Star. — London, England, 1825-06-25 00:00:00

-- . • • PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. ••‘. HOUSE OF LORDS, JUNE ay. Lord SUFFIELD, referring to what had been said yesteray respeeth_rg the proposed removal of the Norfolk Assizes from Thet ford to Norwiih, stated that the Noble and Learned Earl on the Woolsack had promised to apply to the Judges for an account of their realms for objecting to that removal, and to communicate them to Ulm. in order that they might be tlansmitted to the Ma &rates of Norfolk, to whom the matter was of great importance. The Earl of LAUDERDALE prriented a Petition from the °weer, and Occupiers of Land, and Tradesmen of Woodbridge, in the County of Suffalk, against the admission of Bonded Corn under the Distillery Au.—Laid on the table. SCANDAL. Lord I)ACRE said, he had a Petition to present from a Gentleman of very great respectability, and having made inquiries into the circumstances stated in the Pe tition, had found them to bz-cerrect. The Petition accused a Clergyman of the Church of England of the greatest indecency and immorality, and s t rayed their Lordships to institute such proceedings as might put an end to scandal, such as was deta led in that Petition. About the year 1814 or 1815, a Dr. Free came to reside as Rector of the . Parish of Sutton. in the County of Bedford, and shortly after that pe, it'd was guilty of conduct almost too gross and too immoral iss conceive, proof of which was immediately adduc?d, irl various ways, by witnesses, and by the number of his natural. children. The predete:sor of the Right Rev. Prelate opposite (the Bishop of Lincoln) had interfered, and had obliged the parfshioners to point out to the Diocesan the conduct of this Clergyman. The Right Reverend Prelate who was n•lw before him, had instituted pro ceedings against him, and in the Court of Arches the Learned Judge who presided had admitted the conduct of this person to be infamous, but had decided that by the tith George 111. proceedings against a person for inconti nence could not be held unless within eight months after the com mission of the act. The question now remained to be decided by the Court of King's Bench. The parishioners earnestly prayed their Lordships to enact such measures as should enable them to take proceedings against this individual; if not by enlarging the period of limitation,by some other means that might give them relief. The Petition of Montagu Burgoyne, Esq. of Sutton, in the County of Bedford, on behalf of himself and several other pa rishioners, praying that the moral conduct of the Rev. Edward Da: Free, Tteetnr of Sutton, in the said County, might be inquired into was then read. The Bishop of LINCOLN said, that as this P.tition nrigirated in his diocese, and as the Noble Lord (Dacre) had alluded to him, he felt it necessary to address a few words to the House. No words could be too strong to describe the gross immorality of the individual whose case was then before their. Lordships, and it was his (the Bishop. of Lincoln's) most anxious wish that some remedy might be suggested, which not only in this in stance, but in all similar instances, would empower the B shop to bring such offenders to a justly merited pueiihment. Soon after he had been appointed to the See, the case arced in the Petition. with all its aggra vated circumstances, was laid before him by the pa rishioners, and he had done all in his power to punish the offender in his Court, but had found that he could do nothing. lle had then directed his Archdeacon to do all he could' to remove the evil, but he also had failed. He had then nothing left but to bring the mat ter into the Court of Arches, where it now was. It would ill become I im to say anything as to his having in solved himself in considerable expense. The situation he now held called upon him, and made it his bounden duty to meet all such cases in the way he had met this; but he lel , it necessary to observe, that it was rather a hardship that Bishops shisitld be driven to art expense little short of four or 5(X)1. because their power over their dioceses was found to be inadtquate to meet the evil;. Hal sincerely wished that si me measure might be proposed which should enitble the (louse to put a stop, as fier'is possible, to such acts as those alluded to; for it must be evident •to every one that the difficulties which lay. in the yray e f prosecu ion was a sort of en• couragement .to such conduct. This was not a time when persons, who held the high and responsible situa tion lie now held, ought in any way to 'clot their ex ertions—when their conduct was so freely commented upon, although they wished to do more than they really Coulded- He felt it his, duty to express his thanks to the Noble Lord (Mere) for having abstained from entering into the disgraceful and scan dalous circumstances detailed iu the Petition, which could only do harm to the cause their Lordships would advocate. He trusted that their Lordilips were fully impressed with the importance of the subject, and the necessity of doing'something to prevent the re petition of the evil. EQUITABLE LOAN BILL. Lord DACRE moved the third reading of the Equitable Loan The LORD CHANCELLOR should state what in his opinion was really the object of the .Bill. In doing this he should lay aside the conduct of the individoals coccerned in the matter before the execution of the Deed, and look at the question as it stood at present. The pubic were.told that the object of the measure was a Charitable Institution to reline the poorer classes from the fiat sh claims made upon them by Pawn brokers. This was not a representation which belonged to 'that Bill ; quite the contrary ; for it was stated in the deed which had been executed, what its true objects were. The preamble said that certain individuals had formed a Society, and had subscribed, or might sub- ' scribe, a sum of money to make Loans on various objects of property b low ten pounds, and to take a lower interest than pawnbrokers. Now, in fact, it was proposed to embody a number of persons who might amount to 7coo, to compete with individuals in the market;•but ri.'t ultimately for the benefit of the public ; for, after having driven. these individuals out of the ,market,, they might make and impose what terms they pleased. Ille.Nob'e and Learned Earl then read various portions of the preamble and of the deed, to stew that the Company intended to sell deposits like pawnbrokers. any proposition was ever made to sanction usury under the pretence of something equi table, it was this: for if a man took more than .5 per cent. interest in any way,.it was usury under the sta tute. Then were the 7000 shareholeers to be consi dered 'guilty of usury? No ;by the Bill, their clerk alone was to be guilty of it. Then how was the judg , nient to be enforced in civil actions (for Ake Bill did rut admit. of criminal ones) against the clerk ? After he had been ten or twelve months in prison, what was to bo,done with the company? Theh,olso, this Corn- 1 pany was not to be confined to a focal existence in Lona don. • •It woe to become a general shop of Consignees itom Consiknots, not only. ilf t England; but is allthe orld, aiiiikliciiewas not one won! in the Bill to com pel it to cOnthiae the business of pawnbrokim which formed the pretence fir its institution, One *gliontkafter the Act *field ilave pitsir. 'lt was tbetefare for their ‘ . tt' 'Tearable which , t•I , - \ - 711/ 5 • - . ::~; T.M'w . • f bers,ilf they brottabt themselves under the Usury Act.' except that of punishing the poor clerk, who woad be. as innocent as he (the Lord Chancellor) himself?, If this Bill were. passed, there would be a revival of those suits in equity springing' from the practice of young men buying pre.peity at an imfnense price on credit at one end of this city, and pawning or selling it at the other for less than its value. if this were to be the case, their Lordships must-take care to place in the Bill that principle of equity, that if young men bought on credit, en purpose to pawn or to sell, whatever price was given at one end r f the town they should be com pelled to pay no more than swhat was given at the other. The attempt was an evasion of the Act of Usury ; it was calling en Parliament to establish the Company in matters not mentioned in the preamble, whilst the day after they might drop the business of pawnbroking. The House had on its table a Bill to repeal the 6th of George 1. (the Bubble Act), and he did not mean to object to itt repeal, because it• pro hibited nothing which was not already prohibited by the common law of the land. lit whether it were re pealed or qot, he defied the ablest men in this country. and those who had drawn the present deed, were evi dently able ones, to get rid of this, that without a charter from the Ctostn, or an incorporation by Par liament, the law of England, as it was administered in the Courts of Law or Equity, was not equal to enforce the ob'igations of any Deed. And it was his decided opinion that all partnerships, the obligations of which could not be enforced by the laws, were ilk gal. He would be glad to know what was to rn..ke this Company legal? and indeed he could not find by any of the clawes of the Bill, whether there was any in tention at all of making it legal. He also begged those Noble Lords who were at home to- night,and who meant to patronize the Bill, to point out how the Company could proceed against strangers, or against its own members? The Bill did not contain one word to make those who were members this day liable to any judgment which might be obtained in actions against them, if by that time they had sold their shares and given place to others. If the. Clerk were sued, and the Clerk could not pay, then the suing party would only be so much the worse for having sued. It was said that executioa might be taken against any Member, but the means of doing so were not given. Let their Lordships determine whether what was, and what had been the law, that partnerships we re nut to consist of more than a limited number of individuals, were or were not to be adhered to? Under all the circumstances of the case, he should act on his own opinion of the measure, and move that the Bill be read a third time that day three months. Lord DACRE would only make a very few obser vations, as the subject had been already amp:y discussed in all its details. He contended that the Preamble had been understood by the Noble and Learned Earl in a very different manner from what lie expected, and what it ought to have been. It did not limit the Company to transact merely pawnbroking business, but enacted it to make advances in money on goods and profits. Th- Noble and Learned Lord doubted its being productive of benefit, but would it not be a positive advantage to -the public that small sums below 101. should be ad vanced at 20 per cent. less intetest than by the Paten hrokers? The Noble Lord then compared the course pursued by Pawnbrokers with that which the Company meant to follow. If any act of usury were cemmiited, a Jury would decide on the subject, .and iheie were clauses in the Bill to make the individual members of the Company liable in their persons as well as in their goods. The clauses most objected to had been copied from an old Act for the better regulation of co-partnerships of bankers in Ireland, which had been adopted without opposition by their Lordships this Session. The Noble and Learned Earl bad said, that the Detd had been drawn by able men. he (Lord . D.) could add, that he held it from an authority second to none, that it was thought impossible that ob jections should have been stated to the clauses of that Deed. Being fully convinced of the utility of the measure, he should feel seriously disappointed if it were surrounded with so many legal difficulties as to prevent its obtaining a third reading. • The House then divided on the Amendment— Contents . • . • Not Contents . 27 'Majority against the Bill • —II • , The Bill for abolishing the Sale of Offices in the tontt of Site Bench, and the Judges Salaries Bill, were reed a second time. The Scotch Copartnership Societies Regulation Bill was also read a second time. The Bill for abolishing the Sale of Offices in the Court of Com mon Pleas, the Excise Duties and Drawback Bill, the Irish Cur* remelt Assimilation Rill, the Master of the Rolls and Vice.Chan 7 cellor's Salaries Dill, the High Office Holders Compensation Bill, and the University Police Bill, went respectively through Commit tees and were reported.--Adjourned at Saves o'Caoce. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. F. BUXTON complained of an error in one of the newspapers with respect to what tell from him last night. Ile was made to say rh the had received a let- ; ter from the Missionaries in the West Indies. He had received no such letter. There was another mistake, in making him say that the Barbadians had subsctibed so large a sum towards . the building of the Chapel which they afterwards destroyed. The' Hon. Member then presented a Petition in favour of Parliamentary Reform, from Warrington, Lancashire.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. BROUGHAM presented a Petition from a respectable in dividual, named George Milner, a Magistrate of Cambridgeshire. The object of the Petitioner was to complain of some misrepresen tation of the language used by him (Mr. Brougham) on some former occasion, when a Petition was presented from a person named Hayes. No doubt the mistake was accidental, because the imputation made to rest on the character of Mr. Milner was one of ignorance in his Magisterial capacity, an ignorance which Mr. Milner never could have 'hewn, inasmuch as he was a lawyer by' profession, and had presided as Chairman of the Quarter Sessions of his County. He hoped the error might be corrected through the same channels by which it went forth to the world.—The Pe tition was ordered to be printed. The Apothecaries' Bill was read a third time, and after some ob servations from Mr. C. DUNDAS and Nlr. ilibcows, passed. • PETITION OF AIR. MONTAGU BURGOYNE. Mr. J. SMITH presented a Petition from Mr. Mon tagu Burgoyne, a Gentleman of the highe t honour and most undoubted benevolence—(Flear). He Pe titioned the House in his character of Churchwarden of Sutton (Bedfordshire), asking for some means of ob taining redress against Clergymen who misconducted themselves in their sacred station. The facts on which the Petition were grounded. were these: In 1808, Dr. Free was presented to the living of Sutton. Th.s indi. vidual, for a course of years, had been committi.lg a series of scandalous and immoral acts. Several illegi timate children had been sworn to him by different. women. Mr. Burgoyne had offered to prove, in the Eccltsiastical Cou s, hit habits of drunkenne , s, in decent exposure, swearirg, and gross irreligion. Trese facts could be proved, and the whole conduct of that unhappy Clergyman was one series of immorality.— He had alto refused to perform his clerical functions. The details were disgusting, and he (Mr. J. Smith) ssiould not go farther. into them. Some proceedings here instituted in the Bishop's Court, but nothing was effeted, and - the cause 'was afterwards removed to another Court (the Arches), where proof was gone into. lie appealed , to the Court of Kin;'s Bench, under an Act Of '2'7,h Geo:III. which provided that no prose . canon:should be instituted against a Clergyman by his parishioners after six months. from the commission of the• offence.. It was expected that a prObibition would .iisue . from the King's Bench, and thus the parish would be left without redress, and they would continue to be afflicted' with such a flagitious charac ter. Ile earnestly hoped the Right Honourable Secretary (Mr. ii r i l ii old n s ot hi p s : 'PS. 'one w id o t r r d ‘ . 4 o f i l f lit d i l et e O a l l i i : i tre s a e ll . b f l o e r w w r ii ic c h h ' re . theto e t s tuspattilewparisnfcoirpteeli.the ee nig‘itolio:dcoinnssitgitfeeionfbodrl sons of property not only in this country; but in all the world, and with no other means of punishing ill MM. ' i FF4r i, ,~ `( 7- ^" • , . . ' ' Peel) wou'd app'y himself to the taw, line devise wine remed against such an evil. The prayer of the Petition ►bas, that th 4 27th Geo. 111. might be amended,• Kt that ' Clergymen might be punished for improopetionduct. •• Mr. Secretary PEEL said he had never heard of the name of Dr. Free before, though he was aware oh the respectability of Mr. Burgoyne. Of the facts he knew nothing. If the allegations were true, the per son accused was utterly unworthy of his station— (Hear). But considering the general exemplary con duct of the body 'of the Clergy, such an instance of misconduct only appeared the more flagitious. He would inquire into the law, and if it could be amended he had no wish but to have it done. Still, as there were suits pending, he hoped that the Petition might not be printed. Mr. BROUGHAM agreed that the Petition ought not to be rrinted, for the reason just assigned. The case was a flagitious one, and he regretted to say, the hue Diocesan had shewn a culpable remissness in bringing the matter forward. If it had been a matter of neg lect of the Thirty-nine Articles, something would have been done. He bore testimony to the respectability of Mr. Burgoyne, and said it was shameful that Dr. Free should be permitted to act as a Clergyman. Mr. J. SMITH said he knew the faits to be true of his own knowledge. Mr. Burgoyne had acted with the greatest reluctance, and had given Dr. Free the option to give up his rectory and ap point a curate, and then no public notice would be taken of his conduct —The Petition was ordered to be laid on the table. • .1 on tie rant? when be poin ted out trio of m y sheep. 'Miter* was of pitch and tar snindgect on the right side, not in any pertieu.. lar farm, nor were there any initials; it was about the size of an inkstand. Haggett said he saw Beal leading the ram awry In a string; the Silue of the ram was about 50s. but I kept him for breeding. I told Adams that my chatke against Beal was fur a felony; chid was before he brought the form of the search warrant into the mon. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL. —The distance . front West: wood Common to Beal's house is ahem three miles. I told Mr. Kenrick that I had seen the ram in Bears fold, and that I bad a chain of evidence against him. I do not know whether Vows i with me as a witness . K w whetheraggett w Beal turned his sheep on West : fares.. , wood Common, and I know no thin g about the size of his fa y nt.- to in lie g d sto i n i . a gg ßeal told me how the rant was mar ked, and I knew the rant front ietes don't ai k u t e 10 . ir his description. I told Kenrick this. Kenrick never told me; during the converution, that it ought to be ;wide the subject of 1 civil action. Beal told me it was his own ram, and I told Mr: Kenrick that he said so. I did not tell Kenrick everything thai passed between Beal and myself, but I answered all his questionC The question referred to Nash and the other was, whether fleece was mine or not? Mr. BitOUG H A M.—Haggett told me he had seen Beal seat the sheep, but he did not see him take it off the Common. *hen I shewed Mr. Kettrick's note to Beal, I said, " I understand y are a favourite of Kenrick's, or else you would have been • placed in an awkward situation." Beal said, '• he did nut care a d---a for me or Kenrick." Mr. M. A. TA YLOR.—Adams brought in a search-warrant the room; neither Mr. Kenrick nor Adams gave hint (witness) any paper to sign. Sir It. Kr I ISO N.—Berl might have obliterated the mark' after he (Candor) had told hint his intentions to charge hint with a. .felony. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—Mr. Nash, to whom it was referred, is a very respectable man; before his (Canter's) person was searched he had not said anything rude or uncivil to Mr. Kenrick. Mr. W. LAMB.—Witness was not advised by any one to take• the course he had done. Mr. 11 [LOU GHA M.—He (witness) offered to give evidence on oath Deicer Mr. Kenrick, but he did not take it. Mr. Secretary (witness) was not dissatisfied with the compromise which was entered into at the trial by his Cour.sel. He thought Mr. Kenrick was not a ht person to hang a man, as lid had let one eacape. The AT roitNEY.GENER AL—The compromise at the Assizes, he (witness) talked about with Mr. hlarryat his Counsel; • he (witness) now lived in Church-street. Stoke Newington ' his. Attorney lives in Falcon-square ; he can't teeollect when be fiat gave him instructions to draw up this Petition ; he never made auy offer of compromise to Mr. Kenrick. —The witness withdrew. Mr. DEN MAN said he had no intention to call any other wit ness on this part of the case. Mr. bIiOULiHAM suggested that the more regular course would be for Mr. Kenrick's answer to be given by way of Petition. Mi. S.:cretary CANNING obieeted to that course, and thought the Counsel should read the Petition of Mr. Kenriek as part of his speech. Mr. BROUGHAM said his ohj ct was not to pre. chide Mr. Kentick from addressing them, either by hums Counsel, or Agent. Ile wished to have some record of the proceedings. When Counsel was heard upon eves y thing connected with the matter, he would wish to lure the au swer presented in shape of a Petition, and this would serve as a recurd of the proceedings. Mi. 6UItSEY then iead the statement.—lt stated the • facts that Mr. Kentick was not at the Assizes when the ttial took place, and that the compromise was not m ttie with his consent. That he had no knowledge nf Beal but by reputation, and never spoke to him in his life. He denied that any motive could be imputed to him for acting with partiality. He might have committed an error in judgment, but nothing mote; and he sub- . mitted his Lase to the favourable consitetation of the. House. The Learned -Counsel having finished reading the statement, sa d he should be quite content to leave the case of Mr. Kenrick upon this statement, but fur the part which he had taken in the proceedings out of - which the accusation arose. His reason for proposing a compromise at the t•ial•was this; he understood the whole object of Camfor to be that cf obtaining his . costs ; and as he saw that a verdict must go against h:a client, he consulted with the Counsel for the plaintiff, and they entered into an arrangement, to which he agreed. It was for the House to say whether Or'not, upon afterwards finding the compromise not equal to • his u ishes, this person had not brought his Petition before them as a measure of revenge? The Learned Counsel then defended the course taken by Mr. Kenrick,.. in refusing to rant the search warrant, as being one of . sound discretion.. Was it to be said that every Magistrate , was compelled to grant a search war rant upon its being asked for? If so, it would be ' no longer necessary to have Gentlemen of learning and character in the Magistracy ; for the office , might . as easily be discharged by a foo man or a. clerk. Domestic privacy would be no longer secure from intrusion, and the liberty of the subject would be destroyed. The case came before Mr. Kenrick in the shape of a question of disputed property and the course to be adopted in issuing his summon'; instead of a search warrant, was one which had done no injury whatever to Camfor, in respect to any ulterior proceedings he might have taken. It was impossible to say that there had been any denial cf justice, either in intention or effect; and with these few observations, he should confidently leave the case in the hands of the House. Mr. BOLLAND was asked by the Chairman whether he des'red to add anything on the part of Mr. Kenrick? which the Learned Counsel declined doing. • A MEMBER. under the gallery said that Beal was al• ways considered in the neighbourhood to be an honour able and respectable man. He Was of opinion, that in such a case a Magistrate would be highly . culpable who hastily issued a search warrant—(Hear, bear). The Mr. Nash who had also been referred to, was a man of most respectable cha racter. lie was not a common farmer, but very superior to that class of persons. Mr. S cretary CANNING said, he apprehended it was quite impossible to proceed with the case, in its present state. They had, on one side, evidence gives. at their bar, which would be Fainted ; on the other side, they had the speech of a Learned Counsel, which was evanescent, and of which they had no record. They certainly could not proceed without some motion was made. Mr. I)KN MAN said, he would move the evidence be Mr. Secretary CANNING thought it would bsedun fair to assent to a motion of this kind, the evidence being all on one side. He was ready to go to a decisive verdict on the cue, as it now stood; and, if no other person would make a specific,motion on the subject, be would. * Mr. DENMAN thought the whole of the proceed ings had been of a novel character, and he had found nothing so novel as the objection of the Right Honour. able Gentleman. Why was not the same course now * to be put sued as in all other similar cases? He defied any man to shew a precedent where the House, after. hearing evidence in. any case of enquiry whatever, did not order the printing of the-: evidence before the Meiners were called upon to come to a decision ' The statement of Mr. Kenrick would not be found of that evanescent nature which the Right Honourable Gentleman attributed to it, supported as it was by that ingenious, and powerful, and eloquent speech which tad been .delivered by. his Counsel. That speech had red iLlth so strongly in the• minds of every Gen .leman who heard it; that it could not fail to in lue-uce tlicrit whenever they were called .upon to give v.idizt upon the qucstti.n. Ht: eipected that chelttg he . • ■ Yi {.~~ - T t - ' A.~~ • . TrOO , Gel evidasee . accompa Rive . slim 'doing), depart f should p • in the-bal enaider OR= He ;night be 'Le 'Was Arm :triiffee.e wI • Alr:Se the Hon. . 1 .4) entire! Theenqui was direct 'ought to I he, for on to a resoli dence of 1 saw nogrott Gentleman . Mr. Al opinion ui would no; elsence*of tl proceed to any decision Mr. Se at first w; posed tha any pled4 be taken statement Inittee ups and with some Re Gentletna report pr. evidence, then prop Commitu of bis band: going out o chance mig in the abort niorrow, ei to a decista *no good to Mr. 1.) morrow. the evade alder and the attem even be da propose Oa sit again on S upon the come to act when por. ed. - point out Nu,* tbai As far as tl or Monday Mi Set tuitte st there we; trial. Bo not ()lice W nourabte resolution pared to Mr. Sc' ready to c Mr. V already I to inculpal Learned ( MR. KENRICK. The Order of the Day was read on this matter, on the motion of Mr. DENMAN. Mr. DEN MA N moved that Martin Camfor be called in. After a remark from Mr. Baottous,u—. The SPEAKER said he was not aware what course was to be pursued. If it wet e to be a mere detail of the facts, that he would remain in the Chair; but if it were to be an examination by ques tion and answer, the I !num had better go into aCommitter—( Hear.) Mr. D ENM A N said his object was to examine Camfor as to the facts of his Petition, and probably other Members might wish to ask questions. Mr. Secretary PEEL said the Counsel for Mr. Kenrick might wish to examine the witnesses. It would be better to go into a Committee. fhe House then resolved itself into a Committee, Mr. It. Goa- DON in the Choir.—llr. Camfor was ordered to be called in. Mr. GURNUT and Mr. Butaarin appeared as Counsel for Mr. Kenrick. Mr. DEN MA N then proceeded to examine the witness Cam for; the substance of whose answers was as follows :—I am a fernier residing at Chariwood Common, in the County of Sutrey. I lust a good many sheep last summer, and amongst them a ram. After spending a whole week in search, I found some of them on WestwoodCommon,(bere the witnev was ordered not to refer to the printed petition which he held in his hand) which is about four or five miles from Charlwood Com . There were six ewes and live lambs, but the ram was net there. They were marked with a peculiar composition of gaa.tar and pitch, and I never knew any such composition used before. I afterwards found the • ram in a fold belonging to one William Beal, or his mother, I don't know which. He was shorn of his fleece when I' found him, but not when T 100 him. I saw William Beal, and asked where the ram tame from? to which he answered, after a short time, that he got bim on Westwood Common. Ile said the fleece was not sold, but that he wonld not produce it ; nor would be give up possession of the rani, which he had taken from Westwood Common, because he thought it was his own. lie admitted that the ram had been marked with a bNck smudge On the right side, though none of his sheep were marked in that way. As 1 requested him to give up the fleece, but be refused, I inquired for a Magistrate and was termed to one. Mr. Kenrick, whom I bad never seen before. I went on Monday morning (it was in June, but the date I cannot tell) to Nlr.Kenrick, and saw a man whom I afterwards knew was Adams, but then thought fiim to be Kenrick.% When I began to tell my business, he said he was the servant, and shewed me to Mr. Kenrick's room. I said I wanted a search warrant, as I had lost a good many sheep, and had traced one to Beal. air. Kenrick asked me a great many questions as to how I could prove it, to which I answered that I had seen one of my rams and could swear to him. I said I wanted to search Ideal's premises for the fleece. Remick then began to .Wants ' who had left the room, then c. , me in with a paper in hia hand, which he said was the form of the search warrant. Kenrick said, " what I am writing will answer the same purpose." I said that I did not come there for any note, but for a search warrant. I said that if I could not get back my property in any other way, I should go to a solicitor about it. Kenrick flew into a passion, and ordereo me to leave the room. Ile told me not to talk about solicitors. I said • I was sorry for having offended him, and begged him to go on his own way. Ile then gave the note to Adams, who gave it to me. Kenrick said, go and get the Head Constable, afterwards he said I-could be the messenger myself. I took the note to Beal's, bet did not find him, but .I made sure of the rani, and moved him into another farm, belonging to Mr. Nash. I afterwards (on the same day) saw Beal at a public-house and 'offered hint the note, but he would not take it. I asked again for the fleece, and he refused to give it me. On Tuesday I went to another Magistrate, Mr. Burgess, about three miles from Kenrick's, and nine miles.frons my house. I had seen Beal on this same day, a little earlier, who repeated his refusal. When I told Mr. Burgess that I bad been with Mr. Kenrick, he 'said he could not interfere, and refused me the warrant, but adviseline to go once more toKenrick. did so, and in my way met Beal, with his brother (who is Ken. rick's bailiff), and again he refused the fleece, and snapping his fin. gers at me, said, "Go on, I'll see it out with you." However, 1 Went on to Kenrick's and saw Adams, who told use Mr. Kenrick said I was "to go about my business." Adams said Beal bad been there and talked about the matter being left to a reference, 'to be decided by Mr. Nash and Mr. Cutler; but of this reference I knew &milled hearl nothing. Beal, when -be came, said, "I am sure Cansfor will have, it to Nash." Beal promised to produce the fleece, and I consented. Beal did produce the fleece, and I sent a lad for sonic of mine, with the mark 'on it, and Nash and the other referee, a Mr. L ee, decided that it was mine, and wrote two certificates to that effect. I wont to Kenrick with these certificates, and he asked me for the note he wrote originally. would not give 'Cup, and he ordered Adams to take it by force.— This I objected to, and a constable was sent for, Adams in the mean time guarding the door, and Kenrick standing at the window. Mr. Kenrick had previously said, " Adams I appoint you a special con stable and order Apo to take that note from Camfor ;" but Adams declined it. The constable came, his name was Batchelor, and Kenrick said, " There's your prisoner, search dins and take the note." lie did so, and I took out my pocket-book and gave up the note. Ihid a fi.tece with me, and Mr. Kenrick ordered the constable to take that also, and then he ordered me to go about my business. However, I would not leave the house until I saw the &rue sealed up, and got a mite from the constable that he had acted in this way by Kenrick's order. I brought an r.c ion against Ken rick, which stood for trial at the last Croydon Assizes. It was cons promised on the condition that Kenrick shnuld pay £5 damages, and all the costs and expenses. He May have paid his own costs, but he has not yet paid the expenses I was put to. It was at least a fortnight before I got information where my sheep were. Ido not know who proposed the compromise, but perhaps this legal Gentleman (pointing to Mr. Gurney) can tell you.'—(A laugh). Mr. Gustier, in cross examination. I lost my sheep in May. It was on Monday that 1 first called on Mr. Kenrick; about four days elapsed between the first and last time that I called on hien . . Mr. Kenrick did not tell me that. Beal was a respectable farmer, and not likely to have stolen my sheep. Mr. Kenrick said he would give me a search warrant, and said the note he was writing would have just the same effect. I never threatened Mr. Kenrick that if he did not pay me more money I would do something to him. I wrote to his attorney that if he did not pay my expenses, I should consider about tackling him again. Idols% know whether he had cost. to the amount of .EllO. Mr. BOLLAND said he had no questions to put. Mr. DENMAN then put in the note as evidence. Its substance was—" I order you, to produce the fleece, in order that it may be 'evidence on a charge of - felony against you. You may bring it with I you to my house. " To Mr. W. Beal. a W. Kamm." Mr. Secretary PEEL—The ram I found in Beal's fold. There 'was no attempt at concealment; taut he was mixed up amongst the other sheep. Any one who went up to the fold might have moo him. I was directed there by good information from the man who saw Beal take the ram off the Common. I told Kenrick that I had got a chain of evidence as clear as noon day, to bring the matter home to Beal. The composition I used, in marking my sheep,was wholly unknown in that part a the country. There were about seventy sheep in Beal's fold, they were all shorn, And my rain was the only one jt remember in the fold. The name of the man who law Beal take the ram home was Haggett. When I first saw Haggett I did not knew him, but I asked him if he had seen a Southdown ram with a particular mark? be said yes, and went!to point out where hi was. In our way we passed Westwood Cont. mat, where I had just before (Mind eleven of my sheep, but I di. not tell Haggett; and I asked him if he saw any maths like that