It was proved that _Batteau_ confessed to two persons (both of whom were introduced as witnesses) that he belonged to the conspiracy, and made efforts to induce them to join in the rising, by representing the extent of their preparations, and the probability of their success. He stated he was to head a party near Canon’s bridge, and that he expected aid from the country.—More than one interview took place between Batteau and the witnesses on the subject; the last, on the Sunday fixed for the insurrection, on which he renewed his solicitations that the witnesses should join him.—Batteau was found _guilty_, and sentenced to be executed on the 2d of July.
STEPHEN, belonging to Thos. R. Smith, Esq.
Was next brought before the Court, but the testimony being deemed insufficient, and indeed, the Court being satisfied of his innocence, directed his _discharge_.
PETER, the slave of Mr. James Poyas, was next tried.
It was distinctly in proof, against _Peter_, that he had made great efforts to induce others to join in the insurrection; and the testimony represented him quite in the character of a chieftain or leader, for which his boldness and sagacity unquestionably qualified him.—He appeared, from the testimony, to have employed uncommon pains to remove all the objections arising in the minds of those whom he attempted to enlist, as to the probability of the success of the effort. And spoke with great confidence of the succors which were expected from San Domingo. It was strongly to be inferred, from all the witnesses stated, that the difficult and dangerous sally of endeavouring to carry the Main Guard-House was to have been confided to him, for he particularly acquainted one of the witnesses with the combination of stratagem and force with which he proposed to accomplish this object.
Peter was found _guilty_ on this testimony, and sentenced for execution on the 2d of July.[7]
AMHERST, belonging to Mrs. Lining, was next examined, found _not guilty_, and _discharged_.
The Court then proceeded to the trial of NED, the property of Governor Bennett.
_Ned’s_ guilt was proved fully by the same witnesses that appeared against Peter Poyas, with whom it was established he was in the habit of frequent consultation on the efforts that were to be made. Subsequent disclosures have justified very strongly the finding of the Court against him, and placed it beyond a doubt, that he was a ringleader, and was to have headed a force in the vicinity of the Lines.