ters is now the road to preferment, and that so many concurrent circumstances should almost compel others to think so too. However, while we pity those whose minds are thus debased, and who can disgrace the talents that they possess by such an unworthy prostitution, the duty we owe to ourselves and to the community, calls upon us to guard against the consequences, by detecting their misrepresentations and exposing their falsehoods. I presume you will recollect the satisfaction both of us received some years ago when Mr. Burn first met us on the library committee, and I well remember the pleasure you expressed in the hope that he would prove an agreeable acquaintance. Little did I then imagine he could prove the virulent enemy to us both, which his Reply to your Appeal shews him to be. As to myself, though I have very frequently been in company with him since that period, I never received, or apprehended, the least incivility from him before the publication of this last pamphlet, in which I see with concern and surprise that I am made the subject of some of those malevolent sarcasms by which the book is distinguished. I cannot therefore but be anxious to engage your notice of them, and to have you informed of what I have to say in reply; and as I am in possession of a variety of information relating to the subject of the Riots, and connected with this book, I will detail some of it to you, that you may give the public such part as you think worth notice. I have often been at a loss to account for the wide extension of the extravagant spirit of declamation and outrage upon the occasion under which we are suffering, and am surprised that Mr. Burn should so readily come forward to join in it, because I was informed that he thought well of the French Revolution in the early stages of it. Surely then he should have shewn some consideration for those who still hold his former opinions, as it is possible they may not have the same reasons for abandoning them which have operated upon him. Much do I wish that he had attended to this, and to his character as a minister of peace, which ought to have prevented him from becoming an advocate in a scene of party discord, and a partizan in a business which has not only interrupted the safety and harmony of society, but disgraced the community in which it was transacted. However, as he has thought fit to become the champion of bigotry and the Don Quixote of the high-church party, and I think his motives cannot be mistaken, I sincerely hope he will not be suffered to triumph in his knight-errant expedition. The first part of his Reply, which I feel myself particularly called upon to notice, relates to the advertisement respecting the hand-bill, which he and his friends have endeavoured to represent as one cause of the Riots that followed, but which I verily believe would have no more contributed to them than the letter I am now writing to you, had it not been industriously circulated by them, and thereby rendered subservient to their own purpose of creating a disturbance. That hand-bill, Mr. Burn tells us, was sent to the minister by the magistrates. What more then was necessary for them, or for any one else of the party at Birmingham, to do with respect to it? And if nothing uncommon was meditated, why call out the clergy upon the occasion? Surely the advertisement which followed, offering the 100%. reward, would have been deemed sufficient without their interfering, or without any other signature than those of the magistrates. But I knew on Wednesday the 13th of July, that several others were added; for as I was riding into town on that evening, I accidentally met Mr. Carles on horseback, who immediately stopped, and addressed me as usual, in a very friendly manner, acquainting me with the advertisement which had been agreed upon, telling me that 1007. reward was offered to any one that would discover the author of the hand-bill, and adding, that he had heard we denied any knowledge of, or connexion with, the author; and that as he considered me as the ostensible person for the party I belonged to, he had been much inclined to send the advertisement to me, that I might add my signature, but that, upon second thoughts, he had declined doing it, from motives of delicacy, not knowing how I might feel such an application. For this friendly attention I made my acknowledgments, and added, that I thought myself obliged by his delicacy, but could assure him, that I knew no more of the author than he did, nor had I the smallest suspicion who it was, and therefore sincerely wished he had sent me the paper, as I should have signed it without hesitation. To this he replied, that he was glad to hear me say so, and wished he had sent the advertisement, for he was sure I was his friend, and, let what would come, he would not hurt the hair of the head of myself or any of the sect I belonged to. This led me to say, that possibly it might not be too late for me to add my name even then, and that if he approved it, and would give me leave, I would send Mr. Swinney orders to affix my name to the advertisement, and I would cheerfully pay my proportion towards the expense, should the offer be successful, and the 1007. paid in consequence of it. To this he freely assented, and added, that he wished I would, for I was his friend, I had been his friend, and, let what would happen, he would not hurt a hair of my head, no, he would not hurt a hair of my head, or of any of the sect that I belonged to. The tone in which these words were repeated, and the attitude in which he rode, whilst repeating them, shewed me that he had been drinking, and (as usual) gone something beyond the bounds of temperance. But as he appeared very capable of riding home, I left him, not being at that time impressed with the same idea of the significance of these remarkable words that I have been since. After reflecting on what had passed, and the condition of the person with whom I had the conversation, I was in doubt whether sending my name to the printer would not be deemed an intrusion by the other gentlemen who had signed the advertisement. In consequence of this, as you will, no doubt, recollect, I called at Fair-hill, and consulted you as a friend, when you admitted the reasons I had to hesitate, but, upon the whole, thought with me, that it would be best for me to send my name, which I accordingly did by a note to Mr. Swinney, telling him that, in consequence of a conversation with Mr. Carles that evening, since the advertisement relating to the hand-bill was sent, I had been invited by him. to add my name to it, that I had given my assent, and accordingly requested and authorized him to add it to the others already given in. Mr. Swinney's return to this note was a printed newspaper, which I received soon after nine o'clock, and which proved to me that he was much forwarder with the impression of his paper than I had any apprehension of; and also that the opportunity I thought myself in possession of was passed. This circumstance, however, leads me to remark, that I gave an incontrovertible and renewed proof of my disposition as to the author of the hand-bill; and it also makes it very evident that some scheme had that day been talked of, and that the repeated declarations, that not a hair of our heads should be hurt, was the con sequence of it.* These words have very frequently and forcibly occurred to me since the Riots happened, and I have had an opportunity of observing the direction in which the proceedings were conducted. It is now well known to me, that a meeting had then been previously held at the house of a Church and King partizan, for the purpose of considering how to punish these damn'd Presby terians. These were his own words. It is well known to me that the Rioters very frequently and publicly declared, that they had the justices' protection. It is also well known to me, to yourself, and to many others, that they had a regular list of the devoted houses. Nay, much more than this is known to me and others, though not yet made known to the public; but I trust it will in due time, and that it will appear to every one, that the Dissenters, so far from being such factious, turbulent, and restless characters as they have of late so frequently been represented, have acted with a degree of forbearance and patience unparalleled in any similar instance. You well know it has not been for want of evidence that prosecutions have not been commenced, but because the Dissenters committed their cause to government, and expected redress from thence. The next insinuation of Mr. Burn which I am concerned to notice, is that respecting the offer the Dissenters published of a reward of 100l. to any person who should discover the author of the hand-bill. This, he sneeringly observes, was not advertised, but was "confined to a few corners of the streets in the town." Here again I must lament his want of candour or veracity, for his assertion is untrue. This offer was not confined to a few corners of the streets; it was printed with a type of the largest size, and upon paper in proportion; and particular directions were given that it should be pasted up in every part of the town where the proclamation, which offered the same reward, was put up. Nay, more than this, it was also pasted up in the public streets at Worcester and Warwick, with the concurrence of the solicitor to the treasury, as soon as the assizes commenced. It is true that some insidious An association for burning our houses and places of worship might admit of a condition that our persons should be safe. Will he [Mr. Carles] do us the favour to say what sum was subscribed by this most respectable meeting to pay for the presents they so generously voted, and will he have the goodness to tell us how soon afterwards a sufficient addition was made to it to defray the cost of them, and when the plate was presented to these worthy magistrates? (Russell.) wretches very frequently pulled down these papers in Birmingham, as they did the king's proclamation, which offered 100%. to any one that would discover the authors and abettors of the Riots.* But that does not prove that either the one or the other had not been put up publicly, and very generally too. I proceed now to the invidious charge, (in pp. 54, 55,) aimed at myself through the means of Mr. Dadley, the master of the hotel. And here again it is necessary to expose Mr. Burn's want of attention, or else his wilful exaggeration of facts. In giving his pretended extract from my letter, he says, (p. 54,)" Mr. Dadley, it seems, recommended that the dinner might be had as was intended; he was sure there was no danger of tumult, provided the gentlemen broke up early; and, on this representation, orders were given to the printer to suppress the hand-bill, and Mr. Dadley's measure was adopted." Now, if you turn to my letter in the appendix of his own book, you may see that the words " and on this representation" are not in my letter, as he has quoted them; nor do I call it Mr. Dadley's measure. Surely after such wanton, unprovoked attacks upon private characters as his illiberal pages exhibit, he should have had a little more regard to circumspection. Mr. Dadley's "solemn deposition," for such Mr. Burn calls it, and such he would have the world suppose it to be, (though it does not appear to me to have been made before any person authorized to take it,) is contradicted by the testimony of every individual who was present at the conversation it alludes to; and I am fully persuaded that Mr. Dadley would not have interfered on the occasion at all, had he not been solicited by some of the leaders of the highchurch party. To such miserable subterfuges and meanness does party-spirit carry men whom, in every other character, I can * The following paper was circulated at this time (see supra, p. 879): "From the Committee of Dissenters. "WHEREAS it now appears, that among other insidious and unwarrantable practices made use of during the late Riots, to delude the populace, and instigate them to acts of violence and destruction, letters were forged, charging the Dissenters with a treasonable design to overthrow the present happy constitution of this kingdom, and pretending that the whole body of them were combined together, and had appointed to assemble on the 16th of August, to burn the churches, blow up the parliament, cut off the head of the King, and abolish all taxes:' And whereas it is now well known, that such forged letters were pretended to be found among the papers of the Rev. Dr. Priestley, and William Russell, Esq., and the words above quoted formed part of one of the forged letters which were brought and read by two persons on horseback at Showell-green, the house of William Russell, Esq., whilst the same was in flames, in order to instigate the Rioters to further acts of violence: Notice is hereby given, that the Protestant Dissenters of Birmingham, in addition to the reward of One Hundred Pounds, graciously offered by his Majesty for discovering the instigators of the late horrid violences, will give a further reward of One Hundred Pounds for the discovery of the person or persons who wrote the said forged letters, or any one of them, so that he or they may be convicted thereof, and brought to punishment. "Birmingham, August 22, 1791." "THOMAS LEE, Junior, "Secretary to the Committee of Protestant Dissenters in Birmingham. Appendix to Appeal, 1792, Pt. I. respect and esteem. Mr. Dadley has suffered so much, that I pity him; and I have cheerfully joined with my patriotic compeers in giving him solid proof of it. But I shall not, in return, put him upon maligning others, or exposing himself by becoming the tool of a party, which it must be allowed is extremely ungenerous to require of a man in his situation of life. Against his single testimony I now place that of the three gentlemen present, who on the 1st of May last wrote to me the following note: "DEAR SIR, "Mr. Burn having introduced, into his Reply to Dr. Priestley's Appeal, Mr. Dadley's account of a conversation which he says took place on the morning of the 14th of July, with a view to invalidate your account of the transactions of that day, we think it right to declare that the representation there given is not a just one of what passed between us. Mr. Dadley was expressly desired to tell us if he had the same reason to apprehend a disturbance as when we saw him on the Monday evening, to which he replied, that he had not, and that he then had no fear respecting it, as he had heard nothing further about it. We are fully persuaded that you could not have, in giving your account, the most distant idea of fixing any odium upon Mr. Dadley, or intending to make him a party in the dinner. Mr. Dadley was never considered as any way more concerned in the transactions of that day, than when he was preparing any other public dinner for the various meetings held at his house. "We are, very respectfully, "Your much obliged and obedient servants, Birmingham, May 1st, 1792. WILLIAM HUNT, To this let me add, that I wish to ask Mr. Burn, How long it has been the business of the clergy of Birmingham to watch over the concerns of the publicans there? If I have traduced, injured, or offended Mr. Dadley, pray what have Mr. Burn and his associated brethren of the cloth to do with it? If any explanation was necessary between Mr. Dadley and myself, it surely might have been easily settled without this public, and I must say impertinent attempt to calumniate me, which, though more malevolent than his insinuations of modesty and diffidence, is not less so than his insidious attempt to represent the dinner as the cause of the Riots. To his sneer about modesty and diffidence I reply, that an honest man, who has no other object than the public good, ought not to feel the diffidence of those who have venal purposes, selfish ends, or party views, in their public attendances. It is, however, entirely owing to an infirmity in my hearing, that I am not only obliged to place myself near the chair at public meetings, but to keep there, if I would contribute my mite towards promoting the general good. And that I have uniformly been governed by that object, and by that alone, in all my numerous and almost unceasing |