Page images
PDF
EPUB

quence, and on which the argument appears to us to lie in so small a compass, that we are anxious to -state the question to our readers, and endeavour to counteract the influence of what we consider a pernicious sophistry in the reviewer.

We are quite ready to allow, that tithes are not taxes paid by either landlord or tenant, for both have purchased their respective interests in the land liable to the annual outgoing of one-tenth of its gross produce, and have paid a proportionably less purchase money. Nor shall we at all object to the amount of the revenue obtained for the church establishment. But we cannot there-fore admit that this mode of obtaining it does "not diminish permanently the profits of the occupier" of the soil, and consequently his stimulus for the improvement of it. The argument of the Reviewer is, that when the landlord lets a farm, he calculates the capital which the tenant is to employ, and the profits he is to make on its employment; and that, therefore, if tithes were abolished, the landlord would require more rent, not only on account of the tenth more produced, but in consideration of the greater profit which the farmer would make in his capital. P. 545-6. Now this appears to us to be admitting the principle, that greater profits on capital would be made, though monopolized by the landlord: and to the public at large it would not signify by whom the profit was made, if it only be made, and consequently a greater produce be raised from the total soil of the country. But, again, it is asserted in the same page, "Let the subject be twisted how it may, the abolition of tithes, or a partial reduction of their amount, would not, under any circumstances, increase permanently the average profits of the capital employed in agriculture." How this assertion is reconcileable with the former admission, we do not know-but it is coming to issue. The only reason assigned for the assertion is, that if " no claim for tithes existed, to the demand of the landlord for rent would be added the money value of the tenth portion of the average crop, which the land in a certain number of years would pro

duce, when a given capital had been expended in improving it." But this is merely repeating the former argument, that the landlord will monopolize the increased profits of capital employed in agriculture; and not denying that additional capital will be employed: and as every bargain is a collision of judgment on the subject of it, we should much doubt whether landlords would always judge better than tenants, of the improvements to be made, and capital employed, and profit reaped therefrom. For the landlord's rent is a condition to be settled à priori, not, like the tither's demand, to be made à posteriori. But the Reviewer seems to intend to exclude this argument by putting, in the sentence above cited, the word average crop in italics. This, however, would be entirely begging the question: for it is the opposition which tithes make to improvement on the average crop which is the question in dispute. Having thus endeavoured to clear the way, we will now proceed to show how necessarily and how extensively tithes do prevent improvement, and consequently restrict the power of the country to raise subsistence for its inhabitants. We shall reduce the matter to its simplest form by limiting the inquiry to one year, and the employment of a hundred pounds of additional capital in improvement of agriculture on a tithe-free and titheable farm. As the simplest mode of improvement (and therefore liable to the least objection in the calculation), let it be by the employment of an additional number of labourers. As at the end of the year the hundred pounds will be quite gone, the farmer on a tithe-free farm must expect an increased gross produce worth one hundred and eight pounds—namely, a

hundred to replace the capital, four pounds for the common interest, and four pounds more to make up the common trading interest. With this he will be satisfied; and the country will be richer by one hundred and eight pounds more of produce. But if a farmer on the titheable land were to make the same calculation, he would be miserably deceived: for of the hundred and eight pounds' worth of additional gross produce the tither would take ten pounds sixteen shil

lings, leaving him ninety-seven pounds four shillings to replace his hundred pounds expended, and nothing at all for interest. Is it not obvious, therefore, that on the titheable farm no such improvement will in fact be made, and that the tithing system must continually be repressing improvement? and therefore restricting the power of the country to maintain its inhabitants ? -The next question is with regard to the extent of that repression and restriction. And this is not difficult to approximate. For, in the case we have supposed, the farmer of titheable land, in order to be on a par of profits with the farmer on tithe-free land, must abstain from all improvements which will not increase the gross produce a hundred and twenty pounds: for then only would the deduction of the tenth leave him his capital of a hundred pounds and his trading interest of eight pounds. The obstruction to improvement, therefore, on titheable and tithe-free land, is, apparently, in the proportion of ten to nine; but the real proportion is much greater; for the quantity of inferior land is so much greater than that of good, that of three acres to be improved it is more probable that two will be made capable of the lower rate of additional produce than that one will be made capable of the higher rate; in that case, the obstruction to improvement on titheable land will be double the obstruction on tithe-free land: and, in many cases, the ob'struction will become a total prevention of improvement. Whether the land be let to farm, or occupied by the proprietor, is obviously of no consequence; the reasoning and calculation applying equally to both cases-and therefore we may throw out of the question all the comparison of the shares of profits from the produce of soil, to be adjusted between landlord and tenant.

But it may be asked, is this calculation really and generally made? and does it operate in the degree which is here supposed? There are two kingdoms at hand to answer the question. Scotland, as far back as history extends, seems to have been

slower in the whole progress of civilization than England, from which she was content to borrow every improvement, even to her acts of legislation; which, in rival and often hostile nations, was least to be expected. To the time of the Reformation this order of improvement was observed; and, since that period, England has still kept the lead in every branch but that of agriculture; and in that, and that alone, Scotland leads and keeps the lead: and why? because, at the Reformation, tithes were swept away in Scotland and retained in England. In adducing the fact, we protest against any inputation of our approving the robbery of the church at the Reformation, in either kingdom. In England, it was committed by one rapacious tyrant; in Scotland, by the rapacity of the nobles. But, in England, the Reformation having been begun by the King, and in Scotland by the people, the more immediate interests of the people were totally overlooked in the first kingdom, and promoted in the second by that violence and injustice which so often characterize reforms that are extorted from a reluctant government. But in order for England to have the advantage, it is not requisite that she should imitate the atrocities by which Scotland procured it. Let the people of England have the legal means of purchasing from the church what Scotland partly pretended to pur chase and principally forced from it, and we shall soon see an extensive improvement in the country at large; and, we doubt not, also an increase in the revenues of the church; and an incalculable increase in its moral and religious influence, from removing all hostile interests between the pastor and his flock.

We have no room to discuss the means of remuneration to the church; but we think it could not be very difficult to show, that a per-centage on rents, instead of a tithe on produce, would obviate most of the objections to a commutation; and, when the object is of such paramount importance, trivial objections should not be allowed to prevail.

A PEN AND INK SKETCH

OF A LATE TRIAL FOR MURDER,

IN

A Letter from Hertford.

BY EDWARD HERBERT, ESQ.

As I stand here,-I SAW THEM!-Macbeth.

To the Editor of the London Magazine.

- Jan. 1824.

Hertford, DEAR SIR,-By this time I fear you will have become heartily wearied of the names of Thurtell, Probert, and Hunt, upon which the London newspapers have rung the changes so abominably; I fear this, -because, having consented to give you a narrative of the Trial of these wretched, and hardened men, with the eye of a witness, and not the hand of a reporter; and having in consequence of such consent borne up an unfed body with an untired spirit for two days, against iron rails and fat men, I tremble lest all my treasured observations should be thrown away, and my long fatigue prove profitless to my friend. On consideration, however, I have withstood my fears, and have determined not to abandon my narrative;-in the first place, because the newspapers have given so dry a detail of the evidence as to convey no picture of the interesting scene,-and secondly, because in a periodical work like the LONDON MAGAZINE, which ought to record remarkable events as they pass by, a clear account, not made tedious, as far as possibly can be avoided, by repetitions and legal formalities, may be interesting not only to the reader of this year, but to the reader of twenty years hence!-if at that extremely distant period readers should exist and the Roxburghe Boys should then, as now, save old books from the cheesemonger and the worm!

It is my intention, good my master, to give you the statements only of those persons from whose mouths you will best get the particulars of the murder, and of the circumstances preceding and following it; for, judgFEB. 1824.

ing by myself, I am sure you and your readers would be fairly tired out, if you were compelled to undergo Mr. Hunt's confession, first poured from his own polluted lips, and then filtered through Mr. Upson, Mr. Beeston, Mr. Symonds, and a host of those worthy Dogberrys of Hertfordshire, who had an opportunity of "wasting all their tediousness upon his Lordship." It is well for the prisoner that Inquiry goes about her business so tiresomely and thoroughly,but to the hearer and the reader her love of "a twice-told tale" is enough to make a man forswear a court of justice for the rest of his life! I do believe that no man of any occupation would become a thief, if he were fully aware of the punishment of listening to the "damnable iteration" of his own trial. In the present case, we had generally three or four witnesses to the same fact. It is strange that, solitary as the place was, and desperate as was the murder,-the actors, the witnesses,-all,-but the poor helpless devoted thing that pe rished, were in clusters! The murderers were a cluster! The farmer that heard the pistol had his wife and child, and nurse with him; there were two labourers at work in the lane on the morning after the dreadful butcher-work: there was merry party at the cottage on the very night, singing and supping, while Weare's mangled carcass was lying darkening in its gore, in the neighbouring field; there were hosts of publicans and ostlers, witnesses of the gang's progress on their bloodjourney; and the gigs, the pistols, even the very knives ran in pairs! This is curious at least ; and it seems as though it were fated that William M

a

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

I shall, as I have promised, avoid repetition; and, when you have read Mr. Gurney's statement for the prosecution, which very perspicuously details the case, as afterwards supported by evidence,-Probert's heartless narration, and his wife's hardwrung words; I shall call no other witnesses-for none other will be necessary to satisfy the reader. After these I shall but speak of what I saw: I shall but turn my eye to that green table, which is now and will ever be before me, and say what thereon I beheld! I shall but, in the good impressive words of the crier to the jury," look upon the prisoners;" and describe that one strong desperate man playing the hero of the tragic trial, as at a play; and show his wavering weak comrade, a baby's Turpin visibly wasting by his side, in the short space of eight-and-forty hours! You want to see the trial, you say, not to read of it: Oh! that I could draw from the life with the pen (your pen and ink drawings are the only things to make old masters of you)! Then would I trace such lines as should make the readers breathless while they read, and render a Newgate-Calendarian immortal! It was, in spite of what a great authority has said, an unimprovable horror!

You remember how we parted when I left your hospitable table, to take my place in the Hertford coach, on the cold evening of the 5th of December; and how you enjoined me to bear a wary eye on the morrow's trial. I promised you fair.Well. I had strange companions in the coach with me, a good-looking middle-aged baronet, who was going to Hertford upon speculation; a young foolish talkative reporter who was travelling with all the importance of a Sunday newspaper encircling him, and who had a dirty shirt on his back, and a clean memorandum book tied up in his pocket handkerchief;-all his luggage! And a gentleman of about thirty who was going to his house in Hoddesdon, never having heard of the trial! "not but what he had read something

in the news about a baddish murder." We exchanged coach-conversation sparingly, and by fits, as usual. The Sunday press was on my side (the only time in my life), and the baronet sat pumping it slily of all its watery gossip; while the Hoddesdon body, at the same time, occasionally kept craftily hitting at the character of a person, whom he declared to have known abroad, and who bears the evil repute of lending his aid to our fellow traveller's paper. We dropped our fourth at Hoddesdon, and pretty well played dummy the rest of the journey.

The moment I arrived, I called upon the friend who was to give me a bed for the night; a gift which, on these occasions, innkeepers and housekeepers are by no means in the habit of indulging in; and I found him with a warm fire, and a kettle singing, aye,-more humanely than Hunt. I soon dispatched the timely refreshment of tea, for during it, I learnt the then strange news of Probert having been admitted evidence for the crown, and of his being at that very moment before the grand jury undergoing his examination. I hastened to the Town Hall (a poor pinched-up building, scarcely big enough to try a well-grown pettylarceny in) and found there the usual assize scene; a huddled cold crowd on a dim stone staircase,—a few men of authority, with their staves and long coats, thence called javelin men ; patient oglers of hard-hearted doors, red cloaks, plush breeches, and velveteen jackets-and with all these the low hum of country curiosity! On approaching the door of the grand jury room, wherein stood that bad but not bold man, Probert, I met with a legal friend under whose wing I was to be conducted into the court. He was in some way concerned in the trial; and the first words he accosted me with were "Well!-Probert is in that room!" The dimness of the place helped his sudden words, and I looked at the door that parted me from this wretch, as though it were a glass through which I could see Probert himself darkly. I waited, the door opened for the eighth of an inch -then arose the murmur and cry, "Probert is coming out!" No! It was only to tell some inveterate tapster that he could not be admitted

Another pause-and in the middle of an indifferent conversation, my friend exclaimed-"There-there goes Probert!" And I saw an unwieldy bulk of a man sauntering fearlessly along (he was now safe!) and sullenly proceeding to descend the stairs. I rushed to the balustrade-and saw this man, who had seen all! go step by step quietly down,-having just sealed the fate of his vicious associates (but his associates still) and returning, with his miserable life inflicted upon him, to clanking irons and a prison bed. He was dressed in black, and had gloves on:-But through all these, I saw the creature of Gill's Hill Lane-I saw the miscreant that had held the lantern to the rifled pocket, and the gashed throat, and I shuddered as I turned away from the staircase vision!

On this night the lovers of sleep were sadly crossed in their love, for there was a hum of men throughout the streets all the dead-long night, broken only by the harsher grating of arriving chaises and carriages, which ceased not grinding the gravelled road and vexing the jaded ear till morning. The innkeepers and their servants were up all night, looking out for their prey; -and very late into the night, servant-maids with their arms in their aprons, and sauntering lads, kept awake beyond nine by other men's guilt, were at doors and corners, talking of Thurtell and his awful pair! Gaping witnesses too were idling about Hertford town, dispersing with potent beers and evil spirits, as well as they were able, the scanty wits and frail memories which Providence had allotted to them.-The buzz of conversation, amidst all and in all places, was a low murmur, but of "Thurtell". "Miss Noyes "Probert "-" Mrs. Probert"-and "Hunt." You heard one of these names from a window-or it came from under a gateway,-or over a wall, or from a post, or it met you at a corner! these vice-creatures were on all lips-and in no hour betwixt the evening and the morning was their infamy neglected to be tolled upon the night!-The gaol, to which I went for a few minutes, looked solemn in the silence and the gloom; and I could not but pierce with my mind those massive walls,

and see the ironed men restless within ;-Thurtell rehearsing his part for the morning's drama, with the love of infamous fame stimulating him to correctness;-(for I was told that evening that he was to make a great display;) and Hunt cowering in his cell, timorous of fate,-while Probert, methought, was steeping his hideous senses in the forgetfulness of sleep-for when such men are safe, they can sleep as though their hearts were as white as innocence or virtue!

We were up early in the morning, and breakfasted by candlelight ;with a sandwich in my pocket I sallied forth to join my legal friend, who had long been dressed, and was sitting at his papers and tea, in all the restlessness of a man whose mind defies and spurns at repose while any thing remains to be accomplished. We were in court a little after eight o'clock—but as you know that on this day the trial was postponed, I shall not here describe the scene, but shall reserve my description of the prisoners for the actual day of trial, to which I shall immediately proceed.-I should tell you that I saw Mrs. Probert for a few minutes on this day, and was surprised at her mode of conducting herself, having heard, as I knew she had, of her husband's safety.

Immediately that the trial was adjourned I secured a place in the coach, and returned to London. The celebrated Mr. Noel was on the roof,

and my companions inside were an intelligent artist and craniologist, who had been sketching and examining the heads of the prisoners,―and a tradesman from Oxford-street, who had been frightened out of his wits and Hertford, by hearing that pictures of Gill's Hill Cottage were actionable, for he had brought " some very good likenesses of the Pond to sell," and been obliged to take them out of the window of the Seven Compasses, almost the very moment they were placed there! From this December day to the 5th of January— all the agitation of the public press ceased-and murder had no tongue until the day on which it was privileged to speak.

To the day of trial therefore I come;-for 1 compelled my curiosity to slumber the ordered sleep of the

« PreviousContinue »