TRIAL OF JOHN HORNE TOOKE FOR HIGH TREASON Major Cartwright, Cross-examined by Mr. Attorney General. 2. As far as appears by the books of the Conftitutional So 2: ciety, the last time you were prefent, in that Society, was the 25th of May, 1792? A. It must have been somewhere about that time. 2. Have you fcen Mr. Tooke fince the 25th of May, 1792? A. I think it is highly probable that I attended at the Society till about the time that I left town, fince which I have not seen Mr. Tooke, till I faw him in this Court. 2. Of course you can know nothing of the proceedings of the Conftitutional Society fince May, 1792, except as you may have seen them in print, or otherwife-You have not been prefent at any that passed? A. Certainly not. 2. You were no party to the addreffes to France? YORK A. I was a party to one addrefs; I cannot recollect the date but I was present at that Society, to the best of my remunt brance, when a letter, or an addrefs, or something of that, kind, was sent to the Society called the Friends of the Conftitution," or Friends of Freedom, at Paris, known by the name of Ji̟- ⠀⠀ cobins That must have been before the 25th of May, 1792, as that was the last day that you were in the Society? A. To be fure. 2. With respect to any future addreffes to France, you were no party to them?` A. Certainly not. 2. You were no party to any correfpondence with Norwich, or any other place, about a Convention to be held, either in Scotland or England? A. While I attended the Society I do not remember that the fubject of a Convention was agitated. 2. You were, of course, not a member of the Society at a time when a letter was written to the Editor of the Patriot, at Sheffield, in which it is stated that the vipers, Monarchy and Aristocracy, are writhing under the grasp of infant Freedom, and, in which the Society fays, may peace, happiness, and fuccefs attend its efforts? A. I do not remember any correfpondence of that kind. 2. Do you remember any converfation previous to the 25th of May, 1792, (what paffed afterwards you do not know) in which Monarchy and Ariftocracy were spoken of by any body as vipers writhing under the grasp of infant Freedom? A. I do not remember fuch converfation. 2. If any member of your Society had faid, in a letter to a country Society, that the vipers, Monarchy and Aristocracy, were writhing under the grasp of infant Freedom, and expreffed his hopes that success thould attend those efforts, you would have been vastly furprised, should not you? A. It would have depended upon the particular circumstances to which the letter applied. 2: Do you mean to fay that if it had been convenient to Wilte etter with fuch expreffions, that it would not have surprifed you if fuch a letter had been written? A. If it had applied to any Government where Monarchy and Ariftocracy had been vipers to Freedom, I should have thought it well applied. 2. Then, 2. Then, I afk you, if it had been applied to the English Monarchy, by any member of your Society, after May, 1792, fhould not you have been surprised? A. That is a general question, to which it is very difficult to give a clear and fatisfactory answer; becaufe I conceive that the meaning and the force of expreffions depend upon the context of the compositions in which they are introduced. 2. I quite agree with you in that, there is no doubt about it that it does-You have ftated what, indeed, all the world knew, that you were the father, at leaft you are complimented with the title of the father, of the Society for Conftitutional Information-You have likewise stated, if I understand you, that you were, and ftill are, a member of the Society of the Friends of the People? A. Yes. 2. You have alfo faid that the letter which the Society for Conftitutional Information fent the Friends of the People, was å folemn admonition to them for the purposes you have mentioned? A. Yes. 2. I take for granted that you could not poffibly doubt but that that letter would be very well understood to be fuch by those to whom it was addressed-Have you seen the letter? A. In fo large a Society, as that of the Friends of the People, I thought that it was very likely that there might be dif ferent opinions formed; because, in large Societies, that which may appear to one man to be good and wholesome advice, may, to others, appear offenfive, because every man has not sense to take advice. 2. You are a member, you fay, of the Friends of the People? A. Yes. 2. You may recollect my Lord John Ruffel's writing an anfwer to that letter? A. I do. 2. You may recollect also that, at a general meeting of the Friends of the People,, Lord John Ruffel's answer was approved by the Society of the Friends of the People? A. I think I do remember it. 2 Poffibly you may recollect then that the general body of the Friends of the People,, of whom you were one, stated to the Society for Conftitutional Information, that they would have no further correfpondence with the Society for Conftitutional Information, because they looked upon the refolutions and proceedings in that letter of the Society, as inimical to the principles upon which they propofed to inform and enlighten the people? Major Cartwright. There is fo much contained in the question,. that I have not a clear recollection of it.. Mr. Attorney General. You may recollect then that the general body of the Friends of the People declined having any more intercourse with the Conftitutional Society-do you recollect that? A. Yes.. 2. Do you recollect that the Friends of the People looked upon the refolutions and proceedings in that letter as inimical to the principles upon which they propofed to inform and to enlighten the people? A. I believe there was to that effect; I cannot recollect the words, but I remember when it was agitated in the Society of the Friends of the People, whether this letter fhould be fent; I think it was upon that question that there was fo much di+ vifion of opinion in the Society of the Friends of the People that the question was carried by only one fingle vote, as L recollect. 2. The question: about this letter was. carried only by one fingle cafting vote? A. I am not sure what was the precife queftion relative to that letter; I think it was whether fuch an anfwer fhould, or fhould not, be fent.. 2. You likewife, perhaps, may recollect that in that letter Lord John Ruffel fays We profefs not to entertain a wish ❝ that |
