THE SPY SYSTEM : RICHMOND versus MARSHALL AND MII.RS.

The Court of Exchequer was occupied the whole of Saturday and Monday last with the trial of an action of libel, brought by Alexander Baillie Richmond, the individual for many years known in Scotland by the title of " Richmond the Spy,"against Messrs. Simpkin and M ar- shall, the London publishers of Tait's Edinburgh Magazine. The plaintiff maintained that his character had been seriously damaged by some articles in the Magazine, entitled " The Spy System, or, 'tis Thirteen Years since." The articles were in the form of a review of a work published at Glasgow upwards of two years ago, in fifteen num- bers, called " Exposure of the Spy System—Exploits of Richmond," well known to be written by Mr. Peter Mackenzie. The articles in Tait were full of passages alleged by Richmond to be libelloes misre- presentations of his proceedings in Glasgow in 1816 and 1817, and of

the nature of his connexion with Mr. Kirkman Finlay. These pas. sages were read by Richmond in the course of a very long address to the Jury (for be pleaded his own cause, with Some occasional assist- ance from Mr. Steer, a barrister). In particular, it was said that Richmond had been connected with a combination of workmen in Glas- gow to raise wages ; that he had left the country by the advice of Messrs. Jeffrey and Cockburn, his counsel, and been outlawed ; that he afterwards returned, pleaded guilty to the charge, and was sentenced to one month's imprisonment ; that he was introduced by a letter from Mr. Jeffrey to Mr. Kirkman Finlay, who was then " choke full" of a great State secret, communicated to him by Lord Sidmoath, viz. that a plot existed against the Government ; that a meeting between Richmond and Finlay took place in December 1816 ; and that Rich- mond was employed by Mr. Finlay to discover and give information re. specting the plot. It was then stated that Richmond was just the man for Finlay's purpose ; that he was a " social Burker ;" that, not find- ing a plot ready made, he set himself at work to get up one, and suc- ceeded ; and that no proof could be obtained by the Crown lawyers of the existence of any oath or bond of combination among the conspi. rators, prior to Richmond's first interview with Finlay. The " base treachery and utter infamy of Richmond," in suffering himself to be hired as a spy, and inveigling the weavers:into a plot, and then allow- ing them to be brought to trial, when a conviction would have cost them their lives, was dwelt upon in strong language ; though the pri- soners, Richmond's intended victims, escaped, in consequence of the want of other proof of the conspiracy, and the confession of Camp- bell, one of their own number and the principal witness, upon whom the plot-people relied as " King's evidence," that he had been hired to give evidence against them. Richmond was also designated as the " villain spy," who had instigated the weavers to violent plans to over- turn the Government by false allegations of support, in money and arms, from gentlemen of high standing in the country. A letter from Mr. Tait, in reply to one addressed to him by Mr. Kirkman Finlay, in reference to the articles in the Magazine, was also complained of as libellous. In this letter was the following passage— "It was not we who drove Richmond to execration and contempt ; but it was his own exasperation at the fact of his annuity having been stopped at the Ilona: Office, and that, therefore, having extorted all he could from one party, be would no% cridemour to extort money by making the public acquainted with all that with which lie was acquainted. Why did not the patriotic spy conic forward at the time when the Tory lawyers were doing all they could, to hang and transport the poor men, and endeawur to save them ? "

From what we have stated, the nature of the libel may be under- stood. It was spread over four Numbers of the Magazine ; and long extracts, which we have no room for, were read by the plaintiff. Rich- mond endeavoured to show that his conduct had been cruelly misrepre- sented; that he had used his influence among the weavers to discover the plot which Mr. Finlay believed in, in order to put a stop to it, and save the poor men. He averred, that it was a special engagement with him, that those of the men he might inform against, whom he should use as tools, or with whom he should come into personal contact, shou:d be spared ; and that they would not in fact have been tried, if Mr. Finlay and Mr. Reddie, the parties who employed him, had not broken faith, and caused the men to be arrested without his knowledge. He asserted that he had been covered with unmerited obloquy, and had suffered serious damage in his pecuniary circumstances ; which he laboured to prove had been much better than they were represented ni the Magazine. He denied that he had ever asked money from Messrs. Cockburn and Jeffrey, though he bad received some from them. fie denied, in short, that his circumstances had been such as to render him likely from his necessities to have been employed as a spy. It is to be observed, however, that he admitted several of the facts charged against him ; and only endeavoured to give a different colour to them, and to make it appear that he was actuated in all that he did by humane and kind motives. No evidence was produced in confirmation of this. On the other hand, Mr. Sergeant Talfourd, for the defendants, re- marked with great force upon the action having been brought against the London publishers, instead of against the author of the "Exposure of the Spy System," or against Mr. Tait himself in Edinburgh; where the plaintiff was known, and where Lord Jeffrey and Lord Cock- burn, to whom Richmond referred, in vindication of his character, might have been brought into Court to give evidence. Mr. Talfourd proceeded to state, that the facts in the alleged libel were nearly all drawn from a book published by Richmond himself in 182.5, entitled

"A Narrative of the Condition of the Manufacturing Population, and the proceedings of Government which led to the State Trials in Scotland for Ad- ministering Unlawful Oaths and the Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act in 1817. With a detailed account of the System of Espionage adopted at that period in Glasgow and its Neighbourhood; by Alexander B. Richmond, Lon- don, 1825."

From this publication it appeared, that Richmond had failed in pro- curing money, to the extent of his demands, from the Ministry; though, besides what he calls "annuity," which he had received for

years, he had obtained "a few hundreds" as compensation, or "indemnity" for the losses which he professed to have sustained. This work

Mr. Talfourd pronounced to be " an extraordinary instance of the workings and self-deceptions of the human mind."

Enigmatical in some respects, it was made clear by this work, that the plain- tiff had been in vain importuning Government to give him compensation for his services; that he complained bitterly of Lord Sidmouth, because his Lordship had enumerated him with Qualm, Oliver, and Edwards, and had offered him, like them, an asylum in a distant country. It was clear that he pressed for in- demnity, although he said that he spurned the offer of reward, and cited the cele- brated lines of Spencer on the suitor's misery ; and it was clear that, after a long solicitation, he determined to be revenged on his employers for the neglect he suffered; and with that resolution he came forward in 1t325, voluntarily and unabashed, as the historian of his own course.

It was admitted that Richmond did not appear to thirst for the blood of his victims; and that, although he yielded to infamy under a strong temptation, he might have had some remorse for the misery which his treachery had occasioned. But he certainly had no claim for damages on account of any injury which his chamcter bad sustained by the bring- ing forward of facts, which be had himself given to the world in the first place, and which could be proved by witnesses to be substantially true.

The two speeches for the plaintiff and defendants, and the mere for- malities of the case, occupied the Court till half-past five on Saturday. The witnesses for the defendant's plea of justification were examined on Monday. The first was William M'Kimmie, a weaver, residing at Bridgetown, near Glasgow. He stated that he knew Richmond in 1811, at the time of the combination of weavers; and that he afterwards saw him in December 1816, though he could not "condescend upon the day." Richmond told him, that in England means were taking to orga- nize an army to overthrow the Government ; that men of great wealth and influence were at the head of the undertaking, and that it would be well to do something to aid it in Scotland. M‘Kimmie refused to have any thing to do with it ; and told Richmond, he doubted the truth of his story. Richmond offered to produce letters ; but M'Kimmie would not allow him to read them. Being cross-examined by Richmond, he said that his opinions in 1816 were known to be much opposed to violent measures. "I considered it ridiculous in the extreme for you to make me such a proposition (as that of joining in a conspirney), and I won- dered at your conduct : I did not think you so ignorant a man."

Stuart Buchanan, a weaver, knew Richmond in 1816. His family were in a state of starvation. He made the same proposal to him as to 111‘Kimmie, and used the same arguments. In the beginning of January 1817, Richmond gave him a slip of paper, on which the form of an oath was inscribed. This oath he took : and Richmond said, "as soon as a competent number of persons are engagal, we will bring these villains (the Government) to their senses." Buchanan afterwards regretted what he had done ; and told Richmond he feared there were " some Windsors among them,—alluding to the man who sold Colonel Despard." Richmond, to.prove his sincerity, brought to Buchanan, ball-cartridges, flints, and a turnscrew ; and told him that the point of the bayonet only would overturn the Government, and effect the people's deliverance. Richmond cross-examined this witness, and asked him if he ever saw him before Saturday last ? The reply was—" I have seen you, before Saturday, a hundred times. I have often conversed with your wife ; and a poor, broken.hearted woman she was." The way to com- municate with those who had taken the oath, was " to draw the hand over the face, and grip the left car." When reexamined, Buchanan said that Richmond had new furniture after the people were arrested.

Robert Craig, a weaver, swore that Richmond had told him he was a damned fool for attending public meetings ; and that something more efficient must be done. He afterwards urged him to join the conspiracy ; and mentioned, among others, the mimes of Messrs. Jef- frey, Cockburn, and Kirkman Finlay, as being ready to supply the means of carrying it on. Witness replied that he would think about it ; but [never afterwards communicated with Richmond. In February 1817, lie saw the walls of Glasgow chalked, " Beware of Richmond the Spy."

On cross-examination, this witness said that he earned six or seven shillings a week. In 1817, there was much distress, and many public meetings and petitions for annual Parliaments and universal suffrage. " I was (he said) friendly to that. My sentiments were well known. I had been a delegate. I was well known in my district. I had pro- posed resolutions for petitioning both Houses of Parliament for reform. I never would countenance any thing that was secret in the expression of public opinion ; and what you recommended to me was a secret com- bination. I did not require to be urged on by you to do any good ; but I did require, for any secret machination or bad purpose, to be urged on by you or some other demon. I was taken into custody, I believe by mistake, and kept four weeks. I speak distinctly to your having men- tioned Mr. Jeffrey and Mr. Cockburn in juxtaposition with Mr. Kirk- man Finlay." Mr. David Prentice, editor of the Glasgow Chronicle, knew Rich- mond; who was introduced to him in 1816, by Mr. Owen of Lanark. "In February 1817, I saw Beware of Richmond the Spy' chalked on the walls. I met Richmond on the street, and asked him what was that. He said, ' I don't know.' I asked him, was it true ? He said No.' I said, Go and make an affidavit that it is not true, and I will put it in my paper; or you will be spit upon and kicked wherever you go.' He said be would do so; but I have not seen him since until last Saturday." .William Wotherspoon, a shopkeeper in Glasgow, was the next witness. He had been active in the public meetings in Glasgow in 1816,', and knew Richmond ; who told him that meetings were all damned humbug—mere procrastination ; and asked what good be ex- pected from petitioning? Nothing but .physical force would effect a regeneration.

'I told him, whatever his opinions might be, these were not my sentiments; for I considered persuasion as more influential, and capable of effecting more good than physical force; and I did not expect he would have stated such prin- ciples; and I advised him never to do it again ; after which I rose and left his company. I was a weaver at this time. In • previous conversation, Richmond told me, that if he was doomed to work at the loom all his life, he would cut his throat or hang himself. I saw him the next day after the trial of M'Kinlay, in July 1817, on the shore at Leith. Strang, III'Millan, arid an Edinburgh man whose name I do not know were with me. I pointed out Richmond to them. We went up so him aad addressed him. I said, I did not expect to see him there, but I expected to have seen him at the trial. Ile said, How has that business gone ?' 1 answered, You need not ask of me; you most know it.' He said, Why, I believe I do: had they taken my advice, the result would have been very otherwise. I understood he meant the lawyers conducting the prosecu- tion. I said, You do not seem to have the courage of your friends, Oliver and Castles, who appeared in coin t, with their robes of blood on their back.' He seemed aghast. I said, Sandy, this has been a good paying job for you. At the Calton, your little ones could not come out for their rags ; but now (be had a child in each hand) they are dressed like gentlemen's children.' lie said he did not care a damn fur me, and went away."

When this witness had concluded, Richmond said, that he :did not think it necessary to ask him any questions. Mr. Owen of Lanark was examined. He had intended to employ Richmond in the execution of his schemes for improving the condition of the working classes ; but should have been the last man to be con- nected with one who wished to entrap others.

Richmond—"So should I."

Baron Parke—" That the Jury are to judge of." The plaintiff then said he had no means at present, of answering the strong evidence offered against him. Mr. Baron Parke—" Then you must consent to be nonsuited. Yon must either take your chance of a verdict upon the evidence as it now stands, or you must withdraw your action, and be nonsuited ; and then you will be at liberty, upon another occasion, to adduce further evi- dence."

The plaintiff said he should like to state to the Jury—

Mr. Baron Parke—" You must make your choice." The plaintiff said, his legal adviser concurred entirely with what fell from his Lordship ; and that if he elected to be nonsuited, it was not because he had any doubt of being able, upon a subsequent occasion, to make out a triumphant case against the evidence then adduced against him.

The plaintiff was then called in the usual form; and, not answering, was nonsuited.

[The witnesses for the defendants, though mostly men in humble life, had a very respectable appearance. They received their expenses and the same wages as they would have earned in Glasgow. Their manner of delivering their evidence was exceedingly clear and itnpressive,—in many passages resembling the Scottish dialogues in the Waverley Novels ; and the sharp replies they returned to Richmond when he cross-examined them, told upon the Court and Jury. Indeed, the Judge observed, that the plaintiff could not complain of not receiving direct answers to his questions. The evidence of Wotherspoon, a man who has risen in the world from the loom, was delivered with a solemn preci- sion, as if he were dictating an affidavit. Richmond did not ventine to cross-examine him.]