The Statesman. — London, England, 1821-02-24 00:00:00

ML -. 1 I other step upon it than to wove that it should be print ed. If he were encouraged, he might afterwards move fur a Committee to inquire into the circumstances of the case. It was, he thought, possible that the House might look upon it as a fit case to address the Crown for a mitigation of punishment.—(hear.)—Ile certainly was not friendly to such a proceeding, unless where there existed a great necessity for doing so. Ile cer tasty would have voted agair.st such a proeeetling. , — After shortly alluding to the case of Lord Cochrane, the Honourable Gentleman said that he could not be persuaded that it would not be always attended with mischief and danger, to take front the Courts of Law that power which the Constitution invested them with or to subject their solemn judgments to any revision in that House.—The liberty of the sulijeet, his property, and his dearest rights, would not he so well protected in the House of Commons as they were by the Common Law of England, administered by the Judges of the land. Mr. D. then moved that the Petition be brought up. Mr. HOBHOUSE begged leaved to second the uso ion, and to state shortly the reasons which induced Liao to think that the Petition deserved the attention of the House. It bad been stated by the Learned Gent. at-ho presented the Petition that there was no case, as f•tr as he was aware, that justified a Court in imposing a tine ou a defendant for contempt ; and, he must also say that though he had himself searched with the utmost et r L e h a d been t k aable to find a single case bearing on toe Ilut . stion before the House. The adsence of any similar ••7:ereise of power by a judge in farmer times amounted, be apprehended, to a proof of the illegality of the prac tiLe; for, according to Coke ; "as usage proved the in tentlinent of the law, so non-triage proved what was not ietentied by the law." The strongest authority in favour n; the exigence of snch a power was that of Judge Ilult, io) said, C•at if a defendant was guilty of contempt, the Judge might issue a warrant against him, if the con tempt was committed out of court, or fine him if it was romulitted in court. This, however, was only the dic tum of a judge, and as such could not be opposed to tita lay of the land. When Judge Jetferies was on the bench, William Peon had been lined 40 marks for re ftt..tig to Lti:e oil his but in court, and the jury had been imprisoned k;ving a verdict contrary to the opinion of the bench. lint though Pent) hail insulted the bench, lie was Hot fined for any expression made use of in his tlefeace, but solely for refusing to pull off his hat ; and surely what had been too mach for Judge Jelferies to do ought to be too the present time.—(Loud cries of hear, hear.) In the 31 luititute of Cob!, page 142, there was a report of the case of William Bruce, who, though he had grossly insulted the Court, had nut been fined for his conduct. A verdict having been found against Bruce, he addressed the judge in those words—" Roger Hager, now thou 11.1.4 thy will of me," and on being -Led u hat be meant, he added, " what for a long tittle thou bast sought, any loss and my shame ; and I Lill think of it, and reward it or recompence it." Here, theugla the judge had been grossly insulted, an d thouela the oirence of the defendant was deemed s ) great that he had aftewards been indicted for it, atattll it hail Lot been attempted to fine him. But in his (,ir. ththhottse's) opinion, if even a thousand ad judged eases MUM hr produced in favour of the pray ure, they Wert no: to he regartlel as legal precedents contrary to the ctonnton law of the land. If the hat allt:wed the iaposition of such arbitrary fines, Mr. Fox's libel bill WAS useless, for a defendant might by this power b • so crippled in his defence, as not to be able to avail himself of the benefit which that act 1% . 34 intended to give. Let the expressions used by the de:violent in this case have been ever so gross, that had nothing whatever to do with the question befo e the House; for, however the grossness of the language might be proper matter of consideration in awarding the amount of a fine, it never could of itself give a judge the power of fining. 'I he Honourable lientletuan referred to the condurt of the late Lord Ellenhnrongh on the trial of Eaton, on which occa sion, though the defendant introduced the most blas phemous and libellous matters in the course of his de fence, the Learned Judge had said that he thought it better for the ends of justice to let him go on. The Monne should bear in mind that the ermine with as hid, a judge was clohthed did not invest hint with infallibility. The present case was one that loudly tailed for the interference of that !louse, and he Loped they would see the propriety of putting a stop at once to a practice so imeousistent with every principle of justice. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he did not tinder stand that his Learned Friend (Mr. Denman) bad denied Cie legality of the proceeding of the Learned Judge ; though the Hon. Seconder had roundly denied it. His Learned Friend, however, doubted th e l eg ,lity o f t h e Power to fine a defendant for contempt. His Learned Friend could not have been present when the question was hilly discussed in the Court of King's /tench, and when al, j.he Judges gave ther deliberate opinions upon it. Vie petition called in question the propriety of the ilec:s'om of .!iat Court. To enable the liouse to judge on the stliject, lie would state that the offence for which the defctv!aut was tried, Was not a political libel, hilt one of the most disgusting of blasphemous libels. He ahould read one short passage of it as a specimen. Lord J. RUSSELL objected to the reading of a pas ige of the description which had been mentioned, hich was alsolitterly irrelevant to the question before le Muse. No Member could, without Lave, read from printed cop). Mr. HOB - HOUSE observed, that lie had disclaimed iv defence of the Petitioner's libel—(Order 'f lie SPEAKER said, it was true, as the Noble lord id stated, that no person, without leave of the !louse, tulti read from a printed paper, though this rule had general not been strictly insisted upon. The ATIORNEY-GE N ERAL said, lie had no inten ton of prejudicing the case of the Petitioner by reading se libel; but when the conduct of the Learned Judge .ad been called in question, he thought justice would not he done unless lie shewed the object of the defen iant. lie should read, therefore, a short passage— Cries of " No!" from the Opposition.)—lle would ion crate it from memory. As the Learned Gentleman was looking at the paper, the SPF,A KIM said, as the attention of the House hail been called to the strictness of the rule, he was obliged • enforce it. Mr. BERNAL hoped no difficulty would he thrown io the way of the Attorney-General's exercising his dis cretion in reading the passage he had spoken of—(Cries of hear.) The ATTORNEY-OENERAL laid he should read a very short passage. The defendant in his libel in treated his fellow-countrymen to throw from them that book (meaning the Holy Bible) which was foil of blas phemy, lies, and uninteresting nonsense.. The House mast know that it was ths_practice of permss who were charged with such an °fence, to reiterate their libel ea their trial, sad, Weal, to attar ,terse blasphemy. ur in 'th s e " : L t l stand the lay legal though I Learned Power ti Friend e o as full] when all it. The derision on the si the dery one of tl should r Lord sage of which the floe a priute Mr. I an def 'the bad atm could r in Lent The tion of the lihs hal het sot be dint. (Cries then st • As tl the SP • been ei i • tio ears Mr. la the I credo' at heal VIVI SNOW boa Om, aetnt i 'bum ea ill ST, In tlOt rise die 'fudge hid In determine weether he soul 4 salter well a•proceeding. The defendant had come prepired alit% a written defence. In that delkice, after be had bee , . admonished by the Judge, he attacked the whole profession of the law. For this he was not lined, but was checked by the judge ; upon which he con ducted himself with the greatest insolence, held out Ins band in a menacing manner, and said, "if you Wish, to I send me to your dungeon, here is the key." For this lie ivr; lineii 2111.,and haying persisted in his blasphemy, lie was fined 2.1 f. more, and also a third time. After this I be pleaded his wife and children, and his inability to I pay the fines, on which the Judge remitted them, he ' cause they had anawered their purpose, by checking the inundation of blaspheme. The question was brought before the King's Pencil on a motion for a mew trial; a rule was granted to skew cause, and the cause was deli berately argued. After argument, the Judges were una nimous in their opinion of the propriety and legality of Mr. Justice Best a conduct. After this deliberate de cision in a Court of Justice, the Petition could not be received with the allegation that the Learned Person had acted illegally. If his Learned Friend who pre sented the Petition thought that the law ought to be altered, be might present a Bill to that effect ; but that House had not yet assumed the power of acting as a Court of Appeal from the (Wirt of King's Bench. The Petition was the more objectionable on account of the last allegation, which was false and absurd, that the Learned Judge had imposed the lines to obtain his own end—meaninr a verdict. Mr. CItEEVEY said, that the Attorney-tianetal bad represented his Honourable Friend to have decided that t he King's Bench had given an illegal judgmeut. His Honourable Friend had done no such thing; but he had said, that Mr. Justice Best bad exercised a rower that had never been exercised before ; not even iu the cases of Barton and Bastwiek ; in which the authority of 1 Judges had been carried so high. Ile (Mr. U.) thought, with deference to Mr. Justice Best, that he was an interna -1 ;Jenne Jadge. Ile had sliewn that he was an intern -1 perate Judge on the trial of Sir F. Burdett, at Leicester. Ile hail shewn that be was an intemperate Judge in this very case. I !bleed, Mr. Justice Best was the only Judge ;whom he (Mr. Vreeve)•) considered to he a political I.lielge ; awl he hesitated the less to censure his decision i on this n Tas;on, became lie had known Mr. Justice nest nut to ha infaiiikle ; for when he was in that House, he had been seen holding very different opinions while he passed through sarious parties, until he obtained the place which lie mos occupied. Mr. Serjeant ONSLOW.—I rise to order.—(Hear, hear, hear !)--I complain of the conduct of the Hon. .Meddler. lie not only has uttered shoal; charges akainst th:! Learned Person, whnmu 1 am proud to call my friend ; Le has not only called hint an intemperate Jiniv, au I a political Judge, but has censured his conduct when he was a Memher of the House of Com mons, which I conceive to be extremely disorderly. —(lleac.) The SPEAKER said, he had not conceived at the moment that it was his ditty to interfere, whatever the opinion of the House might be as to the decorum of the 1 Hon. Member's observations. It appeared to him (the Speaker) that the Ilon. Meto!ter was making reference to the motives under which the Learned Judge had decided, which was the gist aml gravamen of the Ale gatiuns in the petition. Ile still eimnideretl, after the' tittle which had been air,r,iell him of revising its opi nion, that the Ilu:tottrahle Men.ber gas not out of order.. Mr. CREEVEY said, the Fplt.eker Lad decided he was not out of order--that En did nut intend to pro ceed with any further observations, hut that he cousi elered that the petition was entitled to attention, from the circumstance of no Judge having done such a thilig before; and he thought also, that Mr. Justice Best was an inteneperateJudge. The SOLICITOR-c EN Ell AI, observed, it was im possible fur leitu to sit still after he remarks of the Hon. Member for Appleby. He was astonished to hear the motive of resentment ascribed by that lion. Member to the [.earned Judge.— (Cees of "non — When so grave a charge was preferred against a Learned—(Mr. Creevey—" I never made say such charge"). —lf the lion. Member was ready to retract that charge, it was open to bine to du so.—(Cries of " no, no," and laughter). Mr. CREEVEV—" I refract nothing. I said no such thing." The SOLICITOR-GENERAL.—" I am glad that the Honourable 31ember dues retract his charge. —(Cries of " No, no," and laughter.)-1 do assert that the charge was made.—(Cries of " No, no.")—I do assert that the Ilemonrable Member dill say— Mr. SMITH remark...', that unlmis the words were taken down at the moment, it was not competent for any Honourable Member to assert that they had been uttered, when they had been denied by the Member to whom they had been attributed. The SOLICITOR-GEN ERA 1..—" If the lion. Umetleman disavows the words — Mr. M. A. TAYLOR rose to order, and declared that leaving been present during his !Immutable Friend's speech, be mold affirm, on his honour and conscience, that no such word as " resentment" was uttered by him. Ile su!nnitted, therefore, whether it was competent for the Solicitor-Gement to assume that it had been spoken.—(Order.) The SPEAKER said, that as the Solicitor-General had used the word " disavow," he was rot out of order. By the word " disavow," it was meant that the Honourable Gentleman ball disavowed emeting the words in question, not that he retracted them. The scut:rant-6EN ERA!. proceeded. The lion. Member for Appleby had taken an opportunity to I charge intemperate conduct on the Learned Judge who was mentioned in the Petition, and had referred to the proceedings of that Learned Person on the trial of a Member of the Haase. Ile the (Solicitor-tieneral) would ask what there was in the conduct of the Learned Judge on that occasion, which called for steel, a repre hension? As to the merits of the publication which was the subject of that trial, there could he no doubt that it was of a most malicious and malignant nature. MI the Judges of the Court of King's Bench, even Mr. Justice Bayley, who differed from his Brothers on the point of form, agreed that it was a malicious and malig nant libel. But even on the point of form the majority of the Judges concurred with Mr. Justice Best. Yet the Hon. Member far :.p Irby accused by Mr. Justice Best of intemperance. When they talked of intemperance, what was the character of the Hon. Member who mimic such a serious charge upon such slight grounds—(Hear, hear.)—As to the Petition of Meisel., it contained an incorrect statement of the proceedings• an his trial. When that person began to make an attack on the Gentlemen of the liar, the Judge said, " I allow yea the greatest latitude in your defence, but you Faust not make it the opportunity of uttering libels on ethers." With that reproof the matter terminated. The Peti tioner stated that he was then fined, which was not true; for it was in reply to this admonition, that extending his hand to the Judge, the defendant said. " If your Lordship has the dungeon ready, I will present you with the ker." For that he was tined 291. It was manifest that the object of the defendant was to be imprieoned for contempt, so that the trial might have been interrupted. To impose a fine was there fore the only course that remained to the Judge in order to preserve decorum. The defendant then proceeded to libel the first ranks of the country, and particul...ly the Bench of Ilisimps, as disbelievers. For this lie was again tined, and subsequently a third time. .The defendant complained that he was embarrassed ; but the I..,•arned Judges desiled him to take his own time. and to pursue any legitimate course of defence in his own manner. This was a correct history of the pro c •edings at the time; and if the afTair bad stopt herr, would the !loose have hid a right to interfere ? But this was not all. The defendant applied to the Court of King's Bench, and the case was argued with respect to the law, the merits, and the hardship of it, with all the advantages that learning, ability and zeal could give. The cases mentioned by the Hon. Mem ber fur Westminster, some of which applied to the question, and others of which were entirely irrelevant, were then quoted. The devision of the Judges was unanimous ; and unless the House of Commons made itself a Court of Appeal, both in law and fact, the petition cguld not he seffered to lie on the table--- (bear!)—particularly after the manner in which it bad been defended.—(Hear, from the Opposition). Mr. LOCKHART said, when he heard the grounds upon which the first line had been imposed by the Learned Judge, he did nit doubt for an instant but that he should feel hinistlf called upon to support the petition, and that hr should he only moved from that opi nion by the addition of a strong case, or justification of its exneke in this instance. Such a case had certainly been made out by the Attorney and Solicitor-General of his Majesty ; and lie could not help thinking that the Learned Judge had acted not only in the most proper, bit in the moat legal way; for no wan could iloeht that an offence committed is fccic C. ioe was punishable by line and inipris , .nalent. Mr. SCARLETI' thought there could be no manner of doubt that the judge had a right to commit fur con teuipt,—(Hear,)— and he conceived that a defendant in defending himself might he guilty of contempt of court. It was undoubtedly true that persons were to have a great latitude allowed them in their defence, but they were not to he allowed to controvert all the propositions of the law and the gospel.—(!liar.)—The Honorable and Learned Gentleman, after illustrating this position, pro ceeded to say that no man, from his professional habits and sense of wood , ' he more inclined to support the authority of the courts of jnstice, or the authority and power of tke judges, than himself. Yet wheu he w:AI thus called upon to decide 1111 the question of a commit ment for contempt, he must say that there bad been a case of contempt not very long since, which had agi tated the attention of the public, perhaps rather less than it °Wit to have done. A recent occasion had oc curred, on which the court fined a party for publishing a report of the proceedings of a court of quarter sessions. Now it was to he observed that there was a distinction between that which was a contempt of court, and that which Was a contempt in the face of the court.--(Hear.) Ile did not deny that the court might make its orders; but it might reasonably be asked whether any courts of law were to lay down a rule that their proceedings should not be published, and if a party did publish the proceedings, abetter they had a tight to fine him ? —(Hear, bear )—lle did not know how it was to be shown, as a general principle, that, if a person published thus., proceedings with fidelity, lie was in contempt. But he would not say he would leave that question as one, at least, well worthy to he argued—that if Judges made an order expressly that the proceedings in a court of justice should not be published, and the parties did toadish theta, suds parties might not be in contempt. But if the law was so, he did not see why they should not make another order. If they could order, on pain olcommitment, that proceedings . should nut he published, he knew not what was to prevent their making an addi- 1 tional order that, if published, they should nut be read— also on pain of rommitinent.—(A laugh.)—Nor did he see why the Judges might not also make an order that no communication should be wade from persons in the Court to any ss hoFere without it, even by manuscript or by verbal information. But he thought that the Court of Chancery and the three Courts were in posses sion of a species power wore ancient than the one hr spoke of; it was not called a power of commitment for contempt "t,t jisei c curia,' but " attachment," by which persons could ha brought before those Coons. Notwithstanding what hail been said by an Hon. and Learn.nl Friend sit his, on the other side, lie did think that there was a great distinction to be made between a Court that had the power of attachment and one which had it nut : for he could not conceive that the Court of Quarter Sessions in the comity of Middlesex, for in stance, mold cite him (Mr. Scarlett) who was neither a Sheriff, Deputy Sheriff; Churchwarden, nor High Con. stable before it, to bear hit conduct discussed, and give the Court explanations upon it.—(Cries of (button, question;') Lord CASTLERF.MiII did not knew whether he was finite correct in calling to order the Honourable and Learned Gentleman, but he would leave it to his own discretion to say whether this nos not irrelevant and out of order ? Mr. SCARLETT itplained. He did not think sorb a power as had been assumed by the Court of quarter Sessions was legally vested in it ; but if it were, be was one of those who thought they could wit be too soon divested of it. Sir FBA NCIS BLAKE opposed the bringing up of the peti!ion. Mr. W. COURTEXAY was proceeding to offer some remarks on what had fallen from Mr. Scarlett, when Mr. CI: RIVEN rose, we believe to order; but what he said was not heard in the gallery. Mr. DENMAN and Mr. lIANKRS said each a few words, but they were equally inaudible. Lord CASTLE RFAtill observed, that as no doubt appeared to be entertained by the highest legal autho rities in that House upon the legality of the Judge's conduct to which the petition referred. and as the Court of King's Bench had solemnly adjudged that conduct to be quite cornet, he saw no reason why the Petition should he received, or that that Hove :should at all enter into the iwiliJeet. If a defendant availed Monett ef the Wei / fence afforded Mal to maim his owe defense to roma& froth Memo, was his at tempt to be tolemited et committing still farther oilines s in the shape of a petition " ILtll.ll7en;ei; (Hear. hear, on the Ministerial l'o.:11e .n of rtitiuning was a privilege svhi c h ( . o ,ld nerecro:e. brought into question except by it. own ~ b ase, and therefore lie felt that lie best co:oititsd she p re „„ vi,in of that privilege, by opposing the motion for bringiti, up this petition. It was to he lamented, indeed, Es t a practice hail grown up of late years of bringis g every thing into the House of Common., in qttettee of the facility v. ith which any 'thin might find 1 some Member to present a petition :rout hint. Th is lithe time of the House was unduly occupied, an d functions diverted front their proper purp ose . much, indeed, was this the ca 1 . , ;ha: upon a review sf the month, during which ahe i:ottse hall heel, itttii,, no less than half its time La i beets engaged in dis. cussintr petitions. The present th-n was a prope l occasion, on which he thought it necessary on -' part of the House to admonish the people, that these . was a limit to the right of petitioning.—(ilear, ls t ar.) —.and that tLa abuse of that right would nut be tile. rated. J. P. GRANT had no disposition to atlike,l the House upon this question, if it were not for scu m words which fell from the Noble Lord who had ' sat down, as to admonishing the country upon , necessity of imposing a limit on the right of tinning, accompanied by an observation that too mid of Ithe time of that House was occupied in tliscusa g the petitions of the people. Lord CASTLERSAfiII in explanation stated, , what he meant to deprecate was, the growing practlee of bringing every thing into discussion iu the House of Commons. Mr. GRANT said, that he was in the judgement, iris th th co at iic t e t p wa tio: too of much o fo b t le ao li v eyds , t r h e i e n ou s e o base r Hs tvoi ng, ulster to talk of admonishing the people upon the any exer cise of their inalienable and mod sacred ri ght, the time of the House was misapplied in discmsingt, Petitions; such observations onglit not to be allowed , go forth from that House without appropriate aniet4d. version, and he felt it his ditty to enter I • against their character and tendency. As to lis peet e s: huingi character deirdiscuss of his ion, iro he l e ia ,3 dn eti ot ve.t heard it read, hat'' tion was to him an ample guarantee that it was drams up in decent, respectful language: therefore he amid not decline to vote for its reception upon the erase urged by some Gentleman, that it referred to the combo, of a Judge ; feeling, as lie ilid, that it was competestr that Howe to take rognirince of the cooduc; of ass Judge, however high his character, or however digoifiei his station. Lord CASTLEREAGH thought that if this Petals* were allowed to be laid on the. Table, it would then ly conic matter for discussion, and this among other sons determined his objection to the motion fur having brought up, because he considered it of an improper character. Mr. Ill:1611T spoke with great animation and in favour of the motion, and against the observation Lord Castlereagh. This was not to be regarded as a to question of legality, but as an appeal to that !louse , its great constitutional privilege, according to which, was competent and itoper.itively hound to superir the proceedings of the Judges, and to watch with lousy the manner iu which justice was administered: MIS known, ititirril, from history, that Judges Ind acted wrong, and by that House they were NW But where was the remedy to be ha I for mat-Ansi! tint' on the part of the Judges, if that 'loose, acting , the false delicacy of which lie had heart too mach night, should decline to interfere upon any charge against a Judge? lie did nut wean to say that Mr. Justice acted wrong, or that that Judge would out be at justify his conduct in argument, hut this he would ins. taro, that no precedent could he found for such condset as the Petitioner complained of. The Learned Joao himself, indeed, 1 y remitting his fines upon the Peti. 4 tioner, admitted, at least implication, that he kltia was wrong, and that those lines were onduly impost& He disagreed with the Learned Member in a certainl: of his view of the rase, because he thought thitidli fur contempt of Court should, as they were generally acts of impulse, be liable to the rectification of a wend and sober discretion. 'lhe rage quoted by the 'Learned Member for Peterborough, fully illustrated the alone to which the power of punishing for contempt was but t liable. But as to the Petition to which the motion ferred, it ought, in CO:111111M justice, soil even in decency to be brought up and read before the House detortuinta upoa its rejection. The Hon. C. 111 - TCHINSON set out with ohseri , ing, that possibly lie did not rightly understand ' Noble Lord, but according to his understandi , Noble Lord had uttered that which must rend' feelings of every man who lured the Constituti who had a spark of liberty in Iris heart. When nister, who had for many years acted inch an part to liberty and humanity, both at home and —when a Minister, so closely allied with powers, who cherished absolute tyranny, end red any degree of popular freedoin—told the peer this country, that however his insulting or uppr conduct might goad them lulu madness, he woia allow them even to petition for redress, was the' but too much ground for public alartn.—(lie Fur the Noble Lord declared his intention to lit tight of petitionin:e according to the roles which be suggested by others, or which might occur own wild imagination. He should be glad to find lie misunderstood the language of the Noble Lord, if that language were each as he conceived, it not, in his view, be too strongly deprecated. Thu 'mumble Gentleman concluded with expressi hope, tint before the House acceded to . the Lord's proposition, it wonld hear the pet tho either by the Honourable Moyer, or by th?• the table. Lord CASTLEREAGH observed, that the I able Gentleman must have veri much misconre. words, for he was sure that the lion. (lent. tr, pnble of misrepresentatiou ; and was proceed , _ argue that it was competent to the House to Meet' motioa for bringing up a petition, and that the • was a case in which it was pr•iper to exerei right, when lie WAS interrupted by cries of " spoke." Los d ALTHORP expressed a wish to have de of that Horse thrown wide open f ur the reception the petitions of the people, and a hula , that t he Lord would not press his objections to the motion. As to the language of a p etition, lie thuoglo o House should not object to any stren g th of exprestou which naturally arose out of the ewe of a petit for otherwise a complaint of great oppression or lice could not be adequately described. Me- C. W. WYNN said, he was far from mail hug that tbecondoet of a judge might ant be dons and unconetitutional as to bo a fit fibre' tu Parliamentary inquiry, and if any sue her of I ht the .1 be woult ad way c tg bloul het iog 11111. tad ti-At has It 11( 1 Ili ale r of t% Ili( 1 1 . ri;b At In ? Gnat the &sac Isere 1411 ar.) tele. beet shell ;ow e Crud fast II 0 1 the pea. tlun bed be sou l heti ,that t.:11 ictlee "'"I et i o r : r d ttlP e t I a . t i o r y Mi. eie eser• Pa r that their : 1 r litnad• t• rotest trej it. it the Ist e li• Imola eua Lt kt round naiad test le It if an paifiei rn • 4. Pf era- t ying it I proper • t I force tion of a mere 1 , e upon deb, it ;atrial • ift jea- :lL It torten inistra- w of that 'past Cl! Cent able to condor% Judge he Peti.‘ frit& upessi. 111130 ft lieGto 141,1111 r a mind [Anted tbnse to but too •tion re- decency trtuiued ohseri , and the ing, Ott lilt the lion, a C p . ► a I Itotitile • I abroad bniga abhor- ripple of pfCSSife PUN alit 'ere not the II osirht r to his int, that ,rd, bet t could 'he Ho- ling a Noble )11 :lee: at Honour- -Iy.ll hi. %14 ifli ni p u t p: , ••ft' th.t " be JO 9 " ption lit to tight tht ;prrsci"a maintain- so glafi' object 41 that