13th March 1813: A Leeds Mercury editorial attempts to settle the dispute about George Mellor's last words

THE POINT AT ISSUE.

A dispute of little interest perhaps, except to the disputants, has for some weeks been maintained to the Leeds Newspapers which we hope now to bring to a close, and to this end it is necessary to take a short review of the circumstances in which it originated. It is well known to the public, that on Friday the 8th of January, George Miller, William Thorp, and Thomas Smith, who had on the Wednesday preceeding, been convicted on the clearest evidence of the atrocious murder of Mr. Horsfall were executed at York; at that awful scene, a person from the office of this paper attended, and the report made by him through the columns of the Mercury was that "George Mellor confessed in general the greatness of his sins, but that he made no confession of the crime for which he suffered." This statement an anonymous writer, under the signature of "an Attentive Hearer," contradicted in the Intelligencer on the Monday following, by asserting that Mellor confessed himself a murderer at the place of execution, and that he also used this remarkable expression, "not die game." On such conflicting testimony, a controversy arose in which an Attentive Hearer continued to maintain that Mellor used both these expressions; and in his second letter he insinuated that the Editor of the Mercury had private reasons, "prudent motives" was his expression for concealing the truth; and this attack at once absurd and unfounded, was entirely unprovoked, as a reference to the papers up to that time will show. To contend in person with an adversary without a name, and who had made so free and use of his ægis, and of his spear was to oppose a substance to a shadow; we therefore saw it proper to place the combatants on equal grounds, and with that view, to take the signature of "A Diligent Enquirer." Under these designations the contest continued for some weeks, when by way of bringing this tedious dispute to an issue, the Attentive Hearer was challenged by his opponent to an exchange of authorities, which being accepted, this exchange took place, and the result of the inquiries to which it has given rise, we now submit to the public.

The names of the persons produced by a Diligent Enquirer in confirmation of his assertions amount to seven in number, consisting of the Gentleman who officiated as Under-Sheriff, the Governor of York Castle, the Reverend Gentleman who attended the prisoners in their last moments, and two Sheriff’s Officers, who all stood upon the platform, one of them at a distance of more than three or four yards from Mellor, and some of them at his elbow; in addition to these five authorities, the Diligent Enquirer also verified his assertions by the names of two persons who stood in the place usually occupied by spectators, and all of whom had declared to him, that to the best of their knowledge and belief, the words in question were not used, and to these he might have added the names of a number of other persons, the principal part of whom stood upon the platform; but he selected these as evidences of the most unexceptionable kind, and as amply sufficient to satisfy any man open to conviction.

The authorities produced by an Attentive Hearer amounted to five in number, only one of whom stood on the platform, and such of the others as were present, at a distance of 40 or 50 yards.

The first of these, he that stood upon the platform, says, that he did hear Mellor use the words, "us poor Murderers," but he heard no such words as "not die Game." The second and third make the same declaration. The fourth says, that he thinks he heard the word murderers used in a confessional sense, but he cannot be quite certain, as he stood at so great a distance, that he could only hear a sentence now and then; but as to the words "not die game" he heard no such expression. The fifth and last of an Attentive Hearer's authorities is a Reverend Gentleman at York, and he says, that he was he was never present at an execution in his life, and consequently that he was not present at the execution of Mellor, nor did he ever say that the account given by an Attentive Hearer "was correct."

Such are the authorities by which the assertions of the contending parties are supported, and on a comparison of this evidence, we think no man that will exercise his understanding can fail to arrive at a just conclusion. We have no more doubt that the persons who say Mellor used words amounting to a confession so understood him, than we have that Mellor and his fellow-sufferers were guilty of the crime for which they were executed, but do believe they were murderers, and this belief we ground on the testimony of those whose stations the place of execution gave them an opportunity of hearing distinct every word that fell from the lips of the culprits, and whose official duties required that they should be particularly watchful over the expressions of men dying under such circumstances, and none of whom, it is universally allowed, had up to the moment they came to the fatal tree, made any confession of their guilt, express or implied.

On the other terms are remarkable and so improbable—we mean the expression "not die game," an Attentive Hearer is in effect contradicted by all his own authorities, excepting only that which was not present. Here at least he must admit that he is in error, for not to make that admission would be to impeach the testimony of his own evidence; and this circumstance will, we hope, be useful to him in future life, by inculcating the necessity of being less confident in his own opinions, and more disposed to defer to the opinions of others.

27th February 1813: 'A Diligent Enquirer' responds again to 'An Attentive Hearer'

MR. EDITOR—It is much more difficult to silence than to confute “an Attentive Hearer:” but I will make another effort to submit his assertions to a test from which it will not be easy for evasion itself to rescue him. In his last letter he again asserts, that Mellor, at the place of execution, used the expressions “die game” and “us poor murderers.” I say, that neither of these expressions fell from his lips. Here then is an assertion against assertion, only with this important difference, that, to a certain extent, the reverend gentleman who attended the malefactors in their last moments, confirms my declaration, and falsifies that of my opponent. But for the present I will wave Mr. Brown's authority, decisive as it is, and consider the matter as resting merely on the ipse dixit of an anonymous writer. Men whose names have no reason to expect public credence, in any disputed case, except so far as their assertion are supported by the authorities: here then we come to the pinching point—let “an Attentive Hearer” produce his authorities confirmatory of his assertions, and I will produce mine; and by way of a beginning, I will undertake to produce the names of six persons, who were all present at the execution, all men of indisputable character and veracity, and all so situated at the time as to hear distinctly every word that was uttered, and who will one and all declare most positively that the words put into Mellor’s mouth by “an Attentive Hearer,” were not uttered by him; it being understood that an “Attentive Hearer” shall produce an equal number of authorities, of character equally free from suspicion, who will declare that Mellor did use those words; and to avoid further evasion, it shall be at his option whether the names of the authorities be published, or merely handed to the printers of the respective papers, for the the inspection of those that may interest themselves in this wire-drawn dispute. His election on this point he will make in his next letter.

Should he decline this challenge, as he did the wager of charity, he will be truly chargeable with having attempted to practice upon public credulity, and with having, for six weeks, amused the readers of the Intelligencer with unsupported fictions.

A DILIGENT ENQUIRER.

13th February 1813: 'A Diligent Enquirer' responds to 'An Attentive Hearer' yet again

To the EDITOR of the LEEDS MERCURY.

SIR,—“An Attentive Hearer” shines more as an ingenious quibbler, than as a faithful Narrator. His declaration, that the Editor of the Mercury has pronounced a Diligent Enquirer a publisher of falsehoods, is as far from the truth as his unblushing assertion—that Mellor, the malefactor, in his last address, talked about dying Game! and as erroneous as the declaration, that he used the expression “us poor murderers.” The truth is, that I wished to give as candid a constitution to the publication made by “An Attentive Hearer,” as possible, and therefore hazarded a supposition that he had mistaken “his murderers” for “us poor murderers;” but, so far from publishing a falsehood on the subject, I merely stated this as a matter of conjecture.

By why should I dwell upon a point already established beyond the possibility of reasonable doubt, though not beyond the reach of quibbling pertinacity; and why insist on a subject, on which there is but one opinion, and that opinion is, that “An Attentive Hearer, either from intention or error, or partly from both, has put into the mouth of a dying man, words that he never used.

What could be his motive for so committing himself, in the first instance, it is not easy to imagine; but it is probable, that after having told the story publicly, he thought it more magnanimous to proceed in error, than to retrace his steps into the paths of truth; perhaps too he had a wish to enjoy a laugh at his printer, by trying how far he could be made the dupe of such a marvellous story; and his printer, in order, I suppose, to resent the affront, and to render the DYING SPEECH MAKER as ridiculous as himself, insisted Mr. Brown's contradiction immediately under “An Attentive Hearer's Letter;” so that they now laugh at each other; and they may rely upon it, that the public would, if the subject was not too grave for merriment, laugh at them both.

I am yours truly,
A DILIGENT ENQUIRER

30th January 1813: The Leeds Mercury reprints the Reverend Brown's letter about George Mellor's last words

The following Letter, addressed to the Editor of the Leeds Intelligencer, by the Rev. G. Brown, Chaplain of the Castle of York, is decisive of the point at issue between the “Attentive Hearer” and the “Diligent Enquirer,” and can indeed leave no room for further discussion or doubt upon the subject. It is hardly necessary to observe, that the situation of the Rev. Divine who remained on the fatal platform, close to the prisoners, during the whole of the mournful ceremony, must render his authority, as to what was said by the Prisoners, infinitely superior to that of any hearer, however attentive, necessarily placed at a considerable distance, and where words imperfectly heard might be easily misconceived. And if the “Attentive Hearer” possesses a single particle of candor, he will hasten publicly to retract his confident assertions, and apologise for an insinuation most unfounded, and which can only be protected from the charge of malice by successive folly and absurdity.

23rd January 1813: A new correspondent - 'Diligent Enquirer' - enters the debate about George Mellor's last words

THE SUPPOSED CONFESSION.

Mr. EDITOR,—“An Attentive Hearer” seems to be a very [pernicious] one. He set out with asserting, that George Mellor, one of the murderers of Mr. Horsfall, in his prayer on the fatal platform, speaking of himself and his fellow-sufferers, used the words, “us poor murderers,”and said, “There are many here who have expecting to see us die game.” These words, you say, were never used; on which he repeats his former assertion: and such conflict and testimonies, on a topic of general conversation, naturally produces the enquiry on which side truth is to be found. Feeling this curiosity, in common with many others, and not being myself present at the execution, I determined to ascertain the fact of the case from the best authority; and for this purpose I addressed myself to the Ordinary, to the Under Sheriff, and to the Governor of the Castle, all of whom concurred in stating, that they did not hear either of these expressions, and that they were persuaded they were not used by any of the malefactors. Not satisfied with this, I next enquired of a number of the Sheriff’s Officers, who stood within a pace or two of the culprit when he delivered the prayer or address, in which “An Attentive Hearer” says the words occurred, but they all, except one, agreed with the gentleman mentioned above, and that officer said, that he thought he heard some expression of the kind, but he was engaged at the moment, and could not be quite certain. I then applied to some of spectators who stood in front of the drop, and they confirmed the declaration of the officers, that the words imputed to Mellor were not used by him. Some of the persons said, that in speaking the forgiveness of Christ, he enumerated it sinners of several kinds, to which his forgiveness was extended, and concluded the sentence with saying, and “even to his murderers,” but that no such abhorrent word as “game;” abhorrent I mean in that sense, fell from Mellor’s lips. I am therefore of opinion, and I think my authority will not be thought weak, that as to one of the expressions “An Attentive Hearer” has fallen into a mistake, and as to the other he has indulged in a bold figure of speech.

But as he may still, from “prudent motives,” reiterate his assertion, I will place the matter in a way that may make the dispute not quite so uninteresting to the public, as it might otherwise appear; and for this purpose I have lodged ten guineas in the hands of my printer to be applied to the use of the General Infirmary at Leeds, if an “Attentive Hearer” can, out of the vast concourse of spectators that attended the execution, produce six persons of character who will assert, on their word of honour, that Mellor used the words which he has put into his mouth, and I  challenge this “Attentive Hearer”to offer the same sum to be applied to the same purpose,  on my producing twice that number of persons of veracity, from amongst the spectators, who will assert, that neither Mellor nor his fellow-sufferers, used either of those expressions. As to their guilt there cannot be a particle of doubt, the point at issue is the confession. I was, Sir, not “An Attentive Hearer,” but I have been

A DILIGENT ENQUIRER.