The National Register. — London, England, 1820-12-04 00:00:00

'W" NO LAW INTELLIGENCE. COUIVI OF MSG . .' BENCH MONDAY, NOV. 27. CRIMINAL INFORM riom,—rHE KING V WINTIR. . . . Mr. Moore moved for leave to the a criminal minion azaitist the I le(viidatli, C . :lw ‘V otter, lor sending a letter, coistalnitst; a while!' ciiallvilge, to \lr. Henry Hoare, snit of Sit Henry Hoare, of Gaspar ►lead, in tile county of Somer,q. It appeared fro II the statement or Mr. Moore, that the sriv.oos of Sir Richard Hoare found wires and snares laud for hares, and itavitig traced foot-steps to a cottage ittitabited by Captain Winter, a conversation ensued be tween the Caplan' anti the servatits, in which the former admitted that he had laid the snares. The servants were then directed to go to Mr. Hoare's Solicitor, and having done s f, Captain Winter com plained that Mr. Henry Hoare had acted unlike a gen tleman in omitting to write. to him before a prosecution vvas commenced. Ile also sent a letter, which became *fie hound of the present application to the Court. The Chief Jostler ask,-11 whedter Mr. Moore, in It's affidavits had proof of the hand-is ritilig of the defuothot I r. Moore admitted he itad nut sueit moor, and the Court considering that e% idence mcestary, roused the applicatim.--Itale refused. JUDGMEN'C OF THE COURT. THE CINO V. Ili IKANCII YUKDZIrr. The Colin this tl.ty base judgment in the iinportsnt qtr Sllllll rt•specting the legal c:aiiti of Sir Francis Bia nco to a new trial. Judge Best, as junior on the Bench, read the report of the cause. It was a criminal information, as our Headers will remember, filed by the Attorney General against the Honourable Haronet, for writing a letter respecting the transactions at Manchester on the 22tl of August 1819. The case was tried a. the Spring Assizes fur Leicester, and a verdict Mond for the Crown. Mr. Denman end other Learned Counsel moved for a new trial on the ground that there was 110 proof of a nubli- Cation of the libel in the county of Leicester. Other objections were wade as to the . Judgels chaste to the Jury. The Learned Judge, in an amiable expoosition, conduct, ails cried to all the circumstances which look place at the trial. He complimented Sir F. Burden oil his very able and eloquent deitoice made in person, and obrerved with respect to the publication in Leicester shire, that the Court and Jury had a right to presume a publication took place in that county. If the fact was not so, the detendant had the poster, at the trial, of calling Mr. Bickerstaff to state how the letter caine into his possession. That gentlennie wa• not called, anti the Jury had tINIVeII a fair and reasonable inference. It Was said there was nn proof the letter went by post. It made no difference, however, whether sent !by the:post or ton. It was clear it came 1 the hand of Sir F. Hindett, and was received by Mr. Bickerstaff. Upon probabilities, and the rule of law, the Jury had a nail' to oiler the letter was delivered by Sir F Burdett iti the county of Leicester. It was seal the Crown might have called upon Mr. Bickers' ill, bin how did the Crown know the letter was CVO' tit the hands of Mr. Bickerstatit It lay with the defendant to prove the Vella was tint properly laid If the defendant implanted had actually occurred, it would no, re amer the inalignity of the libel. The Statute of Gen. 111. made the question of libel not a question of fact; it was the duty of the Judge to direct the Jury— and he would contend that his direction in the case alluded to was in no way incorrect or partial. The Learned Judge then adverted to the opinion which had been advanced, namely, that the Jury were Judges of the law. It could be never be supposed that the statute of George the Toird did more than give the Jury power to find a general verdict. The statute dtd not make the question of libel a question of fact. It WAS still, in many instances, a quetion pf law. The legis lature had left the Jury to nod a general verdict, but the Judge had the power of stating the law, by which the Jury were to be governed. The fourth point had been urged, namely, that his charge to the Jury was unjust. He lamented the necessity he was limier M . snaking any allusion to what had when Ifolll the Learned Counsel, with respect to his conduct. It gate hint pain; but he acquitted the Learned Counsel of any tiling like intention to give offence. No man was inure respectful in his demeanour to the Judges than the Honourable Baronet (the defendant) in tae cause, and happy he should have felt to have stated to the Jur ? any pouts in his litoor ; but looking to his rank in society, and the nature of the hoel, he felt it could not be done. The extent of the liberty of the press enabled a 114111 10 instruct liis lrllow•citizrus 1111011 die laws and goyerii• I•ut detallldtion 41141 If itt.lll4lll.llollaildrisfes to the dlSAtleted WaS going, ticymid the liberty of the press, as established in sin cottony. Worther to opiiiiotts weie well founded or out, he could out say, but lie had only been actuated by a desire to do his (buy with tin firm ness the nines demand. ksery Magistraie was b0011(1 to administer j u stice with 11111.artialoy, and to the best of his judgment. He sw no reason to th,ttirlt the verdict. NJ ,. J ust i ce H o l ro yd sail. he was of opinion that the tole for a stew trial ought not to be granted. Mr. Justice Bayley. its several particulars of case. agreed with itic rest of the Judges,. lucre was, however, a difficulty he had felt loon his' to I s, on rote of the punts. lie alluded to the ditection tat the Learned J n , l4e with respect to the publication i n Leicestershire. No consitivrx..!):l he had been able to save was sufficient to ovcnonte hia übjection to that direell011; and be said he ahuulil hot thacharge hia du y I • #‘;• if he did not txpress nal give the t.eiendint the full benefit of it. '1 tie 11,111 110 1114111 so 1+11 . 01111;v the pilbl:Ca11011 was in L•letblef•lllfe %%Milan a prima facia case. Without toe et .detke of Jlr. H.ckerstall the Jury must hate been in the dark upon hat question. Had a bill of ..tchetnient been presented to a Grand Jury, h. was catchier(' trey could not have inutitl the hill witlinajt proof that Use letter was delivered iu Leicester. THE NATIONAL REGISTER. shire. On the whole he was of o; mere was no evidence lication to to the Jury; and if there woos Iltot o II (lilt h. to /.ate glow to the Jury. The I.e.trtied Joilgeoti a lOWA ttttt jimligment, concluded by saying, it niece was any duuln el tile power of the Jury to &Tide upon the publicatioo, the verdict ought not to stand. Clitel Justice expressed his opinion, that the rule obtained for a Dew trial most be drseliarged. The pre. sumptiuu drawn by the Jury was properly drawn.— H a ving consider ,d ilie qatsoins agaiu and ag tin nit all the objections, lie was of upitiont that ilie premise, warranted line i.t saying the paper was syriuen in Lei cestershire. There was no ground to disturb the verdict. Rule discharged. The Solicitor General said, as the defendant had not been put to the expellee of attending the Court from day to day to receive judgment, and was i t ourant of the decision this day, it was not tile intention of the Attorney General to pray the Judgment of the Court before next Term. THE KING V. WOOLER, CARTWRIGHT, HADOX •1110 OTFfbkS. In this .1 rule to show cause why there should not be a new trial, was obtained by Mr. Doninan, but it ap peired the rule mill no. been draten uir, and the Court allowed it to stand carer to the first clay ut . next Tenn. SEDITIOUS LINEL.-lIIE LING V GISEATHEAU 't tie Silliciii,r-General I.raye,l the judgment of lily COUII oil the defend:tat, con% icted of piitilisaing a sedi tious libel concerning the t%lknicoesier Meeting, which appeared its the Coventry paper, of which the defendant is Mr.Jostice Best read the report of the trial, which cattle on at the Summer A.ssises fur the County of IVarwick. The libel was cal( ulated to excite persons to rebellion, by slat ng that the Nlancliesier Yeomanry Cavalry were murderers. It also reflected grossly on the King for having approved of their conduct. The defendant. in his attiLyit in iiiitig,ation of punishmeni, complained iliac he was the victim of a conspiracy, inasmuch a 3 the Jury had heed packed by the Master of tile Crown Office. Tire libel he described to b. taken from a work pub lished in London, which the Attorney-General had not thought proper to notice. The defendant. alter his affida vit had been read, addressed the Court, and alludine to the conduct of Hunt and others. when they received judg ment, observed, that he had heard those persons appeared ~More the Judges with the teeing inert woulu have woo had perhumed a meritorious service. lie was under the same leeling, believing he had done no wrong. 'f he Solicitor-General, on behalf of the proserwtion, said lie had but lone to observe. The defendant haul slated that he took the libel from a pamphlet. lie could only say, the A ttorney-C;etieral and hint•elf hail hever heard of that pamphlet. Solicitor-General then read the strong part of the hurl, and cititeniled that it was calculated to produce the geatrA uhtsclhiel Mr. Justice 11.1yley, addressing the defendant sant— " Von are to rveeive the judgment of this Court, con victed of publishing a hlxl by a Jury selecteo 111 the ordt Miry mode. 'lite libel is one of the most lIIISCiIIt W 1.15 Millie:ley. It Is MOM unjust. An unfortunate event had taken ',lice at Manchester, in consequence of which Ines were lost. The libel in question imputes to the troops that they were murderer., and if they had been to be trued for the crime of murder, I ask you, judging of your own case, to say, whether every man is nut mulled to have a fair trial before an unbiassed Jury? The Learned Judge con:luded by passing sentence on the defendant, namely, to pay a fine ul 501 be imprisoned two years in Warwick gaol, and fiat?' sureties for five years, himself in vow. and two in 1(101. tacit. Alter sentence, Mr. Lewis asked if it was usual for persons in his situation to be imprisoned in solitary cells. Mr. Justice Bayley said thi Court made no order for 111101 C01111111:111C111. Tne deu.uidant was nuke!' ow of Court. TIBESD•T, NOV . es. _ _ JEIN• S. DAVISON. Air. Gllllll'y TIIII% finiTiein(lgtOr:;:o ITrie Court on the deletsdatit, cum IOC(' 111 lllMl;siling a blasphemous libel. 11r. J. - • Bayley' delivered the judgment of the Court, a. d aft ads ertim,, to thepurta of the Scriptures winei t the libel iad vilified, it was necessary, he said, that sociei) s. Id be proaxled against all attacks 4)1 this son, which struck at toe root of human happiness. 'l•he defendant ss is sentenced to be imprisoned two ye.irs in the gaol of Oak hall, (Rutla:idshire), and to find suretios for his good behaviour fur hve years, himself iii SOI. and two others iu vol. each. THL NANO V. HUMPMRT. lite defendant au oilicer no the Alimmouth militia, appealed on the motion of Mr. Cdllll/I,eli, to receive Juilguitin for ail aVOauII nil J gelitlenian Hawed Philpots, also an officer, and a titay.trale. a-satilt and atm-e (mewled on the town o: Alotionoulf, and the tleirit.Wht 5 mile time finer won t an alll o.y, „,,,. cooduct to the drink tie INA t.ff,•ii. proNecono was, however, &knit inwilied, awl the Court, under all tile cue t11113(411CeS, sell elic:4l time ilvlend ins to two months' impr.solisite i, and to find sufficient sureties for his Ituure good beita%mter. Ltwil r. CLEbIttNT. r. Nlarrrt sliewed cause a rule obi:third bt \lr. Adolphus, ior scii hog this cau,e for rv-iiirptir).. it was au tor a abet published by ileittidalit, wr it) suit:red ju,4ciiielit by default. ("tutees being as scs3cd, tut Jury gave a verdict fo, .5001. Nlr. whets he obtained the conditional rule the g rwand of his thin, that evidence had by the Learned Serteaut who presided at the Sh . 1b Court, which ought nut in hate beets re. Cee%L'd. S cusolly, that floc 1111 l ems were kept f he Jury ttloch hut4lit to have been received. Thirdly, that the damages were excessite. All the to i petouts were nail by Mr. Marryat, who contended that the plaintiff had sustained a pecuniary loos by tlit libel, which 6001. did mut couipensats. After Mr. Adolphus and Mr. Platt had been heard in reply, the Court threw out a hint, that the !sorties might r,oune to an aceonanixbtion will t the tlecisinn of the Court. Proposals were amsequently made between Counsel, tan they could come to no agreement, and the Court dec:ded by grai►ting a new writ of inquiry, on condition that the damages he paid into Court, to await the final result. THE RING P. HENRY HUNT. Mr. Searlett shewrd cause agantst 711111; obtained by Mr. Chitty fur a writ of Habeas Corpus, calling on the gaoler or sheriff of Ilchester gaol, to show cause w hy the defendant should not have ftt:l liberty in that pot. son, without being shut tip in a cell, and why he should not be allowed to see his friends, and those friends h ave free access to the prison at reasonable hours. This an. pliettion was made on the allilat it of .'I r. Hoot, and Nlr. Scarlett said he had several long affidavits made by magistrates and others, which fully answered all that Ir. Hunt alleged. Nit. Ciottv hien rose and observed, 014 the affidavits were lona, and l►e was desi of aviim the Court the trouble of resding ahem at that late hoot, (it being six ti lock); he slitittld therefore apply to have the rule enlarged till next Tenn. Mr. Scarleit said, he could have no objection to that. The Chief Justice sail, the Court would tint have enlarged the rule on the application of throe who h id to answer Mr. Hunt's Ali:Lou, because Mr. Hum might have been kept without that he had a right to have, hut as the proposition cattle from the defendant's Connie% the Court would not refitse.—Tne rule was accordingly enlarged. The business :es usual on the last day of Tenn, con. t inued to a late hour. W 10,121011 V, NOV, it% stops N. SAWYER. This action was brou , ,i,lit by the plaintiff, an attorney at ltrading, against tie defendant, the Sheriff of Berk% or lather the Under-Sheriff, Mr. Payne, to recover tia .na.tes sustained by his not making out a warrant lor the arrest of a person named Field, residing at Old Wind sor. The latter being indebted to the plaintiff 23:. an officer was sent to the Under-Sheriff, at M.iidenhead, to get a Capias ad Satisfacienduni duly made out, but neither the Under-Sheriff nor his clerk were in the way. r Payne was gone out hunting; and the officer being obligeu to return without it, the opportianny was lost of arresting Field, ss ho was not afterwards to be found. aoRN V. JOHNSON. This was an aciiM)agdiiiit --- titeirawer of a bill of exchange for 8631. accepted of by a person of the na►»e of Solomon. The defendant was !he captain of a ship ; and at the island of Jamaica he drew upon his owners. The hill was accepted on the occasion, and indorsed to the plaintiff. The signatures of the draw.r and acceptor were proved; and, there being no v .lid defence, the Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for the atuount of the hill, with interest, Wing 9051. Apprehension of Forgers.—The police of Bir mingham have succeeded in detecting and taking the principals connected with a gang of utterers of florged bank notes. In consequeace of the appre hension in London of John Bingley, a publican, of Gnat Charles -street, and George Peacock, a plater, of Cheapside, Birmingham, upon whom were found 1,160 forged notes. a warrant was issued to search the house of William Dutton, of Colmore-street, where a number of notes, nearly destroyed by fire, were found by the police of f icers: this man %t am taken into custody, and, in consequence of something that transpired while the officers were awaiting his return home, Mr. Adkins and assistants proceeded to the house of William Batkin, a copper-plate printer, residing in Freeman-greet, whom, with his wife, they immediately apprehended, and upon searching his house a plate was tiound for working 101. and 51. and two plates for workirv; 11. notes, as well as a large quantity of notes in various stages of forwardness. It is supposed this gang and its con nexions have carried on their net:l6(ms trade exten sively for the last flour or five years; the notes are said to have been all worked by Berlin, the signs. tures affixed by Dutton, and the whole disposed of by Bingley and Peacock to common utterers. The two firmer arc now in prison, but they have not yet undergone a public examination. Beitime HUNT —A fiue gag was turned out at half-past ten on Monday morning, in the neigh bourhood of Harrow-on-the-Hill. A tier many turn ings and windings, the animal entered the metropolis, dogs and huntsmen en rude. The novelty of the sight drew forth a motley multitude of purstsers iu full cry. It crossed Itusst:ll-square, and ran up the steps of a gentleman's house in Montague -street, where it was captured, breathless, but uninjured. DuatiN.--Laer Prornotions.—The Lord Chan cellor has appointed Roderic Connor, F:sq. Barris ter at Law, a Master in Chancery in the place of Stuart King, Esq. who has resigited. NI. Justice Mayne has retired from his situation on the King's Bench, with the salary of a retired Judge, to which he was enitled by his judicial standing. Mr. Ser geant litirtuu will be the new Judge. Mr. Vomit:. leur and Mr. Torrens ore mentioaed fur the vacant Sergelmtt.y. ltaco KLUX'S REPORT.—On Thursday the Recorder made a report to his M.uesty 111 tile capital convict 3 Whit r ...apto cc death in Neweate, wilco .lo•cith Eilitt A ct, George Edwards, TI as NVebh, Price, John Newman, John Amlet), Tii1)111.11r lions. :1111i T 1111.1138 Fidler Harnett. were ordered tot execution on Tucadel neat. The others were reviled dining pleasure. r