The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1820-02-09 00:00:00

ul* . ' 4 • • I _ _ gj- • P . 1 / 44; -A. • • 4,11) at: FASHIONABLE ARRIVALS. The Archbishop of York. How. Mrs. Ye►son awl &wily, potently, ■t their house in Grosvenor-square, from Buisup Thorpe falser, Yorkshire. Lors'. Clement at Grosvenor-square, from a visit to Lord Sydney, at his seat, Froirsal, Kent. Lady Ann Begot, at her house in Downing-street, from a visit to the Earl sod Countess of Lottadsle, at their seat, Cuttesmere, Kollandshire. Hon. Mr. Neville, at his house in Cbsrles.street, Berkeley. square. floss his father's (Lord Brsybruuke) seat, Asdky End, Essex. _ _ BRIGHTON, FEBRUARY 6. It is impossible to describe the agony which has been felt here, iu consequence of the indisposition of his present Majesty. All ranks and descriptions of people have equally shared in the anxieties ex cited. At one tame, the recollection of all other matters seemed lost in the fever of apprehension which palsied the public spirit ; but, 'praised be God! lie iiation nave been preserved from the awful affliction so greatly dreaded. The Lord Steward, the Marquis of Cholmon deley, load his Marchioness, left us at the beginning of the last week fur London ; the remainder of the lousily followed on Friday. Mr. IVatier, the House Steward of his Majesty, departed for Carlton Palace yesterday. Splendid reparations are making in the town for the reception of his Majesty, when he next coudea seen& to honour this place with a visit. The Cou n t De Poland is among the sojourners at the Ye: k Hotel. Lady Webster, Mrs. S. Cox, &c. &c. have apartments in the Royal New Stevie Hotel. Lod Eardley, the Dowager Countess of Guil ford, Lord said Lady J. Townshend, Sir G. Berke. ley, and Lady Kilightley, have left us—the latter for her town house; Mrs. Blaauw, for Queen Anne. street, Cavendish-►quare; Sir M. Nightingale, for Itichanuad ; and Sir H. Kennedy, for Wimpole. _ . A strong and gra►ifying assurance of his Marks ty's promising state of convalescence has been ()f -itted to us this afternoon, by the return of his phy sician in Ordinary. Sir Matthew 'Tierney, to his re sidence here, on the South Parade. TIM LATE KING.—The arrangements for the funeral of the late KING are not yet settled. 11r. MASI! went to Windsor yesterday for that pur pose. The 16th instant, as ws originally stated, continues unaltered. The Duke of MONTROSE, we are sorry to learn, has an attack of the gout. Earl WHITWORTH, and the Duchess of DORSI? i)id family, who are still at Naples, are expected home the latter end of April next. The Earl of CARNARTON and family are ex pected to arrive the latter end of this week at their residence in Grosvenor-square, for the season, from their seat in Hants. The Countess of DARTMOUTH has left bard BACOT'S seat, Blithtield, Staffordshire. for Sand well Hall. Lord Currox has left Cobham Hall, Kent, to visit his constituents at Canterbury. The Honourable Miss Fox, eldest daughter of Lord and Lady HOLLAND, we are happy to state, is fast recovering from her late indispositiou. The QUEEN'S Crown, which is now in the Re gabs Office in the Tower, and which was made fur JANES the Second's Consort, cost It t,9txd. Its weight is 19 ounces only, exclusive of the velvet. Very little, if any, of the gold can be seen, it is so profusely covered with jewels. Our Readers will imagine this, when they find, that although its dia meter at the rim is only five inches, and its entire 1 .. leigtitli, to the top of the cross, only seven inches, it contains 605 diamonds, and nearly ISO pearls. Great as are the external signs of regret on the decease of the late KING, yet the mourning for se rural of our Sovereigns has been deeper. The servants of all the nobility, &c. on going to Court Wive, on former occasions, been put into full mourn mg; and even the carriages have been painted or covered with black. At the funeral ceremony for Otevea CaostwELL, when the procession went from Somerset-house to the Abbey, military mourn. log was csrried 'further than at present. It is alel• nutted, that the soldiers who attended wore block buttons. It is not true, that Sir ISAAC HEARD is the only one now alive who 'misted at the coronation of GEORGE Ii I. The present Marquis of HERTFORD. then Lord BEAUCH•YF, was Train-bearer to his late MAJESTY. We have sincere pleasure in being enabled to state from authority, that the Marquis of HAST INGS was, by the accounts dated the 34th Septem ber, perfectly recovered from the illness with which ne well attacked at church on the lot of August, and which was ascribed to the excessive beat of the weather. His recovery will produce the saute lovely satisfaction in this country that it has done in the peninsula. There the eclat of his conquests, follow ed, as we said, by the justice and mildness of but sub. 11-quelit measures, has procured him the devotion .1 the natives—and here the improvement in the finances of the Company has secured him the sp. probation of the Court of Directors, while the It herd and truly wise step of giving freedom to the Indian Press, has made every man who knows its value his Freud.—(Eoming Paper.) During the late intense frost, two person* belong. lig to Keswick went upon the ice on Dement Lake. Nall the intention of visiting all the islands. Having tppruached those celled Li nghel mes, they discovered something of unusual appearance, end going to the .put, found it to- be a trout, frosen to the ice! which they with much difficulty severed from it, and 'brought it home. It weighed 4i lbs. It bad been haw some days before, and there was water on the margin of the Lake, &swell as on the energin of the Islands.—lt is opisoapi to Amin bees closed by some pike. and ; ed sort mot etdia to to avoid its pursuer. c. an OF 011.A1MCUF, Womiritliskits, Tugboat fitilitoAßCll. Mr. DOWDESWELL was sworn io a Master in Ch'lncery this morning berm* the LoRD CAAN cILLoa. in las private room • after wheels Mr. Campbell. the Accoontant- G eneral, and Master Catnpbell, took the Nth of allegiance to his present Maje.ty• The LORD -CHANCELLOR came into Court at half-past ten o'cluck.secuswpailied by Master Dow deswell, and put the Master's hat on the head of that geistleman, which is a usual ceremony after a Master is sworn in. INFORMATION. THE ATTORNEY-OKNERAL AT THE RELATION OF THE RET. ROBERT GRESHAM. AND OIIIBIIS. NEW BELLOWS AND MASTERS OF cATIIERINE HALL COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. a. THE FELLOWS AND MASTERS UNDER THE OLD FOUNDATION OF THE COLLEGE. Mr. HART in this case (which wa►s mentioned yesterday at the rising of the Court) stated, that it was an information filed against the Fellows and Masters under the Old Foundation of Catherine Hall College, at the relation of the Fellows and Masters under the New Foundation. The informs lion set forth that a Lady of the name of Mary Itamsdesi. by her will devised certain estates situ ailed iit Yorkshire, of the value then of 6701. to Catherine Hall, Cambridge, for the purpose of supporting six Fellows and Masters, who were to be p►►id 401. a year each out of tl►e rents and profits of the estate so devised by her. and the surplus of the rents to go to the general stock of the College ; andishe also directed that the rents of the estate should not be raised, if it possibly could be avoided ; and that the College should be at liberty to grant leases for eleven years, and not fur a greater length of time. The information then complained, that the rents and profits of the estate devised by the testatrix to the College, was now of the annual value of 2,0001. which the Defenslatits, instead of applying to the general stock of the College, ex pended in feasting. The relators then claimed, that they ought to participate of the bounty of the testatrix, and prayed that his Lordship would de cree to that effect. The Defendants, in their an swer, set forth, that the salaries of the relators had been increased in the year 1807, and dolt the old foundation was considerably in debt ; and that it was evident, from the will of the testatrix, that she intended the old foundation should be benefited by her bequest in preference to the new foundation. The Learned Counsel said, the question before his Lordship merely turned on the construction of the will of the testatrix—and by it he contended that the Defendants, after paying themselves 501. a year each, were merely the trustees of the surplus fund for the benefit of the general uses of the Col lege, instead of lavishing it in eating and drinking. Mr. HEALD and Mr. PEMBERTON followed on the same side. _ _ _ Mr. WSTHERELL, Counsel for the Defendants, was about to address the Court, when The LORD CHANCELLOR observed, that it was two o'clock, and that he was obliged to attend else where. His Lordship immediately rose. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Warramirran, TUESDAY, F 111111IVAILY IL This being the day for the special paper, the Court was occupied the greater part of the mo►u tug iu hearing argument pro awl contra demurrer.. cum° and OTHERS V. BRITTEN. This was an ,than on a policy or insurance effect ed on a vessel loaded with wine. shut, lead. gun powder, and other commodities. in 1817, bound to Pernambuco and Maraiiham. The ship was ee:zed by the Portuguese off the port of Pernambuco, that port having been put into a state of blockade. the Captain of the Venus (the slap in question) being ignorant of such' an event. A special verdict had been given for loss by seizure and detention. The objections were, first, that the adventure was con trary to the law of England ; secondly, that it was contrary to the law or Portugal. Mr. CAMPBELL cited the provisions of the 14th Charles IL, the 29th George 11.. and the 33d George 111., and fully established the legality ac cording to the laws of England, the license being regularly drawn. As to the second objection, the i Learned Counsel contended that the venture was not contrary to the law of Portugal ; and if it had been, as that condition must have been known to the assurers. if insured as a smuggling venture, as it did not violate the laws of the country wherein the policy was effected, it would have been per• fectly legal and binding. The sentence of fur. feiture and fine pronounced by the Portuguese upon the seizure, was the sentence of a municipal court, which could be of no authority in setting aside the claim of the assured, as it did not arise front any reference to the law of nations, and ewer over wanted the essential property of equitable au thority, as the suffering !tarty was not heard in defence. Mr. PULLER spoke in support of some less im portant objections; one of them was against the form of the license, and its conditions not having been complied with. The Plaintiff had failed on the trial in proving the mention of the bond re quired by the proclamation. Proof was now offered of a strict compliance having been observed of the directions of the proclamation. The Learned Couirsel still, however, objected. He particularly contended, that the small shot being ammunition, and ammunition being of the nature of warlike stores, was among the articles, the exportation of which was prohibited by the proclamation. The COURT could not consider sparrow-shot as ammunition of war, the sort of ammunition intend. ed by the proclamation. As to the objection of Ur. Camelo being a Portuguese, and that the um. d r rwritors were nut liable for loss occasioned by big violatioss of the laws of his own country, the au. awry was, that the ship was seized as the English ship Venus, and condemned under the sense We end unditratandirig. The loss therefore was Mktg all influenced by the nationality of the Plaintiff. The last objection wee. that a part of the oeimene • was to cover the penalties inflicted by the Ports. guess Court. awl that for such part of the Iwo, at , any rote, the underwriters could nut be liable. • • The Cou&T. however, overruled all the •6110.1 bows owes that which referred to -the=lif the boedVaseiiM► lAt>i Viniwisissurn iallbtruasne bt fffslthe* Prick s the' ititsu who petitioned fo► the license. initead of the im a iiitiff4. who were the per. sons actually interested. Flow far this informality matted the validity of• the inestance, which yet had no effect in enhancing the perils of at, the Court would not then determine, hut undertook to pronounce upon it in a few days at the utmost. CONSTRUCTION OF A WILL. a cane where one Vickers had made a will sp. pointing Thomas Lewis and Henry Lewis to be' •• sole executors of all his lauds, unseen.% toed tenements;" and hail added, in another cleat% that •• his rights and twopenny all. and in whole, within and without, in all name, is to he enjoyed freely fir ever" by the same persons; it was made a question for the consideration of the Court, whe ther. under the devise, Thomas and Henry Lewis should take the reel property of the devisor, to the prejudice of the heir at law. Mr. TAUNTON argued the case for the latter, who wee the Plaintiff. lie contended, that the words first recited shewed the intention of the de visor, that the Lewis's should ouly take the estate as executors, and in trust fur others—snit the latter words were too obscure and unintelligible to war rant an opposite inference : it being an established rule of law that the heir at law could b e gi n i u t ie . rued by nothing but express words. or necessary implication. The Learned Counsel quoted a pas sage from Coke on Littleton. and dif f erent cases, to support his argument. The COURT wee of opiuion, that though the words of the latter clause were uograinsoatical. they were yet sufficiently clear to skew that the devisor intended that his executors should take his real estate in fee, and gave judgment fur the Defendants. At the rising of the Court, and when Mr. Jus tice Bayley had retired, Mr. Hunt presented him self to their Lordships' notice, to renew an appli cation which had been rejected on Saturday lest, for a certiorari. to remove a prosecution fur coo 'piracy, iu winch he is a defendant, from the county of Lancaster to that of York or Middlesex. The ground of their Lordships nut acceding to the ap plication on that day was, that the other Defend ants were not in Court. Mr. Hunt now intimated, that pursuant to the order of tise Court he was prepared with the affi davits from the rest of the Defendants. The Cuter Jurrica said. that when it was wished to remove a cause in which Use King was Prosecutor, Counsel ought to be employed. In answer to a question from the COURT, Mr. CHITTY said, he was not furnished with in structions from the other Defendants. Mr. thug stated. that one of them was incapa citated from appearing, by being in prison. If the i Court would favour him with a hearing, he could spew where the Court had granted the application under similar circumstances. _ _ _ _. _. The CHIEF JUSTICE said it would be better it should stand over till to-morrow. when Mr. Justice Bayley should be iii Court. Mr. Hunt lamented that he had •n opportunity of speaking only after the Court had gone through the bar, red was fatigued. The Cuisit JUSTICE directed that the ca• should be called early to-morrow (this day.) COURT OF COMMON MPS, Weimar/3a, Tuassaary Irsimuuwor S. , MIII.M.M. BUTT D. COIAXT. The Jury ou the trial of tlim case brought in a special verdict, in order that the opinion of the Court might be taken on this point, whether or no • Justice of the Pence has a right to commit • per son brought before him on a charge of libel, for want of bail ? Mr. Serjeant BLOSSITT was heard for the De fendant at considerable length on Saturday last. This dry, when the case was called on, Mr. Serjeant Blossett produced the 11th volume of the State l'ritils, in which the case of the King v. Wilkes, referred to in the course ofergument, wins very dif ferently reported from the manner iss which it is given by Serjeant Wilson. Mr. Serjeant VAU0111•11, for the Plaintiff, coat• metsced his argument by saying, that fur the power contended for, there was nothing iu the statute book, nothing in the ancient common law of the land, or in the decisions of the Courts, to warrant it; it was a stretch of power which the law did not authorise, and it was of the first importance to the public interest and to the freedom of the press, that the question should be set at rest for ever. The Learned Serjeant then adverted to a number of cuses cited by Mr. Serjestit Blown on the former day, and argued. that they were not such as ought to influence the decision of the Court. The passage from Bracion which was cited did not bear upon the subject ; there a libel' was treated as • case ad suiting: of a civil remedy, though it also might become the subject of iiidictmeut. The authority front the year books of the 2d Henry VII. was one of great importance ; it was the case of Sir Robert Croft—he and another Gentleman wore their swords on a particular occasion at Westminster. and the question was, whether they had forfeited their sureties or not ? All the Justices went to White. friars, and the distinction was made as to a breach of security for good behaviour, end • breach of se curity to keep the peace. All the Judges agreed that a security to keep the peace could not be broken without battery. Libellers were bound to find security for good behaviour; and why not bound to find security to keep the peace? because, on the authority of Darby's case, libellers were not among the breakers of the peace, but were considered as disturbers of the peace ; there was oo passage from any of the books. to spew the right of the Magistrate in this instance to coerce the liberty of the subject ► and to compel the finding of securities to keep the peace. Two things in themselves were confimuled. namely, the finding of security to keep the peace, and the finding of security to be of good beha viour, and he Mt strong ou the authority of Lord Coke. in laying down the principle—for what was th e l anguag e o f Lord Coke ?—that by the common law of the land, even in cases of felony, 00 Magi strate had • power to commit before indictment ; there wee too colour for a coutrary doctrine before Lord Cake's time. It woo true. Lord Hale held a tfilleretst opinion, sod called the decision of the Justice., es reoWilied in the year books, hasty : it was not so—it ass an spittle') dalivetail slew much deliberation. there Lord Oaks held teirt r Argo pirate could not 4sue his vriurrnt to unrest even for felony before inchcemesit ; but he might make out • warreut fir the prenervatiorrof the 'peace. to arm • constable. who might attend the perms prefer ring the charge. 1.0 The Covet—Suppose the felon wee brought before him, what was he to do with him SerjeantV•UONAU said. he felt great difficulty ha raying wbut might be dime with him ; his cape might he prevented until indictment found ; but hr war there allay that by the law of the laud no man could be imprisoned sea tooter certain cir cumstance* d•fferesit from those of the present case. The statute of Philip and Mary gave power to the Magistrate to examine the party. How did that statute become necessary ? If before that statute the Magistrate had a right to have the secured ap prehended and brought before him. he undoubtedly must have had the power to examine biro, but he had no such power before the statute of Philip and Mary. He did not stand there to contend for a broad principle, that the Magistrate. in cases of high treason, might not be justified in issaiug his warrant. and indeed Lord Hale confined himself to crimes, and not to cases of misdemeanor. He stated his reasons why lie did not egret with Lord Coke, and, asuougat other reasons, lie said, because the doctrine of Lord Coke would have an injurious tendency on the public peace. And when Ins Lord ship said that the decision in the year boukwas given hastily, he (Hale) committed a mistake; it was a decision made after much deliberation, and the party got liberty to amend his plea. A. for tile authority of &dean Hawkins, Hawkins admitted the law as it anciently stood, but that the modern practise had altered it. He said. it seemed prohshle that anciently the Magistrate had no power to snake out his warrant in case of misdemeanor; and added, that those only could legally issue a warrant who had juris diction over the offence. Libel, now, was certainly considered in the light of a trespass. and the Justices at the Sessions had cognizance of libel ; but if the law had bees settled and uniform on the subject.as it was contended to be. would the Court of King's Bench have refused to quash OP indictment, and to tell the party that he might demur ? This *hewed that it wits only of late years that the offence of libel was provable at Sessions; and Serjeaut Hawkins added, that takiisg the practice as one not resting on ancient authority, but rather (though law) claimed by connivance, and as it affected in no small degree the liberty of the subject, it ought to be treated with great tenderuess. This was an im portant remark—fur here it was admitted that the jurisdiction of the Magistrate at Sessions was not justified by ancient authority....that it was a prac tice which grew up, and at length became too strong to be grappled with; sod though it could Dot be said not to be law, it yet ought to be treated with great caution, and with great ten derness. The case of the Seven Bishops was an authority of great importance. There the question was as to the power of committal, and there it was argued that the committal was good, because it was sired by the Lords in Council ; but the Attorney-General of that day never contended that any of the Council, as individual Justices, would have had a right or authority to commit to prison. The decision in that case had been called an un righteous decision. and had the Seven Bishops been brought before their Lordships, under all the cir cumstances, no doubt the Court would discharge them. They claimed their privilege as Peers of Parliament, which was not extended to them; but in the present day it has been held that the pri vileges of Parliament extends to all caws except felony or breach of the peace. The case before Mr. Justice Park, where the power of the Secretary of State was in question, had no analogy to the present case : the authority of the Secretary of State, with respect to State offences. had been so long maintained, it was of so long duration. that he was uot at that moment prepared to call it into question—but he denied that the power of the Secretary of State should be taken as illustrative of the power of Magistrates. The Secretary of State, in many essential points. differed from the Magis trate: he MINA administer an oath—lie cannot hold to beil—.but he might commit to gaol ; he might bring up such person to be further examin ed ; he might commit to close custody, which the Magistrate could not do. The Secretary . of State was the immediate servant of the King, exercising the King's prerogative in affairs of State necessity. there was so similarity whatever between him end the Jamie:seat the Sessions. In the Kiug o. Darby, the question was not whether the Magistrate had a right to commit, but whether he had a right to exa mine the party, to bring the party to be examined and dealt with according to low. but not the power of committal. It wesesked, whether in case of felony, had not the Magistrate the power to examine ? Cer tainly; but he had no such power before the statute of William and Mary, which gave him that power ; the Magistrate had the right to examine only snider the Act of Parliament. hi the King ti. Airbury, the power of committal was not discussed; the simple fact . thete was, that the party was committed by the Secretary of State for a libel, end outlawed ; and be come iii to he released from the outlawry. In the Itiaig w. Wilkes, his Leonora Brother (Ser kern Blown) seemed to quarrel with the audio. rity of Wilson, and prefers the Report in th State Trials, an anonymous instillation, unsenotioned by sup name whatever. Their Lordship*, however, if bound to make an election, might prefer the authority of Serjeaut Wilson, considering his learning, his stetson, and his *slew', and coos'. daring too that he was present 'during the entire discussion of that celebrated case.. Is. Wilkes's case ' it was a question of privilege. seal him wise the libel en actual breech of the peace, or a more tendency to a breach of the peace. If an actual breach of the peace, then the privilege of Parka. meat net up by Mr. Wilkes would not awed. If ts mere tendency, to a breach of the peace, it would avail him—the authority was in point; and it was decided that the Magistrates could not commit for a libel. - By the Isw of the laud, utiles* an actual breach of the peace. ypu cannot call fur securities to keep the peace. velem ms the authority of-the Secretary of State—hew that authority erigioatod, it was not made clear; it was' sisprosed. to -h t re ' originated out of the liceqsiiig Act: At . that' 1 the press was liceusid. and worms coiled ' wagers wets arsitassiowsl c itovieg she 4 40 Of the Kiwi, we the warrant of Ilmliweerwor . to germ *bee wen drioramed _ ism** g est the plebes. seise Mimi with rec.._ power of t h e Seams', of elate, co that Act, had been gvadisolly egeecierotieirro tkwe subject practice and of wisp,* hail b c ed.tbat this power claimed hy else Jestin of the Peace had been exercised for so entire cets-i tory ; yet from .the tin to the 56th of Geo there were but lis* instances uf , person. eamemii tea iu case of libel for want of bail, two of thme wet. anterior to the derision in Wilkini's CAS. Aber •1 1 lapse of 37 years, Lord 1111roberougholiew Attor ney-Overcoat, ventured to Eiger ciao- that pew''. , Whet then, he would ask. was the.infererice ?- Wes it not that the law of the lend, vs loud dom. and established in the case of Wilkes, was consider ed as conclusive? For how otherwise did it hep• pen that this power bad slept for 37 yeses moo having slept so long. what, he wooliteesk, was tar necessity of disturbing it now ? It teemed te home slept indeed, to hare been extingaished for 37. years; subsequent to Wilkes's case it was not re• sensed. it wee not exercised is one nue. instance. The fact speaks most manifes'ly tie acquiescence of the Judgment proonunced that case. It was true that from the time to. Queen Anne to the 11‘1 of George 111. that pewee had been exercised. bet it was an illegal puw-r. unknown to the ancient law, and be need ono c re that where any doubt appeared, it shawl.' be tett ed in • way favourable to the liberty of the 'object The power chinned was very extensive. owl • roe stitutional jealousy ought to be einerisinerf by all who valued the liberty of the press, inid the secs. rity of thine rights epos which ro ouch depeaded: It was right to cherish that fur to issitutieuel jealousy, because it war in the witere of power to press beyond its boundaries. In the prevent iii stance there was an enlargement of power claimed, far beyond what was authorised by the law of Use land. He knew it had been essintailie I by wine. that Junes acquired nothing by the Libel Bill. whilst others contended that they acquired much— that Juries have the power to pronounce libel or so libel. and to return their verdict fete and unfettered by the opinion of the Judge; if so. the power contended for would give the Magistre•or a power to commit to pries:min eases of libel, though the care would ultimately go under the considers lion of a Jury, who!might pronounce that tbecherg was altogether unfounded. On the whole. lie sow no reason to cramp in this manner the liberty el t h e subject ; and, he would again repeat. that the dear. trine contended for was unsupported by the 'totem book, or by the ancient law of the land. By the ancient law. the power of the Magistrate woo kept within proper bounds, and he was quite sure their Lordship* would feel no disposition to estend It. Lord Chief Justice DA LAMB commenced his pair meat by saying, that the present question was and of great magnitude, that it was essential to the in terests of the public ; affecting. in one way. the liberty of the press ; and, in soother, the powers of Magistrates—poems which were necessary fee the maintenance of the public order. and the preserve. tion of the public peace. Viewing she case iu obi* way, he was glad it received so ample and so able a • discussion. On the trial be felt no difbcolty instating plainly his opinion; it was this, tbst,in point of low, the Magistrate had the power he exercised; sad that, is point of duty, be was bound to exercise dist pewee. It would have beets a culpable dereliction of his duty if he hod bet dew so. The Jury. however, did not adopt the law as laid *down by him. said they returned sad stated diet they did Not sob scribe to his ',stemma of the law, and that they wished to reteru • special verdict that the question of law might be discussed. They did re accord ingly. It was admitted that the libel was of the worst possible description—whether it was *edit or not, certainly it bordered much en the meant ot seditious libel. He woad ant advert to the were of the libel, or the parties against whom it directed; the duties they have to perform. the interest the public have is the a:incise of duties—for it was admitted that whatever might the nature of the libel, whether seditious, eases. or scandalous, or a libel ea a private iedi • Anal. that in either of these cases the question wow 'identically the sanse—bed, er bed tot' the No gistraste the pewee to commit the party drorgoel on omit, in case of libel, he woe thllluag ""clsna The first consideration was as to usage; be. • set my that usage constituted law, but it bet , Mielrew what the law was, and to explain the 'la where it was doubtful; therefore they natu turned to the books IS see how the power war erased. Oa this a body of evidence presented self, which he would say was newer preduced fore a Court or Justice on say cote whatever There were no less then 120 isolates.* of penes• bailed on committals. in came quite similar to present. This evidence was collmited from she cords of the country. sod wood over a te.litlei 120 years. from the time of Queen Anne .in .67th of his late hisjeisty • nor were demo oil. instances; for it might be fairly evni;ladads• en infinitely greater number of screams were witted for want of bail. If ,;he case bad • there, sod nothing appeared in the books bust uniform practice or 120 years ;bet alone w • be conclusive ; and be would be a bold moo deed, he would say a presumptuous men, who womill say that this was not the law at the 'moved 44, in most of those cases the pailies were brsoirf up on Baler Cerra, so that the practice moils, a silent and creeping practice. but net the light of day, and was breugbt from time to ties under the consideration of the most consent ssis illustrious person' who ailed the highest p'i'ers Coons •of Critaiusl Jurisdiction'. Ott the 00 1 baud, not one book, net one saying—except a test Lary saying. which he would presently elleert ter not a statute or authority could be sliewifto &Ur the validity of this usage. But it warselfl`that practice did sot go back further than . tbe lion. the objection wee a 'singe's: one, weer' question bore on the liberty of the ibblet , reason why the inquiry ilid sot proceed *V to avoid procegesics of 's daubtfut shit dents from times when every thing Wit that was odium' aid iirbiicary. - tia the exercise of tyeanoicil Oster; • lie et ever, with his Ilistfarr *doe et practice sliatild naktill *i*ebit' tit apPoiedlie die priliiphi'af 4V4l::....ariet 'a • - *ben!" it mai egpeeeirai ibe ~t tat ` ireir 4 4ll66 , was said o 5 t • w as 414 ce*ill • . 1 911;. ~~~lSri.