2. In what character did the prifoner appear there? A. As fecretary, I understood.

2. Who were the delegates at that meeting?

A. Being a young member at that time, I had not made my—. felf informed of the names of the delegates, nor the number of the divifions.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. Was this a committee of delegates ? A. This was a meeting of the Divifion, No. 2.

Mr. Bower. Did Mr. Hardy, while you was there, take any part and what? were any reports made by any body?

A. There was brought forward at that time Tom Paine's Addrefs to the French People, and it was voted to be published and delivered to all the divifions.

2. Was any thing more faid or done at that meeting? A. Yes.

2. By whom?

A. I don't know that.

2. What was done next?

A. Tom Paine's Letter to the People of France, already publifhed, to be delivered out, and the Rights and Duties of Man to be continued weekly.

2. Are thefe minutes of refolutions that were passed that night?

A. Yes; the delegates had received letters from the Manchefter and Sheffield Societies, approving of the London Correfponding Society's Address to the French Convention-Reported that two thousand and upwards had figned it at Norwich-The Crown and Anchor approve of it, but would fend one of their own thinking; the more addreffes that were fent to the Convention the better,

2. Who were prefent befides the prisoner?

A. A great many.

2. Who communicated the letter from the Manchester Society?

A. The mode of conducting the divifions is thus: the delegate of the divifion attends the business that has been tranfacted

at

at the Committee of Delegates, and he makes a report of what letters and what refolutions were brought forward and agreed to. 2. That was the mode of doing the business?

A. Yes.

2. Was there any thing more paffed at that meeting?

A. That feems to be all that I have made any memorandum of.

2. Do you recollect any thing more, or do you not?

A. That is all I recollect at that meeting.

2. Who made that report that you have been speaking of at the laft meeting?

A. I cannot charge my recollection who it was, and therefore I would not fpeak. The next meeting was of the divifion, No. 12, at the Crown, in Newgate-ftreet, on the 31st of October.

2. Who was present at that meeting?

A. Mr. Hardy was not prefent.

2. What was done at that meeting?

A. At that meeting the Addrefs to the French Convention was reported by the delegate that was brought forward on the 27th of September at the Unicorn.

2. Did any thing more pass there?

A. I have made a remark of nothing more than that, I fancy there was nothing of any confequence. The next meeting was at the Rainbow, in Fleet-ftreet, on the 2d of November.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. What divifion was that?

A. I have not got the number of the divifion, and I do not immediately recollect it.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. It was not your own divifion;

No. 12?

A. No, number 12 was the divifion I entered into; it was not that, but another divifion; to the beft of my recollection it was No. II.

Mr. Bower. Did any thing material pass at that meeting?

A. The delegate reported, that the Company at Stockport had wrote to Sheffield of their approbation of the different meetings. The Editor of the Sheffield Paper wrote to the delegates, that it would

would be a good plan to fend London delegates down to teach the farmers politics. A letter from a Meeting just formed at Nottingham, addreffed to the delegates-I am inclined to think that letter was not read. The next report was, that there were fix honorary members admitted at the Crown and Anchor.

2. Admitted to the Constitutional Society, do you mean? A. Yes; that is the whole of that meeting. The next, division No. 12, at the Crown, Newgate-street, November the 14th.

Mr. Bower. I will prove by the paper in my hand, that Mr. Hardy was the delegate of divifion, No. 2; because your Lordships will have a good deal of evidence of what passed in the divifion of which he was a delegate.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. You faid you did not know who was the delegate?

A. I will not take upon myself to be certain, but believe I fhould be right if I faid that Mr. Hardy was delegate at that time, for that divifion.

Mr. Lauzun (called again.)

Mr. Bower, Did you find that paper (fhewing it to the witnefs) among Mr. Hardy's papers?

A. I found it in Mr. Hardy's house,

Alexander Grant, I believe that is Mr. Hardy's hand-writing, (It was read.)

"London Correfponding Society, at the Unicorn, Covent"Garden, Monday, October 1, 1792.

"Refolved, That Thomas Hardy, divifion No. II. be ap"pointed our delegate to the standing committee of the several "divifions, and to continue in office for three months,

(Signed) "ALEXANDER LOWRIE, Chairman."

Indorfed, "Divifion No. II. delegate,

"Thomas Hardy.

"Number of members, 120,"

Mr. Bower, to Lynam. Whether the perfon who made the report at that meeting, on the 29th of October, at the Unicorn, was the delegate?

A, Surely

A. Surely fo

Mr. Bower. Now go on from where you left off.

Lynam. The next meeting was at the Crown, in Newgatestreet, on the 14th of November.

2. What paffed at that meeting?

A. Nothing material I fancy; I have no minute of any thing. 2. Pals on to the next.

A. I return back again here to a meeting at the Unicorn, November 12th.

2. Of divifion No. 2.?

A. Yes.

2. What paffed at that divifion?

A. There was read a letter, written by Mr. Barlow-his Addrefs to the Convention, very inflammatory, and there were very loud plaudits at the reading.

2. Who made the report that night?

A. The delegate reports, the report is always made by the delegate.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. Was that a letter addreffed to the divifion, or communicated by the delegate as coming from the committee of delegates ?

4. As coming from the committee of delegates, and it was Barlow's letter addreffed to the Convention of France. The next is a report by fomebody to the meeting, that the London Corresponding Society in London, in number, was fix thousand; that the divifion, No. 14, meeting at Spitalfields, was increased, and would foon be equal in number to all the rest of the divifions of the fociety. The first meeting of the London Corresponding Society, I was informed, was at Mr. Robert Boyd's, No. 11, Exeter-ftreet, and that he had the first resolutions of the fociety; I was shewn one, dated the 2d of April, 1792:-A letter from Major Johnson, of Edinburgh; he does not approve of the Addrefs to the Convention, but was framing a paper to inform the public on politics, and would send one foon to the society. 2. How was that letter conveyed; was that to the division, No. 2. at the Unicorn?

A. Yes; the London Correfponding Society's Addrefs reVOL. III.

C

ceived

ceived by the National Convention, and ordered to be published and fent to the eighty-three departments.

2. Is that a report of what had been done in France?

A. A report by the delegate, of their Address to the National Convention of France being received, and that by the Convention it was ordered to be published and fent to the eighty-three departments in France:-The fociety at Sheffield fent up their Address to the Convention to the delegates, who had forwarded it; that is the whole at that meeting.

2. Had fent up their Address to the committee of delegates ? A. Yes, and they had forwarded it to the Convention.

2. Is that the whole of the minutes you have of what passed at that time?

A. It is. The next meeting was at the Crown, in Newgateftreet, No. 21, divifion No. 12: It was at this divifion mentioned, that there was a talk of a Congress to be held in Scotland. The next thing that was done, was to read Judge Afhhurft's Charge to the Grand Jury. Reported, that a fociety at Norwich wanted to know, if we meant to come into the Duke of Richmond's plan, or to rip up Monarchy; they fufpected that this was to draw them into fome unguarded expreffions, and declined answering. Reported, that the delegates had wrote to the fociety at Sheffield, and at Edinburgh. The next is, the branching off of the new divifion, from No. 12; the branching off was on the 21ft of November, and this new division took No. 23, and met at the Ship in Moorfields, on the 27th of November.

2. Were you a delegate of the new divifion, or did you continue in the old one?

A. I was chofen delegate of this first meeting on the 27th of November; it was recommended to inform the public that we were not levellers, and it was recommended to avoid riot or refiftance to the laws.

Lord Chief Justice Eyre. Were the reasons for that recommendation stated?

A. There was, at the time, but I did not make any memorandum of it, but it was on account of the magiftrates interfering with their meetings, and fome of the publicans had been threat

ened