Rain an Su4tite.

TRIAL OF DENNIS COLLINS. • •

The trial of 'Dennis Collins took place on Wednesday, at Reading. A trial for high treason is. happily' rare enough in this land of peaceful rule, to be interesting; and therefore we owe no apology for giving to this a larger-space in our columns than the investigation of ATI 4mary atrocity would have had a right to claim. The Times reporter retoatks, that Collins, when produced' befote the

Court, had a pale and thin appearance, although he had not been ill. We are not surprised at this. Confuieinent, if sufficiently long, with a bread and water diet, is not perhaps very injurious to health, but it is singularly unfavourable to the complexion. The indictment contained five counts,—the first charged the prisoner with compassing and intending the death of the King, by throwing 'at 'him the stone, &c. ; the next charged him with intending to do his Ma- jesty bodily harm tending to his death ; the other counts varied the of- fence, stating it differently ; the fifth charged him with compassing and devising bodily harm to the King, tending to maim or wound his Majesty. Collins listened with all his ears to the detail of his crime, but seemed sorely puzzled at the legal jargon in which the lawyers had wrapped it up.

The Petit Jury was then sworn, after two or three unimportant challenges from Collins's attorney, Mr. Frankum, of Reading. The names of the gentlemen sworn were—William Bosley, John Munday, William Wale, Thomas Snook, James Little, Joseph Thatcher, John Smith, Noah Hughes, John Wilkins, Joseph -Lewis, Charles Hedges, William Bell. The Attorney-General stated the law of the case— The compassing and intending the th.ath of the King, or the doing him any bodily harm, with intent to kill, or maim, or wound him, was one of the highest crimes in the law, and was punishable by a forfeiture of life. There had been two acts passed on this subject,--one in 1796, and the other in 1799 or 1809, by which any overt act done which could show an intention to compass the death was made high treason ; the second of these acts made it equally treason to ilo any act which could show an intention of doing the King any bodily harm, tending to maim him.

He then discussed the more difficult question of the prisoner's in- tention— It would he proved that the blow which his Majesty had received was of suf- ficient force to make him reel back, and that it left a considerable mark, which remained for so:4e time. It would also be proved, that the act was deliberately done by the prisoner ; that he was aware of the consequence of his act; and that he said it was as well to be hanged or shot as to starve in the streets. All these were important matters to shiny the prisoner's intention. The motive would also be proved in the prisoner's own admission,—that he had sent a petition to his Majesty to have his pension restored ; but that not having had the desired effect, he determined to make the attack on him. That his Majesty's life was in danger, no reasonable doubt could be entertained, for it was probable that had the hat not intervened, the blow which his Majesty had received might have been fatal. It would be for the Jury to say whether, all the -circumstances of the case being considered, there was evidence to show that the prisoner did in- tend and compass the death of the King ; if they thought there was, they would bring in a verdict to that effect, and the prisoner would then be 'declared guilty of the highest crime known to the law. But if the Jury should not be of opinion that there was evidence to bear out the charge of intending or compass- ing the death of the King, the next consideration would be, whether there was evidence to show an intention with a view to maim or wound. For-this pur- pose, they would look attentively at the circumstances to which he 'had already called their attention, and which would be more fully detailed in the evidence. If they should be of opinion that be did make the assault with intent to wound so as to maim or injure, that would be sufficient to bring the act within the 39th and 40th of George III. It was a common maxim, that if a person does certain acts calculated to produce certain effects, the doing of those acts must be taken as evidence that he intended to produce those effects. Now the thrcriving of two such stones as would be produced to the Jury was calculated to cause a most serious injury to his Majesty; for no person could deny that if the stone which struck his Majesty's hat had hit him in the eye, it might have deprived him of the use of it, and thus maimed him. It was not necessary that it should have maimed or severely injured ; the fact of the deliberate throwing of such a missile must be taken as evidence of the intention to produce the effect-which it was calculated to produce. This, however, would be for the Jury to decide upon, considering the whole of the evidence.

The Attorney-General alluded to the line of defence to be taken up— He was aware that the prisoner had lost a leg, and had received a wound in the head ; but there was he believed, no good ground for supposing that those

wounds had disturbed the prisoner's reason. It would be proved that he was labouring under excitement, and that he was also under the influence of liquor; but the fact would be put beyond doubt, that he deliberately (according to his own admission) picked up the stones with the intention to throw them. If the

Jury should be of opinion that there was Le proof of intention to destroy i his Ma- jesty's life, then, he repeated, they would consider how far it was his intention to maim or wound ; and if the circumstances should be, as he believed the Jury

would hear them, he thought that no man could entertain any doubt, that the deliberate throwing of a stone by which an eye might be lost, was such an aet as must be construed into an intention to maim or wound. He would not ad-

vert to the horror which would have overspread the country had the stone taken effect fatally, or even so as to maim the sacred person of the Sovereign. 'With these the Jury had now nothing to do, and he would not urge them on their notice.

Captain Smith was the first witness called. His testimony differed in no respect from that which he gave before the committing 31agis- stmtes— Cross-examined by Mr. Swahey—" The-appearance of the prisoner is much changed since the time -I saw him. He is much thinner, and appears to have suffered since from his confinement. He was then healthy and ruddy in his appearance, and did not seem as if suffering from want. He was flushed in the face, but was not intoxicated. He said he was so unfortunate that he did not care whether he was hung or shot. This was not said in a tone of despair."

Mr. Benjamin Turner corroborated Captain Smith's statement. He described the stone to be as big as a good-sized potato. It was produced in Court; and is said to have weighed about four ounces, which would make it of the size of a very small potato.

Colonel Wood gave evidence to the assault—.

Examined by Mr. Shepherd—"I was in the Royal Stand, immediately on the left of his Majesty, on the day in question. I heard the stone strike him. He put up both his hands, as if to catch his hat, which was driven to the back of his head. His•Majesty made some exclamation, which I could not hear. He then went back in the stand, got a chair, and appeared pale and faint. He asked 'for a little wine and water. He took ta his hat, and I saw a mark on his head, as if from a blow of some kind. It was a red mark. His Majesty, after a moment, took his hat and went to the window again. I saw his Ma- jesty's head soon after, and there was a mark on it about file size of the head of a dessei t.spoon,. but the next day it had gone. As soon as his Majesty returned-A° the window, I went to where the prisoner was. I asked him several questions as to the cause of the attack. He said he had been an in-pensioner of Green-

wich Hospital, but was turned out of it in December last for some quarrel with a wardsman. He seemed under a strong sense of having been wronged and in- jured. He said he had been beggiog the whole of that day, and had got but one halfpenny. As he had the appearance of having been drinking, I asked him where he got the money to pay for it ; and he said that he had got a shilling from a gentleman the day before, which he had spent in beer. He said he did not care what became of him—that he would as soon be shot or hanged as be starving in the streets. At the time he mentioned, having spent the shilling in beer, he pointed to his head. To me he appeared no otherwise affected than as a man who had been drinking until he was half tipsy would be. He acknow- ledged that he had thrown two stones at his Majesty, and that he had picked up three, with the intention of throwing them all at the King. When he pointed to his head, I understood by it that he had received a wound there. He did not appear to me to be insane. He seemed to know perfectly well what be was doing ; but he evidently laboured under a strong feeling that he had been injured. There was no affectation of any concealment about him. He admitted, at once, that he threw the stones, and had picked them up for that purpose." Cross-examined--" I am a Colonel of the East Middlesex Militia. I never saw or visited any of the men of my regiment when in a state of lunacy. The Prisoner appeared in a state of considerable excitement. He seemed to have been drinking. He was not intoxicated, but what people call half drunk. He had a few old crusts and other bits of broken victuals in his greasy cap. He certainly seemed in a state of great destitution. He said he had been begging all day, and had got but one halfpenny, and that seemed to me to be in his opinion one of the grievances of which he had a right to complain. But he seemed to labour under a general impression that he bad been ill-used and could not get redress. I should suppose that a man who hail received a wound in the head would be more susceptible of excitement than a man who had not. The prisoner seemed

under excitement, but such as I have stated. The hack of the stand where he said he had picked up the stones was not far from where the prisoner stood ; but, in order to reach it, the prisoner would have to go round a considerable way, as the booths would prevent his getting directly at the place where the stones were. The broken victuals which I saw in the prisoner's cap were such as a man in

want would eat." - By Mr. Swabey—" Were they such as no man would eat who could get better ?"

[ Some of the Yahoos in Court—they were chiefly of the higher ranks—laughed at this question. Why ? Mr. Swabey's meaning was obvious enough ; though the gallant Colonel of the East Middlesex Militia does not seem to have caught it.]

Colonel Wood—" Every man, I presume, would prefer better; but they were such as, if I were in want, I would eat. They had the usual appearance of broken victuals; there were a few brown crusts. The prisoner certainly had all the appearance of a man in a state of great destitution."

1 The stone that struck the King was produced by Earl Brownlow ; and another, that dropped from Cie prisoner in the struggle Of his cap- ture, was produced by Gardener, the officer that arrested him. Gar- dener also spoke to Collins's account of his dismissal from Greenwich, and his unsuccessful attempt to get reinstated there, and the extreme distress to which he had been reduced in consequence. The confession -which embodied these facts was given in by the clerk of the Commit- ting Magistrates. It fully admitted the throwing of the stone at the King, while it expressed great sorrow for the consequence.

k Mr. Swabey's defence was confined to the plea of insanity; which he endeavoured to establish in a very logical manner-

" If," argued the learned gentleman, "the man who performed good acts was considered a good man, and the man who performed bad acts a bad one he was sure that it would not he denied that the man who performed mad acts should be regarded as a madman."

The difficulty in such cases is to prove the quality of the act ; and in this Mr. Swabey was not quite so successful as in laying down his general definition of a madman— It hail probably happened to several of the gentlemen of the Jury, at one period or another, to have performed the duty of jurors on coroners' inquest in cases of suicide ; and if so, they must be aware that it frequently occurred that the ouly evidence that could be produced, and which was sufficient to satisfy the jury that the unfortunate individual who had taken away his own life laboured at the time under the effects of insanity, consisted in the simple act of his destroying himself. The jury in such cases caine to that conclusion, on the ground that no man who was of sane mind would destroy himself; but were there no other modes of destroying one's-self, except by the actually taking away of one's own life by the infliction of personal violence ? What were they to think of the in- fatuated folly of an unfortunate being like the prisoner at the bar, who attacks the King of England at a moment when he was surrounded by his Court, and by thousands of his loyal subjects who would be willing td spill their blood in ins defence? What were they to think of an individual who made such an at- tack openly, and in such a way that it was impossible for him to escape obser- vation, or to avoid apprehension ? Did not such a man resort to as effectual a way of destroying himself as if be had put the halter about his neck? And could it be possible, that while doing so he was in the possession of his reason and senses ? What this man had done, he had done openly, in the face of day, in the presence of thousands, and without the hope, wish, or even the expectation of es- cape. This was not an attempt at assassination—it was an act of folly, for which it was impossible to assign any motive that could be considered as influ- encing a rational mind. The Jury would perceive from the evidence, that at -the time this act was committed, the unfortunate prisoner was ground to the soil of poverty, Oppressed with the severest penury, and suffering under the com- bined effects of hunger and despair. It was in such a state of mind as that that the unfortunate and wretched man committed this act.

Mr. Swabey enlarged on this point_

Rehad not played the assassin's part—he called for no bowl—he clutched no dagger, to take away the life of his Majesty ; but, at a moment when hunger and-the effects of despair had deprived him of his reason, and when misery had rendered him weary of existence, he proceeded to the commission of an act, the folly and absurdity of which was unprecedented in this country. It was im- passible that a man in a sane state of mind could have thrown a stone, as he had done, at his Majesty : but had hunger no pang? had despair no object ? Had this unfortunate and wretched inan no claims on their compassion? He did not assert that the prisoner was mad now ; but he would maintain, that when he committed this act he was not in the possession of his sound senses.

He concluded with a somewhat singular appeal, the only effect of which, it appears to us, must have been to persuade the Jury to find his client guilty— ?ft' He believed that he conferred no favour on the prisoner in standing there and pleading for bi life; for if the Jury should acquit him where was he to bend his steps? Tleir doing so would only have the effect Of turning the unfortu- nate prisoner ,nit into the streets, a prey to that pestilence "which walketh abroad at noonday," and with which Almighty God, no doubt for good and sufficient reasons, at present afflicted this land. He could not make • any sapped to their passions ni behalf of his unfortunate client, who stood friendless and alone here, for England was not his native country. There was no wife with anxious hopes expecting to greet him to his home—for -home he had none; and if they acquitted him, he would go forth into the world with nought to cheer and nought to console him. The homeless child of want, he had suffered from the pangs of honer, and his doing so had most probably led to his being placed at that bar. He would not attempt to conceal or to extenuate the follies of the unfortunate man ; but still, if the Jury should acquit him, they would send him forth a miserable solitary outcast, with no home to go to for shelter—no do- mestic hearth to welcome him : cheerless and desolate he would wander abroad, without any one to rejoice at his delivery,

" No children run to lisp their sire's return, And climb Iris knee the envied kiss to share."

Mr. Carrington, after some dispute, was allowed to address the Jury

on a more homely subject than that which had been so eloquently dwelt on by the sympathetic Mr. Swabey—namely, the application of the law to the case of the prisoner. The reporters, however, accord- ing to their invariable custom, slip over Mr. Carrington's argument, with the general notice in such cases provided—" The learned gentle- man entered upon a review of the acts of Parliament on the subject." We are therefore unable to give his argument ; though its tenor may be guessed from the introductory remark, that the size of the stone altogether contradicted the assertion in the fifth count, that any maim- ing or wounding of his Majesty was intended by its projection.

When his counsel had finished, Collins himself being called on for his defence, addressed the Court and Jury with great rapidity for a few minutes. He said— •

He had served their Majesties George the Third and Fourth as a warrant- officer. After he was discharged from the Navy in May was a twelvemonth, he was admitted as an in-pensioner in Greenwich Hospital, where he remained till the 16th of December last. He had been given to understand while at Greenwich Hospital, that Sir R. Keats owed him a grudge for something which he had mentioned in conversation. He had afterwards some dispute with the mate of the ward ; and Sir R. Keats wrote up to the Admiralty on the subject; the result of which was, that a letter came down for his discharge. He peti- tioned the Lords of the Admiralty, but without effect; and afterwards, on the 19th of April, he petitioned his Majesty ; he went to the Palace and inquired at his Majesty's private door. He went again on the 27th of April, and was told that if he would go to the Admiralty hewould find a letter that had been left there for him. He went across the Park, and asked the porter at the Admiralty what answer the King had sent. The porter brought down three letters, and told him by word of mouth that the King could do nothing for him. He took the letter to the Admiral Duncan public-house, where there were many who knew the handwriting of Barrow. The letter from his Majesty was part in print and part in writing ; and the persons there who knew the handwriting of Barrow, were willing to swear that he had forged the letter sent to him to the bar of the Admiral Duncan public-house, and that his Majesty knew nothing whatever about it. He went on to say, that on the 13th, 14th, and 15th of June, he had not broken his fast. On the Sunday morning, he went up to Sir Charles Rowley's house—Sir Charles Rowley, whose father was an admiral. Sir Charles began to swear at him, and said, - " D—n your eyes, what do you want here ?" and he kicked him, and told him to be off. In conclusion, the prisoner said, that after having served his country for years, he was without house, home, or victuals ; that he was extremely sorry for what he had done, and that lie hoped his Majesty would have mercy upon him.

The Attorney-General, in replying, commented on the absence of all attempt at proving the alleged insanity of the prisoner.

Mr. Justice Bosanquet, in summing up, concurred in the view taken of the law by the Attorney-General. The Jury then retired; and, after an absence of about ten minutes, they returned to court ; when the Foreman said, "We find the prisoner Guilty of throwing a stone, with an intent to do his Majesty some bodily harm." Mr. Justice Bosanquet--" Gentlemen, do you mean to say, as it is charged in the indictment, to do his Majesty bodily harm, tending to maim and wound his Majesty ?' " The Foreman--" We do not find the prisoner guilty of intending to destroy his Majesty; but on the fifth count—of intending to do his Majesty bodily harm." Mr. Justice Bosanquet--" Then, gentlemen, you find the prisoner guilty on the fifth count—of compassing and devising bodily harm to the King, tending to maim and wound his Majesty?" The Foreman replied in the affirmative, and the verdict was so recorded.

The Judge then proceeded to pass sentence ; which, as there is not the most distant probability of its being executed, we can only regard as a piece of idle mockery, tending to bring into contempt a very so- lemn act of administrative law. He said-

" Prisoner at the bar, you have been convicted, after a careful consideration of your case, of the crime of high treason,—namely, of compassing and intend- ing bodily harm to the King, tending to maim and wound his Majesty; and in lifting up your hand against your Sovereign, you cast aside that bond of alle- giance which binds the Sovereign to protect his subjects, and the subjects to obey the Sovereign. In doing so, you have subjected yourself to the extreme sentence of the law ; and it is not for me or my learned brother to offer you any prospect that a remission of that sentence is to be procured. You have stated that you are sorry for the offence you have committed. If you really feel con- trition for your offence, it is not to us you must address a representation on that subject, but to that quarter from which alone mercy can be extended to you in this world. We cannot interfere upon that subject; and I would have you under- stand, that in what I have said to you, I do not by any means mean to hold out to you the expectation that such a representation on your part will be attended with success. That would be beyond the bounds of my duty. I have only mentioned that channel through which mercy, if any mercy is to be extended to you, can come. My duty now is to pronounce upon you the sentence of the law; and I do earnestly exhort you to reflect on the confusion which must have taken place if your attempt had succeeded, and to prepare yourself for that fate which may possibly soon await you. The sentence of the law upon you is, that you be taken to the place from whence you came, and from thence that you be drawn on a hurdle to the place of execution, and that you be there hanged until you are dead, and afterwards that your head be severed from your body, and that your body be divided into four parts to be disposed of as his Majesty shall think fit. And may God 'Almighty soften your heart and bring you to repent- ance."

Collins heard the sentence without any change of manner or appear- ance ; and bowing tOthe Judge, he was removed from the bar.