seen them about the 
 streets. — Have you occasion to know 
 where it was printed ? Yes ; in the Ga¬ 
 zetteer Office _ Had you any concern in 
 
 the printing of it? No_ Was Mr. Skir- 
 
 ving’s name annexed to it ? It was, in the 
 
 printed copy _Do you know who paid 
 
 for the printing of it ? to whose accompt 
 it was put ? I rather think, but I don’t 
 know, that it was put to the Society of 
 the Friends of the People. I am a clerk 
 in the office, but I don’t manage that 
 part of the business. — Who does? Mr. 
 Scott. — Had you any conversation with 
 Mr. Skirving about it ? I don’t recollect 
 
 that I saw him at that time _ Were you a 
 
 member of the Convention of the dele¬ 
 gates of the people, the British Conven¬ 
 tion ? Yes, I was ; I attended it the first 
 day. — Was there any subsequent Con¬ 
 vention met afterwards ? Yes, there was. 
 — And the re-assembling of the whole 
 Convention, do you recollect where they 
 met; it was this winter, was it not ? Yes. 
 — Did you attend that meeting? I did. 
 — Who acted as secretary to that meet¬ 
 ing ? Mr. Skirving ; I don’t know whe¬ 
 ther he was secretary, but he acted in that 
 capacity. — Were there any other secre¬ 
 taries, assistant secretaries, or depute se- I 
 cretaries, or substitute secretaries, who 
 acted at that meeting ? Yes ; Mr. Aitche- 
 son was appointed by the meeting to as¬ 
 sist Mr. Skirving — Any body else ? you 
 or your brother ? I never did. My bro- i 
 ther used to take notes ; and several other 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 49 
 
 persons did the same; I don’t recollect 
 who they were.—Were their accounts, to 
 your knowledge, of the proceedings of 
 this Convention, published weekly in the 
 Gazetteer, or abstracts? Yes.—Do you 
 know that there was a scroll of minutes 
 made up at each sitting ? Yes, there were ; 
 which were sometimes read at the next 
 
 meeting, and sometimes not_Were there 
 
 ever any corrections or alterations made 
 upon the reading of those minutes ? Yes, 
 by Mr. Skirving and Mr. Aitcheson ; but 
 there was a committee proposed to be ap¬ 
 pointed to revise the minutes. — Did this 
 scroll of minutes contain an accurate 
 statement of what passed? They contained 
 
 the substance of what passed_Should 
 
 you know the scroll of minutes again if 
 you were to see them ? I saw them in the 
 Sheriff-clerk’s office—Look if you know 
 any body’s handwriting there. [Shews 
 him the scroll.] It is like my brother’s 
 handwriting.—Do you know Skirving’s 
 handwriting ? I have seen papers which 
 were said to be his handwriting, but I 
 never saw him write : this looks like what 
 I have been told vvas his; but I cannot 
 say, as I never saw him write. 
 
 Lord Dcjnsinnan —Do you think it is 
 like his handwriting ? I think it resembles 
 it. 
 
 Lord Advocate _Did you use to 
 
 take down the debates of the Convention 
 
 in short-hand ? Yes_For what purpose? 
 
 For publication in any way I thought pro¬ 
 per. — In the Gazetteer ? Yes. —Was 
 what was published in the newspaper, in 
 general, a correct statement of what pass¬ 
 ed in the Convention, as far as you know? 
 My notes were very incorrect,; having 
 taken a bad cold which affected my hear¬ 
 ing, but I made them as near as I could. 
 —Was you accurate with regard to the 
 
 names of the speakers ? I cannot say_ 
 
 Do you remember any motion being 
 made in particular by Mr. Skirving? Did 
 you ever hear of a Solemn League and 
 Covenant in the Convention (and consi¬ 
 der before you give an answer), or any 
 thing resembling those words? I cannot 
 say—Did you ever hear him make any 
 motion at all in the course of their pro¬ 
 ceedings? There were so many spoke, 
 that I cannot tell.—What! did he sit 
 dumb during all this time ? I don’t recol¬ 
 lect his making-any motion_Do you 
 
 know of any committee, called a Secret 
 Committee, being appointed by the Con¬ 
 vention ? I recollect something of it. — 
 Do you remember if the Secretary was a 
 member of that? I cannot remember that. 
 
 Lord Abercrombie.—Y ou have sworn 
 
 D 
 
 by Almighty God to tell the truth, and the 
 whole truth ; if, therefore, you say, you 
 do not recollect what you do recollect, 
 you are guilty of perjury.* I am very 
 much obliged to your Lordship for the 
 admonition ; but I don’t recollect that. 
 
 Lord Advocate— 1 ask you again, 
 who were to be the members of that Se¬ 
 cret Committee ? I cannot recollect that. 
 —Do you remember what was to be the 
 business of this Secret Committee ? It 
 was to appoint a place of meeting for the 
 
 members present_Was this place of 
 
 meeting to be made known to any body 
 besides the members of this Secret Com¬ 
 mittee ? I suppose it was to be communi¬ 
 cated_And upon what occasion was it 
 
 they were to meet, think you ? In certain 
 cases. —- What cases ? Cases of emer¬ 
 gency ; I cannot recollect them all_ 
 
 You need not repeat them all, but you 
 must tell us some of them before we part ? 
 One was, in ease of a bill being brought 
 into Parliament, similar to the convention 
 
 bill in Ireland_That is one : now tell us 
 
 any other ? I cannot recollect_Upon 
 
 your oath, did you ever hear of any other 
 being mentioned ? I don’t recollect them. 
 —You have told us there were some 
 others; now you must know something 
 about them. Was any thing mentioned 
 about a foreign invasion ? I ask you upon 
 your great oath? There was something 
 about a foreign invasion, but I don’t know 
 that that was one of the cases of emer¬ 
 gency—How came it to be mentioned 
 at all ? I cannot say : it might be at the 
 beginning of a motion, or something of 
 that kind.—Was it upon the occasion of 
 debating upon a convention of emer¬ 
 gency ? I cannot say—Was a dispersion 
 of the meeting ever given, as one of the 
 cases of emergency ? There was some 
 conversation about that the night before. 
 —I see you are very correct in some 
 things, though not in others. Did you 
 ever hear of the Scotch act of 1701, a- 
 gainst wrongous imprisonment ? I have 
 heard of it_Did you ever hear it men¬ 
 
 tioned in the Convention, as one of those 
 cases of emergency, if a motion should be 
 made for suspending that act of Parlia¬ 
 ment ?—recollect yourself? I think I do 
 
 recollect it_Did you ever hear of the 
 
 Habeas Corpus Act in England? I have 
 
 frequently heard of it_Did you hear of 
 
 it in the Convention the other day ? Yes. 
 —If a motion should be brought into 
 
 * This, as it stands, is a very self-evident truth. 
 Lord Abercrombie meant to say, “If you do not 
 recollect what I wish you to recollect, you are 
 guilty of perjury.”— Ed. 
 
 No. 4. 
 
50 
 
 TIUAL OF 
 
 Parliament to suspend the habeas corpus 
 act, was that a case of emergency ? Yes. 
 —Were there any other cases of emer¬ 
 gency mentioned ? I don’t recollect any 
 more.—Look at that: is that one of the 
 
 papers published in your office ? Yes_ 
 
 And these ? Yes_Do you know if they 
 
 contain the substance of the proceedings 
 
 of the Convention ? Yes_What was the 
 
 common name by which the members 
 were addressed ? You will see in the pa¬ 
 pers_But we want to hear from you ? 
 
 Sometimes citizen. —Did you ever hear 
 the word section used in ths Convention ? 
 Yes, they were divided into classes, or 
 divisions, or sections ; a section consisted 
 of fifteen or thereabouts : they met every 
 morning, and made reports in the even¬ 
 ing.—Were you a member of a section? 
 Yes, No. 4 ; we met in Simon’s-square. 
 —Were you ever present in the Conven¬ 
 tion, when reports were made by other 
 sections? Yes—Did you ever receive 
 any strangers in the Convention ? Yes..— 
 Did you ever confer any mark of favour 
 
 or honour upon any strangers? No_ 
 
 Did you ever hear or know that there was 
 at any time honourable mention made of 
 any person ? I cannot say that I ever did. 
 —Did you ever see or know the honour 
 of the sitting given to any person that 
 came in? No; I don’t recollect it.— 
 Have you had, since the indictment was 
 served upon Skirving, a meeting of the 
 witnesses on his trial? I have been in 
 company with some of them, but don’t 
 
 know of any meeting appointed_Do 
 
 you know a man of the name of Robb ? 
 I have been in his house. — Were not you 
 
 there last Wednesday evening ? Yes_ 
 
 Was Mr. Margarot there? Yes. — And 
 Somerville ? Yes.—There were ten or a 
 dozen of you ? Yes, I believe there was. 
 —Do you know the purpose of that 
 meeting ? It was new-year’s day. I heard 
 that they were to dine there, and I went 
 over to them. 
 
 Mr. Solicitor-General _Who told 
 
 you of that meeting ? I don’t recollect 
 I did not know of it till within an hour 
 of the meeting_You went upon the sum¬ 
 
 mons of you don’t know who—was it Mr. 
 Margarot ? No. — Was it Somerville ? 
 
 No.—Your brother? No_John Clark, 
 
 the mason ? No_Was he there? No.— 
 
 At that meeting, was this trial the subject 
 of conversaffen ? It was mentioned that 
 
 the trials were coming on this week_ 
 
 And what was said about them ? I don’t 
 recollect. — And do you think we are to 
 believe that ? I can’t recollect any thing 
 particularly relating to the trial, or with 
 
 regard to the people who have been sum¬ 
 moned as evidences.—Was any thing said 
 about what was to be the event of the 
 trials, or ahout the evidence upon the 
 trials? Not that I recollect 
 
 Lord Dunsinnan. —You will remem¬ 
 ber that you are to answer at the great 
 tribunal of Almighty God for what you 
 now say ? I cannot recollect that any 
 thing particular was said about it. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirving— 
 If I put any questions respecting the Con¬ 
 vention, it is for the sake of occasionally 
 taking any blame from them, and not as 
 it respects myself, because I don’t hold 
 myself responsible at present for what 
 they do.—Does it consist with ycur know¬ 
 ledge, that ever a deputy secretary was 
 appointed by the Convention ? No —Did 
 the Convention ever acknowledge any 
 minutes of their proceedings, till a com¬ 
 mittee of their own had drawn them up ? 
 No, I believe not.—Did the Convention 
 appoint any names to be used by its 
 members in preference toothers? No, 
 not that I know of.—Did the Convention 
 appoint any established form of proce¬ 
 dure, or were they only consulting about 
 it ? If I recollect right, plans had been 
 given in, but none of them were adopted 
 before it was broke up.—Had you ever 
 the least apprehension of any design to 
 raise tumult, riot, or any thing like sedi¬ 
 tion, in all the proceedings you have seen 
 of mine in that Convention ? I never had 
 the smallest idea of it — On the contrary, 
 have I not always urged attention to or¬ 
 der, and regular proceedings? 1 have al¬ 
 ways seen you attentive to good order and 
 regularity.—Does it consist with your 
 knowledge, that meetings by delegates 
 was preferred to general meetings, in or¬ 
 der that things might be more regularly 
 carried on ? I understood so. — And that 
 the principal business of the Convention, 
 from first to last, was an application to 
 Parliament for reform ? That was the 
 only object that I know of.—This secret 
 committee, was it not surely a committee 
 of confidence, and appointed for the pur¬ 
 pose of timeous remonstrance, against a 
 quietism-bill, by a speedy call of the Con¬ 
 vention the instant that a motion for such 
 a bill passed the House of Commons? I 
 understood it so. 
 
 Alexander Aitcheson sworn.—Examined 
 
 by Mr. Burnett _Are you a member 
 
 of the society of the Friends of the Peo¬ 
 ple ? Yes; I became a member upon 
 the memorable 9th of August, 1791 : I 
 joined the general association at that 
 time : I afterwards attended at Barbers’- 
 
51 
 
 WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 hall; and afterwards 1 joined the first 
 
 meeting of the Canongate society_Were 
 
 you a member of the British Convention ? 
 Yes, I was a member of all the three con¬ 
 ventions by delegation from the Canon- 
 gate society.—Was the pannel a mem¬ 
 ber? Yes, he acted as secretary_Did 
 
 you bear any office ? Not in the first 
 Convention; but afterwards, in the second 
 and third, I did assist Mr. Skirving. 1 
 took notes to the best of my knowledge of 
 
 the business_Were they, in general, as 
 
 accurate as you could make them ? To 
 say they were accurate, would be paying 
 too great a compliment to myself; but I 
 did it to the best of my abilities. — Look 
 at this scroll of minutes, and see if it is 
 your handwriting? Part of it is.—Do you 
 know Skirving’s handwriting ? No, I do 
 not.—Is that like it ? I cannot say; there 
 were other gentlemen appointed at the 
 last Convention as assistants to the secre¬ 
 tary ; and I believe I could guess at Mr. 
 Ross’s writing : here are two or three 
 pages of his; there are several other hands, 
 but none that I know except Mr. Ross’s, 
 and mine.—Is this any thing like any 
 handwriting that you know ? Is this like 
 Skirving’s ? It seems like a great many 
 hands that I know : it is a very general 
 kind of hand, and never having corre¬ 
 sponded with him, I cannot swear to his 
 writing. When I have been absent from 
 the Convention, and have come in after 
 the sitting was begun, I have seen him 
 write, but paid no such attention as to be 
 
 able to swear to it_Did you offer to give 
 
 in a resignation of your title to be there 
 as a member? Yes; I found it inconve¬ 
 nient to my business, but they refused to 
 accept it, saying, I might come when I 
 could ; and they appointed two delegates 
 in my room_Do you know if the mi¬ 
 
 nutes were revised by a committee of the 
 Convention? Yes, before engrossing, they 
 were always first revised by a committee ; 
 and ordered by the committee to be en¬ 
 tered in a book, and afterwards printed.— 
 Do you recollect any thing about the pro¬ 
 ceedings of the Convention, particularly 
 the names that the members went by ? I 
 don’t know what you allude to by that 
 question.—Was Mr. Skirving called Wil¬ 
 liam Skirving, or what ? No ; we were 
 not a society of quakers.—Did you ever 
 hear the word “ citizen” in the Conven¬ 
 tion ? Yes ; and I think it is the best title 
 a man can have. I should blush for my¬ 
 self, as a burgess of Edinburgh, if I did 
 not think so ; and it is preferable to mas¬ 
 ter, because we are commanded to call no 
 man master. 
 
 d 2 
 
 Mr. Solicitor-General _Did you at 
 
 any time hear any thing pass relating to a 
 Convention bill ? Yes ; I remember a 
 motion was brought forward, that in case 
 a Convention bill should be brought into 
 Parliament, some resolutions might be en¬ 
 tered into respecting it. — And that was 
 done, was it? Yes.—Did Mr. Callander 
 make any motion upon that business ? I 
 think he did ; but I cannot.say unless you 
 will permit me to look at the minutes. 
 [Looks over the minutes.] It is impossible 
 that I should remember what is here men¬ 
 tioned, because it is not in my handwrit¬ 
 ing ; I was not present at the time..—Do 
 you recollect any thing about a motion 
 for appointing a secret committee ? I re¬ 
 collect such a circumstance had taken 
 place when I was out; and when I came 
 in, as soon as I had taken my seat, a mo¬ 
 tion was made by Mr. Sinclair, that a mo¬ 
 tion that had now passed should be burnt. 
 
 I got up and opposed it. I said that our 
 proceedings were all free and open ; and 
 I was told that the resolutions had already 
 passed : all that was meant was, that some 
 place should be appointed for us to con¬ 
 vene in, in case we should be stopped by 
 any compulsive measures. —Was there 
 any particular name given to this meet¬ 
 ing? It was a committee of secrecy.— 
 But the meeting that was to take place 
 
 was called-? Yes, a Convention of 
 
 emergency.—Did you hear or understand 
 why it was proposed that this resolution 
 should be burnt ? I never learned it any 
 farther than this, that when Mr. Sinclair 
 proposed its being burnt, it was resolved 
 that the motion, instead of being burnt, 
 should be reported and published. 
 
 [The witness read from the minutes 
 the resolution that Mr. Sinclair moved, 
 should be burnt.] 
 
 Look at the page before that ? That 
 is not my handwriting ; I was not pre¬ 
 sent, nor I don’t think it is Mr. Ross’s 
 handwriting. 
 
 Mr. Solicitor-General _Here it is 
 
 said the members stood upon their feet, 
 and solemnly, and unanimously, passed 
 the resolution as follows, and then comes 
 a blank of a page. 
 
 Mr. Burnett _Do you remember 
 
 any motions being made by Skirving in 
 the Convention ? Yes, many; but I have 
 so bad a memory, that, unless there is 
 something particular passed, I think no 
 more about it. [Reads from the min¬ 
 utes.] “ Citizen Skirving moved, That 
 all the members, both of the Convention, 
 I and of the primary societies, should sub- 
 | scribe a solemn league and covenant.” 
 
52 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 But I remember very well, that Skirving 
 was never called upon to explain what 
 he meant by it. [Reads.] “ Citizen 
 Skirving moved, That the convention 
 express its ardent desire, to cultivate a 
 more close union with the' societies in 
 England, which was likewise unanimous¬ 
 ly agreed to.”—Is that your handwrit¬ 
 ing ? Yes. 
 
 [The witness read several motions, 
 made by the pannel, in the British Con¬ 
 vention, from the minutes.] 
 
 Lord Advocate.— Was you there 
 the night on which Skirving and others 
 were taken up ? Yes, I was there, when 
 
 the Lord Provost paid us a visit_Do 
 
 you recollect any resolution that was come 
 to by the Convention, that if you should 
 be dispersed, that should be one of the 
 cases in which the Convention of emer¬ 
 gency were to meet ? I heard such a re¬ 
 solution.—Was you present in the con¬ 
 vention, when you heard it ? I cannot 
 say; I rather think not, but I think I 
 heard it.—Do you know of any other 
 cases in which they were to meet ? I have 
 heard that one was, in case the island 
 should be invaded by a foreign enemy ; 
 another was in the case of a convention 
 bill—Did you ever hear that the suspen¬ 
 sion of the habeas corpus act was one of the 
 cases ? No.—Was the Convention ever, 
 to your knowledge, divided into sections 
 or classes ? We were divided into divi¬ 
 sions first, and then classes, and after that 
 a section was thought to be a better name 
 than either of the others, and, for the 
 last fourteen days, the word section was 
 used—Was it common in the Conven¬ 
 tion, to give in motions in writing ? Yes, 
 that was an early rule adopted, that all 
 motions should be given in writing, and 
 
 signed_Look at that paper ? [shewing 
 
 the witness Mr. Callander’s motion re¬ 
 specting universal suffrage.] The in¬ 
 dorsement, at the back, is written by my¬ 
 self.—Look at that ? [a motion by Mr. 
 Margarot.] I have seen that motion be¬ 
 fore, but 1 had no hand in it.—Look at 
 that ? [a motion made by David Downie, 
 for regularity and order.] I think I re¬ 
 collect having seen that before, but it has 
 not my hand to it. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirving. — 
 Did the Convention appoint any name in 
 
 preference to another ? No_Were any 
 
 minutes acknowledged by the Conven¬ 
 tion, till a committee had revised them ? 
 No—Was there any appointment of you 
 by the Convention as deputy secretary? 
 No—Was this meeting, which you say 
 was for a convention of emergency, to 
 
 take place upon a motion to bring in such 
 a bill, or upon such a bill being passed ? 
 
 I cannot be certain, but 1 understood it to 
 
 be when the bill had passed_Did not 
 
 you understand that it was a confidential 
 committee, to be named with a view to 
 have a place in readiness, that whenever 
 the thing was mentioned in Parliament, 
 the delegates would know where to meet, 
 in order to draw up a petition against it ? 
 
 Yes_Did not the convention frequently 
 
 alter on one day, what they had done the 
 day before ? Yes, many things that I have 
 written in these scrolls, were dashed out 
 by order of the convention, and others 
 were left as they were, till the committee 
 should revise them_-Had the conven¬ 
 
 tion finished their regulations and ap¬ 
 pointed them, or were they only consult¬ 
 ing about them, when it was broken up ? 
 They were only consulting about them, 
 
 they had not finished, by any means_ 
 
 There is a motion, which is said to be in 
 my name; did you understand that I could 
 have any other motive than that of regu¬ 
 larity and good order ? The expression 
 surprised me, and I took but little notice of 
 
 it_Did you ever suppose I had any thing 
 
 like a seditious intention in any thing that 
 I did ? So far from it, that I have heard 
 you say, you was sure the only way to 
 support the present form of government, 
 by King, Lords, and Commons, would be 
 to obtain a timely reform_Do you re¬ 
 
 member when the motion, of the Duke 
 of Richmond’s plan of universal suffrage, 
 was acquiesced in, I agreed to it, because 
 that nothing less could overturn the cor¬ 
 ruption ? Certainly ; and we were sanc¬ 
 tioned in that opinion, by what the Duke 
 and Mr. Pitt had published, a dozen years 
 ago. 
 
 Mr. Burnett _Do you read the Ga¬ 
 
 zetteer ? Yes, but for several weeks past, 
 
 I have received them and not read a single 
 line—Did you read the proceedings of 
 the Convention ? No, I did not, as they 
 contained nothing new, I thought I would 
 look at them at any time.—Do you re¬ 
 member receiving, at any time, from the 
 pannel, an address from Dundee ? I re¬ 
 member I saw that paper at a meeting of 
 the Edinburgh monthly committee; it 
 was handed to me by one of that com- 1 
 mittee as a curiosity ; I did not receive it i 
 at that time from Mr. Skirving; I advised I 
 against its being read in our meeting, as ; 
 there was something in it which, I sup- i 
 posed, might be construed seditious. 
 
 Mr. Skirving _Does it consist with 
 
 your knowledge that the Convention had 
 any concern with the paper, called the 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 53 
 
 Gazetteer ? As individuals we all wished 
 it well as a paper, tending to the spreading 
 of universal liberty, but not as a Conven¬ 
 tion. 
 
 George Boss sworn—Examined by 
 Mr. Burnett —What profession are you 
 of? A clerk in the Gazetteer Office-—. 
 Do you remember a hand-bill that was 
 
 published in October last? Yes_Do you 
 
 know who composed that hand-bill ? Yes, 
 me and my brother; it was laid before 
 the general committee of the Friends of 
 the People, who ordered it to be printed. 
 —Was Mr. Skirving present at that meet¬ 
 ing ? He was; it was afterwards published 
 in the Gazetteer. Mr. Skirving refused to 
 put his name to that, or any other which 
 was not produced by himself.—His name 
 was afterwards annexed to it? Yes; and 
 there were some thousands of them pub¬ 
 lished.— Did the Convention meetin con¬ 
 sequence of that ? No. There were se¬ 
 veral meetings of that sort_Did you 
 
 attend the meeting of the 29th October? 
 Yes, and Mr. Skirving was there, he was 
 secretary to the Convention of the dele¬ 
 gates of the Friends of the People, but 
 not secretary to the British Convention ; 
 there was a scroll of minutes of their pro¬ 
 ceedings.—Were any of their debates ta¬ 
 ken in short-hand ? Yes. — Did you assist 
 in taking them down? No.—Was there 
 a particular place assigned in the Con¬ 
 vention for the Secretary and short-hand- 
 man ? There was no place for the short¬ 
 hand-man at all..—-Were they published 
 as minutes of the proceedings of the Con¬ 
 vention ? No. They were published as 
 news—Do you remember a motion for 
 a secret committee? I remember there 
 was a motion about a committee for ap¬ 
 pointing the place of meeting of the Con¬ 
 vention, but I do not know how it came 
 by the name of secret committee ; I never 
 knew the Convention call it by that name. 
 —Was the pannel a member of that com¬ 
 mittee ? I cannot say.—Was Mr. Mar¬ 
 garet a member? I believe he was.— 
 Was Mr. Browne? I cannot say.—Do 
 you know any thing of a convention of 
 emergency ? Yes ; in case any bill was 
 passed to stop their meetings.—Was any 
 other emergency mentioned? No. That 
 is all that I recollect. — Recollect your¬ 
 self, if you ever heard of any other case 
 of emergency ? The grievances of the 
 nation—Was any thing mentioned about 
 oreign troops landing ? I never heard of 
 i French invasion ; I heard of Hessian 
 -roops and Hanoverians being brought 
 nto the kingdom ; it was reported out of 
 loors, that in that case the Convention 
 
 were to meet.—But yo* are sure you ne¬ 
 ver heard of French troops landing? I am 
 sure of that. 
 
 Mr. Solicitor - General. —Did you 
 
 write any of these minutes? Yes, I did_ 
 
 Look at that, and tell us what these 
 words allude to : “ the members stood 
 upon their feet, and solemnly and unani¬ 
 mously passed the resolution as follows?” 
 I don’t know what it alludes to—Was it 
 the common practice to pass resolutions 
 in that solemn manner? I don’t know 
 anything of it; I don’t recollect what it 
 was, but I suppose it was a resolution re¬ 
 specting the Irish Convention - Bill.— 
 What follows is a blank ; can you explain 
 that ? No, I cannot; I suppose it is mis¬ 
 placed. 
 
 Lord Advocate. —Does it consist with 
 your knowledge that this convention was 
 divided into sections ? Yes, I called them 
 sections myself; I was a member of a 
 section which met in an empty house in 
 the Gazetteer-office stair, opposite to cne 
 Mullo’s; it was our business to choose a 
 preses ; and if any motion was made the 
 preceding evening, we made it our busi¬ 
 ness to discuss it, and make ourselves ac¬ 
 quainted with it. — Did your secretary 
 ever make a report to the convention ? 
 Yes. [Points it out in the minutes, and 
 reads it.]—Did you ever admit any stran¬ 
 gers in the convention to hear your pro¬ 
 ceedings? Yes. — Was there any particu¬ 
 lar mark of honour or attention paid to 
 them ?— No ; no particular mark of hon¬ 
 our, except a seat next the door—Did 
 you ever form yourselves into acommittee 
 to take in a member ? We have formed 
 ourselves into a committee to read a news¬ 
 paper, containing Mr. Pitt and the Duke 
 of Richmond’s resolutions. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirving— 
 This report which has just now been read, 
 you say, was written by you. Was it wholly 
 done of yourself, or was it directed by the 
 meeting ? No ; it was entirely of myself; 
 
 the convention had no concern in it_ 
 
 Was the committee on the Convention- 
 Bill to meet for any other purpose than 
 to draw up a remonstrance against it ? I 
 
 never heard of any other_And was not 
 
 this the reason for declaring the time of 
 the meeting of the convention, to be at 
 the time of the motion for a Convention- 
 Bill, for the purpose of getting the re¬ 
 monstrance into Parliament in time? No 
 doubt of it. 
 
 Mr. Solicitor-Generai _Did you 
 
 ever hear in the convention, a proposal 
 for a resolution to be burnt ? I don’t re¬ 
 collect any such thing_Did not Citizen 
 
TRIAL OF 
 
 5i 
 
 Sinclair make such a motion ? Not that 
 I know of.—[Giving him a paper.] Is 
 that one of the Edinburgh Gazetteers ? 
 
 I believe it is ; it looks like it_Was it 
 
 your intention to give the world an ac¬ 
 curate account of these proceedings ? It 
 was, as nigh as we could make it. 
 
 Mr. Skirving.—D id the convention 
 order the publication of them in the Ga¬ 
 zetteer? No. —Or had any concern what¬ 
 ever with them ? No. 
 
 Lord Advocate.—W as it known to 
 the convention that your brother attended 
 and took notes for publication ? I daresay 
 it was to many of them ; he was a dele¬ 
 gate himself..—Is the pannel a subscriber 
 to the Gazetteer? Yes.—Was he fre¬ 
 quently in the Gazetteer Office ? Yes; 
 but not so often during the sitting of the 
 
 convention as before_Do you know his 
 
 handwriting ? I cannot say that I do_ 
 
 Look at the minutes, and see if you there 
 see any thing like his handwriting? I 
 cannot say. — Look at the two last pages, 
 and see if it is your brother's writing ? 
 
 No, it is not_Do you believe it to be 
 
 Aitcheson’s? I believe part of it is_ 
 
 Do you believe this to be Skirving's hand¬ 
 writing ? I have not seen much of his 
 writing_Is that like it? I cannot say. 
 
 David Dowiiie * sworn. —Examined by 
 
 Mr. Burnf.tt _Were you a member of 
 
 one of the societies of the Friends of the 
 People ? Yes ; I was a member of the 
 British Convention, and I understood Mr. 
 
 Skirving to be the secretary_Look at 
 
 that paper and see if it was a motion that 
 was made by you in the convention ? Yes, 
 it is. [Reads it.]—Look at that, and see if 
 it is a motion of yours ? It is. [Reads it.] 
 
 Mr. Skirving _Did the convention 
 
 pass either the one or the other of the 
 motions you have now read ? To the best 
 of my knowledge they did not. 
 
 James ftnbertson sworn, and examined 
 by Mr. Burnett—L ook at that printed 
 letter, and tell me if you know where it 
 was printed? I printed exactly such a 
 
 letter as this_Was it by Mr. Skirving’s 
 
 authority that you did it ? Yes it was_ 
 
 Is that his handwriting? I cannot say; I 
 am a very bad judge of any handwriting. 
 — Did you ever employ him to keep your 
 books ? He has directed newspapers, and 
 assisted me ; but I say now, as 1 did to 
 the Sheriff, I cannot positively swear that 
 it is his handwriting, but it is something 
 
 like it_ [Shewing him another paper.] 
 
 Is that his handwriting ? 1 do not know. 
 
 * Tiiis person was, several months afterwards, 
 tried lor high treason, found guilty and condemn¬ 
 ed, but ultimately reprieved — See Appendix. 
 
 William Lind sworn.—Examined by 
 
 Mr. Burnett _You are apprentice to 
 
 Mr. Robertson, the printer ? Yes_ 
 
 Look at this, and see if it consists with 
 your knowledge that that came out of Mr. 
 Robertson’s office ? Yes ; it was printed 
 
 there_Do you know by whose order ? 
 
 No_Should you know Mr. Skirving’s 
 
 handwriting if you should see it ? No— 
 Did he never write about your master’s 
 office ? I believe he has, but I cannot 
 swear to his writing. I have seen a great 
 many people’s hand like Mr. Skirving’s. 
 —Is that like his handwriting [showing 
 
 him a paper] ? It resembles it_Is that 
 
 like it [showing him another] ? It re¬ 
 sembles it. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Skirving_ 
 
 Did you ever see me write ? Yes ; I have 
 seen you write two or three passages, or 
 paragraphs, when the paper was going on. 
 —And upon the recellection you have of 
 what I then wrote, you think that is my 
 writing ? It resembles it very much. 
 [A letter read, no address, signed Wm. 
 Skirving.] 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk (to Mr. Robert¬ 
 son)_Do you know what number of 
 
 copies w'ere thrown off of that letter ? 
 There were four or five dozen. 
 
 [The pannel’s declaration of 5th of 
 December read.] 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _Have you any 
 
 exculpatory evidence to adduce, Mr. Skir¬ 
 ving ? 
 
 Mr. Skirving _The day is already so 
 
 far spent, my lord, and it appears to me 
 so unnecessary to bring forward any ex¬ 
 culpatory evidence, the public Prosecutor 
 having proved nothing criminal against 
 me, that I shall entirely decline it, espe¬ 
 cially that even the witnesses for the crown 
 have exculpated me, from every suspicion 
 of seditious intention. 
 
 Lord Advocate _Gentlemen of the 
 
 Jury, William Skirving, the pannel at the 
 bar, stands charged, in this indictment, 
 with the crime of sedition ; a crime which 
 has been known and recognised by the 
 common law of Scotland, and by the 
 common law of every civilised govern¬ 
 ment upon earth, from the earliest records 1 
 to the latest period ; which, when stated, 
 carries along with it, to every person who 
 hears it stated, as precise and distinct an 
 idea as the crime of murder, of robbery, 
 of theft, or any of the greater or lessee 
 offences, which are the subjects of crimi¬ 
 nal law, and the objects of courts of cri¬ 
 minal justice to punish. The minor pro¬ 
 position of the indictment against him 
 sets forth, fully and distinctly, the various! 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 55 
 
 facts and circumstances imputed against 
 this man, and from which the legal con¬ 
 clusion is inferred, that he has committed 
 the offence, stated in the major proposi¬ 
 tion. To that charge he has this day, in 
 your presence, pleaded not guilty; he 
 has told us indeed just now, within these 
 very few minutes, that it would be idle 
 and impossible indeed, for him to avail 
 himself, of that permission, to avail him¬ 
 self of that right, which the law of this 
 country gives to exculpate his guilt, or 
 alleviate it in any respect, by the exam¬ 
 ination of witnesses; because has had the 
 confidence to state to you, that he does 
 not think, nor does he see any thing, that 
 has yet been proved against him, or any 
 thing to be the subject of a proof in ex¬ 
 culpation. Upon that point he and I are 
 at issue; upon that point you are this 
 nightto return your verdict; and to speak, 
 not with too much presumption, not with 
 too much confidence; I trust, you will 
 teach this man what, it seems, he has now 
 professed himself to be ignorant of, whe¬ 
 ther his conduct is criminal, or is inno¬ 
 cent ; or, whether he is entitled, in your 
 impartial judgment, to a verdict of not 
 guilty, or to a verdict of acquittal, in re¬ 
 spect that I have not proved my case to 
 you. I must, for one, till taught other¬ 
 wise by your verdict, against which it is 
 impossible, either for the pannel or me, 
 to lift up our voice with r.ny effect in this 
 country ; I must consider it in a very dif¬ 
 ferent point of view indeed. I shall, in 
 the sequel, take the liberty of stating to 
 you, and of demanding from you, a ver¬ 
 dict in favour of the prosecution. I shall 
 state to you, that that verdict will be 
 founded, not upon evidence of one kind 
 or another, but upon a body of direct pa¬ 
 role and written evidence, so satisfactory 
 and conclusive, that, if your minds are' 
 not yet made up upon the subject, I trust, 
 ere I sit down, to satisfy you, by selecting 
 from that enormous mass of seditious—I 
 had almost said treasonable matter, upon 
 the table before you, that you cannot have 
 a doubt upon your minds of returning a 
 verdict in my favour. I hope to be cre¬ 
 dited, gentlemen, when I state to you, 
 upon my own behalf, that although this 
 person, who in the end of July last was 
 taken up for his accession to thaf paper, 
 which constitutes the first article of the 
 charge against him; and, although it was 
 judiciously and properly directed that he 
 should not be examined as a witness a- 
 gainst Palmer, who has already suffered 
 a verdict of his country against him, as 
 the person more directly concerned in the 
 
 composition of that paper, I say, that I 
 hope to be credited when I tell you that, 
 if this man’s conduct had been of a dif¬ 
 ferent complexion since the 13th of Sep¬ 
 tember last, the date of Palmer’s convic¬ 
 tion, although it was competent for me, 
 at the meeting of this winter sessions, im¬ 
 mediately to have brought my indictment 
 against him, upon that fact alone, 1 trust 
 you will believe me, when I say, that if 
 that had been the only criminal matter 
 against him, I should have found myself 
 warranted, after what had passed upon two 
 recent trials, after two unanimous verdicts 
 of the country, in two separate parts of 
 Scotland, signifying, in the clearest and 
 most direct terms, a disapprobation of 
 those proceedings ; after the severe, but 
 the adequate punishment which these two 
 persons have met with, and are at present 
 undergoing, that the example, which these 
 had held forth, that the distinguished opi¬ 
 nion, which the country had given upon 
 the subject in those two cases, away from 
 that prejudice which the pannel complains 
 of to-day, that he and his associates labour 
 under, among nine-tenths of the inhabi¬ 
 tants of this country; a prejudice which, 
 I trust, will last with the British constitu¬ 
 tion ; a prejudice which is born in the 
 minds of the people of this country, and 
 which, after every artifice which has been 
 practised by this man, and such as him, 
 has failed of its effect so completely, that 
 in place of having the diabolical effect it 
 was intended to have, it has, from one 
 end of Great Britain to the other, and in 
 Ireland itself, it has only had this effect, 
 to wed them more deeply and earnestly to 
 that constitution, which their ancestors pur¬ 
 chased with their llood; and which, I know, 
 they will transmit inviolate to their pos¬ 
 terity, not only against the attacks of des¬ 
 potism, and arbitrary power, but, knowing 
 that the country is not to be led away by the 
 republican principles of such men as this 
 pannel, they have the good sense to see 
 where the delusion lies, that they are not 
 to be misled by the glare of false reason¬ 
 ing, and that they will support the King 
 and Constitution, against all who dare to 
 attack it. And though the great, the 
 only object of human criminal justice, or 
 of human punishment, is to hold out a 
 salutary example to others, I think the 
 conduct of this man, such as it appears 
 to-night, and such as I shall represent it 
 to you, ere I sit down, will satisfy you 
 that, in this case, the benefit of example 
 has been lost; and that, however proper 
 or improper you may consider our con¬ 
 duct as public prosecutors, in having ne- 
 
56 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 glected instantly to bring him to trial for 
 the offence of which Palmer was found 
 guilty, there is a hard, and a dire and a 
 melancholy necessity indeed, imposed 
 upon us to bring this man before you for 
 subsequent conduct, that he may receive 
 from you either an acquittal, or that pun¬ 
 ishment which he more than ever, after 
 this pertinacity of sedition, most undoubt¬ 
 edly merits. 
 
 Gentlemen, the facts and circumstances 
 stated in the minor proposition, though 
 branched out into a variety of different ar¬ 
 ticles, appear to me properly to be com¬ 
 prehended under two general heads: — 
 His accession to the guilt of Palmer, in cir¬ 
 culating (not composing) that hand-bill, 
 which is there stated ; and, in the second 
 place, his endeavouring, from the 4th of 
 October, 1793, w hen this hand-bill makes 
 its appearance, down to the 12th of De¬ 
 cember last, when he made that extraor¬ 
 dinary appearance at the cockpit in the 
 Grassmarket : his endeavouring, — 1 can¬ 
 not, indeed, use the word endeavouring, — 
 but his persisting, during that period, in a 
 seditious intent, manifested by his wri¬ 
 tings, and manifested by his conduct. 
 And, 1 will tell him mor.e, if he is so ig¬ 
 norant cf the law and constitution of his 
 country, as one would think, from his de¬ 
 claration to-night, he must be, that if that 
 meeting at the cockpit had been followed 
 by tumult, or by insurrection, coupled 
 with his conduct at the convention for 
 several nights before, he would have stood 
 at this bar charged with high treason; and, 
 as such, would have suffered, if convicted, 
 a capital punishment, under the statute of 
 Edward III. because it could not be con¬ 
 strued into any thing else but levying war 
 against the king, under that statute ; and 
 I will tell him more, that, when these in¬ 
 dictments were preferred against him and 
 others who now hear me, and who must 
 soon stand before a jury of their country 
 likewise, that it was very dubious, among 
 those who stood at the head of criminal jus¬ 
 tice, whether it did not warrant us in such a 
 prosecution ; however, we have taken the 
 more lenient, and, 1 trust, the more pro¬ 
 per line of conduct; he and they stand 
 charged with sedition ; but of the truth or 
 falsehood of that charge, and the suffi¬ 
 ciency or insufficiency of evidence, it is 
 not now my business to argue upon : it 
 will be hereafter your province to give 
 your verdict. 
 
 Upon Palmer’s paper 1 shall offer but a 
 very few observations. A respectable 
 and an impartial jury, as all juries in this 
 country are, and as all juries must be, I 
 
 care not for those injurious aspersions 
 which men, such as these, presume to 
 throw upon their conduct; and as little 
 do I care for those arts that have been 
 made use of to intimidate them in their 
 duty: I say, this has already been stamped 
 by a verdict of the country as a seditious, 
 inflammatory paper, and the person who 
 composed it found guilty as such ; but, 
 Gcd forbid that the judgmentof any man— 
 that the opinion of any court—that the au¬ 
 thority of any man, or set of men what¬ 
 ever,—should influence your minds one 
 moment, or prevent you from taking that 
 paper under your own serious considera¬ 
 tion, and judging of its import and ten¬ 
 dency, in a manner as free and as untram¬ 
 meled as your powers are ample, as if it 
 was now for the first time brought under 
 your consideration. I desire you to read 
 that paper. I desire you to consider with 
 yourselves if it is a paper such as Palmer 
 professed it to be, merely for obtaining a 
 reform in Parliament, and which he glo¬ 
 ried in the circulation of; if you are of 
 that opinion, it is idle to inquire whether 
 the fact of circulation is proved or not: 
 he is not only not guilty, but has done 
 that for which he is entitled to praise, and 
 which does not merit censure ;—but you 
 will peruse that paper; and if it appears 
 to you, as it does to me,—as it does to the 
 Court, by their permitting it to be consi¬ 
 dered as relevant,—a most seditious and 
 inflammatory libel, to tell us, “ The time 
 is now come, when we are to assemble 
 round the fabric of liberty to support it; 
 that we are plunged into a war by a wicked 
 ministry, and a compliant parliament 
 when it is not the parliament alone, but 
 the united voice of the country has justi¬ 
 fied us in going to defend ourselves in a 
 war with a neighbouring natiou; if that 
 should be your opinion, it will be your 
 business to inquire, how far the fact will 
 bear you out; and I should think 1 ob¬ 
 scured, instead of illustrated, if I did any 
 thing but desire you to look upon this 
 paper with a favourable eye to the panuel; 
 but you cannot but agree with me, that it 
 is as seditious and inflammatory a paper 
 as ever was circulated among the inhabi¬ 
 tants of this country. 
 
 Gentlemen, among the papers pro¬ 
 duced, is one of the records of the court, 
 a petition of the pannel; he being taken 
 up as guilty of an imputed offence, and 
 after having it in his power to give bail for 
 his appearance, he chose obstinately (from 
 some desire of reform 1 suppose) to re¬ 
 fuse to give bail, and insisted on his im¬ 
 mediate liberation, and that the officer of 
 
VVM. SKI HYING-. 
 
 57 
 
 justice should be incarcerated in his stead; 
 or, at least, insisted before this court that 
 it should be served upon him, when your 
 lordships scouted the idea. In that paper 
 he tells you, that “ the chief business of 
 the Friends of the People, as preparatory 
 to the reform in parliament which they 
 sought, was the information of the public 
 as to the grounds of parliamentary re¬ 
 form, its importance, and immediate ne¬ 
 cessity. Your petitioner, therefore, judged 
 it to be his duty, as secretary, to submit 
 every information to the public which he 
 received, and thought calculated to illus¬ 
 trate these points; and the individuals 
 and societies who had it in their power to 
 give such information, naturally trans¬ 
 mitted the same to him as secretary.”— 
 Why, here is an explicit and an avowed 
 declaration, upon his part, that the infor¬ 
 mation of the public, and the grounds of 
 it, were what he was bound to lay before 
 them ; and, if you consider that paper as 
 such an information, as you will permit 
 with impunity to be circulated through all 
 parts of Scotland, I give up the question 
 at once ; you ought to return a verdict in 
 his favour. He also adds, “ Your peti¬ 
 tioner has already suffered too much for 
 attempting to prevent the overthrow 7 of 
 the constitution of his country, by the 
 overweight of any of the branches against 
 the other, to be guilty of willingly assist¬ 
 ing in any such design. He considered 
 the paper complained on as merely the 
 strong effusion of honest hearts, alarmed 
 by the measures of those in administra¬ 
 tion, judging the constitution in the ut¬ 
 most danger, and catching at the first 
 grounds of alarm which presented them¬ 
 selves to their view.”—This confession of 
 his own is confirmed by one of the decla¬ 
 rations just now read ;—it is confirmed by 
 the testimony of Morren, and of Kid, both 
 of whom, though with considerable reluc¬ 
 tance, deponed to their receiving such a 
 copy of it from him ; and that he was the 
 person who appeared to have the charge 
 of it. Morren, indeed, distinctly goes to 
 this, that he received the paper from Pal¬ 
 mer for publication ; that he was desired 
 to give so many copies to Skirving if he 
 called for it; that he went afterwards to 
 Skirving’s house; that Skirving sent some¬ 
 body for it; that he received an hundred 
 copies; they are found circulating through 
 the town ; and when the repositories of 
 Skirving himself were searched, the hun¬ 
 dred copies were all expended to two or 
 three, or something within half-a-dozen : 
 you will consider if that was not all that 
 remained out of the thousand copies which 
 
 were thrown off; and which these gen¬ 
 tlemen were to send round to the public ; 
 with regard to the important business of 
 reform, Skirving having one-tenth part of 
 it in his own possession, distributing them 
 among different persons; and only one 
 or two appearing to be left, you will con¬ 
 sider whether you have not distinct, satis¬ 
 factory evidence, that he received those 
 papers, knowing the purport of them, and 
 glorying in them, whether the fact is not 
 clearly and distinctly proved (not being 
 contradicted upon the part of this man), 
 beyond the possibility of denial. 
 
 Having said so much upon this part of 
 the charge, I come to the most material, 
 the most important part of it,—I mean all 
 these proceedings from the 4th of Octo¬ 
 ber, 1793, down to the 12th of Decem¬ 
 ber, 1793, when the authority of the civil 
 magistrate was contemned and despised ; 
 when nothing but the vigilance and exer¬ 
 tion of the magistrates, to whom the coun¬ 
 try owes much for that public spirited¬ 
 ness with which they conducted themselves 
 upon this trying occasion, could have dis¬ 
 persed this seditious, this illegal, and, I 
 had almost said, this treasonable meeting. 
 But the hand-bill of the 4th of October is 
 very candidly to-day owned by one of the 
 Ross’s, and 1 have no objection to give him 
 the credit of that elegant composition. I 
 only impute to the pannel the criminality 
 of having lent his name, as secretary of 
 this general committee, to authorise its 
 circulation into the world; and, as such, 
 having become responsible for it. It ap¬ 
 pears, from Ross’s account of it, to have 
 been wrote by both of them jointly; it 
 was wrote the evening before the meeting 
 of the general committee, at which Skir¬ 
 ving is proved to have been present; and 
 though, from a particular kind of frailty of 
 memory, which seemed to distinguish both 
 those able brothers, they did not precisely 
 recollect every question which came from 
 one side of the table, though, when they 
 came to be questioned from the other, that 
 recollection revived in a most extraordi¬ 
 nary and a most amazing degree; although 
 they did not perfectly recollect what he 
 said upon the subject, they only recollected 
 that he would.not put his name to any 
 thing but his own composition ; there is 
 enough to shew you that, if he would not 
 as an individual, yet he had no objection 
 to do it in his official capacity ; in which 
 capacity he now stands at your bar, as Se¬ 
 cretary to the Convention of the Friends of 
 the People: it is perfectly clear that, as he 
 never, in the smallest degree, complained 
 of that seditious hand-bill being handed 
 
58 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 about with his name to it, by which he ra¬ 
 tified and approved of the proceeding. He 
 has not told you, nor dare he tell you, that, 
 when the paper was sent into the world 
 with his name to it, he did, as every honest 
 citizen ought to do, revoke it, and publish 
 to the world who were the persons guilty 
 of it; and, therefore, you must hold him 
 as a person responsible to you, and respon¬ 
 sible to the country, for this hand-bill, cir¬ 
 culated with his subscription annexed to 
 it, and under his authority, though the two 
 Ross’s are perfectly satisfied that they 
 wrote this hand-bill, and that Skirving did 
 refuse in the meeting to sign his name 
 to it. 
 
 Gentlemen, is it possible to read the 
 concluding paragraph of this paper, cou¬ 
 pled particularly with the preceding adver¬ 
 tisement of Palmer’s, in which he is proved 
 to have so distinguished a share ; is it pos¬ 
 sible to read the concluding paragraph of 
 that paper; holding out a menace to an 
 association, numerous beyond example, 
 which took place last year, when every 
 good and worthy man in the country, of 
 all ranks and denominations, was found 
 subscribing to it ? Can you read it with¬ 
 out discovering an insolent and audacious 
 menace to them for that conduct ? if they 
 did not retract, and the Friends of the 
 People would be innocent? What were 
 they associating for ? For the protection 
 of liberty and property. 
 
 It also contains another menace, equally 
 seditious, and equally illegal. It is true 
 the inhabitants of this country have a right 
 to petition parliament for a redress of 
 grievances ; but is this, or any man, or 
 any set of men whatever, entitled, when 
 the country is at peace and in quiet, to 
 send such a hand-bill as this among the 
 people,—to sound the trumpet of alarm 
 among those who are contented and hap¬ 
 py,—to threaten even those men who may, 
 in the moment of delusion, have been led 
 to join in their proceedings, but who be¬ 
 came satisfied, as ninety-nine persons out 
 of a hundred are satisfied, that their pro¬ 
 ceedings are not tending to reform, but to 
 subvert the constitution of this country; 
 and I know there are many well-meaning 
 men who, having been led by false rea¬ 
 soning, imposed upon by the glare of some 
 man’s sophistry, or the cant of some man’s 
 enthusiasm, have now withdrawn them¬ 
 selves from that society into which they 
 had once been deluded, and that conduct 
 which they had once been betrayed to fol¬ 
 low. He tells you in this advertisement, 
 that those members who do not attend, or 
 send an excuse, will be publicly called 
 
 upon ; and this is a paper of which thou¬ 
 sands were thrown off, as Ross tells you ; 
 those men, therefore, who chose to retract 
 or alter their opinions, who chose to come 
 back and join the majority of the country, 
 to be faithful and loyal to their king, and 
 attached to their constitution, had this me¬ 
 nace held out to them, that they would be 
 publicly called upon, in as public a way 
 as this paper is circulated, to intimidate 
 them from following the dictates of their 
 consciences, and exciting them to join 
 in forming an arbitrary government, worse 
 than that despotism of which a neigh¬ 
 bouring country affords an example ; do¬ 
 mineering over the minds and bodies of 
 their countrymen, and owning no autho¬ 
 rity but that which they mark with atro¬ 
 cious acts of injustice and cruelty. 
 
 Gentlemen, let us now come to the ma¬ 
 terial point of the case : let us consider 
 the proceedings of the British Convention 
 of the delegates of the people, associated 
 to obtain universal suffrage and annual 
 parliaments ; a convention which, in its 
 name and in its object, though the meet¬ 
 ing was originally, and has for some time 
 past, gone under the name of the Friends 
 of the People, and only holding out, as 
 their end, the obtaining a reform in par¬ 
 liament, has now, with an audacity which 
 has excited, not the attention of this me¬ 
 tropolis, not the attention of Scotland 
 alone, not the notice of England only, but 
 of Ireland, and, 1 believe, of the whole 
 empire at large ; which has attracted the 
 attention even of France itself, and been 
 there the object of admiration; a meeting 
 which, in its avowed object, tends, not to 
 reform, as they pretended, but to subvert 
 the constitution. Let these men argue as 
 they please, let them declaim till they are 
 sick, universal suffrage is a thing which the 
 constitution of this country never did re¬ 
 cognise, for the best of all possible rea¬ 
 sons, because it is impracticable ; and if 
 ever attempted to be carried into execu¬ 
 tion, as it was well observed by my elo¬ 
 quent friend to-day, would tendjust to the 
 precise same effects and pernicious conse¬ 
 quences which we have seen, to the asto¬ 
 nishment of the present day, in a neigh¬ 
 bouring country. 
 
 Gentlemen, two things are to be mate¬ 
 rially weighed and considered by you upon 
 this indictment. 
 
 In the first place, if the proceedings of 
 that meeting, of which this man was a 
 member, and not only a member, and an 
 office-bearer in it, but, as I shall afterwards 
 prove to you, in evidence, the ringleader, 
 and chief instrument in calling it together, 
 
WM. SKIRV1NG. 
 
 59 
 
 the first thing you must consider, with de¬ 
 liberation and care, is, was it, or was it not 
 a seditious meeting ? In this country, you 
 have always possessed the right of deter¬ 
 mining the law, as well as the fact; your 
 opinion must be made up upon the point 
 Is this meeting seditious, or not ? And, 
 if you determine it in the former case, 
 then you will inquire into the sufficiency, 
 or insufficiency of the evidence. It shall 
 be my business to endeavour to satisfy 
 you, that you have every evidence of the 
 seditious nature of it that you can reason¬ 
 ably require, and that the nature of the 
 case admits; more indeed than, I believe, 
 could have been expected from a meeting, 
 such as this, which, with all its avowed 
 pretexts and pretentions, I will point out 
 to you in several parts of their conduct, 
 their own firm conviction, that they were 
 acting a dangerous part; and that the con¬ 
 duct that they were following was not such 
 as the law of . their country recognised. 
 It seems, from some parts of the evidence, 
 which I shall immediately notice, that they 
 could not even in these meetings stifle 
 their own consciences; there was that si¬ 
 lent monitor within, which, (with all that 
 pretence of reform, and that confidence 
 which some have expressed to-day, of the 
 legality of their proceedings,) whispered 
 to them this, that they were carrying on 
 a kind of conduct which, if discovered, 
 they must suffer for, and proves their own 
 conviction of a sense of the seditious na¬ 
 ture of their proceedings. In a country 
 such as this, nor indeed in any country, 
 possessing an established system of go¬ 
 vernment, and much less, in such a coun¬ 
 try as this, where the opinions of the peo¬ 
 ple are made up upon the wisdom of that 
 government, and are attached to it, by the 
 surest of all ties, if the magistrates are ac¬ 
 tive in the execution of their duty, it is 
 not to be expected that any such meeting 
 as this would directly avow an attempt to 
 subvert the government, or constitution 
 of this country ; you may rest assured you 
 will always find some pretext or other held 
 forth to cloak their proceedings, till the 
 moment shall come when they shall think 
 it safe to avow them. Had we at present 
 been trying the conduct of this man, by 
 any thing which passed in the four first 
 days of this convention, before they as¬ 
 sumed that name which they have taken 
 to themselves, and before they came to 
 choose resolutions, which I shall in the se¬ 
 quel read from the minutes, we should 
 have had such a case before us that you 
 would have had to decide whether they 
 were really and truly meeting for the pur¬ 
 
 pose of a reform, or whether they were 
 acting under a mask for the purpose of 
 destroying the government of the country; 
 but from the date of the assumption of 
 this name, and during the subsequent 
 week, or ten days, these gentlemen have 
 done away even the shadow of a mask 
 over their proceedings; in every mode of 
 their proceeding, every resolution which 
 they adopt is framed directly and positi¬ 
 vely upon the model of the French con¬ 
 vention ; and I desire you to take this 
 along with you, when you consider this 
 subject, that although this meeting was 
 illegal in every part of it, that it is because 
 it is a convention, forming itself upon the 
 model of a nation, with which we are at 
 war, proving itself to be so by every means 
 they could adopt to satisfy all the world, 
 that that was their intention, except that 
 they have not said we desire to have a 
 French republic formed here, substituted 
 in tbe place of our own, except, that they 
 have not said so, totidem verbis; every 
 other circumstance of their conduct di¬ 
 rectly points to that object alone. They 
 make use of the term citizen. A smile 
 I observe to drop from the pannel at the 
 bar, and from his friends who, I under¬ 
 stand, are now sitting round him, and some 
 of whom, I am afraid, must soon stand in 
 his place, as if the assumption of the word 
 citizen, was of no importance, and as a 
 very high, and a very distinguished mem¬ 
 ber of this society, the deputy secretary, 
 declared, that as a Burgess of Edinburgh, 
 he should blush for himself if he did not 
 think the name of citizen a good one ; it 
 is true we are all good citizens of Great 
 Britain; recollect this, it is used in a meet¬ 
 ing professing a purpose which is incom¬ 
 patible with the constitution of the coun¬ 
 try : and take along with you this likewise, 
 that the term citizen, being used in every 
 subsequent part of their proceedings, shews 
 whattbe purport of their proceedings were. 
 In that case it comes to be material, like 
 the case put by my learned brother, that 
 he who a few years ago, with a white cock¬ 
 ade in his hat, should have marched to the 
 castle-hill of this city, and fired a few shots 
 at it, would have been treated as a mad¬ 
 man ; but he who, in 1745, had been 
 guilty of the same thing would have atoned 
 perhaps for his conduct with bis life. The 
 term cittzen, of itself, is no crime ; but 
 used in this manner, it is a circumstance, 
 in the chain of evidence, to shew that they 
 are a set of French Conventionists. I 
 give them no other name ; and that, as 
 such,they are offending against the known 
 criminal law of this, and every other coun- 
 
TRIAL OF 
 
 60 
 
 try upon earth; and, as such, are seditious. 
 You find they have committees of finance, 
 of instruction, of organization ; in short, 
 there is not a single entry, not a single 
 motion, not a single step taken by them, 
 which is not precisely formed upon the 
 model of the French Convention : they 
 date their proceedings in the first year, 
 not of liberty indeed, but of the British 
 Convention—members are admitted to 
 the honours of the sitting; and, in short, 
 every thing exactly upon that model. 
 
 Gentlemen, 1 stated to you, that the 
 evidence in this case, was not only direct 
 and proper, but what is much better, it is 
 written evidence, which cannot be mis¬ 
 taken,which must be true, and upon which, 
 in the course of your duty, you are to 
 form your opinion. Gentlemen, it was 
 not till we had full information of the ex¬ 
 tent to which their proceedings went; 
 nor, indeed, till they themselves entered 
 in the Edinburgh Gazetteer, that which 
 Mr. Aitcheson told you, was a paper 
 favourable to liberty and to reform, till 
 they had entered in that paper the pro¬ 
 ceedings of their Convention, that a war¬ 
 rant was issued for their dispersion, and 
 for the detention of their, papers. The 
 paper has been identified in the most sa¬ 
 tisfactory manner, as indeed every other 
 has, except article twenty-four, and it is 
 your duty to take them into your consi¬ 
 deration. 
 
 Gentlemen, I shall now state that which, 
 of itself, is sufficientto denote the seditious 
 nature of their proceedings; and I shall 
 dismiss what I have to say upon that se¬ 
 cond and last topic, in a very few words, 
 and I shall confine myself to that par¬ 
 ticular motion which was made by Mr. 
 Callander; I beg his pardon, I mean Citi¬ 
 zen Callander, for so the motion stands, 
 which I shall report from the minutes ; 
 and I shall beg leave to take some little 
 time in commenting upon them ; and, I 
 trust, I shall not unnecessarily trespass up¬ 
 on your patience, if I follow the minutes 
 from the first appearance of this motion, 
 respecting the Convention Bill , till by the 
 sudden and unexpected arrival of the ma¬ 
 gistracy, an end was put to all the pro¬ 
 ceedings upon the subject. 
 
 Gentlemen, upon the sixth day’s sit¬ 
 ting (I read exactly the words of the 
 motion), being the 25th of November, 
 
 and Mr.- Citizen, President, being 
 
 in the chair, Citizen Callander moved, 
 
 “ That in case the minister should bring 
 into the Commons House a motion for a 
 Convention Bill, such as was passed in 
 Ireland, it should be noticed immediately 
 
 to the delegates.”—By the form of their 
 proceedings it should seem, for those gen¬ 
 tlemen conducted themselves with amas- 
 ing regularity, that this motion was not 
 taken up at the same sitting that it was 
 made, and we see no more of it till the 
 next day, when we have the following ac¬ 
 count of what passed upon the subject. 
 Mr. Mealmaker in the chair. [Reads from 
 the minutes.] John Gartly,—he, I under¬ 
 stand, is the town drummer of Paisley.* 
 Margarot was for adopting the spirit of 
 Callander’s motion, butthought “it would 
 be most advantageous to postpone it till 
 the conclusion of the Convention busi¬ 
 ness.”—Margarot moved, &c. [Goes on 
 reading.]—Also, upon the twenty-ninth 
 day of November Citizen Mealmaker in 
 the chair, passed a resolution as follows.— 
 This is in the handwriting of George 
 Ross, a gentleman who occasionally offi¬ 
 ciated as secretary to the meeting; then 
 there is a blank of a page follows in the 
 minutes; and then Citizen Gerrald makes 
 au animated and an energetic address, ex • 
 pressinghishappinessatthe motion passed, 
 that a secret committee of three, and the 
 secretary, should be appointed to deter¬ 
 mine the place where such convention of 
 emergencies should meet. Let me stop 
 here, and direct your attention to what 
 the minutes have now directly proved to 
 you, and to what Ross has, with so much 
 reluctance, said : let me direct your at¬ 
 tention to the three papers of the Gazet¬ 
 teer, marked Nos. 78, 79, and 80, and 
 though therewasareluctance in the Ross’s 
 to account for the blank in the book, I 
 shall be able, I think, upon solid grounds, 
 to satisfy you why this blank was left in 
 the minutes, and that motion, which was 
 made by Sinclair, to have that paper burnt, 
 was not what Aitcheson told you, the 
 motion for a secret committee, which ap¬ 
 pears two pages afterwards ; but was a 
 motion for a Convention of emergencies, 
 and that convention founded upon cases, 
 founded upon circumstances, which I con¬ 
 fidently say, verge upon an act of treason. 
 Citizen Margarot moves, “ That a secret 
 committee of three and the secretary be 
 appointed, to determine the place where 
 such convention of emergencies should 
 meet.” Look at these minutes, and see 
 if you can find any prior mention of such 
 a Convention of emergency ; its name 
 itself proves that this measure was under 
 previous consideration, and was now de¬ 
 termined upon, at the moment that Mar- 
 
 * This is one of the gross falsehoods invented 
 by the opposers of Reform, for the purpose of 
 throwing an odium on the cause of Reform. 
 
WM. SKIHVING. 
 
 61 
 
 garot made his motion for a secret com¬ 
 mittee ; therefore, it is clear to demon¬ 
 stration, by real and convincing evidence, 
 that the blank in the minutes, which pre¬ 
 cedes this speech of Gerrald’s and Mar- 
 garot’s, must relate to that convention of 
 emergencies, and not to that secret com¬ 
 mittee which follows Margarot’s speech. 
 
 Gentlemen, I know not whether, in 
 the heat of argument, I may make my- 
 self understood, but I am satisfied of this, 
 that you must concur with me, not only 
 that both the Ross’s, but Aitcheson, did 
 this evening conceal the truth, to give it 
 no worse an appellation. I think, this 
 circumstance proves, by real evidence, 
 that what they said is not the fact; and 
 proves, that something did pass, for which 
 this opening was left:—to wit, the ap¬ 
 pointment of a convention of emergency, 
 which Margarot, by that subsequent mo¬ 
 tion cf his, clearly and distinctly points 
 out that something of this kind had passed 
 before : for, if you find any thing of it 
 before, my argument is good for nothing; 
 —but circumstances do sometimes happen 
 to come out in evidence which the most 
 artful cannot foresee, and which the most 
 wicked cannot guard against; and, I say, 
 this speech of Margarot’s is as decided 
 and as fortunate a circumstance, to shew 
 that this blank is meant to be filled up 
 with that motion for appointing this con¬ 
 vention of emergency, as if you had seen 
 the motion before you. Mr. Aitcheson 
 tells you, that he came to the meeting at 
 about half-past ten, and was informed 
 that there had been a motion respecting 
 a secret committee, and that Citizen Sin¬ 
 clair said it should be burnt; that Ait¬ 
 cheson exclaimed against it, and said, that 
 their proceedings were fair and open, and 
 the motion was not burnt. But mark 
 this also, that every part of the minutes, 
 previous to the blank, is admitted to be 
 in the handwriting of Ross ; every thing 
 after the blank, is admitted to be in the 
 handwriting of Aitcheson ;—it is there¬ 
 fore perfectly clear from Aitcheson’s ac¬ 
 count, that this secret resolution, which 
 he swears was come to by the convention, 
 before he entered the room, and which 
 they told him he was too late in giving 
 his vote against, could not be that secret 
 committee which was moved for after he 
 came into the room, but must have been 
 the motion of Citizen Callander, which 
 Citizen Sinclair wished to be kept secret, 
 and was afraid should see the light. 
 
 I hope, and trust you follow me in the 
 argument, because I think what I am 
 now stating is circumstantial real evi¬ 
 
 dence ; that this motion for a convention 
 of emergency was meant to be put into 
 this blank. It was Sinclair’s motion, to 
 which Margarot afterwards alludes, pre¬ 
 vious to the appointment of the secret 
 committee, which appears in the minutes, 
 in the handwriting of Aitcheson; but 
 leaving the previous blank for the inser¬ 
 tion of Sinclair’s motion. Before I go 
 any farther, I beg leave to refer to a pa¬ 
 per which, with great difficulty, the 
 Ross’s admitted to be at least the sub¬ 
 stance of their proceedings ; and that fills 
 up, in a measure, this blank in the mi¬ 
 nutes. In this paper, Mr. Scott, the 
 printer of the Gazetteer, tells you, that it 
 is an accurate account of the proceedings 
 of the British Convention, down to Mon¬ 
 day. [Reads from the Gazetteer.] 
 
 One of these gentlemen was a short¬ 
 hand writer, chosen for the purpose of 
 publishing their proceedings; and, I 
 hope, I may be allowed to assume, that 
 this Gazetteer, though it may not, per¬ 
 haps, tell every thing that they did, yet 
 upon the authority of the two Mr. Ross’s, 
 and upon the authority of Mr. Scott, the 
 publisher, that it does contain, at least so 
 far as it goes, an accurate account. Let 
 us see whether this was merely the mo¬ 
 tion for a secret committee which appears 
 in the minutes, or whether it was not a 
 motion with regard to the nomination of 
 the convention of emergency, which I 
 told you he was so very willing to have 
 burnt; what does he say ? On the Thurs¬ 
 day, Mealmaker being in the chair, they 
 wer-e for adopting Callander’s motion — 
 and then it was referred upon motion to 
 a committee. “ The committee reports 
 progress, and asks leave to sit again,” &c. 
 
 You will consider, whether the bare 
 nomination of a secret committee could 
 be the subject of this serious and solemn 
 address of Sinclair’s, or whether it was 
 not the cause, the motives, and the cases 
 under which the convention of emergency 
 was to be assembled which could alone 
 claim this serious attention, which could 
 only be supported by their uniting, which 
 underwent a long discussion, and received 
 several amendments; and, when the Con¬ 
 vention was resumed, it passed unani¬ 
 mously in the form of a declaration and 
 resolutions : but, being ordered to stand 
 the last article on the record of the pro¬ 
 ceedings of the Convention. 
 
 You have it then distinctly in evidence, 
 that the motion of Sinclair was not that 
 which Margarot, half-an-hour after, made 
 for the appointment of a secret commit¬ 
 tee, it is impossible it should, from the 
 
62 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 circumstances of its being kept out till 
 the termination of that session, which ter¬ 
 mination never arrived; and then, Mr. 
 Gerrald rises and makes a speech—com¬ 
 pare the Gazetteer, it tells you, Gerrald 
 rose to congratulate the Convention on 
 the adoption of this resolution, not only 
 on the propriety of the motion itself, but 
 on that unanimity and that solemnity with 
 which it was passed, tallying exactly with 
 the words in the minutes, that the Con¬ 
 vention rose solemnly upon their legs. 
 Then is it possible for you not to believe 
 that this blank, the only blank in the 
 minutes, was left for the purpose of en¬ 
 tering Sinclair’s motion at the termina¬ 
 tion of the present session, and that it 
 was this motion which they passed with 
 so much unanimity, which Gerrald con¬ 
 gratulated the Convention upon, in such 
 an animated, energetic, and manly a way 
 as they tell you. I say, the subsequent 
 motion of Margarot, which followed from, 
 and was a consequence of the previous 
 antecedent resolution, could not be the 
 motion intended to be put into this page. 
 I will not give you all Mr. Gerrald’s 
 speech—he would have stood in that 
 place the day after to-morrow, but he is 
 indulged, at his own desire, to have his 
 trial put off; but he shall stand his trial 
 in this court, before he and I have done 
 with each other. After all this you have 
 a long speech of Margarot and Browne. 
 You will hear what this Gazetteer then 
 tells you ; after stating Gerrald’s speech, 
 which congratulates the meeting upon 
 the motion already passed ; after stating 
 Browne's speech at the length of a page 
 and a half, and, you will attend to this, a 
 secret committee was appointed to fix a 
 place for the meeting of the convention, 
 under the circumstances mentioned in 
 the preceding resolution. Am I wrong 
 then, or, am I unfounded in the view 
 which I am now giving of the evidence, 
 to satisfy your minds that it is founded 
 upon the nature of the case; founded 
 upon evidence which cannot err, and 
 which cannot be mistaken, that this con¬ 
 vention of emergency, and the cases in 
 which that convention were to meet, was 
 the motion for which this blank was left, 
 and was the foundation and the basis of 
 that last meeting moving for a secret com¬ 
 mittee, which the minutes bear to have 
 been moved by Mr. Margarot, and which 
 follow after the resolution of Sinclair; 
 that business, which they would not dare 
 to meet discussion upon, whether it should 
 be secret or not; when Aitcheson called 
 upon them again to go over it, they said the 
 
 resolution was already come to, and it 
 was now too late, though he had the con¬ 
 fidence to tell you, that he thought this 
 secret committee, which appears in his 
 handwriting at the foot of this page, was 
 the secret committee to which the motion 
 alluded. I hope and trust, that, if I have 
 done wrong at all, it has been in using 
 too many words to satisfy you how the 
 truth stauds, notwithstanding all that re¬ 
 luctance to tell the truth, which is so con¬ 
 spicuous in all these persons, and that 
 what I have said, and only that can be, 
 and is the truth. 
 
 Gentlemen, let me look back again to 
 the minutes; 1 am sorry to trespass so 
 much upon your time, but 1 feel it a duty, 
 incumbent upon me, and I confess I feel 
 some kind of anxiety in a cause of this 
 nature, however clear the evidence may 
 be, for the sake of my country, or for my 
 own satisfaction at least, to leave no argu¬ 
 ment unstated which may be necessary 
 for your subsequent deliberation. Mr. 
 Margarot moved for a secret committee ; 
 and that each delegate shall be entrusted 
 with a sealed letter, containing the name 
 of the place of meeting, and the following 
 Citizens were named as a committee. 
 There are only four members ; and yet 
 those persons, Aitcheson, who wrote the 
 minute, and Ross, and his brother, the 
 assistant secretaries, who gave it as an ar¬ 
 ticle of news to the public, could not re¬ 
 member the names of those four persons, 
 though such distinguished characters as 
 these gentlemem are, Messrs. Margarot, 
 Skirving, and Browne, they could not re¬ 
 collect their names, though three of the 
 members, which constituted this secret 
 committee, are now at that bar. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, at the end of the 
 meeting, it is moved by John Clarke and 
 Matthew C. Brcwne, “ that a committee 
 of observation be appointed in London, 
 to give the earliest information of that 
 kind, mentioned in the foregoing resolu¬ 
 tions.” Clarke moves the very same even¬ 
 ing, “ to establish a committee of obser¬ 
 vation.” 
 
 They may certainly pretend what they 
 please, but the resolution of Sinclair was 
 that by which the convention of emer¬ 
 gency was appointed. This lies over till 
 next day, in common form. The next 
 day, the 29th November, in the first year 
 of the British Convention, anno Domini, 
 (which I wonder they did not discard) 
 1793, tenth day’s sitting. The secretary 
 read, according to form, the previous 
 motion of Clarke for a committee of ob¬ 
 servation, to be appointed in London. 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 63 
 
 Citizen Margarot said, “there was no 
 occasion for a committee of that sort, as 
 there were some thousands of persons in 
 that city, upon the look outI hope 
 there are, gentlemen. On the evening 
 before the convention was broke up by 
 the civil power, when they had sufficiently 
 provoked the vengeance of the magis¬ 
 trates of this city, who took those steps 
 which ended in a complete detection of 
 the whole ; and it seems we have been 
 blamed ; it is said, “ why were these men 
 permitted to proceed so far as they did ?” 
 Gentlemen, they were permitted to pro¬ 
 ceed till we had our information com¬ 
 plete ; and till we were ready to strike 
 that blow which was struck, and upon 
 which we recovered every species of evi¬ 
 dence that was necessary ; and, it should 
 seem, it had even reached the ears of those 
 persons; for, on the preceding evening, 
 it appears that Mr. Margarot had either 
 heard or suspected that they were now 
 come to the very utmost point of their 
 guilt; and that the sword of justice was 
 just ready to descend upon them ; the 
 very evening before the other motions ly¬ 
 ing before them were dismissed, and Mar¬ 
 garot got leave to bring in a motion to 
 the effect, “ that the moment any illegal 
 dispersion of the British Convention, 
 should be considered as a summons to the 
 delegates to repair to the place of meet¬ 
 ing, appointed for the convention of emer¬ 
 gency by the secret committee, and 
 that the secret committee be instructed to 
 proceed, without delay, to fix the place of 
 meeting.” The Convention having con¬ 
 sidered the motion fully, unanimously re¬ 
 solved the same, and appointed the secret 
 committee to proceed as desired. Early 
 the next morning the ringleaders of this 
 party were apprehended, before day-light, 
 in their beds, and all their papers seized. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, permit me only to re¬ 
 mind you of the evidence of Aitcheson 
 and the two Ross’s, however ignorant they 
 were, you recollect they were extremely 
 reluctant to speak out upon the subject of 
 this Convention; both of them concurred 
 in telling you at once, I believe the last 
 did not remember any thing at all about 
 the matter, but the two former, Aitcheson 
 and William Ross, did tell you, that in 
 case of the parliament moving for a Con¬ 
 vention Bill, similar to that of Ireland, that 
 that was one of the cases under which this 
 convention of emergency was to take 
 place. They admitted that fact com¬ 
 pletely, which they thought was very in¬ 
 nocent ; but I beg leave to state, that it 
 is the very reverse ; and if I had nothing 
 
 more to argue upon, in support of my 
 proposition, that the proceedings of this 
 Convention were seditious and illegal, I 
 would ask nothing more than they them¬ 
 selves have admitted, the purport of Citi¬ 
 zen Callander’s motion ; and this case 
 of emergency, as they themselves state it. 
 Gentlemen, is it possible that you can 
 permit any individual, or set of indivi¬ 
 duals, for any reason whatever, true or 
 false, real or pretended, to set themselves 
 up in opposition to the legislature, to take 
 measures for thwarting them in their de¬ 
 liberations for the public good, to appoint 
 secret committees, to call together dele¬ 
 gates for thousands of persons, as they tell 
 us, they are to fix upon a place to rally; 
 and, if government do proceed to act as 
 the Irish parliament have done before 
 them, that that shall be a signal to rally 
 to a given point, and for what purpose ? 
 The purpose is not spoke out, but it is 
 your duty and your business to consider, 
 that if a quiet and peaceable petition to 
 parliament is, as we all admit, a reasonable 
 and a proper step, yet if you confound 
 with that right to petition, a secret ap¬ 
 pointment of this nature, the moment that 
 such a Bill is brought in, to convocate 
 and call together in one given point, the 
 delegates from numbers of persons all 
 over the country. Shew me sedition ? 
 Tell me what it is? Is it possible for you 
 to conceive any thing more directly fall¬ 
 ing under the name of sedition, than this 
 resolution of Sinclair’s, a step aetually 
 taken by them, to carry that seditious in¬ 
 tent against the parliament into execu¬ 
 tion ; they appointed a secret committee, 
 whether they appointed a place of meet¬ 
 ing or no, I don’t care, for I take the 
 meeting in the cockpit to be something 
 like it; here then is a seditious intent act¬ 
 ed upon, as far as the magistrates suffered 
 them to act upon it. Gentlemen, I be¬ 
 lieve you see here, before you, one half 
 of the British Convention of the delegates 
 of the people,— the worthy representatives 
 of eight millions of people, and four persons 
 two of them now at your bar. Are those 
 men fit to be trusted with the power of pe¬ 
 titioning parliament peaceably and quietly? 
 or did it require that these people should 
 appoint a secret committee to watch the 
 motions of parliament ? or was it neces¬ 
 sary for a peaceable appeal to parliament, 
 on this, or any other question, that a con¬ 
 vention of emergency should take place ? 
 I say it was nothing but an attempt, if it 
 was possible that the good sense of the 
 country should be so misled, to take the 
 first step in that system of anarchy and 
 
61 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 disorder which they wish for, and which 
 has taken place in a neighbouring country. 
 
 Gentlemen, the conclusions will be un¬ 
 questionably for you to draw; you are to 
 judge of men, not by their professions, 
 but by their conduct; and if you can re¬ 
 concile their conduct in any respect to 
 quiet, to legal, to constitutional proceed¬ 
 ings, I will give up the point Gentle¬ 
 men, I might have rested upon this case 
 of emergency, but I say it does not rest 
 there, the legal dispersion of the meeting 
 is proved to have been an additional case 
 moved and carried in the convention, up¬ 
 on the evening of the 4th, when they were 
 apprehensive of being laid hold of. And 
 will you permit this man, or any set of 
 men whatever, in the face of your magis¬ 
 trates, who are obstructed in the execu¬ 
 tion of their duty, will you permit them 
 to make, what they call an illegal disper¬ 
 sion of their meetings, also a signal of 
 this rallying of the convention of emer¬ 
 gency, in which Mr. Gerrald rejoices and 
 exults, and which Sinclair tells them, is 
 to be supported by their united efforts. 
 
 Gentlemen, last of all comes what de¬ 
 pends upon the evidence of the first Ross, 
 and upon the evidence.of Aitcheson, what 
 is proved is, that one case cf emergency 
 was that of a foreign invasion. Ross 
 called it a French invasion. I think the 
 other man called it a foreign invasion, 
 and young Ross said it was in case of 
 Hessians and Hanoverians being brought 
 over, but not a word of the French. 
 Gentlemen, you will judge of this Con¬ 
 vention with all its French terms, whether 
 young Rossis to be believed, or Aitcheson 
 and his brother is to be believed; you 
 will consider whether the emergency of 
 a suspension of the HaiWeas Corpus act, 
 or of a motion in parliament for a Con¬ 
 vention Bill, similar to that of the Irish 
 one, does or does not proveittobea meet¬ 
 ing for seditious purposes ; you will con¬ 
 sider what purposes they, if they were 
 peaceably inclined, could serve, whether 
 such a delegation, from thousands of per¬ 
 sons, was not calculated for some other 
 purpose. It remains unascertained, and 
 unexpressed, because it durst not be ex¬ 
 pressed, whether this convention of emer¬ 
 gency was for the raising a French inva¬ 
 sion, or supporting it; you will consider, 
 holding the balance of evidence strictly 
 between the pannel and the Crown up¬ 
 on this subject, if upon viewing the con¬ 
 duct of these gentlemen, if upon observing 
 Skirving glorying in a paper which ac¬ 
 cuses the parliament and the whole body 
 of this country of injustice; going to war 
 
 with a nation merely because they will be 
 free ; if upon looking to citizen president, 
 and citizen this, and citizen that, —to the 
 divisions into sections, to the Vive la Con¬ 
 vention, which appears to one report, and 
 ja ira at the bottom of it, admitting per¬ 
 sons to the honours of the sitting, if you 
 are to subvert the constitution of your 
 country, by putting in place of it univer¬ 
 sal suffrage, I call upon you, as honest 
 men, if you can throw these circumstances 
 altogether from your minds, or if you 
 think these men were met together to re¬ 
 sist an invasion, if such a thing should 
 happen, then you will say so ; but if, as 
 my opinion is, their purpose was to as¬ 
 semble a convention of delegates, repre¬ 
 senting, as they say, thousands of people, 
 then the conclusion is inevitable, that the 
 purpose for which this convention met 
 was to join those persons whom we know 
 within these few months have dared to 
 hold out, in their own country, that they 
 would land an army in this, and establish 
 what they pleased in it ; would punish 
 London, the proud metropolis of Britain, 
 for its interference and defending itself as 
 it has done, you will be of opinion with 
 me that they meant to lift the hand of re¬ 
 bellion against their sovereign — the con¬ 
 stitution of their country, and the liberty 
 of their fellow citizens. 
 
 Gentlemen, before l sit down, I hope 
 I shall not be accused of unnecessarily 
 trespassing upon your time, when I pro¬ 
 fess the authority from which I draw it, 
 the reading, as part of my speech, that of 
 an able and intelligent man,"pronounced 
 very lately upon this very subject, I mean 
 the Irish Convention Bill, and I think I 
 cannot be imputed a panegyrist if I take 
 the words of the Solicitor-General of Ire¬ 
 land. When the convention was moved 
 for last summer in Ireland, it received all 
 the censure, it was made the handle of 
 every topic of abuse, and of an attempt 
 to inflame the minds of the Irish against 
 it, but the minds of persons in that coun¬ 
 try, of a similar description to those here, 
 could not possibly listen to such a censure, 
 it received an ample discussion in parlia¬ 
 ment ; and, to the honour pf opposition 
 in Ireland, who have in a great measure 
 followed the honourable and patriotic con¬ 
 duct of the opposition here, though Mr. j 
 Grattan, the chief of their leaders, was for 
 limiting it to a certain time, it was uni¬ 
 versally admitted to be a measure which 
 no country could tolerate; and which, in 
 some effectual way or other, though they 
 differed in the mode, they were bound to 
 resist. Gentlemen, give me leave to 
 
WM, SKIRVING. 
 
 65 
 
 read part of his speeeli upon that subject, 
 because it is immediately upon the point 
 before us; and farther, because it is more 
 eloquent, better composed, and more ar¬ 
 gumentative than any thing I could say 
 upon the subject. 
 
 [He here read an extract from the So¬ 
 licitor-General’s speech in the Irish Par¬ 
 liament.] 
 
 I ask yourselves, if that gentleman stood 
 in this place, addressing you, instead of 
 the Irish Parliament, if the circumstances 
 would not precisely justify an adoption of 
 the same language ? We have a parlia¬ 
 ment assuming to itself the name, not of 
 England alone, but of England and Scot¬ 
 land, upon the French model, partaking, 
 in all its proceedings, of the distinguish¬ 
 ing marks of the proceedings of France; 
 and I appeal to a speech of Mr. Browne’s 
 particularly, as Mr. Margarot boasted that 
 thousands in London were upon the look¬ 
 out, so he encouraged this meeting in 
 Blackfriars’-wynd, telling them, that at 
 Norwich, and Sheffield, and everywhere 
 else in England, there were many thou¬ 
 sands, of whom he was the worthy repre¬ 
 sentative, who had delegated him to this 
 meeting. Gentlemen, there were also 
 contributions levied upon the poor and 
 the ignorant, the deluded and infatuated ; 
 many of these persons were brought here 
 to-day before you. You saw their ap¬ 
 pearance and their situation in life. 
 Aitcheson, indeed, is in the employ of 
 some gentleman or other; but look at 
 the list of those persons, and you will con¬ 
 sider what Skirving has to answer for, or 
 what others of a higher description have 
 to answer for, who, with the aid of supe¬ 
 rior talents and discernment, have know- 
 ingly propagated the contagion among 
 such persons, by discourses and by pro¬ 
 ceedings of that kind which are laid in 
 this indictment. 
 
 Gentlemen, I think I have now gone 
 through the greater part of what it appears 
 to me to be necessary to state. In the 
 division of the sections you will find it to 
 be equally clear and distinct; the hon¬ 
 our of the sitting ; a compulsory attend¬ 
 ance : in short, in every point after the 
 model of the Convention of France. And 
 they pass to the order of the day; when 
 one person, a gentleman whom I shall 
 not name, because he must soon be re¬ 
 sponsible at your bar for his conduct, ap¬ 
 pears and attacks the verdict of an Eng¬ 
 lish jury, and the sentence of the Lord 
 Chief Justice of England, he is admitted 
 to the honour of the sitting. I say this 
 upon the authority of the minutes. And, 
 
 E 
 
 in one particular motion, I think made by 
 the secretary, a regulation is made that 
 no stranger shall be admitted to the hon¬ 
 ours of the sitting, unless recommended 
 by two members, and a variety of other 
 circumstances, which it will be unneces¬ 
 sary for me to state ; but I pledge my¬ 
 self, without fear of being contradicted, 
 that every single word that I have now 
 stated stands upon these minutes. Here 
 is a motion made by Citizen Ross, with 
 vive la Convention at the top, and ja ira 
 at the bottom of it; here you have a body 
 of circumstances together, perhaps each 
 of them separatim, insufficient to found 
 any serious charge, but all taken together, 
 directly pointing to shew that it was a 
 meeting of a seditious tendency; besides 
 that, you have a motion made by Mr. 
 Margarot and Mr. Callander, copied, I 
 believe, exactly from one of the resolu¬ 
 tions of the French convention. Then 
 comes Mr. Dowmie’s motion, and, in one 
 word, to bring the whole distinctly to the 
 pannel, that,, as he was the secretary, so 
 he is the chief tool and instrument in 
 bringing them together ; it is proved, in 
 the most complete and satisfactory man¬ 
 ner : first by the motion of Downie, which 
 describes him completely in that charac¬ 
 ter, and on that account alone, as being 
 the chief spring and the very soul of all 
 their proceedings, he seems to be indulged 
 with the power of speaking oftener than 
 once. You have also two letters pro¬ 
 duced, which calls upon these delegates, 
 in the most inflammatory manner, who 
 had gone away previous to this, to return 
 to their duty at this awful period, and 
 come to their posts ! You have also, what 
 is still more material, and proves distinct¬ 
 ly, that this Skirving is the person who 
 formed the idea of this delegation, and of 
 this meeting; that he is the person to 
 whom this country is indebted for that 
 wonderful advantage which they have de¬ 
 rived from the presence of Messrs. Mar¬ 
 garot, Gerrald, Browne, Callander, and 
 Sinclair. Here are two letters found in 
 the repositories of Skirving, one of the 
 5th October, 1793, dated London, ad¬ 
 dressed Mr. William Skirving, head of the 
 Horse-wynd, Edinburgh, signed Thomas 
 Hardy; two days before the meeting of 
 the general committee, containing an ob¬ 
 servation which goes to attack the con¬ 
 duct of the jury, and of the supreme 
 court of judicature of this country. 
 
 Gentlemen, this proves, that, upon the 
 2d of October, Mr. Skirving had wrote to 
 Mr. Hardy, the secretary of the London 
 corresponding society, stating, that which 
 
 No. 5. 
 
TRIAL OF 
 
 ()6 
 
 Hardy says is an excellent opportunity, 
 that he had suggested the plan of a gene¬ 
 ral convention ; and it contains an obser¬ 
 vation which, I hope, will be made by 
 these gentlemen upon the chief magis¬ 
 trate of the city of Edinburgh, who has 
 just followed the conduct which Sir James 
 Sanderson followed, and for which that 
 magistrate has received the thanks of, I 
 believe, nine-tenths of the city of London. 
 Upon the 24th of October, Hardy writes 
 again to Skirving. 
 
 Gentlemen, I have now gone through 
 the whole of the evidence. It remains 
 for me only, in a very few words, to con¬ 
 sider, which I shall do very briefly, the 
 proceedings consequent upon this. You 
 have the evidence of Mr. Davidson the 
 Sheriff-substitute, of the Lord Provost, 
 Mr. Laing, and Mr. Scott; and I shall 
 dismiss them all, with just referring you 
 to a perusal of what is charged in the in¬ 
 dictment upon that subject, and ask if 
 you can hesitate one moment in saying, 
 that every word that I have charged in 
 the indictment, is distinctly and fully 
 proved, beyond any possibility of doubt; 
 when they were forced to retire from 
 Blackfriars’-wynd, upon the evening of 
 the 5th, they called out that they were to 
 adjourn; they adjourned to another place; 
 and it is proved by the Gazetteer, that 
 that evening the Convention declared 
 themselves permanent. The event of an 
 illegal dispersion was one of those events 
 which was a signal for the convention of 
 emergency to take place, the meeting 
 place of which the committee were to 
 keep secret from all the world, that it 
 might not be known ; that a fire might be 
 kindled in a place where the eye of the 
 executive power could not see it, and 
 might rise to such a height, that it would 
 have been perhaps impossible to have ex¬ 
 tinguished it. Gentlemen, you find them 
 the next evening, though out upon bail, 
 again acting within the bounds of the city 
 of Edinburgh. Here they yielded to the 
 authority of the chief magistrate ; but had 
 they done what was oppressive, had they 
 presumed to have dispersed a constitu¬ 
 tional, peaceable meeting, they might 
 have obtained redress. You find them 
 again assembled the next evening, and 
 Skirving particularly, under a thin pretext 
 which you will not receive, that the cock¬ 
 pit was his own private house : they were 
 to meet, agreeable to advertisement, upon 
 the 10th of December ; the British Con¬ 
 vention being now constrained to adjourn 
 to the place appointed for the convention 
 of emergency, the general committee of 
 
 the Friends of the People were requested 
 to meet at the house of Skirving, at the 
 cockpit, at twelve o’clock at noon. Can 
 you consider this meeting at that place, 
 founded upon the restraint which they had 
 met with, and this advertisement being 
 signed by this very gentleman as secre¬ 
 tary to them,—can you consider it as any¬ 
 thing but a pettifogging pretence to shel¬ 
 ter themselves under the wing of the law ? 
 Mr. Skirving was there, and Mr. Browne, 
 persons who were the ringleaders, and ac¬ 
 tive, not only upon Thursday the oth, but 
 upon the evening of Friday the 6th ; and 
 when called upon, before the magistrates, 
 upon the Wednesday, to answer for this 
 insolent advertisement, he pretends a wish 
 to obey the law : he gets a copy of the 
 prohibition of the magistrate; and, to 
 conclude what 1 have to say with regard 
 to him, what is his conduct ? You find 
 him reading a paper which my brother, 
 who spoke early in the day, anticipated 
 every thing I could say upon the sub¬ 
 ject, is as insidious, as seditious, and as 
 inflammatory a paper as, under such cir¬ 
 cumstances, could possibly have been 
 composed : he writes it in the morning 
 before he goes to the place of meeting ; 
 and he says, “ The magistrates of the city 
 having forbid your legal and constitutional 
 meeting, called this day by advertisement, 
 and, by their proceedings to prevent it, 
 having given occasion to a great con¬ 
 course of people, which m3y issue in tu¬ 
 mult, and hinder your deliberations, it is 
 judged proper to adjourn- the meeting.” 
 It vj-as false when he wrote this paper, 
 that any assemblage of people had taken 
 place ; whether it was likely to be so or 
 not, he could not know the fact which did 
 not exist; but this he cooily and com¬ 
 posedly puts upon paper before he goes, 
 and shews what was the objec? he sin¬ 
 cerely wished should happen, that there 
 might be a concourse of people and a 
 tumult, that he might retire with precipi¬ 
 tation from it, and leave, perhaps, a mis¬ 
 guided and deluded mob to suffer for 
 their folly, if a tumult did exist; or if 
 there was any chance, that upon this oc¬ 
 casion any riot was to take place, the tu¬ 
 mult would be of a different nature, and 
 a dangerous stop indeed, which would 
 have directed its force, if it had not been 
 checked by the arm of the magistrates, 
 upon the heads of those who were the 
 real objects of it. He says, “ It is there¬ 
 fore proposed to you, to give place to the 
 violence used against you. You will 
 thereby convince the public, that you did 
 not deserve such treatment; and now that 
 
AVM. SKIRVING. 
 
 67 
 
 your delegates have a permanent exist¬ 
 ence,”—they had voted themselves per¬ 
 manent the week before, when it was car¬ 
 ried, that they were to assemble under 
 another name at the cockpit; this proves 
 that the object was the same, that they 
 were in a state of permanence which the 
 Friends of the People had not come to, 
 but which the British Convention un¬ 
 doubtedly had ; and now that they “ have 
 a permanent existence, your several socie¬ 
 ties will be multiplied greatly, and means 
 will be used to lay the business before 
 each society individually, by printed bul¬ 
 letins.” Still the same French expres¬ 
 sions, from the moment that he appears 
 upon the stage, till his last appearance 
 which he makes upon it; and with which 
 appearance I take my leave of him. 
 
 Before you, gentlemen, the only legal 
 representatives of your country ; and to 
 whom, as such, your country look up, 
 and who, I know, will support your pro¬ 
 ceedings ; before you have I laid the con¬ 
 duct of this man, and from your hands 
 1 demand justice against him. I cannot 
 conclude without reminding you of what 
 it is, perhaps, indecent in me to suppose, 
 that you can be intimidated, or that you 
 can he overawed, or that you can be dis¬ 
 suaded from exercising that duty which 
 you owe to yourselves and to your coun¬ 
 try, and following the dictates of your con¬ 
 science, by the calumnious, false, and un¬ 
 just aspersions of any man, or set of men. 
 I know', and I trust, these will be treated 
 by you with the same contempt with which 
 I have treated all those attempts which 
 have been made upon me ; with that con¬ 
 tempt with which I shall treat all that ca¬ 
 lumny to which I have been lately ex¬ 
 posed ; with that contempt with which I 
 have treated even those anonymous threats 
 of assassination, which I have received in 
 the course of these two or three months, 
 because I have dared to he vigilant and 
 faithful in the execution of my duty ; and 
 1 shall not cease in the course of that 
 duty, in the situation which at present I 
 hold, and which I hold to be a great and 
 important one ; I shall not be induced to 
 recede from that kind of conduct, which 
 I am determined to follow at all hazards, 
 and in every event. 1 did hope that the 
 example of two recent prosecutions might 
 have had their effect, hut which the con¬ 
 duct of this man proves, have been com¬ 
 pletely lost upon him. I shall, however, 
 continue to discharge that duty ; and every 
 man who presumes to follow the conduct 
 of these^ersons, not only those who are 
 at present under charge, but those who 
 e 2 
 
 may not take example from what, I trust, 
 will be the result of the proceedings of 
 this night, they may depend upon it, that 
 the arm of the criminal executive justice 
 of this country shall be directed to bring 
 them to punishment. I shall bring them 
 into this court, to this bar, before a jury of 
 Scotchmen, and in their hands I shall 
 leave them ; and 1 know they will do jus¬ 
 tice. And I trust we shall all, as jury, 
 men, as prosecutors, and as judges, meet 
 with the applause, and with the support of 
 every worthy, every good, and every vir¬ 
 tuous citizen ; and the abuse or threats of 
 those of a different description, 1 shall ac¬ 
 count my highest honour, and consider as 
 my best reward. 
 
 Mr. Skirving. -— Gentlemen of the 
 Jury, It gives me pain to think of detain¬ 
 ing you, by going over the whole that I 
 stated on the relevancy ; but as you was 
 not then in judgment, I think it my duty 
 to state again generally what I then said, 
 and to which I now call your judicial at¬ 
 tention. 
 
 [Here Mr. Skirving proceeded to run 
 over the substance of his pleading before 
 the Lords of Justiciary, and having stated 
 to the jury that it was impossible for a 
 person not accustomed to speak in pub¬ 
 lic, to follow out the Lord Advocate in so 
 long and elaborate a speech, in which, 
 however, he observed there was, he might 
 say, nothing to criminate him personally, 
 the most of it being occupied in vilifying 
 the convention, and in tilling up a blank 
 leaf of some notes, said to be of the pro¬ 
 ceeding of the convention, and taken 
 down by a number of persons : he went 
 on to his defence, and took the liberty to 
 read and speak alternately as follows :] 
 
 Though what 1 have stated already in 
 pleading against the relevancy of the li¬ 
 bel, must have convinced you of the in¬ 
 justice of charging any thing concerning 
 that paper against me, after what had al¬ 
 ready taken place relative to it; yet, as 
 the writing has been condemned by a 
 jury, and the prosecutor seems still to lay 
 much stress, in his endeavours to crimi¬ 
 nate me, upon my having received some 
 copies of it, and upon my giving some of 
 them away to a very few people ; I must 
 call your attention to the amount of the 
 evidence produced on this point, although 
 it must strike every person, on the first 
 reflection, that if I had thought that writ¬ 
 ing calculated to any purpose which I had 
 in view, instead of giving away the very 
 few charged on me, I might have had 
 them sent to all places where there were 
 societies of the Friends of the People. 
 
H8 
 
 TRIAL OK 
 
 There appears no concert, on my part, 
 in this business, nor previous knowledge 
 of the nature of the writing, nor com¬ 
 mendation of it. No evidence of my 
 ever approving it; and so far from shew¬ 
 ing an anxiety to distribute it, I had taken 
 no means to spread it at all, nor ever con¬ 
 sidered it as a writing that could give of¬ 
 fence, or, in the smallest degree, endan¬ 
 ger the peace of the country. There is 
 not a single thing more come out in trial, 
 than what I acknowledged before the She¬ 
 riff, and from which I was assoilzied by 
 him. The Fiscal, who, on no principle, 
 could be a witness in this cause, did in¬ 
 deed swear that I was only dismissed to 
 bring up the letter which J had acknow¬ 
 ledged. But you see the Sheriff himself, 
 with candour, acknowledges, and you see 
 the Fiscal himself declaring the truth by 
 his conduct at that time, though the pre¬ 
 judice of his heart has operated a differ¬ 
 ent idea in his mind since that event. At 
 that time he believed his first petition to 
 be judged and rejected ; for he first gave 
 me a new summons, without a petition, 
 and then presented a new petition by the 
 Lord Advocate's orders, to have my papers 
 searched, and myself incarcerated, though 
 no new crime, nor additional circum¬ 
 stance to th e form er, was so m uch as alleged 
 in it. “ The above petition having been 
 read in court, the Lord Advocate, as the 
 petitioner has been informed, objected to 
 it, and said, that the proceedings against the 
 prisoner had been all token in consequence 
 of directions given by him.” 
 
 The Jury who condemned the Dundee 
 address, informed of the alarming society 
 of the Friends of the People, by the false 
 and insidious calumnies of vile and venal 
 newspapers, and magnifying the hideous 
 picture, according to their distance, might 
 naturally enough suppose, that, putting 
 such a paper into the hand of such men, 
 was giving arms to the enemy, or a dagger 
 to madmen ; but it could never enter my 
 thoughts that such -a paper would ever ex¬ 
 cite the Friends of the People to riot, or 
 tumult. I knew them too well to appre¬ 
 hend the smallest danger from their read¬ 
 ing of it; the facts set forth in the paper 
 were already known to them. And if this 
 paper fell into the hands of others, it could 
 only have excited them to join the Friends 
 of the People, which to do, is synonymous 
 to a declaration, to avoid all riot and tu¬ 
 mult ; and, instead thereof, would have 
 been subjecting themselves to good order, 
 and to wholesome regulations. 
 
 The public prosecutor must have been 
 very ignorant of me, if he thought my 
 
 reading was so contracted, as that I should 
 be startled at such a paper. I have read 
 many, much more strongly expressed ; 
 and even the worst of them did not come 
 up to my idea of sedition, which is leasing 
 making ; and, let me observe, that seeing 
 this quality was admitted as essential to 
 make up the crime of sedition, at the time 
 of making these statutes, and these were 
 the times of arbitrary government in this 
 country, could I ever suppose, that at the 
 end of the eighteenth century telling the 
 truth would be found sedition ? And if 
 the authors, who have wrote the same 
 things, have not told us the truth, in the 
 passages which I will now read to you, 
 from whom are we to get the truth ? And 
 who are we to believe ? 
 
 I have already read some passages, and 
 will afterwards read some more. 
 
 If then, I, who knew these things, could 
 not believe the Dundee paper to be false 
 and calumnious, how, then, can I be 
 chargeable with sedition, for only receiv¬ 
 ing it, and letting a few friends, who were 
 all on the most intimate footing with me, 
 get copies of it, when desired ? Besides, 
 it is to be observed, that, as they were 
 sent to a society whose secretary I was at 
 that time, I might have given them all 
 without fault, though it had been a crimi¬ 
 nal paper, because 1 might have given 
 them without looking at them, so as to 
 judge of their merit. 
 
 It is not proved, though asserted in the 
 libel, that I gave a single copy to any, 
 but to those to whom it was sent, and only 
 to them, when they called for it. 
 
 No more is proven. And can doing 
 this admit the suspicion of seditious and 
 felonious intention? Surely no person 
 hearing me can believe it. I ask you 
 again, has the public prosecutor proven a 
 single thing more than what I acknow¬ 
 ledged before the Sheriff, except giving 
 one copy to Mr. Kid, and one to Mr. Ait- 
 cheson, of both which, however, the She¬ 
 riff likewise knew, and yet judicially as¬ 
 soilzied me ? 
 
 The Prosecutor is not more successful 
 in his proof, relative to the 2d hand-bill 
 charged in the indictment. He has nei¬ 
 ther proved that I wrote it, nor that I 
 signed it, nor approved of it, nor published 
 it, nor even that it is the address by the 
 society, to which I am secretary ; nor that 
 I was secretary to that society in parti¬ 
 cular. Nevertheless, as he will not give 
 up his charge against me in this parti-] 
 cular ; and, as some may suppose, that I| 
 must have been concerned in it; and yet. 
 
 I trust, that none of my judges will pro* 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 69 
 
 ceed in judging me upon any thing, ex¬ 
 cept what it fairly charged upon me in 
 the indictment, and also fully proved; I 
 will beg leave to put that natural inter¬ 
 pretation on the address, which unpreju¬ 
 diced investigation must be inclined to put. 
 Supposing that a society of the Friends 
 of the People, for I can only suppose it, 
 as the Prosecutor has by no means proved 
 it, had drawn up this address to the public, 
 
 ' yet some of the witnesses said, that the 
 meeting referred to, refused to pass these 
 resolutions. As all of them were very 
 sincere, and conscientious, and of course 
 zealous in the cause of reform, as being 
 that alone which, in their humble estima¬ 
 tion, can save the country; can it be sup¬ 
 posed by any thinking man, that on such 
 a subject, they could possibly express 
 themselves more softly ? They believe 
 sincerely that they have been, as by piece¬ 
 meal, deprived of all the rights which, 
 they have been instructed, their fathers 
 had purchased by their blood—as was of¬ 
 fered to be proved in the House of Com¬ 
 mons, by Mr. Wharton, as you have seen 
 by his motion made there, and not con¬ 
 tradicted, and which I have already read 
 to you. In what other terms can you 
 suppose that they, as free-born Britons, 
 would apply to those who kept them up, 
 than in the language of demand and of 
 restitution ? If they have not been robbed 
 of their rights, they are made to believe 
 so by those who should know best; the 
 members of that very house, which, it is 
 said, have sold them. Fully persuaded, 
 and high in the idea, that they had at. 
 length fallen on the only plan by which 
 they could recover their lost rights, and 
 in which they thought their fellow-citizens 
 were blind in opposing them, because 
 their opposition to the measures, which 
 they judged effectual, hurried the ministry 
 into a destructive war, which they dreaded 
 would end, as is now evident, in anarchy 
 and ruin,—in what more moderate terms, 
 then, could they reproach them for their 
 folly, in being the evident cause of reduc¬ 
 ing their country to so great calamity and 
 danger ? 
 
 After all,—for I must take every advan¬ 
 tage of the prosecutor, because he has 
 discovered an unjustifiable keenness to 
 criminate me,—-you will immediately be 
 convinced, that all he has said, and all the 
 evidence he has brought, is quite foreign 
 to the object before you. It cannot any 
 way be applied to the address in the in¬ 
 dictment. The hand-bill is described, in 
 the indictment, to be a hand-bill, in con¬ 
 sequence of which, a society, termed first 
 
 “ The General Convention ; and which 
 did afterwards arrogate to itself the name 
 of “ The British Convention,” did assem¬ 
 ble. But all the witnesses have declared, 
 that the hand-bill, on which they bore tes¬ 
 timony, was that advertisement, whose ob¬ 
 ject alone was to call the several meetings 
 of the Friends of the People, in Edin¬ 
 burgh, to meet in their respective bodies. 
 It called no meeting of any other descrip¬ 
 tion, as you will see by the part of the bill, 
 which the Lord Advocate has industriously 
 kept out of sight, and which parts omitted, 
 are as follow's: 
 
 “Friends of the People, Mason Lodge, 
 
 Blac/tfriars’-wynd, 4 ih October, 1793. 
 
 “ Conscious of the purity of their mo¬ 
 tives and the legality of all their proceed¬ 
 ings, which have been solely confined to 
 that great object of national justice, a 
 Parliamentary Reform ; the Friends of 
 the People have heard, with mingled as¬ 
 tonishment and contempt, the false and 
 injurious aspersions bestowed upon them, 
 in the course of Mr. Muir’s trial. 
 
 “ In their own vindication, and to shew 
 the world, that neither the imbecile ridi¬ 
 cule of a crown lawyer, nor the uncon¬ 
 stitutional opinions of a judge, can make 
 them desert the great and important cause 
 in which they are embarked ; a numerous 
 and respectable meeting of the Friends 
 of the People, in and about Edinburgh, 
 holden as above, have unanimously agreed 
 to the following resolutions : 
 
 “ I. That this society is determined to 
 adhere to the original principles of its in¬ 
 stitution—‘An equal representation of 
 the People, and a shorter duration of par¬ 
 liamentary delegation.’ 
 
 “ II. That, without reflecting on a ver¬ 
 dict of the country, the meeting consider 
 it their duty, to return thanks, in this pub¬ 
 lic manner, to Thomas Muir, younger of 
 Huntershill, for his manly and honourable 
 exertions in the cause of a Parliamentary 
 Reform. 
 
 “ III. That this meeting likewise con¬ 
 sider it a duty to express their thanks to 
 the Rev. T. F. Palmer, for his exertions 
 in the same important cause. 
 
 “ IV. That this society calls upon the 
 people of Scotland to unite in promoting 
 the happiness and prosperity of their coun¬ 
 try, by assisting to obtain a Reform in the 
 Commons House of Parliament, the only 
 measure that can secure to them and to 
 their posterity, the inestimable blessings 
 of peace ; check an increasing and op¬ 
 pressive system of taxation, and prevent 
 the baneful influence of that corruption 
 which has proved so inimical to public 
 
70 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 virtue, and so destructive to private mo- 
 ! rals.” 
 
 Then comes the part of this hand-bill, 
 narrated in this indictment:— 
 
 “ Friends of the People.— The General 
 Committee call on you to meet in your 
 respective societies, at the times and places 
 directed below, for the purpose of admit¬ 
 ting those who now incline to join your 
 several societies, and thereafter to take 
 the proper measures previous to the Gen¬ 
 eral Convention, which will be then sub¬ 
 mitted to your consideration. 
 
 “ Wednesday, Oct. 9_The Calton 
 
 and Laurieston societies will meet at their 
 usual places, precisely at 8 o’clock. 
 
 “ Thursday, Oct. 10_The Cowgate 
 
 society will meet at the same hour, in the 
 Mason Lodge, foot of Blackfriars’-wynd,” 
 &c. &c. 
 
 As I know of no other meeting, except 
 those nominated in the said hand-bill itself, 
 which did meet in consequence of the 
 hand-bill, the general meeting, as is stated 
 in the indictment, “ assembled in conse¬ 
 quence of it,” must have been one of 
 Reeves’ associations ; and which might, 
 with great propriety, be termed an illegal 
 association, for all that is known to the 
 pannel, for he was never connected with 
 any of them ; and has no knowledge of 
 any such illegal association. 
 
 But, it is actually proved, by the con¬ 
 fession of the person who was the author 
 of the indicted part of said hand-bill, and 
 by the evidence of his own brother, that 
 the parts of that publication complained 
 of, namely, the first half of it, is not my 
 composition, but his own, and can any 
 person suspect roe to be the composer of 
 the remaining half of the bill, when they 
 see that it contains an address of thanks 
 to myself; if ever the same was at all 
 ordered ? 
 
 I have shewn that there is nothing in 
 the first part criminal, and what in the 
 last part is wrong ? Who does not see, 
 that after the French have conquered all 
 Europe, they must also conquer Britain ? 
 And if this country associators were sin¬ 
 cere, they are now certainly called upon 
 to risk their lives and fortunes, that is to 
 say, they are called to oppose this for¬ 
 midable enemy, who may take both life 
 and fortune from all those who have pledg¬ 
 ed their lives and fortunes to oppose them, 
 if they shall find them making good their 
 promise, by still urging and aiding the 
 very ruining attempt, to subjugate that 
 people. 
 
 The public prosecutor and some of the 
 lords of justiciary have grievously twisted 
 
 the N. B. at the end; which, however, 
 if considered in the plain and obvious 
 light in which it appears to every eye, 
 not jaundiced with prejudice, cannot be 
 construed to mean more than a peremptory 
 call, to make good their share of the pub¬ 
 lic obligations of the society in the pre¬ 
 sent deficient state of their finances. 
 
 I have already said, that the general 
 meeting, defined in the indictment, is not 
 any meeting called by this hand-bill. 
 That, at any rate, I am no way connected 
 with any such general meeting, as the one 
 so charged with sedition, and said to have 
 met in consequence of said hand-bill. 
 The British Convention, whose secretary 
 1 am, is that well known society and meet¬ 
 ing, which was a prorogued meeting of 
 the Convention of the Friends of the 
 People, that met on the 30th of April 
 last, and adjourned till October ensuing; 
 and then assembled in consequence of 
 said adjournment, and of the following 
 public advertisement; and not in conse¬ 
 quence of any other advertisement what¬ 
 ever. 
 
 “ Friends of the jfeople, and of Parlia¬ 
 mentary Iieform. 
 
 “ The General Convention, at the last 
 meeting in May,—unanimously resolved, 
 to persevere in the cause of Reform which 
 they had espoused; and therefore adjourn¬ 
 ed to Tuesday the 29t'n of October next, 
 when they would again assemble in the 
 city of Edinburgh, in such a plqce as 
 the Friends of the People there should 
 provide for the meeting. 
 
 “ The several Societies are now there¬ 
 fore called on, to meet in their towns with 
 all convenient speed, for the purpose of 
 electing and instructing their Delegates 
 to the ensuing general meeting. 
 
 “ Societies lately formed, and those who 
 have not been yet affiliated with the Gen¬ 
 eral Association, and such as may now be 
 formed, in consequence of this intimation, 
 wall not fail to send with their Delegates, 
 an attested declaration of their adherence 
 to the principles, and the object of the 
 Association. 
 
 “ Another application for redress of 
 grievances,—the kind of Reform sought, 
 and for the not specifying of which, in 
 the last Petition to the House of Com¬ 
 mons, it was rejected,—the mode of this 
 application,—the vindication of the asso¬ 
 ciation against the public charges of se¬ 
 dition, and malignant design, Sec. are sub¬ 
 jects which will require the most deli¬ 
 berate discussion. The Delegates will 
 therefore come up to this meeting, as to 
 file duration of the sitting. 
 
WJI. SKIRVING. 
 
 71 
 
 “ Meetings, and incorporations of every 
 denomination, already established for ne¬ 
 cessary, or benevolent purposes, in what¬ 
 ever part of the kingdom, and who may 
 not conveniently change their firm, but 
 who are well disposed to unite their efforts 
 for a speedy Reform, as being that which 
 alone cun put a period to the calamities of 
 the nation, will be received as brethren 
 in the persons of their Delegates,— for 
 the Friends of the People seek not their own 
 reputation , but the universal good of all. 
 
 “ The Association, in Edinburgh, wiil 
 advertise the place of meeting in due time. 
 
 “ W. Skirving, Sec.” 
 
 This is the meeting which I acknow¬ 
 ledge, and which I will defend if called on. 
 
 The minutes produced, may be the 
 minutes of any other meeting. It is not 
 proven that they are the minutes of the 
 true British Convention, with which I am 
 concerned, and for which I will ever be 
 ready to answer. Not one witness has de¬ 
 clared that they are so; and 1 have never 
 been called on to instruct how these pa¬ 
 pers came into my hand. They are evi¬ 
 dently the notes and writings of many per¬ 
 sons. It is not proven that any of them 
 are my writing, and though this had been 
 proved, it has been at the same time prov¬ 
 ed, that they could not be the minutes of 
 the British Convention ; because the Bri¬ 
 tish Convention appointed a committee 
 to draw out their minutes, and it is not 
 even hinted, that these are the minutes 
 drawn up by this committee. And how 
 can they possibly be the minutes of the 
 Convention which appointed them ? 
 
 The British Convention of delegates is 
 a justifiable and justified association. It 
 met under the sanction, and after the ex¬ 
 ample of the convention of delegates 
 from the Burghs, and of the convention 
 of delegates from the counties of Scotland, 
 and both of these countenanced by the 
 first characters in the kingdom. It had 
 the same legal authority for assembling 
 as either of these. When a few of the 
 pensioned, and to be pensioned, members 
 of these in this country, wanted to call 
 in question the propriety of their own 
 conduct, with a view to put a stop to our 
 pensionless associations of the people, 
 they were pleased to report the following, 
 and transmit the same to the other coun¬ 
 ties : 
 
 “ Report 11 th. In addition to this re¬ 
 port on the merits of the two bills, the 
 committee submit, that they entertain 
 great doubts of the propriety of sending 
 delegates to the meeting appointed for 
 the 30th of May next. In the present 
 
 situation of this country, they w T ish not to 
 give their sanction to general Conventions 
 for the purposes of reform : they do not 
 see any good that can arise from it, for 
 the business can be more fully and better 
 investigated in each county, where free¬ 
 holders and commissioners of supply form 
 a legally constituted meeting: but they 
 have no powers by law to send delegates 
 to any Convention. The only legally 
 delegated body is the House of Commons; 
 and each county can give instructions to 
 its representative, by which mode the 
 general wish of the country may be ob¬ 
 tained in a constitutional manner.” 
 
 “John Ingi.is, Preses.” 
 
 This attempt of the committee of the 
 county of Edinburgh, evidently intended 
 to pave the way for a quietism bill, re¬ 
 ceived the following answer from a num¬ 
 ber of the principal members of both these 
 Conventions : 
 
 “Answer 1 \ih. The opinion of a 
 meeting thus constituted, will not, it is 
 hoped, have much weight in the meetings 
 of the 30th of April, or with the com¬ 
 missioners of supply, and the great body 
 of heritors, entitled to attend these meet¬ 
 ings, it was the declared intention of the 
 last meeting of county delegates to restore 
 the riyht of representation, to all men who 
 stood deprived of it by the act passed im¬ 
 mediately preceding the Revolution, and by 
 the different explanations given to it in 
 the present century. 
 
 “ It is curious that the committee of 
 Edinburgh Freeholders, most of whom 
 were delegates, and voted for the re-elec¬ 
 tion of delegates this year, should have 
 made such a proficiency in the study of 
 law, during the course of a month or two, 
 as to discover the illegality of meetings of 
 this kind, and that they should venture to 
 state their opinion against that of the 
 Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Ex¬ 
 chequer, who presided in the last meeting, 
 and of the Lord Advocate, upon whose 
 motion it was unanimously resolved, to 
 recommend a new meeting of delegates 
 this year, without either the Dean of Fa¬ 
 culty, or any other of the eminent lawyers, 
 or any of the country gentlemen, having 
 once suggested a doubt concerning the 
 legality or propriety of the measure. 
 
 “ We entreat the committee of the 
 county of Edinburgh, to recollect that 
 every meeting is lawful upon the very 
 principles established at the revolution, 
 which they have so solemnly bound them¬ 
 selves to stand by. 
 
 “ The futility of the argument, that 
 each county may, without communication 
 
72 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 with others, instruct its members on the 
 mode of amending a law, which is general 
 over the whole country, must be apparent 
 to every one. Were this attempted, we 
 may be sure no amendment whatever 
 would take place, for it is next to impos¬ 
 sible that any two counties should, with¬ 
 out communication, agree on the same 
 mode of amendment. Hence it must ap¬ 
 pear that the consequence of the com¬ 
 mittee of Edinburgh’s resolution, is to 
 allow those abuses to remain in the law, 
 which (/o use their own words) have ren¬ 
 dered it impossible for courts of law to 
 follow uniform and consistent decisions. 
 
 “ Robert Graham, Preses.” 
 
 It is evident then, that in being a mem¬ 
 ber of the British Convention of Dele¬ 
 gates from the societies throughout Bri¬ 
 tain, I am no more chargeable with guilt, 
 than his Lordship the Prosecutor himself, 
 or these other great names who patronised 
 the burgh and county conventions. And 
 the British Convention is also equally 
 justifiable, and must be held so, until le¬ 
 gally condemned. One of the Prosecu¬ 
 tors, comparing this regular and well- 
 known meeting, or society, to a mob col¬ 
 lected for mischief, maintained, that any 
 one of the number might be taken up and 
 punished; but he by no means instructed, 
 that either by the law, or the practice of 
 this court, any man was ever punished for 
 being present at a mob, if it was not also 
 proved, that he had an active hand in ef¬ 
 fecting the mischief that was done by that 
 mob. 
 
 If the British Convention is to be es¬ 
 teemed by you a mob, you cannot find 
 me guilty of any thing, but of those things 
 only which the Prosecutor has proven, was 
 ray own individual act. If the Prosecu¬ 
 tor had charged me, as the secretary to 
 the British Convention, and therefore an¬ 
 swerable, in law, for their proceedings, I 
 should have met him boldly in that capa¬ 
 city, and challenged him to criminate any 
 part of their conduct; I should have been 
 prepared to answer every thing his inge¬ 
 nuity could have suggested against those 
 deserving patriots. I should have justi¬ 
 fied them fully. In this case, I would 
 have stated candidly, the object and de¬ 
 sign of that body; their proceedings down 
 to the time of the violent attack made on 
 them ; and submitted the whole to a fair 
 and open trial. But to try me, individu¬ 
 ally, upon parts and portions of proceed¬ 
 ings, of a seditious number of people, as 
 the indictment states them to be, and 
 which were called in a very different 
 manner from the British Convention, 
 
 which was summoned by an avowed ad¬ 
 vertisement of mine, put into the news¬ 
 papers by their authority, as I have already 
 stated, and which w'as of a very different 
 nature from that one narrated in the in¬ 
 dictment, is certainly the most extraor¬ 
 dinary and unprecedented attack ; and 
 which, I am sure, the Prosecutor could 
 never have made, if he had not known, 
 that every person, and every thing would 
 be at his back like his faithful minion, 
 whose mistake has been shewn before his 
 face in the court. 
 
 If the British Convention, consisting 
 of delegates from the various societies of 
 the Friends of the People throughout Bri¬ 
 tain, is justified by the example set them 
 by the whole nation, and which example, 
 I have shewn you, was vindicated and jus¬ 
 tified by some of the first characters in the 
 kingdom, and cannot be condemned; 
 surely neither can you condemn the busi¬ 
 ness for which these delegates were sent 
 up, namely, to take the proper measures 
 for a substantial parliamentary reform. 
 Can any man have a doubt of the neces¬ 
 sity, the immediate and absolute necessity, 
 of such a reform ? I will not suffer a doubt 
 to remain about this necessity in the breast 
 of any one who hears me ; I will read a 
 few paragraphs from the publications of 
 those who should know, who must know, 
 that such necessity exists, and if we may 
 not believe them, whom shall we believe? 
 1 will first read you from the Earl of 
 Buchan’s political essays, lately published, 
 the opinion of men in the higher spheres 
 of life. 
 
 “ A rich and powerful nobility (abas an 
 oligarchy) must soon destroy the liberties 
 of anv - people among whom they are suf¬ 
 fered to domineer. 
 
 “ It is in vain to search for the moral 
 and rational principles of government in 
 the military Gothic age: in those wretched 
 times men had no civic union, no proper 
 interchangeofpolitical sentiment. Fixed, 
 or rather chained as they were to the soil 
 of their masters, the people were without 
 collision of sentiment; bad no organised 
 societies for the contemplation of common 
 interests; no high roads, no posts, no 
 printing presses! What is man in such 
 a situation, but the machine of regal or 
 princely ambition and luxury ! 
 
 “ The struggles for liberty in Greece 
 and Italy, recorded so eloquently bv the 
 Greek and Roman classics, imbued the 
 minds of youth, and excited the feelings 
 of the aged, with the ardour of political 
 sentiment. The people then began to 
 know truly what it is to be a member of 
 
WM. SKI IIV1NG. 
 
 73 
 
 a free commonwealth, to be a citizen : 
 delightful name! best of inheritances, best 
 of rights, not to be surrendered, but with 
 the life that accompanies it! With these 
 sublime and heart-engagingaffections, the 
 study of the Scriptures of Moses and the 
 Evangelists in the living languages of 
 Europe, and the consolation of free- 
 agency in the choice of religious opinions, 
 remarkably contributed to the creation of 
 new political energy among all ranks of 
 men, but particularly among the middling 
 and lower classes of the people, who by 
 religious controversy were made, as it 
 were, artificial members of society, and 
 felt the inexpressible, and captivating de¬ 
 light of thinking and acting for them¬ 
 selves, and of touching and affecting ge¬ 
 neral society. The clergy, irritated to 
 madness by the dissolution of their magic 
 superstition, and looking forward to the 
 total destruction of their profitable fable 
 of the church, persecuted the thinking 
 and reforming people ; and this laid the 
 foundation of that perception of religious 
 liberty, which immediately connected it¬ 
 self with political liberty in Scotland so 
 early as the reign of James V. 
 
 “To women, some how or other, we 
 have been indebted from the beginning 
 for fortunate revolutions. 
 
 “ To the beauty, gaiety, and impru¬ 
 dence of Mary Stuart, the daughter of 
 James V. we are indebted for the present 
 state of Britain, such as it is. Had Mary 
 been prudent, Scotland might have be¬ 
 come a popish monarchy. England at 
 best would have been under its old mon¬ 
 archy (with proper address, under the 
 Stuarts) ; and we should not have had oc¬ 
 casion to deprecate Gallic freedom with 
 the monstrous insanity of modern English¬ 
 men ; but to deplore the want of it. 
 
 “ I stop rather to inquire concerning 
 the comparative state of Britain, in this 
 philosophical age of political sentiment, 
 with France and other countries, that have 
 had inferior advantages. 
 
 “ Who but a clerk of the treasury, or 
 a lord of the king’s bed-chamber, can con¬ 
 template this parallel without regret? 
 
 “ It was in the last war of George II. 
 that Great Britain laid herself under the 
 necessity of defending her wide-extended 
 dominion ; and of asserting her claim to 
 be the first nation upon earth. The con¬ 
 test was bloody and expensive, but the 
 end was glorious—the enemy prostrate 
 and breathless, empire extended, honour 
 maintained, peace established, and, like 
 the sun rising after a storm, a young and 
 native monarch holding the sceptre, and 
 
 ascending the throne, amidst the acclama¬ 
 tions of the freest and happiest people on 
 the globe. 
 
 “ These acclamations are heard no 
 more. A system of corruption, esta¬ 
 blished and digested early in this reign 
 by a baneful aristocracy, has prevaded 
 every rank and order of men, till the spirit 
 of the constitution has fled and left only 
 the caput mortuum behind. The forms 
 of our government have out-lasted the 
 ends for which they were instituted, and 
 have become a mere mockery of the 
 people, for whose benefit they should ope¬ 
 rate. 
 
 “ The prophecy of Montesquieu is ful¬ 
 filled ; and nothing can save the country 
 but the fulfilment of the prophecy of 
 Franklin. What that prophecy was, what 
 this prophecy is, I leave to the curious to 
 learn. What I have written, I have writ¬ 
 ten : futurity will determine the truth of 
 my own particular predictions, and whe¬ 
 ther I am to be remembered as a captious 
 Cynic, or a wise and Pythonic politician.. 
 
 “ To conclude : as I think it unneces¬ 
 sary to delineate the spirit of the times in 
 Europe with respect to government, so I 
 think it to be indispensably required at 
 my hands, that I should, with respect to 
 Scotland, deprecate the refusal of a mi¬ 
 litia to my country, the necessity for which 
 was so eloquently set forth by my favou¬ 
 rite Fletcher. 
 
 “ That I should mark with my blackest 
 coal the game license act, which is an in¬ 
 sidious and dangerous disarming of the 
 commons. 
 
 “ That I should express my utmost de¬ 
 testation and abhorrence of the conduct 
 of a first minister, who calling himself the 
 minister of the crown, with a treasonable 
 audacity should dare to advise the disso¬ 
 lution of a parliament, against the sense 
 of a house of commons, the only legal 
 organ of the voice of the people, let that 
 house be ever so ill constructed, and de¬ 
 mand ever so much reformation. 
 
 “ That I should loudly protest, that a 
 parliament ought to be allowed to die a 
 natural death. And, 
 
 “ That if a parliament, contemplating 
 the foreboding, the ominous imperfections 
 of the constitution, should on its death¬ 
 bed provide for a remedy by the equaliza¬ 
 tion of the representation of the people, 
 it would prevent the dangerous concus¬ 
 sion which must undoubtedly arise, and 
 that quickly, from their political franchises 
 being brought to the level of surrounding 
 nations with a violent jerk. Let us not 
 (said my admirable preceptor and friend, 
 
74 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 Adam Smith, author of the Essay on the 
 Wealth of Nations,) rashly believe that 
 Great Britain is capable of supporting any 
 burden. 
 
 “ Let us consider what hold we have 
 now of the two Indies, of Canada, and our 
 other lucrative dependencies. A blow 
 may be struck, a blow will be struck, that 
 shall reach the vitals of public credit, and 
 it is an event which nothing but political 
 insanity can induce public ministers not 
 to provide against. But no provision can 
 be made against this event, except that 
 which has been pointed out by the fin¬ 
 ger of the genius of Britain’s welfare. 
 
 “ I will not offer incense to the living, 
 but to the dead : I inscribe this and the 
 following sheets to the memory of Sir 
 George Saville, of Rufford Hall, member 
 of parliament for the county of York. 
 
 “ In Scotland the rights and liberties 
 of the people had been determined, and 
 fixed by multiplied instances of changing 
 the order of succession, and attainting 
 their soverigns for treason against the 
 rights of the people : and it is to Scotland 
 and a Scotchman that the world is in¬ 
 debted for the establishment of the philo¬ 
 sophical and logical principles of a free 
 constitution both in theory and practice. 
 George Buchanan, the greatest man of 
 his age, as well as country, established, 
 by irrefragable arguments, in his treatise or 
 dialogue concerning the rights of the peo¬ 
 ple of Scotland, the rights of all mankind ; 
 was the father of whiggery, and, what is 
 much grander, the father of that system 
 which will one day verify the prophecies 
 of the Christian Scriptures, to the abase¬ 
 ment of kings, and the destruction of 
 priestcraft. 
 
 “ The same sentiments,” he goes on to 
 add, “ kept up the sacred fire of freedom 
 in France, in the midst of folly and des¬ 
 potism, till the progress of commerce, 
 printing, philosophy and literature, opened 
 the eyes of Frenchmen every where to 
 discover that they were men, and ought 
 to be citizens; that men were not born 
 with gold chains about their necks, with 
 stars upon their breasts, or coronets upon 
 their heads: that it is the nature of kings, 
 as hitherto constituted, to consider their 
 interests as separate from the interests of 
 their nations, and to watch continually 
 like wolves or foxes for their prey, in or¬ 
 der to destroy the citizens committed to 
 their charge. That it is necessary, there¬ 
 fore, that they should have only the power 
 of obeying the laws made by the people, 
 with that of doing good; but that the 
 power of doing mischief, either by prero¬ 
 
 gative or influence, ought to be taken away. 
 These were the principles of Fletcher— 
 principles that seemed extravagant, dis¬ 
 loyal, and impracticable, in his days, but 
 whic-h are now acknowledged almost everv 
 where, except in Spain, Germany, and 
 England. 
 
 “ From this busy period, till the meeting 
 of the union parliament, Fletcher was uni¬ 
 form, and indefatigable in his parliamen¬ 
 tary conduct, continually attentive to the 
 l ights of the people, and jealous, as every 
 friend of his country ought to be, of their 
 invasion by the king and his ministers; 
 for it is as much of the nature of kings 
 and ministers to invade and destroy the 
 rights of the people, as it is of foxes and 
 weasels to rifle a poultry yard, and de¬ 
 stroy the poultry. All of them therefore 
 ought to be muzzled.” 
 
 I will next shew you the public opinion, 
 as narrated by Arthur Young, in his 18th 
 and 19th volumes of the Annals of Agri¬ 
 culture, and surely none will suspect Ar¬ 
 thur Young of prejudice against the pre¬ 
 sent Government. The passages which 
 I shall read you out of this book, are 
 queries proposed to the public considera¬ 
 tion, by Mr. Lotft, a member of the Bri¬ 
 tish Senate, together with the answers to 
 the same. 
 
 “ Queries by Capel Lofft, Esq. of Forslon. 
 
 “ Dear Sir, —You have often, and 
 with success, invited discussions in the 
 Annals, on subjects immediately or con¬ 
 sequentially affecting Agriculture. Will 
 you approve the wish of proposing the 
 following queries? 
 
 “ 1. What number of Agriculturists, in 
 the several counties of this island, may 
 be computed to be without a vote in the 
 choice of representatives ? 
 
 “ 2. What effect may this deficiency of 
 representation be reasonably regarded as 
 having, relative to agricultural interests? 
 
 “ 3. What influence, in this respect, 
 ought to be ascribed to the septennial 
 duration of parliaments ? 
 
 “ 4. Are the interests of agriculture, 
 at present, understood and regarded in 
 parliament in proportion to their national 
 importance ? 
 
 “ .5. Is it probable that a reform in the 
 election and duration of parliaments, or 
 either, would cause them to be regarded? 
 
 “ 6. What reform in the representation 
 would be most conducive to this effect ? 
 
 “ 7. What mode and circumstances of 
 election ? 
 
 “ 8. What duration of parliaments ? 
 
 “ 9. Is this a fit season for such reform ? 
 
 “ Those who are directly engaged in 
 
WM, SKIKVING. 
 
 75 
 
 Agriculture, either as owners, occupiers, 
 or husbandmen, form so great a part of 
 the nation, that a view of the subject, as 
 it respects them, will give a very general 
 insight into its principles and tendency. 
 
 “ I am persuaded you will not concur 
 with some, who think this question cannot 
 be discussed without disordering the peace 
 of the nation, and endangering the exist¬ 
 ence of the constitution : on the contrary, 
 I am certain there are those very friendly 
 to both, who look to such an inquiry as 
 the very means of preventing violent and 
 precipitate measures, promoting confi¬ 
 dence and tranquillity, and preserving the 
 constitution.” 
 
 Annals in Agriculture by Arthur Young. 
 
 “ Replies to Mr. Lofft’s Queries. 
 
 •‘Frickley, near Doncaster, 
 September 8, 1792. 
 
 “ Sir, —Before any attempt to answer 
 Mr. Lofft’s very pertinent queries, it will 
 be necessary to premise, that whatever 
 apparent weight, by representation, the 
 agriculturists, cr any of the lower orders 
 of the state, may have in the legislature, 
 is so utterly absorbed, and rendered void 
 by the superior influence of the crown 
 and peerage, in the House of Commons, 
 that a calculation, even of the number of 
 agriculturists, w ; ho actually have votes, 
 must, by no means, be considered as a 
 datum for an estimate of their real con¬ 
 sequence in that house. While the crown 
 and peerage act in concert, the govern¬ 
 ment of this country is virtually an aris¬ 
 tocracy ; and I fear it is approaching fast 
 to the situation predicted of it by the 
 celebrated Montesquieu, ‘ 11 perira lors- 
 que la puissance legiatative sere plus cor- 
 romque que l’executrice.’—Esprit des 
 Loix, tom. i. p. 324. The lower orders, 
 of course, lie at the mercy of the govern¬ 
 ment, until the middle class of citizens 
 shall assert its consequence, and obtain its 
 natural level in the constitution ; a cir¬ 
 cumstance as desirable and essential to 
 the general interests of the nation at large, 
 as it is the real and durable interests of 
 the crown and peerage in particular. By 
 the middle class of citizens, I mean those 
 men possessed of property, from the small¬ 
 est portion, to a moderate degree of afflu¬ 
 ence ; and this class may be defined, as 
 ending where the real utility and elegance 
 of life give place to its fastidious plea¬ 
 sures, magnificence, and pageantry; which 
 last are only within the reach cf such as 
 are aptly called overgrown fortunes. This 
 middle class includes all the inferior gen¬ 
 try, the yeomanry, and farmers, with near¬ 
 ly the whole of the manufacturing and 
 
 commercial men in the kingdom. This 
 class, then, constitutes the body of the 
 state, in the aggregate of its numbers and 
 property; and if the crowmand aristocracy, 
 or head of the state, will obstinately per¬ 
 sist in refusing to legislate, in union with 
 the body, where will be the barrier of 
 their defence, from the lowest members, 
 in any extremity of danger and public 
 convulsion, which the history of mankind, 
 in all ages and nations teaches us, are 
 almost periodically to be expected, as the 
 blazing eccentric comets of the political 
 hemisphere ? What an awful warning our 
 neighbour France presents to the tower¬ 
 ing pride of the great men in the earth : 
 the monarchy and nobility of that king¬ 
 dom, the most powerful and numerous in 
 the world, could not resist the shock of 
 contending political elements, but have 
 now fallen victims to the want of union 
 and concord with the middle class, or 
 body of the state.” 
 
 “ Replies to Mr. Lnfft’s Queries. 
 
 “ J. I think there are, atleast, one mil¬ 
 lion of agriculturists in this island (in¬ 
 cluding labourers, to whom, I presume, 
 the query extends,) without a vote in the 
 choice of representatives : these, with 
 their families, amount to more than five 
 millions of souls, or above the one-half of 
 the whole population of the country. 
 
 “ 2. This deficiency of representation has 
 certainly the effect of diminishing the con¬ 
 sequence of that which, in common sense 
 and policy, ought to be the first concern 
 in the state ; it follows, then, that the real 
 interests of the agriculture of the king¬ 
 dom are very little regarded or known 
 in the House of Commons. 
 
 “ 3. As the House of Commons is now 
 constituted, it matters not to the agricul¬ 
 turists of this nation, whether the duration 
 of parliaments be septennial or septuagesi- 
 mal; perhaps it would be better if there 
 were none at all. 
 
 “ 4. The interests of agriculture are cer¬ 
 tainly not atall understood and regarded in 
 parliament: witness the duration of tithes, 
 the influence they and the manorial claims 
 have in preventing the inclosures of com¬ 
 mons, now utterly useless to the commu¬ 
 nity, also the enormous expense and trou¬ 
 ble of applications to parliament for that 
 purpose : in addition to these discourage¬ 
 ments, sufficient of themselves to pro¬ 
 scribe and destroy the plough as if it were 
 an implement of no use or value, has not 
 an act been recently passed, by which the 
 American farmer, with very trifling rents 
 and taxes, and tithe free, is allowed a com¬ 
 petition with the British farmer in his own 
 
76 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 markets, though he is crippled, as above 
 stated ? Yet the British farmer is no ad¬ 
 vocate for a monopoly, and is ready to 
 allow, that the people of England have 
 a good right to be supplied with corn at a 
 moderate price ; to take off his shackles, 
 and the British farmer will have the ad¬ 
 vantage in competition with any farmer 
 upon earth, with a free corn trade. Per¬ 
 haps the best answer to this query may be 
 given by stating these plain facts :—An 
 annual import of foreign grain to a vast 
 amount; ten millions of acres of uncul¬ 
 tivated land, waiting only for the fiat of 
 the legislature, to enable Ceres, with her 
 golden harvests, to triumph over the cha¬ 
 otic reign of heath, and whins, and mut¬ 
 ton-bones. If the senators of Great Bri¬ 
 tain did not love racing and fox-hunting 
 better than the plough, could these things 
 exist? I am here reminded of our good 
 editor’s remarks on the poor peasants of 
 Laincourt, who were actually enclosing 
 and cultivating the duke’s wastes for their 
 own use.—[See his Travels in France, 
 p. 266.] 
 
 “ 5. It is very probable, that a prudent 
 reform in the election and duration of 
 parliaments would secure .to the interests 
 of agriculture their proper attention. 
 
 “ 6. Let the House of Commons con¬ 
 sist of five hundred representatives for the 
 counties of this island, the number for each 
 county to be proportioned to its extent 
 and population. 
 
 “ 7. Let every parish, or small district 
 in the county, send a deputy-resident in 
 such parish or small district to the county 
 town, the deputy to be chosen by ballot, 
 in a meeting of the men of the parish or 
 district, above the age of twenty-one 
 years. No person to declare himself a 
 candidate for this office, or to canvass, 
 bribe, or otherwise endeavour to obtain 
 votes, on pain ofimprisonment and confis¬ 
 cation of effects. The deputies of the pa¬ 
 rishes or districts, thus elected, to assem¬ 
 ble as soon as possible after their election 
 at the county town, to proceed to the elec¬ 
 tion of the representatives for their county 
 in parliament. Let the deputies, when 
 assembled, choose a president, the presi¬ 
 dent immediately nominating, with con¬ 
 sent of the assembly, a committee of six 
 deputies, who, after such nomination, shall, 
 out of the place of assembly, make out a 
 list of such of the said deputies of parishes, 
 or districts, as they deem most proper to 
 represent the county in parliament,—the 
 president to read over the list to the as¬ 
 sembly ; after which, each person on the 
 list shall be severally voted for by ballot. 
 
 On all occasions of equality of number, 
 &c. &e. 
 
 “ 8. The duration of parliaments to be 
 triennial. 
 
 “ 9. All seasons are fit for reform, and 
 the present is particularly so : a wise man, 
 in prosperity, will ever endeavour to se¬ 
 cure himself against the return of adver¬ 
 sity, in the best manner ho is able ; and 
 will not, by a dangerous security, delay a 
 salutary design. 
 
 “ It gives me pleasure to see that the 
 editor of the Annals of Agriculture is not 
 alarmed with the idea of introducing that 
 terrible word, reform, the bugbear of weak 
 and wicked minds. How intolerable it 
 must be to the spirit of a free and inde¬ 
 pendent Englishman, to hear the quon¬ 
 dam reformers of parliament, men now 
 possessed of high offices and emoluments, 
 make specious orations against reform. 
 Such men, being parties in the case, and 
 reaping to themselves the foul harvest of 
 abuses, ought not, in common decency, 
 to say one word ; at least, what they say 
 ought no more to be attended to, by in¬ 
 dependent men, than as the speeches of 
 those who they know are intending to de¬ 
 ceive them for their own profit: but the 
 frequency of this circumstance must in¬ 
 duce honest men to fear dangerous revo¬ 
 lutions, far more than to hope for salutary 
 reforms ; for I believe the present mas¬ 
 ters of this country cannot even yet de¬ 
 fine Englishman, as the tyrant of Rome 
 once did the degenerate Romans, homi¬ 
 nes ad servitudinem pavati. Though, I 
 confess, the servile echoes to the late pro¬ 
 clamation, apparently give the ministry 
 some grounds for the assumption of it as 
 a principle, that we are a people ready for 
 slavery, and to be managed as such ; yet 
 the ministry ought to know, that corpora¬ 
 tions are not towns, and that the great 
 body of the people are not in habits of 
 corrupt and corrupting obligation to the 
 numerous host of their creatures.” 
 
 After such information, was the public 
 not to be alarmed ? and if things really 
 are in such a state—if our constitution is 
 really thus on the verge of destruction,— 
 ought not the public to be roused, by 
 every means, to prevent its total annihi¬ 
 lation ? Convinced of this, could wise and 
 prudent men withhold from stepping 
 forth to prevent the evils to be expected 
 from such an event, if, as it is now appa¬ 
 rent, the evil is unavoidable ? and the 
 more so, that the means which presented 
 themselves as the most prudent for coun¬ 
 teracting the calamities, if they should fall 
 upon us, I mean the union of the people 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 77 
 
 in heart and mind, were the only means 
 of averting these calamities themselves ; 
 because the only effectual means for re¬ 
 storing the constitution to its original 
 principles by a substantial parliamentary 
 reform. 
 
 Our opponents use the most strenuous 
 exertions to misrepresent our design's and 
 purposes ; but have they proven that we 
 have endeavoured to overturn the consti¬ 
 tution ? They have only given you asser¬ 
 tions, and we are not bound to prove the 
 contrary, nor need we. The contrary is 
 apparent to every unprejudiced mind. It 
 is because evils exist which tend to sub¬ 
 vert the constitution, that we are associ¬ 
 ated to seek the removal of these evils, 
 and to prevent their further progress in 
 the undermining of the same ; and it is 
 proven to you, by the prosecutor’s own 
 witnesses, that when Thomas Elder, Esq. 
 and Harry Davidson, &c. and the multi¬ 
 tude with swords aud staves attending 
 them,,for I cannot call them magistrates, 
 not being able to recognise any legal au¬ 
 thority under which they acted, when they 
 violently broke up the meetings of our 
 Convention. When they came the first 
 night to disperse us, we were actually be¬ 
 ginning to consult about the execution of 
 a former resolution, viz. about applying, 
 by petition, to the House of Commons, 
 for that reform which alone seemed to us 
 adequate for the removal of those evils 
 by which we apprehended our constitu¬ 
 tion endangered. We were interrupted 
 in this legal and constitutional business 
 that we had that night. We assembled 
 the next evening out of the town, thus 
 giving way to violence, and proving our 
 disposition to peace ; and that, as much 
 as was consistent with duty, we would 
 avoid giving offence, in proceeding upon 
 the same business of an application to 
 parliament. The Lord Advocate has 
 avoided the taking any notice of this cir¬ 
 cumstance, though, if these are the mi¬ 
 nutes of our Convention, they must con¬ 
 tain, first, an unanimous resolution to ap¬ 
 ply to the House of Commons by petition; 
 next, a resolution to take under consi¬ 
 deration the means of executing that reso¬ 
 lution ; and, thirdly, a resolution to make 
 this the subject of deliberation on that 
 very evening on which we happened to 
 be dispersed, expecting that the previous 
 matters would, by that evening, be all 
 settled. 
 
 The Solicitor-General and the Lord 
 Advocate have exerted all their powers to 
 impress you with the belief, that the Con¬ 
 vention must have had a design to over¬ 
 
 turn our happy constitution. They said 
 we were pursuing a thing inconsistent 
 with the constitution, and which never 
 came into the minds of those who framed 
 the constitution. That we were seeking 
 it on the plan of the French Convention, 
 and that they must be right in the appre¬ 
 hension which they have formed, since we 
 were at so great pains to keep our doings 
 a secret. 
 
 As to the first of these averments, no 
 person in the least acquainted with the 
 history of Britain, can deny the former 
 existence of annual parliaments ; and he 
 must also acknowledge, that universal suf¬ 
 frage is the very principle of the constitu¬ 
 tion of the British House of Commons. 
 But the fact is this,—the British constitu¬ 
 tion is neither more nor less, than the in¬ 
 dependent spirit cf the nation, always dis¬ 
 posed to trust too much to their rulers ! 
 but finding them, at any time, to have 
 abused this confidence, always chastising 
 them, and restricting their power where 
 they found it dangerous, and increase the 
 control of their own will, as the circum¬ 
 stance of the case required. 
 
 Much clamour has been made against 
 the manner of our proceeding. The Lord 
 Advocate sees distinctly the Revolution of 
 France in every step. Circumstances the 
 most trivial and accidental, arising from 
 the wit and humour of a very few indivi¬ 
 duals, and which the Convention never 
 designed to open a thought on, seems to 
 have given the greatest alarm to those who, 
 misled by calumny, had previously been 
 made to believe that the Friends of the 
 People were in concert with the French. 
 And, considering such calumny, how 
 could we treat it by more marked con¬ 
 tempt, than by holding up such empty 
 bugbears to the deluded, as nurses do to 
 children to fright them to sleep ? 
 
 The great burden of the third division 
 of charges, and which have, been magni¬ 
 fied to the highest by his lordship, is the 
 supposed motion of a convention of emer¬ 
 gency, and the appointment of a secret 
 committee; but concerning both of which, 
 not a single thing is charged as if done by 
 me. I need not, therefore, exhaust your 
 patience to hear me further on the sub¬ 
 ject : I shall only crave your attention to 
 the evidence itself of the witnesses pro¬ 
 duced by the Crown lawyers. To what 
 does it amount, supposing these to be the 
 true minutes of the proceedings of the 
 Convention, though not its real minutes ? 
 It amounts to these things only; namely, 
 that the Convention, dreading the intro¬ 
 duction and passing cf a quietism, or con- 
 
78 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 venticle bill, which they cannot view in 
 any other point of light but as the putting 
 on of the grave-stone of the liberty of 
 Britain, with the view of restoring ; on a 
 proper remonstrance against so grievous 
 a measure, and of getting the same au¬ 
 thenticated by the people’s subscriptions 
 before the bill could pass through the 
 house, agreed to have an interim-meeting; 
 and in order to avoid the tedious forms of 
 calling such a meeting, prescribed by the 
 standing rules of the Convention, namely, 
 the procuring the consent of ten towns, 
 having societies of the Friends of the Peo¬ 
 ple, for an interim-meeting of Conven¬ 
 tion, appointed the same to be called by a 
 confidential committee, in a way which 
 appears to them best calculated for a 
 speedy assembling of the delegates. This 
 confidential committee is named a secret 
 committee ; and what is the difference be¬ 
 tween the two terms, unless it be that the 
 one is shorter ? Is there any thing sedi¬ 
 tious in this ? Is it sedition to complain 
 and remonstrate against what we judge of 
 the most dangerous tendency to the con¬ 
 stitution ? If not, what was there to be 
 apprehended from calling a meeting to 
 petition and remonstrate against it, in the 
 way that seemed to the Convention most 
 adequate to the doing of this timeously. 
 
 The bringing foreigners into the country, 
 has ever been considered as the most dan¬ 
 gerous to the liberties of this country. It 
 has already been experienced in a way 
 never to be forgotten ; and the minister 
 that would attempt it, would be a traitor 
 to his country. I could not conceive a 
 stronger reason for the people assembling 
 to remonstrate ; and I trust that, in the 
 present crisis, the measure must appear, 
 to every unprejudiced person, as the most 
 dangerous that ever could be adopted, 
 both against the liberties and peace of the 
 country. And I trust that you, gentle¬ 
 men of the jury, must approve of the ho¬ 
 nest patriotism of the British Convention, 
 in providing for a due remonstrance 
 against this and every such attempt. 
 
 Gentlemen of the jury, After what I 
 have already instructed relative to that 
 part of the indictment which charges me 
 with contempt of authority, and resisting 
 the sheriff and magistrates of Edinburgh, 
 it does not appear to me as necessary to 
 add any thing. It is evidently proven, as 
 I then observed, tha£ the provost and ma¬ 
 gistrates, the proper judges of such an of¬ 
 fence, had already taken cognisance of 
 the whole of that matter, and had also as. 
 soilzied me ; and therefore the Lord Ad¬ 
 vocate had no right whatever to institute 
 
 a new suit in this ease, any more than in 
 the affair of the Dundee address. 
 
 I shall, therefore, now only request 
 vour serious attention to a few paragraphs 
 respecting your own duty, which I shall 
 readyou from a very sensible book, though 
 the same must already be well known to 
 you ; and then address you upon the 
 whole in a few words. 
 
 “ As juries have ever been vested with 
 such power by law, so to exclude them 
 from, or disseise them of the same, were 
 utterly to defeat the end of their institu¬ 
 tion. For then, if a person should be in¬ 
 dicted for doing any common, innocent 
 act, if it be but clothed and disguised in 
 the indictment with the name of treason, 
 or some other high criine, and proved, by 
 witnesses, to have been done bv him ; 
 the jury, though satisfied in conscience, 
 that the fact is not any such offence as it 
 is called, yet because (according to this 
 fond opinion) they have no power to 
 judge of law, and the fact charged is fully 
 proved, they shall, at this rate, be bound 
 to find him guilty : and being so found, 
 the judge may pronounce sentence a- 
 gainst him, for he finds him a con’ icted 
 traitor, &c. by his peers ; and thus, as a 
 certain physician boasted, that he had 
 killed one of his patients with the best 
 method in the world, so here should we 
 have an innocent man hanged, drawn, 
 and quartered, and all according to law. 
 
 “ Suppose, for instance, a man should 
 be indicted, For that he, as a false traitor, 
 not having the fear of God before his 
 eyes, & c. did traitorously, presumptuous¬ 
 ly, against his allegiance, and with an in¬ 
 tent to affront his Majesty’s person and 
 government, pass by such or such a royal 
 statue, or effigies, with his hat on his 
 head, to the great contempt of his Majes¬ 
 ty and his authority, the evil example of 
 others, against the peace, and his Majes¬ 
 ty’s crown and dignity. Being hereupon 
 arraigned, and having pleaded not guilty, 
 suppose that sufficient evidence should 
 swear the matter of fact laid in the indict¬ 
 ment, viz. that he did pass by the statue 
 or picture with his hat on ; now imagine 
 yourself one of the jury that were sworn to 
 try him, what would you do in the matter ? 
 
 “ Nothing can be clearer than the duty 
 of jurymen as defined by Magna Charta : 
 Wherever the statute law has not provided 
 a specific punishment for any crime, it is 
 the duty of the Jury to determine the ex¬ 
 tent of the punishment:—The practice 
 of leaving that to the Court is a desertion 
 of their duty, and repugnant to the prin¬ 
 ciples of the Constitution. 
 
WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 “ The words of Magna Charta are, that 
 no Freeman shall be amerced for a small 
 fault, but after the manner of his fault, 
 and for a great fault after the greatness 
 thereof; saving to him his contenement, 
 and a merchant, saving to him his mer¬ 
 chandise ; and none of the said amercia¬ 
 ments shall be imposed, but by the oaths 
 of honest and lawful men of the vieinage. 
 —Thus our Forefathers not only prevent¬ 
 ed a judge from imposing the tine, but 
 likewise tied up the hands of the jury from 
 ruining a man by an excessive fine ;—in 
 all cases reserving to the criminal the 
 means of a future livelihood. 
 
 “ But on the other side, when the mat¬ 
 ter in issue, in itself, and taken as a na¬ 
 ked proposition, is of such a nature, as no 
 action, indictment, or information will lie 
 for it singly ; but it is worked up by spe¬ 
 cial aggravations into matter of damage, 
 or crime ; (as that it was done to scan¬ 
 dalize the government, to raise sedition, 
 to affront authority, or the like, or with 
 such or such an evil intent) : if these ag¬ 
 gravations, or some overt act to manifest 
 such ill design, or intention, be not made 
 out by evidence, then ought the jury 
 to find the party not guilty. For ex¬ 
 ample, 
 
 “ If the jury shall honestly refuse to 
 find the latter in cases where there is no 
 direct proof of them, (viz. that such an 
 act was done falsely, scandalously, mali¬ 
 ciously, with an intent to raise sedition, 
 defame the government, or the like,) their 
 mouths are not to be stopt, nor their con¬ 
 sciences satisfied with the court’s telling 
 them—You have nothing to do with that; 
 it is only matter of form or matter of law; 
 you are only to examine of fact, whether 
 he spoke such words, wrote, or sold, such 
 a book, or the like. For now, if they 
 should ignorantly take this for an answer, 
 and bring in the prisoner guilty, though 
 they mean and intend the naked fact, or 
 bare act only ; yet the clerk recording it, 
 demands a further confirmation, saying to 
 them thus : ‘ Well then, you say A. B. 
 is guilty of the trespass or misdemeanour, 
 in manner and form, as he stands indict¬ 
 ed ; and so you say all ?’ To which the 
 foreman answers for himself and his fel¬ 
 lows : ‘ Yes.’ Whereupon the verdict 
 
 is drawn tip—‘ The jurors do say upon 
 their oaths that A. B. maliciously, in 
 contempt of the king and government, 
 with an intent to scandalize the adminis¬ 
 tration of justice, and to bring the same 
 into contempt, or to raise sedition, &c.’ 
 (as the words before were laid); spake 
 such words, published such a book, or did 
 
 79 
 
 such an act, against the peace of our lord 
 the king, his crown and dignity. 
 
 “ Thus a verdict, so called in law, quasi 
 vcritutis, because it ought to be the voice, 
 or saying , of truth itself, may become com¬ 
 posed in its material part of falsehood. 
 Thus twelve men ignorantly drop into a 
 perjury. And will not every conscien¬ 
 tious man tremble to pawn his soul under 
 the sacred, and dreadful solemnity of an 
 oath, to attest, and justify a lie upon re¬ 
 cord to all posterity ? besides the wrong 
 done to the prisoner, who thereby per¬ 
 haps comes to be hanged, (and so the 
 jury inforo conscientice are certainly guilty 
 of this murder;) or at least by fine, or 
 imprisonment, undone, with all his family, 
 whose just curses will fall heavy on such 
 unjust jurymen, and all their posterity, 
 that against their oaths, and duty, occa¬ 
 sioned their causeless misery. And is 
 all this, think you, nothing but a matter 
 of formality ? 
 
 “ Much of the office of jurors, in order 
 to their verdict, is Ministerial; as not 
 withdrawing from their fellows after they 
 are sworn ; not receiving from either side 
 evidence not given in court; not eating 
 and drinking before their verdict; refusing 
 to give a verdict, &c. wherein if they 
 transgress, they may be fineable. 
 
 “ To what end is the jury to be returned 
 out of the vicinage (that is, the neigh¬ 
 bourhood) whence the issue ariseth ? to 
 what end must hundreders be of the jury, 
 whom the law supposeth to have nearer 
 knowledge of the fact than those of the 
 vicinage in general? to what end are they 
 challenged so scrupulously to the array 
 and poll ? to what end must they have 
 such a certain freehold, and be probi, et 
 legates, homines, and not of affinity with 
 the parties concerned, &c. if after all this, 
 they implicitly must give a verdict by the 
 dictates and authority of another man, 
 under pain of fines and imprisonment, 
 when sworn to do it according to the best 
 of their own knowledge ?” 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, Having submit¬ 
 ted already some things that appeared to 
 me to be altogether necessary for your 
 consideration, and for my own exculpa¬ 
 tion, I shall now, in a very brief manner, 
 state the heads of my defence. To these 
 I would beg your particular attention, be¬ 
 cause, by bestowing this, you will be the 
 better able to judge the cause. Remem¬ 
 ber you are called upon, this day, serious¬ 
 ly to decide concerning the conduct and 
 fate of one of your fellow-men, who has 
 been accused of a crime of a very hei¬ 
 nous nature, no less than that of attempt- 
 
80 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 ing to break the peace of society, and of 
 being engaged in practices hostile to the 
 constitution of this realm. You already 
 know what has been urged against me ; 
 and you will not discharge your duty to 
 God and your country, you will n*ot ful¬ 
 fil the sacred obligations which you have 
 come under, if you do not hear and con¬ 
 sider my defence, with an unbiassed 
 mind, with a mind anxious to discover 
 truth, and to render a just decision. But, 
 gentlemen, I hope that you will not only 
 judge my cause with that force of mind 
 which resists prejudice ; but, (in the con¬ 
 fidence of my innocence, permit me to 
 add,) I trust that you will shew that you 
 possess that rectitude which places you su¬ 
 perior to influence, that you possess that 
 honesty and virtue of mind which would 
 make you, undismayed, withhold your 
 consent when the hand of power solicits 
 your approbation. 
 
 I am charged with sedition; and, in 
 support of this allegation, it has been at¬ 
 tempted to be proved, that I have done 
 such and such acts, or have spoken or 
 written such and such words, as amount 
 to the crime. My entire innocence of 
 this crime of sedition, I most solemnly 
 avow ; and it is your business, then, when 
 I deny the crime, to investigate whether 
 and how the charge has been proved. 
 My defence divides itself in two parts. 
 You are to examine, in the first place, 
 w’hether the evidence of different kinds 
 that has been brought before you, is suf¬ 
 ficient to prove the facts alleged, or to 
 fix on me the writings, speeches, and acts, 
 specified in your libel: and farther, being 
 judges of law, as well as of fact, you are, 
 in the second place, to determine whether 
 these speeches, &c. even if they were 
 proved to be mine, constitute in their au¬ 
 thor the crime of sedition. 
 
 First, Witth regard to the former of 
 these points, the proof of the simple facts, 
 I believe it is a maxim, not only alto¬ 
 gether fair, but agreeable to the dictates 
 of common sense, that when you are false¬ 
 ly accused of a foul crime, you may, and 
 indeed, ought to employ every lawful ex¬ 
 pedient in your own defence. It is not, 
 therefore, from any mean desertion of 
 principles, it is not from any weak dread, 
 that any part of my conduct about poli¬ 
 tics will not stand the strictest scrutiny, 
 and may be tried by the severest rules, 
 those rules which should ever regulate 
 the conduct of every good man and good 
 citizen. I say, it is not from the appre¬ 
 hension that any of my speeches, writ¬ 
 ings, or practices are criminal, that I call 
 
 upon you to investigate the nature and 
 amount of the evidence adduced in sup¬ 
 port of the several charges. Perhaps, 
 some may think it was unnecessary to re¬ 
 fuse, while I am conscious of my own in¬ 
 tegrity, that which I deem to be no crime; 
 and may therefore judge it better that I 
 should have admitted, that all such things 
 have been done by me, as libelled, and 
 should content myself with your opinion 
 of their quality and import. This, how¬ 
 ever, I could not do, even supposing I 
 had been inclined to it, for the purpose of 
 saving you some trouble. While mea¬ 
 sures the most insidious, and, but for 
 some harmless difference in political opi¬ 
 nions, the most unprovoked upon my part, 
 are employed to circumvent and destroy 
 me, and ruin my family. I am fully war¬ 
 ranted to deny, on the whole, a charge so 
 unjust. I do not beg, then, gentlemen, 
 that you would have the generosity, but I 
 demand that you will do me the justice, 
 to attend to every sentence of the libel; 
 weigh the evidence brought in support of 
 it; and deliberately judge how far the al¬ 
 legations are truly proved to be matters 
 of fact, or to have taken place simply as 
 stated. Besides, you are to try the cause, 
 and to decide concerning the truth or 
 falsehood of the charges from the evidence 
 set before you, and in no other way ; and 
 this, gentlemen, you must know to be 
 your bounden duty. With these general 
 remarks, I leave you to determine as to 
 the truth or falsehood of the alleged facts. 
 
 Secondly, I will now beg your attention 
 to the second part of my defence, in which 
 I affirm, that the import of all that has 
 been alleged, or specified to have been 
 said or done by me, even though it were 
 completely proved, will not amount to 
 the crime of sedition, or to any crime 
 whatever. Under this second, which, in 
 this case, is by far the most important 
 branch of your duty, you will examine the 
 facts, or matters charged in the indict¬ 
 ment, in two points of view. Gentlemen, 
 in the first place, you are to weigh the im¬ 
 port of the facts charged themselves ; and, 
 in the second place, you are to consider 
 with what intention they were done : for 
 unless you can say, from the proof ad¬ 
 duced, that the alleged speeches, and 
 other matters libelled on, are of a seditious 
 import, and besides, that they proceeded 
 from a wicked and felonious intention in 
 me, the accused person, you cannot find 
 me guilty of the crime charged in the in¬ 
 dictment. With respect to the former of 
 these, I need not tell you, that, if the 
 words and actions ascribed to me can be 
 
WM, SKIRVING. 
 
 81 
 
 found, on a fair interpretation, to import 
 nothing wrong, there can evidently be no 
 crime ; for allowing that T had discovered 
 the most perverted and wicked intention 
 in the matter, yet, if all that I did was of 
 no seditious import or tendency, weakness 
 and folly could only incur contempt, and 
 be treated with derision. Now, I have no 
 doubt, that I shall be able to satisfy you, 
 and all candid persons, that every thing 
 that is alleged to have been done by me, 
 amounts to nothing criminal—to nothing 
 more than what any Briton, with the most 
 entire regard to the constitution of his 
 country, has a full and undoubted right 
 to do. Read, I beseech you, and take a 
 connected view of the whole writings, 
 speeches, and proceedings referred to in 
 the indictment, and you will then be able 
 to judge of their import, much better than 
 you can be from the partial extracts and 
 mistaken details inserted in the libel. 
 What can you discover there inconsistent 
 with the principles of the British constitu¬ 
 tion, or subversive of the authority of the 
 British government ? Is there ought else to 
 be found there, but a sincere wish, and an 
 ardent, but honest attempt to procure that 
 relief from errors, or remaining imperfec¬ 
 tions,—to effect those political improve¬ 
 ments, to spread that information,—and 
 to enjoy that friendly and mutual inter¬ 
 course and advice of cur fellow-citizens, 
 that seem necessary to improve the situa¬ 
 tion of society in Great Britain,—to give 
 its constitution purity and perfection, and 
 to procure to the inhabitants of these 
 realms greater security, satisfaction, and 
 peace? Is it not the birth-right, the old¬ 
 est and most invaluable privilege of every 
 Briton, to possess the power of pointing 
 out those errors, which he conceives to 
 exist in the administration of govern¬ 
 ment? If we discover wherein, according 
 to our opinion, the happy constitution of 
 this country, the constitution of the three 
 estates of King, Lords, and Commons, 
 may be improvedif we suppose, with 
 some reason, that the privileges of those, 
 connected with one estate, may require 
 to be extended and improved, and may 
 readily be so, without, on the one hand, 
 occasioning any detriment to the royal 
 prerogative, or to the privileges of the 
 members of the other estate, and without, 
 on the other hand, introducing disorder 
 and anarchy among the inhabitants at 
 large;—if, in the pursuit of these impor¬ 
 tant objects, we reckon it improper to rely 
 wholly on our own opinion, and wish, 
 therefore, to collect the sentiments of our 
 fellow-subjects ; and if we think it im¬ 
 
 pertinent to trouble the legislative body, 
 who alone are competent to remove the 
 errors, grant the reform, and confer the 
 improvements sought after, with our soli¬ 
 tary and inept application, I say, when 
 with these views we are actuated, is there 
 any thing wrong in honestly declaring 
 and avowing our sentiments and openly 
 consulting with our fellow-citizens ; and, 
 especially when we do so in such a man¬ 
 ner, as becomes the attentive and dutiful 
 subjects of a regular government ? Has 
 not this, and even more than this, been 
 done by the favourite minister of the day, 
 and many of his adherents; they who now 
 discovertheir hot zeal for the constitution, 
 by watching, with such anxious concern 
 and suspicion, the actions of others? But 
 I need not insist, for it is known to every 
 one what has been done, and what has 
 been said by them. You know their 
 sentiments were the same with ours. You 
 know that the friends of reform in those 
 less irritable times, met openly and with¬ 
 out obstruction, and that their words and 
 conduct, (not less expressive of their sen¬ 
 timents, than our words and actions are 
 of ours at present,) if not approved of by 
 every one as proper, were not denied by 
 any one, to be consistent with the spirit 
 of the constitution, and the liberty of dis¬ 
 cussion permitted by our laws. With 
 such upright views, to meet with undue 
 opposition, contumely, and even oppres¬ 
 sion from our fellow-subjects, who hap¬ 
 pen to differ from us in opinion, must 
 surely be irksome, and calculated to ex¬ 
 asperate. But we have hitherto behaved, 
 and will always conduct ourselves with 
 moderation and quietness. Though we 
 have reason to believe, that the present 
 opposition to our sentiments and conduct 
 is too pointed and too personal, to arise 
 wholly from a simple difference of opin¬ 
 ion ; and, though we may suspect that 
 some oppose us, because they derive ad¬ 
 vantages from the corruptions which we 
 desire to have removed, yet no bad treat¬ 
 ment has ever yet seduced us from our 
 principles, or provoked us to turbulence ; 
 and if has been our constant prayer to the 
 God of Peace, that amidst the shakings of 
 the nations, he would bless with unity and 
 concord the inhabitants of these islands. 
 As we conceived the civil magistrates to 
 be rash, and to act unconstitutionally, in 
 dispersing and forbidding our meetings, 
 our astonishment, at what we deemed an 
 unmerited insult, and our desire to assert 
 our privileges, will sufficiently account for 
 
 our wishing to continue our meetings_ 
 
 No rudeness, however, was ever meant or 
 
 No. G. 
 
82 
 
 trial of 
 
 shewn by us, as the witnesses tor the 
 crown have attested ; and another public 
 meeting, if it could not be procured in 
 Edinburgh, but at the risk of public order 
 and tranquillity in the smallest degree, 
 would neither have been desired nor at¬ 
 tempted. You will see then, gentlemen, 
 that there is nothing of a seditious or in¬ 
 flammatory tendency, to be inferred from 
 our behaviour to the magistrates and sheriff, 
 even though, in our opinion, they unwar¬ 
 rantably and forcibly deprived us of our 
 
 acknowledged privileges_Had we given 
 
 place to the arm of power, directed as it 
 then was, even more slowly than we did, 
 it would have been no more but a trifling 
 misdemeanor, by no means an approach 
 to sedition. It could only be said, that 
 our submission was shy, for resistance we 
 made none. 
 
 The interpretation which has been at¬ 
 tempted to be put upon some of the in¬ 
 scriptions quoted in the libel, by the Lord 
 Advocate, is altogether forced and con¬ 
 strained. Nothing more was ever sought 
 after bv myself and the other Friends of 
 the People, than the information of the 
 country, and the acquisition of friends to 
 reform, to be obtained in a manner con¬ 
 sistent with the spirit of the constitution, 
 and respectful to the legislature. If we 
 wished for more, it was the steady ad¬ 
 herence, and the amicable union of the 
 friends of reform, and good concord and 
 neighbourhood with every class of citi¬ 
 zens, that we might give the necessary 
 respectability to that cause, which we 
 judged of prime advantage to the nation. 
 Our solicitous perseverance in the pur¬ 
 suit of a constitutional reform can never, 
 in fairness, be construed as an insult to 
 the legislature of our country, far less can 
 it be branded as an attempt to destroy its 
 approved and happy constitution. 
 
 The palpable misconstruction attempted 
 to be put on our conduct, I mean on the 
 conduct of the general society or collec¬ 
 tion of the delegates of the Friends of the 
 People, called, by way of distinction from 
 the others, the British Convention, from 
 certain words supposed to be similar to 
 those used by the French having been 
 accidently employed, is hardly deserving 
 of notice. The use of such terms may 
 vex a weak ear, or enrage a peevish mind; 
 but it will neither disgust nor alarm a 
 sound and happy patriot, nor any true 
 friend to the British constitution. The 
 employment of these words arising wholly 
 from accident, or from the whim of one 
 or two individuals, might be defended. 
 As they are sufficiently logical, not un¬ 
 
 common in our language, and not disre¬ 
 spectful to any thing British ; but they 
 are too inconsiderable to require any fur¬ 
 ther apology. 
 
 “ Take notice of the nature of the 
 
 CRIME CHARGED, AND WHAT I.AW THE 
 PROSECUTION IS GROUNDED UPON, AND 
 DISTINGUISH THE SUPPOSED CRIMINAL 
 FACT, THOUGH YOU MAY THINK THE SAME 
 PROVED, FROM THE AGGRAVATING CIR¬ 
 CUMSTANCES, WHICH ARE NOT PROVED.” 
 
 To conclude, allusions have been made 
 to the affairs of France. But with these 
 I have nothing to do. This much, how¬ 
 ever, I will say, that excesses and sangui¬ 
 nary measures make no part of my prin¬ 
 ciples. And I trust that such measures, 
 and such conduct as has been attributed 
 unjustly to that people, will never, and 
 far less at present, be adopted by British 
 tribunals nor approved of by British sub¬ 
 jects ; and may He who hath the hearts 
 of all men in his hand, influence you to 
 an unbiassed love of the truth, and direct 
 you to return such a verdict as will be 
 consistent with the future peace and con¬ 
 solation of your own minds, such a ver¬ 
 dict, as will accord with those principles 
 of free inquiry and communication, which 
 are natural to men, as rational and social 
 beings, and which are recognized by the 
 law and constitution of this country. 
 
 Permit me to remind you of the advice 
 of a learned Judge. 
 
 “ I verily (saith he) had rather twenty 
 evil doers should escape death through ten¬ 
 derness, or pity, than that one innocent man 
 should be unjustly condemned." 
 
 I shall conclude with that excellent ad¬ 
 vice of my Lord Coke, which he generally 
 addresses to all judges, but may no less 
 properly be applied to jurors : — 
 
 “ Fear not to do right to all, and to de¬ 
 liver your verdicts justly according to the 
 laws; for fear is nothing but a betraying 
 of the succours that reason should afford : 
 and if you shall sincerely execute justice, 
 be assured of three things : 
 
 “ 1. Though some may malign you, 
 yet God will give you his blessing. 
 
 “2. That though thereby you may 
 offend great men, and favourites, yet you 
 shall have the favourable kindness of the 
 Almighty, and be his favourites. 
 
 “ And lastly, that in so doing, against 
 all scandalous complaints, and pragmati¬ 
 cal devices, against you, God will defend 
 you as with a shield—‘ For thou, Lord, 
 will give a blessing unto the righteous, and 
 with thy favourable kindness wilt thou de¬ 
 fend him as with a shield.’ Psalm v. 15.” j 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. —Gentlemen of 
 
WM. SKIltVINCr. 
 
 83 
 
 the Jury, After so long a trial, and after 
 hearing so much, I should not think it 
 proper to detain you long ; but, without 
 running over and reciting the evidence, 
 I would submit to your consideration a 
 few general observations, which may be 
 of use in forming your opinion upon the 
 case. 
 
 Gentlemen, the crime here charged is 
 that of sedition: by the penal law of Scot¬ 
 land, it is a crime very different from the 
 law of England; for it is not necessary to 
 have any act of parliament for it. But, 
 gentlemen, although there is no special 
 act of parliament for it, it is very well 
 known that it is a crime of a high nature, 
 and of a dangerous tendency. I take the 
 crime of sedition to be violating the peace 
 and order of society ; and it is attended 
 with different degrees of aggravation, ac¬ 
 cording to what is the object of it. When 
 sedition has a tendency to overturn the 
 constitution of this country, it borders up¬ 
 on high treason; and if it goes that length, 
 it loses the name of sedition, and is buried 
 under the greater crime of high treason; 
 and a very little more than is contained 
 in this indictment, would have made it the 
 crime of high treason. The crime charged 
 is that of sedition, and the public prose¬ 
 cutor has, inthe minor proposition, enume¬ 
 rated a variety of circumstances from which 
 he infers this crime of sedition ; and the 
 conclusion of the libel is, that these facts 
 or part thereof, being found proved by the 
 verdict of an assize, he shall be punished 
 with the pains of law. 
 
 Gentlemen, although the public pro¬ 
 secutor, in justice to the party, that he 
 might see his way clear, to make his de¬ 
 fence, has enumerated a variety of cir¬ 
 cumstances, from which he infers that this 
 pannel was guilty of the crime of sedition. 
 In order to procure a verdict, finding him 
 guilty of these crimes, it is not necessary 
 that all these facts should be proved, but 
 the question you are to try, is whether he 
 has been guilty, art or part, whether such 
 facts and circumstances, as are stated, are 
 not sufficient to convince you, that the 
 pannel has been guilty of the crime of se¬ 
 dition: if you, upon the whole, are satisfied 
 that what is proved against him does not 
 amount to the crime of sedition ; or is not 
 sufficient to establish his guilt, you will 
 find him not guilty, or the libel not proved; 
 but if you think it is sufficient, then you 
 will find the opposite verdict that he is 
 guilty, or that the libel is proved. 
 
 Gentlemen, in considering this case, 
 one thing occurs to me, and that is the 
 conjuncture under which these facts are 
 F 2 
 
 alleged; it was during the time when 
 this nation is engaged in a bloody war 
 with a neighbouring nation, consisting of 
 millions of the most profligate monsters 
 that ever disgraced humanity, justice will 
 never enter into their ideas, but they swal¬ 
 low up all before them, and I say, gen¬ 
 tlemen, that the greatest union in this na¬ 
 tion is necessary, in these circumstances, 
 to support us under this war, and there¬ 
 fore, gentlemen, supposing that, in short, 
 this nation has been feeling some griev¬ 
 ances, from any imperfection attending 
 the constitution, I say, under these cir¬ 
 cumstances, this is not the time to apply 
 for relief, and I appeal to your own feel¬ 
 ings, and your good sense, if it would not 
 be brought forward better at any other 
 time, and that we should employ all our 
 force to get rid of that foreign enemy up¬ 
 on which the safety and the happiness of 
 the country does in a great measure de¬ 
 pend. 
 
 Gentlemen, any person who had never 
 heard of the name of Great Britain, and 
 knew nothing of its constitution, if the 
 proceedings of these Friends of the People 
 and this contention, and their publica¬ 
 tions, were put into his hands, I think 
 the conclusion that would be naturally 
 drawn by such a person would be, that it 
 was a nation the most wretched under 
 the sun, that we were living under the 
 most despotic government upon the face 
 of the earth, and were the most unhappy 
 of mankind : that, I think, would be the 
 idea of a man who knew nothing of this 
 country, upon reading the publications of 
 this convention. But, gentleman, I ap¬ 
 peal to your own feelings and your own 
 knowledge, how much it is the reverse of 
 that. I believe every one must admit, 
 that of all the nations under the sun, Great 
 Britain is the happiest; and that under all 
 the imperfections that may attend their 
 constitution, it is the most complete sys¬ 
 tem of government that ever existed up¬ 
 on the face of this earth, with all its im¬ 
 perfections. I am sure, gentlemen, you 
 must all be sensible that you enjoy your 
 lives and your properties, and every thing 
 that is dear to you, in perfect security; 
 every man is certain that he will not be 
 deprived of any thing that belongs to him; 
 and there is no man, let him be as great a 
 grumbletonian as he will, if he is asked 
 where he is hurt by the imperfections of 
 the constitution, he cannot tell you, but, 
 on the contrary, that he is living happily 
 under it. Gentlemen, when that is the 
 case, what construction must you put upon 
 the proceedings of a society, who represent 
 
84 
 
 TRIAL OF 
 
 this country as on the very brink of de¬ 
 struction ? I submit it to you whether that 
 is the work of the people, who have a real 
 regard for society, and if you are of opi¬ 
 nion, that these meetings are of a sedi¬ 
 tious nature, and of a seditious tendency; 
 when the question comes home to the 
 pannel at the bar, you must findhim guilty; 
 for, gentlemen, I must observe to you, 
 that it is a rule in law, and a rule in good 
 sense, that if a meeting is illegal, all the 
 members of that meeting are liable for 
 every thing illegal that is done at that 
 meeting, the whole meeting are under¬ 
 stood to be guilty, art and part, in the crime 
 that is committed, and they are all and each 
 of them amenable to the laws of their 
 country for what they have done. And 
 at common law, even in the commission 
 of the crime of murder, and robbery, 
 some persons may be more active than 
 others, but they are all guilty art and part, 
 and all equally liable to the punishment 
 of the law; and those who have been 
 more cruel than the rest may have a 
 greater sting in their own minds, but, in 
 the eye of the law, they are all guilty art 
 and part. Then, gentlemen, you are to 
 consider how far you can think Mr. Skir- 
 ving innocent, when it is proved to you, 
 by a number of witnesses, some of their 
 own convention, and what is best of all 
 is his own declaration, that he himself 
 was not only present at all their meetings, 
 but was secretary of the society, entrusted 
 with every thing done by them, and ac¬ 
 cording to the proof this day laid before 
 you, when the officers of the law went, 
 they seized all the papers and minutes of 
 their proceedings. If you are of opinion 
 that those meetings are of a seditious na¬ 
 ture, how is it possible to find this man 
 innocent, the whole meeting being guilty 
 art and part, and he being secretary, is 
 the most active man ?—if one man can be 
 more guilty than another, it is that man 
 now standing at your bar. 
 
 Gentlemen, you will attend here to¬ 
 morrow at two o’clock, to give in ycur 
 verdict. 
 
 Mr. Skirving— My lord, may I not 
 be admitted to bail ? 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk— No, you can¬ 
 not ; it is contrary to a rule of court. 
 
 Tuesday, Jan. 7,1791,2 o’clock. 
 
 The names of the Jury called over. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk. —Gentlemen, 
 who is your Chancellor ? 
 
 One of the Jury.—Alexander M'Ken- 
 zie, and David Anderson, Clerk. 
 
 VERDICT. 
 
 Edinburgh, January 7,1791. 
 
 The above Assize having inclosed, made 
 choice of the said Alexander M'Kenzie 
 to be their Chancellor, and the said Da¬ 
 vid Anderson to be their Clerk ; and hav¬ 
 ing considered the criminal libel raised 
 and pursued at the instance of his Majes¬ 
 ty’s Advocate, for his Majesty’s interest, 
 against William Skirving, pannel, the in¬ 
 terlocutor of relevancy pronounced there¬ 
 on by the Court, the evidence adduced 
 in proof of the libel,' and the evidence in 
 exculpation ; they are all, in one voice, 
 finding the pannel, William Skirving, 
 Guilty of the crimes libelled : in witness 
 thereof, their said Chancellor and Clerk 
 have subscribed these presents, consisting 
 of this and the preceding page, in their 
 names and by their appointment, place 
 and date foresaid. 
 
 (Signed) Alex. M'Kenzie, Chan. 
 
 David Anderson, Clerk. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _Gentlemen, 
 
 y T ou have returned a very proper verdict, 
 and I am sure you are entitled to the 
 thanks of your country for the attention 
 you have paid to this trial. 
 
 Mr. Skirving. —My lords, owing to 
 an accident, I have been deprived of very 
 considerable assistance, namely, the advice 
 of counsel from London voluntarily trans¬ 
 mitted to me. However, there is no 
 help for it now ; but there is one part of 
 the advice of counsel, which may merit 
 the attention, though not perhaps very’ 
 orderly as to time, but if your lordship 
 will allow me, I will state it. Upon the 
 first page of the indictment it is said, 
 “ W’hereas by the law of this, and every 
 other well governed realm, ‘ Sedition' is 
 a crime of a heinous nature, and severely 
 punishable.” The observation of the 
 counsel at London, is, “ it will be neces¬ 
 sary to ascertain, connectly, the definition 
 of the crime of sedition. Erskine, Inst. 
 8vo. edit. p. 488, says, * sedition consists 
 in the raising of commotions or disturb¬ 
 ances in a state. He indeed adds, that it is 
 either real or verbal, but sedition can only 
 be that offence whereby an actual breach 
 of the peace is committed in order to pre¬ 
 vent the due course of law, and though 
 words of a seditious tendency may be fur- 
 nished,yet where actual sedition is charged, 
 as in this case, words or libels alone will 
 not, without a real act of sedition, be suf¬ 
 ficient to maintain the indictment. 
 
 “ The crime charged is sedition, and the 
 averment is, that the said William Skir¬ 
 ving is guilty actor or art and part, that 
 is, in the phraseology of the Scots law. 
 
WM. SKIItVlNG. 
 
 85 
 
 that he is either principal or accessory. 
 But as this is stated in the disjunctive, it 
 does not appear with certainty, whether 
 he is charged as the principal or as acces¬ 
 sory. He cannot be both principal and 
 accessory, nor can he be indicted for both 
 offences— therefore the whole is void. 
 
 “ This is an objection which will apply 
 in arrest of judgment, therefore reserve 
 it till after the verdict.” 
 
 Now, my lord, if there is any thing in 
 that opinion, I plead it in arrest of judg¬ 
 ment, and as it is a thing not common 
 in this court, I appeal to your lordships’ 
 candour, that if there is any justice to be 
 obtained upon that point, I may obtain it. 
 
 Mr. Solicitor-General _As to the 
 
 nature of sedition, it was fully discussed 
 in argument before your lordships yes¬ 
 terday. With respect to this learned opi¬ 
 nion of counsel, he may be a very good 
 English lawyer, and very eminent in his 
 profession, but is perfectly ignorant of the 
 law of Scotland; because as that is stated, 
 it would be impossible for any person to 
 be convicted of any crime, because 1 never 
 saw an indictment but what charged a de¬ 
 fendant with being guilty actor, or art and 
 part thereof. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _If there had 
 
 been any thing wrong in the proceedings, 
 the court would have taken it into consi¬ 
 deration. 
 
 Mr. Skirving. —After all that was 
 stated yesterday as to sedition, I could get 
 no satisfaction upon it. 
 
 Lords Eskgrove, Swinton, Dunsin- 
 nan, and Abercromey, now severally de¬ 
 livered their opinions, and thought that 
 the pannel should not undergo a milder 
 punishment than fourteen years’ transpor¬ 
 tation. 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _My lords, I 
 
 feel very much for the situation of the 
 panne], but, my lords, we must not allow 
 our feelings to interfere with the discharg¬ 
 ing of our duty, we must feel for the wel¬ 
 fare of the country, and what would have 
 been the situation of the country, if they 
 had executed the scheme that they were 
 meditating. My lords, I could have 
 wished, and it would have made me hap¬ 
 py, if he could have given a proper vin¬ 
 dication of his conduct, so as to have got 
 an acquittal from the crimes with which 
 he is charged; and I should be very sorry 
 to think, that he suffers for want of the 
 advice of counsel; but, my lords, it gives 
 me a great deal of satisfaction, that after 
 the proof that was heard yesterday, the 
 ingenuity of no counsel, Scotch or Eng¬ 
 lish, could have been able to have satis¬ 
 
 fied an intelligent jury, that this man was 
 innocent of the offence charged against 
 him. My lords, if he suffers for the want 
 of counsel, he must, I am sure, impute 
 that to himself, for he must know, that a 
 man arraigned at the bar of this court, 
 whether he has money to pay counsel, or 
 whether he has not, he need not go with¬ 
 out, for this court would appoint him one; 
 but it is very odd, that he should, in place 
 of applying to counsel here for advice, go 
 to an English counsel, whose place it is 
 not to know the law of Scotland, and who, 
 certainly, had very little business with it. 
 —But he reads something to teach us a 
 little of the English law, but they certainly 
 have no business with Scotch law, and he 
 being to be tried in a court of Scotland, 
 by the laws of Scotland, ought not to have 
 meddled in it; and I am sure, however 
 able an English lawyer he may be, he 
 knows nothing of the law of this country, 
 to say that a man cannot be charged as 
 being guilty, actor, or art and part thereof. 
 Nothing but a total ignorance of the cri¬ 
 minal law of this country could have 
 caused such an observation. As to the 
 other part of the objection stated by Mr. 
 Skirving, as to the nature of the crime of 
 “ sedition,” I think we should not be de¬ 
 serving of the trust reposed in us, if we 
 had this day to seek into the nature of 
 that crime, when we have within these 
 two months, for the same crime, passed 
 sentence of transportation against two 
 persons, Mr. Muir and Mr. Palmer. It 
 is paying a very bad compliment to the 
 court, after that, that we should now be 
 told, we don’t know what we are doing, 
 and that we are yet to learn what sedition 
 is. I thought we were fully apprized of 
 what sedition was, even before the case of 
 Muir, which was followed by that of Pal¬ 
 mer. And, I will say, that that opinion 
 that the pannel just now read, is absurd 
 in itself, because if acts of violence must 
 be committed to make it sedition, it is 
 impossible that the crime of sedition can 
 be committed at all, because it then qeases 
 to be sedition, it becomes high treason ; 
 and if any act of violence had followed 
 these meetings, the consequence would 
 have been thus, that gentleman would 
 have stood there tried for his life, and the 
 forefeiture of his estate, goods, and chat¬ 
 tels, would have followed. 
 
 My lords, as to the punishment to be 
 inflicted, as I have always considered se¬ 
 dition as the most dangerous crime that 
 can be committed, I think we cannot dis¬ 
 charge our duty to the country, unless 
 we inflict for that crime a severe punish- 
 
86 
 
 TRIAL OF WM. SKIRVING. 
 
 ment. Mr. Muir was transported for 
 fourteen years, and the only hesitation in 
 that case was whether it should be limited 
 to fourteen years, or not. I have no in¬ 
 clination to go beyond in this case, but I 
 think it is impossible we can, consistently 
 with the justice of the country, pronounce 
 a less sentence upon this pannel, than we 
 did upon Mr. Muir. 
 
 Aly lords, it is an aggravation of his 
 crime, that with the example of Muir and 
 Palmer before him, if he had before that 
 thought his- conduct was innocent, and 
 did not deserve a high punishment. He 
 was told by the judges of this supreme 
 court in that case, the nature of the of¬ 
 fence ; and any prudent man would have 
 taken care to have regulated his conduct 
 accordingly, and given over those rebel¬ 
 lious practices; but in place of that, he 
 continues their secretary, and attends the 
 British Convention. And, my lords, I do 
 conceive that if any more trials of this 
 kind should happen in time coming, it is 
 still a further aggravation, that they have 
 had not only the example of Muir and 
 Palmer, but of this man also, and my 
 opinion is, that we cannot do less than 
 transport him for fourteen years, and 
 therefore I pronounce the same interlo¬ 
 cutor that was pronounced upon Muir 
 and Palmer in the same form of words. 
 
 THE SENTENCE. 
 
 The Lord Justice Clerk, and Lords 
 Commissioners of the Justiciary, having 
 considered the foregoing verdict, whereby 
 the assize, all in one voice, find the pan¬ 
 nel Guilty of the crimes libelled : the 
 said lords, in respect of the said verdict, 
 in terras of an act passed in the 25th year 
 of his present Majesty, entitled, “ An act 
 for the more effectual transportation of 
 
 felons and other offenders, in that part of 
 Great Britain called Scotland;” ordain 
 and adjudge that the said William Skir¬ 
 ting be transported beyond seas, to such 
 place as his Majesty, with the advice of 
 his privy-council, shall declare and ap¬ 
 point, and that for the space of fourteen 
 years from this date, with certification to 
 him, if, after being so transported, he shall 
 return to and be found at large, within 
 any pa:t of Great Britain, during the said 
 fourteen years, without some lawful cause, 
 and be thereby lawfully convicted, he shall 
 suffer death as in cases of felony, without 
 benefit of clergy by the law of England : 
 and ordains the said William Skirving to 
 be carried back to the tolbooth of Edin¬ 
 burgh, therein to be detained till he is de¬ 
 livered over for being so transported, for 
 which this shall be to all concerned a suf¬ 
 ficient warrant. 
 
 (Signed) Robert M‘ Queen. 
 
 Mr. Skirving. —Conscious of inno¬ 
 cence, my lords, and that I am not guilty 
 of the crimes laid to my charge, this sen¬ 
 tence can only affect me as the sentence 
 
 of man_It is long since I laid aside the 
 
 fear of man as my rule,—I shall never 
 
 walk by it_And, my lords, I could not 
 
 be ignorant of this sentence, because I 
 knew it long before this;—and I had a 
 letter from London, this very morning, 
 informing me that such a sentence was to 
 take place ! 
 
 Lord Justice Clerk _You heard 
 
 that from the counsel of London, too, I 
 suppose ? 
 
 Mr. Skirving _No, I told your lord- 
 
 ships that was a voluntary thing; Icon- 
 suited no counsel. 
 
 My lords, I know that what has been 
 done these two days will be rejudged ;— 
 that is my comfort, and all my hope. 
 
A P P E N D I X. 
 
 TRIAL OF ROBERT WATT AND DAVID DOWNIE, 
 
 FOR 
 
 HIGH TREASON. 
 
 [See Page 54.] 
 
 Robert Watt and David Downie, the latter of whom was a witness in the 
 case of Mr. Skirving, were tried for high treason at Edinburgh, in Septem¬ 
 ber, 1794. Downie, it would appear, was an honest Reformer; but Watt 
 was a spy in the pay of government, and a great instigator in procuring the 
 manufacture of pikes. He had some of these instruments secreted in his 
 house, when a search was made for bankrupt goods;—the pikes were dis¬ 
 covered ;—Watt, as a Reformer, was apprehended, tried, and convicted of 
 high treason—and government allowed their own tool, thus caught in the 
 net he had prepared for others, to suffer the last penalty of the law. The 
 indictment charged Watt and Downie with having wickedly and traitorously 
 conspired and agreed to procure meetings to be held within this kingdom, 
 under the name of Conventions, for the purposes of usurping and assuming 
 the powers and government of legislation, in, for, and over the kingdom, of 
 effecting an alteration in the mode of electing Members of Parliament; of 
 obliging the King, against his will, to change certain laws relating to the 
 administration of the kingdom; of raising an insurrection; of obliging the 
 King to adopt certain laws which theyivished; of consulting concerning 
 the seizing upon the Castle of Edinburgh by force, with pikes, guns, battle- 
 axes, &c., and also upon the Excise-office and Banks; of seizing upon the 
 Lord Justice Clerk, Lords of Justiciary and Session, and Lord Provost of 
 Edinburgh ; of agreeing to be aiding in these conspiracies, and of instigating 
 other persons to assist them in carrying the same into execution ; of buying, 
 and procuring to be made, pikes, spears, battle-axes, &c. for the above pur¬ 
 poses; of raising and levying, and causing to be raised and levied, money, 
 for the purpose of arming themselves and their associates: With writing 
 and publishing wicked addresses, advising the subjects of the King to sub¬ 
 scribe money : Employing John Fairley to distribute the same, and to per¬ 
 suade the people to give assurances to them of support; to inform them of 
 how many they might depend upon; to persuade the people to send money 
 to David Downie, and to purchase pikes, &c. for the purpose of arming 
 themselves; and with employing William Brown and Robert Orrock to 
 make pikes, &c. and cause them to be made for the above purposes; and 
 which, when made, were concealed in the house of the said Robert Watt. 
 
 After the indictment was read over, Mr. Knapp asked Mr. Watt, whether 
 he was Guilty or "Not Guilty ? To which the prisoner replied, Not Guilty ,— 
 
88 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Mr. Knapp. How will you be tried ? — Prisoner. By God and my country.— 
 Mr. Knapp. God grant you a good deliverance.—The same questions were 
 put to Mr. Downie, and similar answers returned. 
 
 Mr. Fletcher having suggested, that it would be proper to have it fixed 
 which of the prisoners was to be tried first, 
 
 Mr. Anstruther said, by act of Parliament, each of the pannels had a right 
 to object to thirty-five of the jury ; and if they did not agree to object to the 
 same gentlemen, the trials must be separate. 
 
 Mr. Fletcher said the prisoners would not agree in their objections. 
 
 The Lord Advocate then said, that the trials must be separate, and that 
 Robert Watt was the first meant to be tried. 
 
 Watt’s trial accordingly took place on the 3d of September. After the 
 case had been stated by the Lord Advocate, the first witness called was 
 Alexander Aitcheson, late goldsmith, who deponed, That he was a member 
 of the British Convention, and assistant secretary to Mr. Skirving, and 
 wrote a considerable part of the minutes, which he now knows; and has 
 seen the same papers before in the Court of Justiciary : That several per¬ 
 sons gave him assistance in writing the minutes; among others, George 
 Ross. lie recollects a motion by Mr. Callander, which caused some obser¬ 
 vation, and was referred to a committee. Mr. Sinclair moved an amendment, 
 on which the convention declared they would continue permanent, and 
 watch over the motions of Parliament. [Here the witness read part of the 
 minutes, which concluded with these words : ‘ Here the members stood up, 
 and solemnly passed the following motion.’ This motion was left blank, and 
 the witness could not say why it was so.] Deponed, That he knows Mr. 
 Watt; and that, in January last, he was, along with him, a member of the 
 committee of union : That the convention was dispersed in December, and 
 the committee formed in January. The committee was to preserve union 
 among the friends of. reform. The Friends of the People met occasionally 
 to keep up a correspondence about the plan of reform proposed by Mr. Pitt 
 and the Duke of Richmond; and that Mr. Watt and he were members of 
 the committee of ways and means, which was established for the purpose of 
 paying the debts due by last convention to Mr. Skirving, &c., and has 
 heard it said it was for the purpose of paying the expenses of delegates for 
 a convention to be held in England. This convention was for the same pur¬ 
 poses and objects as the former. Mr. Bontliron was a member of the 
 British Convention. The purposes the convention had in view were the 
 same which Mr. Pitt and the Duke of Richmond had in view twelve 
 years ago. Depones, That he has heard, out of doors, something of arms ; 
 but cannot name any person who said so : That he has seen a pike in George 
 Ross’s : That he saw two in the possession of a blacksmith : That the com¬ 
 mittee of union met in Ross’s. Depones, That he has heard, out of doors, 
 of pikes being preparing for arming the people; but cannot say particularly 
 by whom he heard it. He thinks it was about the time when Earl Stan¬ 
 hope delivered his speech about introducing foreign troops. Some said they 
 would as readily arm against the French, as against other foreigners : others 
 said they ought to arm in defence of liberty; but cannot say who were 
 the persons that said so. There were perhaps five or six present when the 
 conversation took place ; it was the commou talk of the day. He cannot 
 say what the particular conversation was which he had with Mr. Watt the 
 night the committee of ways and means, or sub-committee, was appointed 
 in January; and cannot recollect any conversation in the committee : That 
 he has been in Mr. Watt’s house, but cannot recollect the conversation that 
 took place. Here the witness was called upon by the Court to recollect 
 himself. 
 
 The Lord Chief Baron bid him think seriously on the nature of the oath 
 he had taken. The witness replied, he knew well the nature of an oath.— 
 Prosecutor, Did any conversation pass between you and the prisoner about 
 arms ? Witness, Never : he only said that something .of importance was 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 89 
 
 on the carpet, which would come before the public, or the world. This was 
 about the time of Lord Stanhope’s speech concerning arming the people.— 
 Pros. What were your reasons for absenting from the committee of ways 
 and means ? Wit. Because I heard that some secret business was to come 
 before the committee ; and as my views, in so far as I was concerned in the 
 cause of liberty, were always open and candid, I never afterwards wished to 
 attend ; but who informed me of this secret business I cannot remember.— 
 Pros. Did you never give a different account of your conversation with 
 Watt than what you now do ? Wit. I never did; or if I did, it certainly 
 was not true. The witness was removed. 
 
 William Lockhart, Sheriff’s Chamber, said, He went to search the house 
 of Mr. Watt for some goods which were secreted, belonging to a bankrupt. 
 In the search he found some pikes. He made a second search same night. 
 May 15th, and found some more pikes in a closet. The witness here pro¬ 
 duced the pikes, sixteen in number, and shewed that each pike had a socket, 
 with a screw at one end, and the other was fitted to receive a shaft; and all 
 the pikes fitted any of the screws. The witness also found the types of a 
 hand-bill, which he likewise carried to the Sheriff’s Chamber. 
 
 William Middleton, Sheriff-officer, said, That on 15th May last he searched 
 the house of Orrock, smith at Dean: That he also searched Mr. Watt’s 
 house, where he found some pikes, and some types set up. In Mr. Orrock’s 
 house he found thirty-three pikes, some finished and some not. Here the 
 witness identified the pikes, and shewed what were found in Orrock’s smithy. 
 
 James Walker, in the Sheriff-clerk’s office, deponed, That he saw a form 
 of types in the Sheriff-clerk’s office in May last;—saw an impression taken 
 off them at Campbell Denovan’s printing-office; and being shown a copy, 
 depones, that it is the same impression. 
 
 Arthur Macewan, weaver, Water-of-Leitb, deponed, That he was a mem¬ 
 ber of the Society of the Friends of the People there; and he was a mem¬ 
 ber of the Committee of Union which met in George Ross’s. Being inter¬ 
 rogated, Whether, at the third meeting of the Committee of Union, any plan 
 was proposed by Mr. Watt for seizing upon the Government of the coun¬ 
 try ? deponed, That Watt that night read a plan to seize upon the Lord 
 Justice Clerk, Lords of Session, and Lord Provost; to light a fire at the 
 Excise Office : That a body were to assemble at the Luckenbooths, in order 
 to meet the soldiers, who would then naturally come from the Castle, whilst 
 another body assembled at the Weigh-house, and thus to enclose the mili¬ 
 tary : That others were to seize upon the Banks, and demand the money 
 from the different banking-houses ; and commissioners were to be appointed 
 to receive the same: That no day was mentioned for accomplishing this; 
 and he cannot remember whether it was to be in the day or night-time, 
 though he rather thinks it was night: That Watt, after he had read the 
 plan, put it into a press in his room, it being there where it was read: That 
 he also read an address to the people, which was to have been issued after 
 the attack had been carried into effect, ordering all farmers, dealers in corn, 
 hay, &c. not to remove the same, under pain of death; and all gentlemen not 
 to remove above three miles from their own houses, under the like penalty ; 
 and containing an address to the King to dismiss his ministers, and put an 
 end to the war immediately, otherwise he might abide by the consequences ; 
 or, fatal consequences would ensue: That Watt called upon the deponent 
 one day, and asked him to go with him to Orrock’s; which he did: and 
 Watt then employed Orrock to make pikes, a plan of which he drew upon 
 the table, and desired him to be busy, and he would get the money as he 
 finished them : That he had four thousand to send to Perth, besides what he 
 had to distribute about Edinburgh : That one day he saw Orrock’s servant 
 manufacturing these pikes, and a gentleman’s servant asked him what they 
 were for; to which he answered, That they were meant for mounting to a 
 gentleman’s gate : That he understands Fairley was sent to the west country; 
 and when he returned to the committee of ways and means, he informed 
 
90 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 them that he had visited a number of places, of which he gave Watt a note : 
 That Paisley teas iti a slate of great readiness: That the witness said he 
 would by no means agree to disturb the peace, or shed the blood of his 
 countrymen; and the paper Watt read led him to imagine that was their in¬ 
 tention : That he remembers hearing a letter read in the committee, which 
 he now identifies: That he has heard of collections in the committee of 
 union : That the society, of which he is a member, gave 15s.; and he knows 
 of no other money they received, except a bill for ,£15, which they said they 
 had got from Perth: That a paper, entitled. Fundamental Principles, was 
 produced in the society by Mr. Watt. 
 
 William Bouthron, Broughton, deponed, That be was a member of the 
 sub-committee, or committee of ways and means, but withdrew from them 
 altogether about 17th April. Watt attended that committee, and the com¬ 
 mittee of union.—Pros. What made you withdraw from the committee ? 
 Wit. Different things, that at present 1 can’t say. (He said he wished the 
 Court to ask him the proper questions, for he remembered nothing at all of 
 the matter; there was such a confusion about him,' that it cut off his whole 
 recollection.)—On being told that he was crimiual in concealing the truth, 
 he deponed, That he heard Watt read a paper.—Pros. What was the pur¬ 
 port or substance of that paper ? Wit. It went on such suppositions, that 
 £ looked upon the whole as a kind of frenzy; it contained something about 
 seizing the Castle; but I don’t recollect anything at all about it. Being 
 interrogated. What the paper said of that matter? deponed, That a number 
 of Friends of the People were to seize on the Castle, while the soldiers 
 were decoyed down by a fire kindled about the Register-office, and likewise 
 to seize on the Banks and Excise-office. 
 
 John Fairley, wright, Broughton, said, He was a member of the British 
 Convention, and was chosen by a society to be a collector. They collected 
 money and sentiments ; because there was a number of people warmly at¬ 
 tached to the cause, who could not give their attendance, but gave money, 
 while others gave only their opinion. This was sometimes called a Com¬ 
 mittee of Ways and Means, where he was sometimes present with Watt. 
 He heard there were some pikes got ready; and was not long acquainted with 
 Watt when he shewed him some. They had once spoke about pikes before, 
 and he (the witness) had a drawing of one made out, which he shewed Watt, 
 who told him the pikes were intended for self-defence, and no person was to 
 get them but those who wauted and paid for them. Watt proposed to shew 
 the arms to the collectors, which the witness objected to as hazardous.— Pros. 
 Did you ever say any thing about your fear of bloodshed?—Wit. 1 was 
 expressing my fears, that the measures of government would drive the 
 people to despair; and Mr. Watt answered, There would be no bloodshed; 
 for those who were most active against the cause of the people would be 
 imprisoned. He recollects Mr. Watt speaking of soldiers; on which the 
 witness said, That if affairs came to extremities, he had no fear of the sol¬ 
 diers. The witness then said it was ouce mentioned, that, after seizing the 
 obnoxious people here, couriers were to be sent to the country, to announce 
 what was done : That Mr. Watt once told him, he would give him some of 
 the arms to show the collectors, upon which he made some objections; and 
 Mr. Watt replied. There could certainly be no objections to a merchant sell¬ 
 ing goods in his own shop; That Mr. Watt shewed him pikes in his own 
 house, which he wished him to carry and show the collectors; but this he 
 would not do. One day, said he, I proposed going to Borrostownuess, when 
 Bonthron asked me to carry a letter. Next morning I called on Mr. Watt, 
 and he desired me to call at Mr. Campbell, hatter, and get a parcel; which 
 I did. It contained papers. At Stirling, l delivered a copy of these papers 
 to all the people I called on, viz. Dr. Forrest, in his own house, where were 
 several others. 
 
 Dr. Forrest, Stirling. A person, named Fairley, called on me in May 
 last, telling me he was desired to inquire in what situation the society was. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 91 
 
 He gave me three copies of printed bills, and a letter, and shewed me a 
 paper, in which money was requested for Mrs. Skirving. It spoke about 
 some collectors, or persons to be provided with - 
 
 Pros. What was the construction you put on this blank ? Wit. I sup¬ 
 posed it should be filled up—“ Arms.”—Pros. What did you say to Fair- 
 ley ? Wit. I told him we did not wish to injure any one, and he should be 
 cautious what he said.—Pros. Did Fairley say anything of arras manufac¬ 
 turing in Edinburgh ? Wit. He was talking about an invasion ; and then 
 made a draught of a halbert, and said, he knew a person who could fur¬ 
 nish such instruments, who, I understood, resided in Edinburgh.—Pros. 
 When the company supped, what was Fairley’s conversation ? Did he say 
 any thing of a rising of the people ? Wit. He did say something about it; 
 but whether as a thing settled, or what might be done, I am not certain. 
 Some conversation took place of a plan for disarming the soldiers : which, I 
 understood, was to be done by the persons who sent Fairley west. He spoke 
 of some people in Edinburgh who would repent their conduct, and would 
 be imprisoned by the people who sent him. He spoke of collectors who 
 were to head and command the people when they should rise. It was said 
 there was to be a convention, similar to the British Convention in Edin¬ 
 burgh. From the conversation 1 had with Fairley, I gathered there was to 
 be a rising of the people, and seizing of soldiers’ arms. 
 
 Robert Orrock, smith, said he was a member of the Water-of-Leith So¬ 
 ciety, the British Convention, &c. He first heard of arms in March, when 
 in George Ross’s house. There were present Watt, Macewan, and Dovvnie. 
 The conversation took place about some speech in the newspaper concerning 
 arms; and one of the persons present said the Goldsmiths’-hall people had 
 got some, and we should apply for some too. It was said we would not get 
 them; to which Watt answered, There was no law in Britain could pre¬ 
 vent us. Some days after, Watt called on the witness, and wished to look 
 at a weapon he had spoken of, and shewed him a draught of one. He ac¬ 
 cordingly made one like it, which he carried to George Ross’s house, and 
 shewed it there to Watt, Downie, and others. Some days after, about the 
 1st of May, Watt called at the Dean, and desired him to make a few pikes 
 with cross axes, and two or three dozen of different forms. He asked how 
 many 1 could make a-week ? I said fifty. He asked if I could get sticks ? 
 I said I might. Some time after, Martin Todd called on me from W’att, 
 and asked if I had made any of the instruments ? He again called, and 
 shewed me a large one, and desired I would make one like it. I said I 
 would not. One William Brown afterwards called, and asked if I was mak¬ 
 ing the pikes r I said I was; but he asked how we could get sticks, for 
 there were thousands of them wanted. I then began to be alarmed; for 
 William Brown made all his in secret. Watt afterwards desired me to say 
 they were for the top of a gate. At first I thought they were for the de¬ 
 fence of the country. 
 
 Martin Todd, smith, said, He remembers going from Watt to Orrock with 
 a pike. Orrock returned it, and said he was going on with them as fast as 
 possible. 
 
 William Brown, smith, said, William Robertson asked him to make some 
 spears for a Mr. Watt; and when he told him he did not know but he 
 might, he desired him to call on Watt, which he did; and he shewed him a 
 spear, and asked if he would make some ? Mr. Watt afterwards called at 
 his shop, when the witness shewed him one half-done ; and he told him he 
 did not choose to make any more of that kind. He then ordered spears with 
 sockets; and the witness made fourteen, and sent them to Watt’s house, 
 when he gave him a line to David Downie, who paid him the money. 
 
 John Fairley sent notice to the Court, that he wished to correct his former 
 evidence. Being again called to the bar, said, he recollected Watt saying, 
 that the banks and the public offices were to be seized; and those most against 
 us, viz, the Aristocrats, were to be seized, and couriers to be sent to the 
 
92 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 country with the news. The Magistrates of Edinburgh were also to he 
 seized. 
 
 After the evidence for the Crown closed, Mr. William Erskinc, junior 
 counsel for the prisoner, said, that as the Court had sat so long, he would 
 not trouble them with many words. He would rest his defence upon the 
 correspondence carried on between the Right Hon. Henry Dundas, the 
 Lord Advocate, and the prisoner; by which it would appear that he had at¬ 
 tended the meetings of the Friends of the People with no other view than a 
 design to give information of their proceedings. A letter from the prisoner 
 to Mr. Secretary Dundas, was read, which stated, in substance, that as he 
 did not approve of the dangerous principles which then prevailed in Scot¬ 
 land, and was a friend to the constitution of his country, he thought it his 
 duty to communicate to him, as a good subject, what information he could 
 procure of the proceedings of those who styled themselves Friends of the 
 People. From an acquaintance with several of the leading men among 
 them, he flattered himself he had this in his power; and then goes on to 
 mention some of the names of the leading men in Perth, Dundee, and Edin¬ 
 burgh. In the first of these places he said he had been educated; and had 
 resided in the two last for a considerable number of years. 
 
 To this letter an answer was returned, which was also read. It acknow¬ 
 ledged the receipt of Mr. Watt’s; and, after expressing a hope that tliiugs 
 were not so bad as he had represented, desired him to go on, and he might 
 depend upon his communications being kept perfectly secret. Another let¬ 
 ter from Mr. Dundas to Mr. M‘Ritchic, the prisoner’s agent, was next read, 
 in answer to one from Mr. M'Ritchie, requesting of Mr. Dundas what let¬ 
 ters he had of the prisoner’s. The answer bore, that all the letters he had 
 received from Mr. Watt, had been delivered to the Lord Advocate. 
 
 Proof in Exculpation. 
 
 Mr. Clerk, Sheriff, deposed, That he found, upon the seizure of Mr. Watt’s 
 papers, amongst others, a scroll of a letter to Mr. Secretary Dundas, and 
 that gentleman’s answer to the prisoner, which Mr. Clerk produced. 
 
 The scroll and the answer were accordingly read. 
 
 The Lord Advocate was the only other witness examined on the part of 
 the prisoner. His Lordship deponed, That, in the month of October, 1792, 
 he had several conversations with Mr. Secretary Dundas, with respect to the 
 then situation of the country; who mentioned, that he had received a letter 
 from a man of the name of Watt, and desired his lordship might inquire 
 whether he was a man in whom confidence ought to be reposed : That he 
 had accordingly made such inquiry, and from the information he then re¬ 
 ceived, had no reason to doubt he was a person in whom he could trust: 
 That, in consequence of this, he had himself corresponded with the prisoner, 
 in absence of Mr. Dundas, and had received him at his own house, where he 
 gave him some information against different persons, whom the Lord Advo¬ 
 cate did not choose to name, unless called upon to do so by the counsel for 
 the prisoner: That Mr. Watt wrote him in March, 1793, that two persons 
 had given him reason to believe that they had some information which they 
 would be willing to divulge upon receiving, as he thinks, £1000, at least, 
 down : That, as this was a pretty large sum, he consulted with some of his 
 Majesty’s ministers on the subject, and it was their opinion, as well as his, 
 that the demand ought not to be complied with ; not that he suspected Mr. 
 Watt, but that he thought he might have been imposed upon: That Mr. 
 Watt afterwards informed him, that, in order to induce the two persons to 
 tell him what they had already disclosed, he had been obliged to accept a 
 bill for £30, which he would be obliged to pay; upon which the Lord Ad¬ 
 vocate ordered a person in Edinburgh to pay him the money, as he did not 
 wish to see him distressed : That the only piece of information he had re¬ 
 ceived from Mr. Watt, which he thought of importance, was that a party of 
 soldiers, on their way from Chatham to Perth, had been wrought upon to 
 mutiny and sedition, and that a certain number of them had stated that, if 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 93 
 
 they were called out, they would uot do their duty in quelling' any disturb¬ 
 ance which might happen; but that, upon the Lord Advocate’s tracing the 
 matter to the bottom, and examining the soldiers themselves, he found the 
 whole to be a falsehood: That he did not entertain any bad opinion of Mr. 
 Watt till the discoveries came out before the Secret Committee of the House 
 of Commons; that Watt had dropt all attendance upon him since October 
 last.— Here the proof ended. 
 
 The jury, after being addressed by Mr. Hamilton for the prisoner, and the 
 Lord Advocate for the Crown, returned a verdict of Guilty. 
 
 The Court then proceeded to the trial of David Downie, which was very 
 similar in its character to that of Watt. Alexander Aitchison was called to 
 prove that Mr. Downie was a member of the British Convention. 
 
 George Ross deponed, That Downie, Watt, &c. belonged to a Committee 
 of Union which met in his house. 
 
 Margaret Whitccross, formerly a servant to Mr, Downie, being shewn one 
 of the pikes, and asked if she had ever seen any thing like it before ? de¬ 
 pones, That she saw a similar one in Mr. Downie’s house one morning when 
 she was dressing: the dining-room; That Mr. Downie had come home late 
 the previous night: That Mr. Downie’s son, Charles, came out of an adjoin¬ 
 ing closet, where he slept, as soon as he had heard her in the room, and took it 
 away; and, at this time, he had only part of his clothes on, and did not seem 
 to have any other business in that room ; That she remembers hearing Mrs. 
 Downie ask her husband what he had done with the large dividing-knife 
 which was found in the dining-room ? To which he answered that he had 
 locked it by : That she never heard her master speak of having such weapons 
 to defend himself, and when she saw it she thought she never saw such a 
 dividing-knife before. Being interrogated for the prisoner, depones, That 
 she had it not in her hand : That there was a difference betwixt her mistress 
 and her, and that the cause of the difference was, that she had engaged in 
 another place when Mrs. Downie thought she had engaged with her for 
 another terra, and had therefore refused to pay her her wages, and owed 12s. 
 at present. 
 
 Robert Orrock, smith, deponed, That he has heard of the committee of 
 union, of which he, Mace wan. Watt, Downie, and Stoke, were members: 
 That he was present at a meeting when they were reading a newspaper: 
 That there was great talk at that time of an invasion: That it was said, he 
 thinks by Mr. Watt, that arms had come to the gentlemen of the Goldsmiths’- 
 hall Association ; and some of them said, that we had better apply for arms; 
 but another said, that we need not apply, for none of the Friends of the 
 People would get arms: That Watt said there was no law in existence 
 against any person having arms; and the deponent said he would make one 
 for himself: That Downie was present, as were Watt, Bonthron, and Mac- 
 ewan : that Watt afterwards came to him to the Water-of-Leith, and asked 
 him if he had made such a weapon : That he told him he had, and shewed it 
 to him. Mr. Watt then shewed him a plan of one, which he thought would 
 do better, which he drew upon the table, and desired him to make one for 
 him of that pattern, which the deponent did accordingly, and brought it up 
 with him to the committee of union, but did not produce it there, but in the 
 sub-committee, where Messrs. Watt, Downie, &c. &c. were present: That he 
 saw one Wright either giving money to Downie, or receiving money from 
 him : That some of them said his pike was too short in the curve, and also 
 in the other end ; That another person present drew a plan of the weapon 
 larger in these respects, and Mr. Watt and Mr. Downie desired him to have 
 that in his eye ; and Watt asked him what would be the price of them ; but 
 he answered he could not say: That he then went into the other room; 
 and when he was going away, Mr. Watt came to him, along with Mr. Dow¬ 
 nie, and desired him to make a few; and also desired him to leave his stick 
 
94 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 with him; and being shewn the stick found in Watt’s house, depones it is 
 the same. 
 
 William Brown said he made fifteen pikes by Watt’s order, to whom he 
 delivered them, and he gave a line to Downie, who paid him 22s. 6d. for the 
 fifteen pikes; the one was Is. 3d. each, the other kind os. each. The 
 line to Downie said, “ Pay to Mr. Brown 22s. 6d., and I will count with you 
 after.” 
 
 After the evidence was closed, Mr. Cullen rose to charge the jury on the 
 part of the prisoner, which he did in an ingenious and argumentative speech, 
 which lasted upwards of three hours. He mentioned, that part of the evi¬ 
 dence which regarded the taking of the Castle of Edinburgh, massacring the 
 soldiers, seizing the judges, &c. which, said he, was one of the wildest 
 phrenzies that ever entered into the head of man. This was not the plan of 
 the prisoner, but of Watt. He alone was the framer and promoter of that 
 diabolical business. But, he remarked, it is here attempted to be proved, 
 that the prisoner and Watt were equally guilty in this matter. This was 
 by no means the case; for, though the prisoner was a member of the British 
 Convention, and afterwards of the committees of union, and ways and means, 
 yet the intention of these committees was not to promote the treasonable 
 plans and projects of Mr. VVatt, but only to collect money for the purpose of 
 carrying their plan of reform into effect, and for succouring some of their 
 suffering friends. It had been attempted to be proved, that the prisoner 
 had both employed and paid for making pikes; but the employment was 
 not so completely proved as the law directs ; and as to the money paid to 
 William Brown, it was entirely on Watt’s account. The rest of the evi¬ 
 dence, Mr. Cullen argued, in a strain of very ingenious reasoning, amounted 
 to nothing that could, in the most distant manner, affect the prisoner; and, 
 on these grounds, he hoped that the jury would be of opinion with him, that 
 the charge had not been sufficiently proved, and would therefore acquit the 
 prisoner. 
 
 Mr. Anstruther, on the part of the Crown, replied. He said he was ex¬ 
 ceedingly sorry to say, that, from his opinion of the evidence produced, the 
 charge was completely proved against the prisoner. He then took a pretty 
 extensive view of the law of treason, in which he differed very much from 
 Mr. Cullen. He said it was by no means a case of constructive treason , but 
 a deliberate plan to overturn the government and constitution of this 
 country ; and therefore came fairly under that part of the statute of Edward 
 III. of compassing and imagining the death of the King. He next proceeded 
 to the evidence produced, beginning at the first motion of a design to call a 
 convention, which design, he said, was clearly and distinctly proved. The 
 next part of the evidence was the prisoner’s conduct as a member of the 
 committees of union, and ways and means, whose views Mr. Cullen had 
 said were solely to promote the cause of reform : but he differed very 
 much from him with regard to this circumstance : for, taking the corres¬ 
 pondence of Hardy and Skirving; the proceedings of the British Conven¬ 
 tion ; the meetings held at the Globe Tavern, and Chalk Farm, upon the 
 principles held out by themselves, and upon whose resolutions those com¬ 
 mittees acted, what was their language? Was it to petition King, or peti¬ 
 tion Parliament? No; it was, as all their proceedings bear, to do some¬ 
 thing stronger than petition ;—it was to effect their purpose by force, which 
 they said petitioning had not been able to do. There could be no doubt this 
 was treasonable; and the evidence fully justified him in saying, that the pri¬ 
 soner had acceded to every particular. He next adverted to the plan of 
 taking the Castle of Edinburgh, &c. which plan, no doubt, was Watt’s; but 
 the prisoner did not dissent from that plan, as Macewan and Bonthron had 
 done, nor abseut himself from the meetings of the committees; but, on the 
 contrary, he, along with Watt, employed Orrock to make the pikes ; paid 
 money to Brown for making them, and to Fairley, to enable him to go to the 
 west country upon their business. In short, the prisoner completely acceded 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 95 
 
 to every part of Watt’s plan; and, besides all this, the evidence fully 
 proved, that a pike was found in the prisoner’s house, and that he was con¬ 
 cerned in circulating a seditious hand-bill, tending to debauch the minds of 
 the Fencibles of this country; a copy of which hand-bill was clearly traced 
 to the prisoner. Mr. Anstruther now took notice of the great pains that 
 bad been taken, by some evil-minded people, to seduce the lower ranks in 
 this country from their duty and allegiance ; and respecting this he gave an 
 elegant quotation from the Roman historian Livy, the purport of which was, 
 that when the lower orders of the people rose against the constituent autho¬ 
 rity of a country, the consequence was, that nothing but anarchy and confu¬ 
 sion ensued, and that country was completely wretched. He concluded 
 with saying, that no doubt remained in his mind, that the charge was com¬ 
 pletely proved ; if, however, the jury thought otherwise, he would be happy 
 at the acquittal of the prisoner. 
 
 The jury were then attended by two constables, to be inclosed. They re¬ 
 mained out of Court about forty minutes, and they returned their verdict— 
 Guilty. 
 
 After which their Foreman said, My lord, I am desired by the jury to say, 
 that, on account of certain circumstances, they unanimously recommend the 
 prisoner to mercy. 
 
 The court adjourned till Saturday at 12 o’clock. 
 
 Sept. 6.—The court met at 12 o’clock, agreeable to adjournment. 
 
 After some steps of form, proclamation was made by the crier, and silence 
 being ordered, Mr. Knapp desired Robert Watt to hold up his hand, upon 
 which he read to him shortly the accusation for which he was tried, and 
 said, “ To these charges you pled Not Guilty, and cast yourself upon God 
 and your country; that country has found you Guilty. Have you any rea¬ 
 son to assign why the sentence of the law, which is death, should not pass 
 against you ?”—The same he recited to David Downie. Both prisoners re¬ 
 mained silent. 
 
 The Lord President then addressed them in a most solemn and affecting 
 manner; after which he said, the painful duty which now remains for me 
 to perform, is to pronounce the sentence of the law, which is— 
 
 “You, and each of you, prisoners at the bar, are to be taken from the bar 
 to the place from whence you came, and from thence to be drawn upon a 
 hurdle to the place of execution, there to be hanged by the neck, but not 
 till you are dead; for you are then to be taken down, your heart to be cut 
 out, and your bowels burned before your face, your heads and limbs severed 
 from your bodies, and held up to public view, and your bodies shall remain 
 at the disposal of his Majesty ; and the Lord have mercy on your souls !” 
 After which, the Lord President informed the prisoners, that the Court 
 would issue a precept to the Sheriff, ordering their execution to take place 
 on Wednesday, the 15th day of October next, between the hours of twelve 
 o’clock, noon, aud four o’clock, afternoon. The prisoners were then both 
 carried to the Castle. 
 
 Downie w'as reprieved and banished, but Watt was executed on the 15th 
 October, 1794. The following account of his execution is taken from the 
 newspapers of the day. 
 
 15th October.—Robert Watt, convicted of high treason, was executed at 
 the west end of the Luckenbooths, pursuant to his sentence. About half¬ 
 past one o’clock, the two junior Magistrates, and the Rev. Principal Baird, 
 walked from the Council-Chamber to the Castlehill, preceded by the city 
 constables, and town-officers, and the city guard. When they reached the 
 Water-house (the limits of the burgh), they were met by the procession 
 from the Castle, which was in the following order: Two Chief Constables 
 of the shire of Edinburgh, in black, with batons—two county constables 
 with batons. The Sherifif-Depute and Sheriff-Substitute, dressed in black, 
 with white gloves and white rods. Six county constables, two and two, 
 with batons. The hurdle, painted black (drawn by a white horse), in which 
 
96 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 were seated the executioner, dressed in black, with the axe in his hand, and 
 the criminal drawn backwards, and tied to the hurdle. Six under constables 
 on each side of the hurdle—twelve on the outside of them, and twenty in 
 the rear. Two hundred of the Argyleshire Fencibles keeping off the mob, 
 walking the dead-march from the Castle to the Water-house. 
 
 Having entered the tolbooth, the criminal, soon after, attended by the 
 Sheriff and Magistrates, came out upon the scaffold, where he was assisted 
 in his devotions by Principal Baird. About a quarter before three he 
 ascended the platform; but craving some longer indulgence, he came down, 
 and kneeling, prayed with much fervency for a short time, when he again 
 mounted, and having dropped a handkerchief as the signal, the platform 
 dropped about three o’clock. 
 
 When the body had hung about thirty-two minutes, it was cut down life¬ 
 less, and placed on a table. The executioner then come forward with a large 
 axe, and at tw r o strokes severed the head from the body. The head having 
 been received in a basket prepared for the purpose, was afterwards, in the 
 usual form, held up hy the executioner, who pronounced, “ This is the head 
 of a traitor.” 
 
 This execution was conducted with much regularity, and the procession 
 in particular was highly solemn and impressive. Watt himself exhibited a 
 picture of the most abject dejection. He was wrapt up in a great coat, a 
 red nightcap (which ou the platform he exchanged for a white one), with a 
 round hat, his stockings hanging loose, and his whole appearance wretched 
 in the extreme. 
 
 The crowd on this occasion was slow in collecting, and though numerous 
 at last, scarcely amounted to what had appeared at former remarkable exe¬ 
 cutions. 
 
 Robert Watt, aged about 36, was the natural son of a gentleman of for¬ 
 tune and respectability in the county of Angus, but, as is usual, took the 
 name of his mother. At about 10 years of age he was sent to Perth, where 
 he received a good education ; and at 16, he engaged himself with a lawyer ; 
 but, from some religious scruples, took a disgust at his new employment; 
 and, removing to Edinburgh, was engaged as a clerk in a paper warehouse, 
 and lived for some years without any other complaint than the smallness of 
 his salary. Being desirous of becoming a partner of the business, he, by the 
 influence of some friends, prevailed on his father to advance money for that 
 purpose; and then made proposals to his employers : but his offer was re¬ 
 jected. Having money in possession, he entered into the wine and spirit 
 trade, and for some time had tolerable success. He eventually, however, 
 became bankrupt; and, to better his fortunes, he offered himself to the Home 
 Secretary as spy and informer, but, by the just judgment of God, speedily 
 fell into that snare which he was preparing for others. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 Muir, Gowans, & Co. Printers. 
 


 
 
 

 Trials. 
 
 r -7 
 
 
 
 L9B778 
 
 Vol.20 
 
 
 DATE 
 
 ISSUED TO 
 
 
 
 
 <to