3rd March 1817: John Beckett advises Jeffrey Lockett on how to apprehend the Luddite 'Little Sam'

Whitehall 3 March 1817.

Dr Sir

The only safe mode of proceeding in this Case, and the least dilatory in this. Send an Officer from Leicester to London with a Warrant of Apprehension—let him apply at the War Office for Sam’s discharge from Porchester Castle—let him proceed with both to the County of Hants, and then get the Warrant backed—let him go to Porchester Castle—exhibit the War office Order for Sam’s discharge, & take him into Custody under the Justice’s Warrant, & go back with him to Leicester

Yrs faithfully

J. Beckett

[To: Jeffrey Lockett]

26th November 1816: The Home Office tells Henry Enfield that his plans to detain suspected Luddites is unlawful

W. 26 Nov. 1816

Sir

I am [directed] by Lord [Sidmouth] to [acknowledge] the [illegible] of yr [letter] of the 23d. inst with its Inclosure & in reply I am to state, what in practice must occurred to you, & the Magistrates, in the Course of Proceeding to be adopted in similar Cases—viz—that before a [Warrant] can be issued for the purpose of apprehending an Individual & binding Him over to keep the Peace, certain affidavits must be made in order to justify and support such Caption; these affidavits should, of course, set forth the Grounds upon which the Deponent believes that such danger exists; and the Party threatened should be able to make an affidavit that He verily believes His life is in danger, before a [Warrant] can be properly be issued for the apprehension of any Individual in order that Sureties of the Peace may be demanded against Him. You will of course apply these observations to the cases before You

It does not appear from any Communication from Mr. Lockett received at this Office, whether any & what Confessions have lately been made by Towle.

At present there does not seem to be sufficient Grounds for apprehending the Individuals alluded to in Your Letter, as being concerned in the Felony at Loughborough for which Towle was executed.

I have

J. Beckett

[To] H. Enfield Esqr.
Nottingham

19th June 1815: John Beckett cautions George Coldham about raiding the home of Gravenor Henson

Copy
Private

Whitehall
June 19, 1815.

Dear Sir,

I received yours of [the] 17[th] by this mornings Post together with the Enclosure which I return according to your desire.—

— As far as one can judge from the Paper itself Lord Sidmouth, to whom I have shewn it and your letter – is of opinion with me that the Communication is much to be a friendly one.—You seem however to have taken all the Precautions possible respecting the Arms of the militias that are alluded to and having done so, I hope no very vicious mischief is to be apprehended — Your future operations will depend probably upon what takes place at Leicester of which you will I take for granted be accurately informed.

Upon the material question in your Letter, viz. as to searching Houses—I have as you desired held a Consultation — and it is clearly Opinion here that unless you can lay before a magistrate such Information of a Treasonable nature as will indeed induce him to grant a Search Warrant — it would be unwise to take such a Step — whether your Information will enable you to go that length of course the Secret Committee will be the best judges―

I shall be glad to hear from you if any thing material takes place in the Course of this week or the next.—I own however that I think your precautionary Steps will shew that you are prepared — and that therefore nothing will happen nothing will happen of consequence.—

I am &c

J Beckett

[To] Geo: Coldham Esqr

2nd March 1814: The Treasury Solicitor informs the Home Office about his views on Nadin's expenses

Lincolns Inn
March 2. 1814

Mr. Hobhouse presents Complts. to Mr. Beckett, and returns Mr. Nadin's Memorial, & the accompanying Documents received from Mr. Beckett on the 26th ulto. Although on the Inspection of Mr. Nadin's Charges there certainly does not appear to be any Claim for his personal Labour, yet the Amount of some of those Items which are charged as Disbursements, leads to a strong Suspicion that a considerable Profit on them must have occurred to himself. W.H. makes this Observation, not with a View of subjecting the Bill to Revision, which he thinks would at this time be useless, but as it may weigh something in deciding on the question of Mr. Nadin's ulterior Remuneration. W.H. regards Nadin as a very useful Police Officer, whom it is desirable to render chearful in the Execution of his Duty, & on this Ground he presumes to think it would not be amiss, particularly after the long Delay wch has occurred in paying his Bill, to present him with a moderate Gratuity.

With regard to the Derbyshire Cases, in respect of which Nadin thinks himself [badly] treated, it is fit to observe that Government has neither directly nor indirectly had any Concern in them. W.H. knows not by whom Nadin was employed, nor by whom the Prosecution were conducted; but he apprehends that the 5 Convictions entitle the Prosecutor to 5 Rewards of £40 each besides Tyburn Tickets, out of which Nadin probably had, & certainly was entitled to have, a considerable Share

11th February 1813: John Beckett of the Home Office instructs General Acland to distribute anti-Luddite propaganda in the West Riding

Private

Whitehall
11.—Febry. 1813.

My Dear Sir

We have just published an Account of the late Trials at York—which it is desirable to circulate in the West Riding more particularly in the neighbourhood of Huddersfield from whence some of the worst of the Cases came

With this View the Printer has been ordered to dispatched through the General Post Office – a considerable No of Copies of this Publication to General Maitland at York – I apprehend however that the General may be detained in Scotland longer than He expected – and it is possible that the Pamphlets in question may remain at York till His Return instead of being distributed immediately as Lord Sidmouth wishes they should be

To prevent the possible Delay in the Circulation of them I am induced to trouble you with this Letter to request you would take such steps as may appear to you most adviseable for accomplishing the Object in View – I did intimate to Genl Maitland a short time ago – that Copies of the above md Publication would be sent to Him as soon as they could be finished – and it is not improbable that he may have left some Orders at York with yourself as to the Circulation of them if they should arrive at York in His absence

I have [etc]
J.Beckett

[To] M.G. Ackland
&c &c &c

16th December 1812: John Beckett of the Home Office informs General Acland of the date for the York Special Commission

Whitehall
16 Decr. 1812

My Dear Sir

I trouble you with a line to mention that the Commission will be opened at York on the 2d Janry.—I shd fear the Cases of the late Robberies at Huddersfield will not be in a fit state to be tried by that time—If not, and I think you could ascertain the point—I should prefer the Men, of whose names I believe you know, been committed for further Examination — to some place of safe Custody, rather than committed finally to York Castle for Trial — wh has been too much the Practice already — perhaps you would be as good as to suggest Something of this sort to Mr. Radcliffe as from yourself if you shd find it necessary — If the Cases — & the Evidence to commit upon them were properly prepared & strong enough — there could be no Objection to their being tried at York — but this at present I hardly conceive to be possible — Do favor me with a Line —

I enclose you an Extra [Garnette] full of Russian triumphs

Yrs faithfully
J. Beckett

[To: General Acland]

27th October 1812: The Home Office Under Secretary, John Beckett, seeks assurances that Walker & Sowden's evidence was given voluntarily

Whitehall 27th Octr 1812—

Sir

I am directed by Lord Sidmouth to acknowledge the Receipt of your Letter of the 24th Instant with its several Inclosures.

There seems to be a fair prospect from what is stated in the Examinations transmitted by you of obtaining a Conviction against some of the persons who murdered Mr. Horsfall. It would be desireable however that Lord Sidmouth should have before him in considering the Case against these parties all the Documents connected with it and I have therefore to request that you would send up a Copy of Walker’s Confession which you state to have been taken at a time when you had no Evidence against him and you will be so good as to inform me whether his Confession when taken was purely voluntary or made under any Inducement held out by yourself or any other person on your behalf. This Information is necessary in order to decide whether Walker must of necessity be admitted as Evidence for the Crown. For the present you will be so good as represent Mr. Radcliffe the expediency of Walker being kept in safe Custody and apart from persons who are likely to tamper with him.

I have a letter from Mr. Lloyd by the same Post which conveyed yours stating that a Man whose name Mr. L. does not mention has been privately examined before Mr. Radcliffe and that his Testimony goes to confirm the Statements contained in the Depositions you have sent up throughout. A copy of this Examination Lord Sidmouth is also desirous of receiving and it should also be known how far the same was voluntary if it is in the nature of a Confession tending to implicate the Party making it in the murder.

You will see the propriety of forbearing to hold out to Walker any expectations of money if the same has not been done already till the whole of the Case against the persons committed has undergone a full Consideration.

I am &c
(signed) J. Beckett

[To] Allison Esqr
Huddersfield

2nd September 1812: John Becket of the Home Office writes to the Stockport solicitor John Lloyd

Copy
Private

Whitehall
2. Septr. 1812.

Dear Sir

I have received your several letters (3 in No) dated the 31st Ulto by this mornings post.

I had certainly been a little misled by your Statement respecting the Persons who had come in & taken the Oath of Allegiance at your office at Stockport concluding that they were from the immediate neighbourhood of that Place—this however does not appear to have been the case—I hope nevertheless the Example will be followed there in a short time.—

I hope the Clergyman at Holmfirth is a discreet man otherwise the Discretion you have entrusted him with to hold out the Expectation of a Pardon to any Person who will offer to make an ample disclosure of his Crimes may lead to some Embarrassment—The moment this is known every Scoundrel in the neighbourhood may come & claim the Benefit of this offer—& I don't see how a Pardon could be refused in any such case—Besides you are to recollect that the Legislature has not authorized such a Pardon to be granted. & it ought to depend & must depend upon the circumstances of a particular case Whether the Party should receive the Kings Pardon for any offence to Which it is not Extended by act of Parliament. I wish therefore you would write immediately to the Clergyman at Holmfirth and desire that for the present at least no previous general Engagement to grant a Pardon to Persons coming in & making disclosures be made, or the Expectation of it held out—it is not at all Clear that Persons who have taken an illegal Oath, will not readily take the opportunity afforded them by the Act of getting quit of the Penalties attached to that offence—Although they may be conscious of having been concerned in other outrages—It is also Possible that Persons with this Prospect of obtaining something like a General Pardon may come in & pretend they want Absolution from the Penalties they have incurred by taking an illegal Oath—While in point of fact their object is to procure a Pardon for other offences—they never having taken the Oath at all.—

You ask what you are to do with Yarwood. Upon this Point I will write to you again for the present let him remain in Custody—Bent also should remain unmolested—I have received information about him Which leads me to request you will take no notice of Him Whatever without writing to me first—You had better consult General Maitland about William Cooper Who you say was sent into Shropshire to be out of the way—if there is a Probability of his being made useful—it would be an easy matter to send for Him & employ him, I should doubt Whether [near] him not suspected—would not be the better Agents.—

I quite approve of your having urged a Commitment to York Castle in Scholefield's Case & you will acquaint Mr. Scott that He has adopted your suggestion very properly. Mr. Wood was not aware probably of all that you had passed respecting him—Which may account for his suggesting a previous communication with the Secretary of State—I trust that your Endeavours to procure Evidence against the other Parties Who were accomplices with Scholefield may prove successful—The case is so strong against Him that nothing should be said to Him Which can be construed into a promise of Mercy, by way of inducement to him to confess—if He proposes of Himself to say any thing let it be received—but I beg the Gaoler at York may be cautioned on this point, it is one of much Consequence. You will of course apprize me if you discover any thing from the Parties Whom you mention it is your intention to take to a distance—I see no great objection to this Step—provided you bear in mind the caution above mentioned respecting Scholefield—& apply it if possible to other Parties Who are implicated. It is not impossible that with care a conviction may be obtained against more than one.—

Please to send me back the intercepted letter signed J.B.—keeping a copy if you please—& send a copy to Ralph Fletcher Esqr. Bolton to Whom it may be [usefully] new Information against the 38 from Lancaster should be taken and sent up for consideration.

I am &c

(Sigd) J. Beckett

[To] J. Lloyd Esqr—
Wakefield—