From Thomas Beddoes to Davies Giddy   3 April [1792]

This is a letter I have this day received from my friend Keir, whom curiosity carried to Warwick assizes. He is a very accurate impartial observer, unless you sh^d suppose his station at the revolution dinner might bias his judgment.¹ For a reformer he is very temperate — one of your half way politicians — I applyied to him when we talk upon politics the character which the late Pretender’s² Secretary³ told me at Paris the philosophers there used to apply to David Hume — one of the best of living creatures, but quite oppressed by the prejudices of education⁴ — His account I fancy will excite your indignation more than your surprize. The newspapers will inform you of the treatment Priestly received at Warwick.⁵ I have just got possession of a curious anecdote respecting the apprehensions of our governors & the measures they are taking to continue the people in their prejudices. I shall most assuredly make it as public as I possibly can & add to it all the authenticity I shall be permitted. It was betrayed by the simplicity of a person of whom they intended to make a tool. I imagine if his name was introduced, some very serious consequences to him w^d follow. I cannot therefore bring forward such proof as w^d satisfy a jury, though such proof exists —

I hope Thomson⁶ received my letter — it is hardly worth while to add that I hope his wife may be the better for any thing it contains. I hope to hear soon of the shipping of the iron ore, & my property in Cornish profits, which I am much afraid has given you a great deal of trouble —

My comp^ts to all your family. You have lately sent us incessant cold, wet & blustering winds. I wish you w^d build a wall along the coast & exclude them. Yours faithfully.

T. Beddoes

3 April

[Keir’s letter to Beddoes:]

I have been at Warwick assizes, but only one of the cases (Mr Ryland’s)⁷ for damages caused by the Riots was then heard. The judge seems to proceed in the same manner as that at Worcester⁸ in giving damages for nothing but what was found clearly to exist at the hour of the riot which in such a case is impossible. So I imagine they have allowed for little but the building, although the furniture was as clearly proved as could be expected. I imagine also that they have taken the lowest valuation of the buildings where the surveyors on the two sides differed, which they did materially. Here on the part of the sufferers were two of the first builders in London, whereas those on the side of the Hundred were men that seemed ignorant of the expence of building not builders, but merely repairors of other people’s buildings & apparently inferior men. The managers for the Hundred (who are the two Birmingham justices, & Brook the no less celebrated attorney in the time of the riots, all of them against whom accusations are lodged with the Secretary of State⁹ ) brought down Harding from London at a great expence to declaim vehemently against the Dissenters & Revolutionists, which he did with all his might, & with abundance of false assertions, & in defiance of the controul of the judge, who twice stopped him & desired him to avoid going into a matter foreign to the cause. He persisted however, & said he would go on if the judge should send him to Newgate for it. I think he could not have ventured on this piece of insolence, if he had not thought himself safe in the approbation of the ministry, or perhaps been instructed. He is King’s Counsellor, & Sollicitor to the Queen. The 2^d part of Payne’s Book has alarmed government much, & particularly a scheme which Payne has of establishing a communication among all the Friends of Liberty throughout the kingdom & also of arming themselves, without exposing themselves to any breach of the Law.¹⁰ I do not know the particulars nor do I expect good effects from it, at this time. However, I am told that Payne’s last pamphlet makes great progress among the lower orders.¹¹ There is a well written book, as republican as Payne’s, but less offensive as being less personal, called advice to the priviledged orders, written I am told by a Mr Barlow.¹² — Harding hinted that he had abundance of more observations in reserve for another occasions, meaning no doubt, Dr Priestley’s trial.¹³ — the judge’s behaviour was very becoming. He set aside all Harding’s interpretation of the Law, who (Harding) contended that it was a penal not a remedial law & therefore to be interpreted strictly & not liberally.