The Sun. — London, England, 1823-06-14 00:00:00

LITERARY NOTICE. MEMOIRS of WILLIAM HAYLEY, Esu. the Friend and Biographer of COWPER. Written by Iltraszt.r. From this Work, which is just published, and which will, no doubt, excite considerable atten tion, we extract the following passage as a fair specimen of the Author's own idea of his pro. duction:-- The life of a Sequestered Student, fond of books and pri vacy, in all the periods of his existence, seems, at first, to offer materials for nothing more than a short and simple History; but incidents, very singular in themselves, and productive of consequences no less extraordinary, befel the subject of these Memoirs ; and though ever devoted to retirement himself, he had so much intercourse with many, the most memorable cha racters of his time, that a fair and full account of him must inevitably be a work of considerable extent and diversity :" and such, indeed, it appears to be. Born of an ancient and opulent family, the Au thor possessed the means of cultivating a taste for literature, without having been, at the same time, compelled to stoop to the drudgery of an inferior occupation for support : whilst with an urbanity, highly creditable to himself, he never failed to foster and encourage the efforts of those who were placed in circumstances of a less auspicious kind. From the station which he enjoyed in Society, nayley often found himself in the possession of influence, which it was one of his highest gratifi cations to employ on the behalf of others ; and the reader of this work can scarcely fail of being struck with this as the most prominent trait in hia amiable character—a constant tendency to acts of the most disinterested friendship. Bence his continual solicitude for the welfare and suc cess of his youthful associates ; his almost ro mantic efforts to raise from obscurity an estimable youth, who had entered his service in a menial capacity, but who, by his means, attained to on honourable station in ,the service of his Country, and among many minor kindnesses, which it would be difficult to enumerate, that pension, which, but, that his sun had set, would doubtless have proved a most important solace to the de clining years of his beloved CoWper. Bayley was, it appears, the grandson of Thos. llayley, Dean of Chichester ; his father, a man of large property, embarked in a militarrlife, and was, in consequence of his services, offered a baronetcy, by the Duke of Newcastle, which he declined. Dying early, he left his son William, the subject of these Memoirs, then a child of five years, heir to his possessions. Entering into life, under such circumstances, Hay ley must have been exposed to many temp tations, but for the affectionate car e of his ami able mother, of whose highly estimable worth he appears to have been duly sensible. Ills educe cation began at Eton, from whence he removed to Cambridge, which he quitted at the age of twenty-two, and ever after devoted himself to literature. As a gentleman and a scholar, his connexions appear to have been of the very first order, and, in the work before us, we have many entertaining anecdotes of remarkable per sons, who have rendered themselves conspicuous by their talents or their history. In these Memoirs, the Author has given us an account of the progress of his studies, and of his compositions, with extracts from his Dials his Gin-respondence, and 114 unpublished Poelrg. The Editor has also introduced some interesting let ters respecting the justly admired Cowper. We lament that our limits forbid us the pleasure of extracting, but in a work so multifarious and di versified, this could avail but little. We must therefore content ourselves - with cordially re commending it to the perusal of our readers, as the most instructive and pleasing piece of auto biography which has, for a considerable period, come under our notice. THE SUN. SOLE3I QUIS 1)ICE8I; FALSUIII AUDICIT LONDON, SATURDAY, JUNE 14, 1323. The great length at which we have given a Report of the interesting Meeting at the London Tavern yesterday, and the pre-occupation of a large portion of our columns by a Law Case, preclude the possibility of our giving insertion either to the Parliamentary Debates of last night, or to the Foreign Intelligence received by us this day. These are, therefore, postponed till Monday, from a conviction that the orris. sion will be excused by our Readers, under the extraordinary circumstances in which we , have been placed by the important share which we took in yesterday's proceedings,---- and respecting whir' we 1.11011 shortly give some further explanations. The principal articles of foreign intelligence are, a Proclamation by the Spanish Regency to the Nation, which still offers no hint of forming a liberal Constitution, and addresses only threats to the Constitutionalists ;—an article in a Bayonne Paper, which seems to indicate that France is already meditating an attack upon Portugal.;— and a Dispatch from Major-General Count GUILLEMINOT, detailing some operations of the Duke d'ANGouLEstE's Army. The following mysterious paragraph, brought by the Dutch Mail, is Ikon reflection too important to be omitted, though we withhold all comments upon it for the present, and probably until we have been furnished with more explicit and authentic particulars respecting it : " BERLIN, MAY 27.—Unexpeeted events which are said to have taken place in Russia, are at this time the chief subject of conversation. Private letters have been received direct from St. Petersburgb, but speak, however, on the subject with extreme reserve, and mention no particulars. According to the reports in Circulation here Tery serious occurrences have taken place. It is said that a conspiracy has been discovered, in which several families of the first rank are reported to be implicated. It is affirmed that an ecclesiastic gave information of the existence of the plot to the Empress Motbcri who was the first to acquaint her son." Our Correspondent in the City writes that he 64 has just seen a Gentleman who arrived this morning from Barcelona. He. saw MINI there, who was preparing an expedition for the fron. , tiers of France. He demanded of the inhabit ants of Barcelona 5000 cockades, and several thousand rations for his troops, which were im mediately furnished. Five hundred of the women of Barcelona had formed themselves into a corps, dressed in jackets, and armed w itit pikes, fully determined to lose their lives in the defence of their City. The above Gentleman states MINA's Army to be abditt 34,000 good troops and, well disciplined. lie is of opinion that the War is only on the eve of commencing, and that the Spaniards have at. the present mo ment about 100,000 thousand welt disciplined troops." We cannot, of course, vouch for the accuracy of the foregoing statement. Our friend in the City also states that the ex presses from Paris have brought the French Funils 87. r. 50c. ; and Spanish, 42. - We beg to refer our readers to the important case of the K Ixc V. JOLLIFFE, a full report of the proceedings in which will be found in another part of our Paper. From the length and importance of the proceedings at the City of London Tavern, yesterday, we are not able to enter into any ob servations on the case at present, but shall avail ourselves of the first opportunity to do so. MERCANTILE SHIPPING. DEAr., JUNE 13.—Wind N.E.—Caine down from the River last night and to-day the Amity, Reynolds, for the South Seas ; Onyx, Willis, for Jamaica and Honduras ; and Meridian, Sevey, for Baltimore. Arrived last night and remain for orders the Regent, Morris, for Itotterdam, and Prince Re gent, March, for Havanneh. l'o 1111131 0 WM, JUNE: 13.—Wind Northerly.—Arrived his Majesty's ship Severn from the Downs, and his Majesty's Steam-boat Comet from ditto. Sailed the Ganges for Bengal. G RAV E S END, JUNE 12.—Arrived his Majesty's ship' Sybille front Jamaica. Fat.atouTu, JUNE 12.—Wind N.—Arrived the Royal George Steam vessel,' from London for Vigo and Carmine. — Sailed the Minerva, Proby, for India, and Elizabeth, for the Cape of Good Hope, T - IMPROMPTU. The Flax= essay'd to bribe Twit SUN As they to others may have done, And Sn,if the means they chose; THE SUN pierc'd thro' the vain disguise, It could not blind its patriot eyes, Or take it by the Non. London Tavern. PINI'II. SPOIITINGINTEIEIGENCE. ASCOT HEATH RACES. Fitinax.—(lJAAT DAY.) In the absence of Royalty, the Duke of Yonx excepted, the course Was but thinly attended. It is a day when the vo taries of pleasure feel that company, or to lice and be seen in the gaiety of fashionable attire, no longer exists. There were two stakes only to be run for, one of which is the moat sporting one of the weA, viz.:— The Wokin'gbatrt Stakes for three yrs old and upwards, three quarters of a mile.—llandicap. Mr: Northey's Sprite, 4 yrs, 7st. 101 b. Lord Dunwich's Langtonian, 6 yes, Ost. 101 b. - Two only were placed. Three and a half to one agat Sir Ilultlibrand, 4 to 1 ags Angelica, 6 to 1 agt . tt brother to Antonio, 8 to I apt Langton, inn, 6 to 1 ag►st Spine, 8 to 1 apt Black and all Black, 10 to agst Magnus Troil.—The race won easy. A Plate of 501. for all ages. Mr. Arnold's Bacchanal, 6 yrs, 9st. 31b. - 1 2 Mr. Curteitt's b. f. Menu', 3 yrs. old, 7st. lib - 2 1 Four to 1 on Becchanal.—Bacchanal was bought of Lord Cavendish during the week for IUO sovereigns, and sold for 170. Even betting after the second heat. The horse won the third heat by several lengths. - 2 FASHIONABLE ARRIVALS. The Earl of Ormond, at the St. James's Hotel, Jerinyn.. street, from Paris; George Caswall, Esq., and Mrs. C aswall, and G. Heron, Esq., and family, at Ncrot'a Hotel, from Cheshire; and Master and Miss Harvey; Aston Leigh, Esq. at ditto, from Lime • J. Dashwood, Esq. and family , at d itto ; Sir Pyers Mostyn, Ilan. at ditto, from Richmond. BATH AnuivaLs.—ni# highness the Duke of Saxe Wei mar, and Suite, Marq G uis and Marchioness of Bate, Lord Blaney, Countess tie Puisey, Sir Ralph and Lady . Moore, Sir 11. and Lady Carew, Lady Palmer , S ir Leonard Holmes — Captain and Mrs. Page, Captain Byers, Captain Child, Capt. Gillam, Capt. Stevenson, Capt. Turberville, Lieut. and Mrs. Gawen, Lieut. Taggart—Rev. Archdeacon Sandiford, Rev. Dr. Carden Mackinnon, Rev. Mr. and Mrs. Isaacson, Rev. Mr. Biedennann, Rev. Mr.llarbin, Rev. Mr. Raymond, Rev. Mr. Wightwick. TILE MAJLSTY did not attend Ascot Races yesterday ; but we are happy to say that his absence did not arise from indispo sition. Ills MAJESTY was in good spirits through out the day, and had a select party to dinner. Yesterday afternoon, at five o'clock, the' Duchess of CLARENCE and the Duchess of SAXE WEIMAR came to town from Bushey, and after wards dined with the Duke and Duchess of GLOUCESTER. The Frau Metta, NORBYE, from Copenhagen to Hatnburgh, was attacked at sea by four Swedish fishermen, who murdered the Captain' and crew, and threw the bodies overboard ; they then broke open the lockers and began to plun der ; but, being disturbed, run the ship aground near Gottenburgh, where they were secured by the Custom-house officers. THE HAYMARKET THEATRE IS likely to open under more promising auspices than since the memorable days of the famous SAM. FOOTE, if the following, which is given as a list of their Dramatis Person' for the ensuing season, he correct :--LISTON, HARLEY, COOPER, TERRY, POPE, WILLIAMS,JOHNSON,VINING (from Bath), Miss CHESTER, Mrs. jormsort (from Norwich), Miss JoitssoN (from Hull), Mrs. CHATTCILLY and Miss PA.TON. Mr. CONWAY still modestly acts as Prompter, and Mr. T. DIUDIN brings all his long theatrical experience to the office of Stage Manager. The new importations of the season are, We find, recommended .by high provincial celebrity LAW INTELLIGENCE• PROCEEDINGS IN - THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JUni 9, 1M•.3. THE XING V.JOLLIFFE. Lerd Chief Justice Mancyrr—We will take the Mug v. Joliffe, Mr. Justice BEST—It will he unnecessary to state the plead ings. The first question was, whether it was the custom for the Bailiff to summon the Jury, and then whether thitt practice, supposing it to exist, was consistent with the law ? I believe those were the two questions. Lord Chief Justice ABBOTT—The last will be upon the Record. Mr. GASELEE—It is moved to enter the judgment for the Crown, notwithstanding the verdict, or to have a special ver dict upon that point. Mr. Justice BEST—The Learned Judge gave you leave to move to enter a verdict for the defendant. Mr. SCAULETT— The rule is, first, whether there should be a new trial; and, secondly, whether the judgment should be entered for the Crown., notwithstanding the verdict. ( Mr. Justice BEST .read the Report of the Trial.) Mr. Seen LETT—lregret very much - that no gentleman who was present at the trial is in Court. Lord Chief Justice ABBOTT—The evidence to sustain the prescription is all one way, and not answered. Mr. S'ealti.F.TT—Ves e entirely.--When I heard this motion made, Mr. Merewether and Mr. Adam, who were in the cause with me, suggested that all the evidence was on one side, and that it was a little understated by the learned Serjeant ; he stated twenty years, and one man speaks of forty-five years practice. Mr. Justice lixsT—Yes. Mr. SCARLETT—The practice was notorious in the place, and as the place is well known now by the parties that have been formed there, there were abundant opportunities for the Crown to call witnesses to disprove the practice. Lord Chief Justice ABBOTT—It is a practice uniformly existing for twenty years, of which the commencement is not shewn, and that is a matter on which a Jury may conclude the thing has always existed—that is the general rule. Mr. Se:JAW:TT—There can be no doubt of that ; and I apprehend, upon reading the Report, your Lordships have ab solved me from all trouble as toehe finding of the Jury. Lord Chief Justice Annoe'r —We think so. Mr. ScARLETT—The evidence is all one way ; find if any could have been adduced the other way, it might have been called. I shall apply myself very shortly to the other part of the case, and it has appeared to me that that is eqnally clear. The objection made is, that the Steward ought not to select a Jury. The custom is that the Steward specifies the names of the persons to he selected as .Jurymen—that custom is said to be bad. Now let us sec how it can be Raid to be bad. When you look at the constitution of the Court—this is a Court Leet; a Court lest is carved out of the Sheriff's Torn—the Sheriff's Torn is the King's view of frankpledge for all his legal men— that is men who can give pledges in the hundred as held by the Sheriff, and of common right every individual resident in the Torn is bound to attend. What is the duty of the Sheriff when they attend? the Sheriff is the judge of that Court, and when they do attend the Sheriff names the Jury, There is no law for the Sheriff's Torn that requires any Jury to be summoned ; for this plain reason, that all are bound to attend, if the Lord demands it. But then in the areument you will see the consequence of that—the Sheriff at his Torn when all the residents in the Torn attended—out of those chose ,the Jury—and swore the Jury, and they being in the nature of a Grand Jury made such a presentment as they thought fit, as to the view of frankpledge. On what principle is it that the presentment of the inquest of the Torn is not traversable, except immediately that it is found; but because the law supposes every person to be present whose duty it was to be present. Therefore he could not come at a subsequent Court and traverse. That the Leet is carved out of:the Torn is evident, for one of the franchises gianted by the King in ancient time was to exempt the inhabitants of a cer tain place from attending the Sheriff's Torn, on condition of attending the Steward at the Leet to have view of frankpledge. It is an emanation of the Sheriff's Court.' The Steward stands in the place of the Sheriff, and all the residents in the beet are of common right bound to do suit and serviceat that Court,otherwise they cannot exempt themselves from being in the Sheriff's Torn. Are they to be summoned ? Certainly, not. They are bound to attend and do their ditty at the beet without summons. Of whom is the Jury formed ? When they attend; the Sheriff is to swear the Jury. Nei the law or custom prescribe any pre, Timis selection of the Jury P I apprehend , certainly not. 'rhe Sheriff before wham the matter is to be heard, when the suitors are all assembled, is to swear the Grand Inquest which is the Jury of the Leet. • Mr. Justice BEST—Here it appears all the inhabitants were warned to attend. Mr. SCARLETT—Ves, my Lord. I am now saying by the common law no warning whatsoever was necessary. No book states it. Undoubtedly the books that give an account of the proceedings of the Sheriff's Torn are somewhat obscure from their long disuse of the Court ; but every one I have looked into is silent upon the subject of e the warning. The Sheriff's Torn is a Coen of the greateet antiquity, and traceable to the time of King . Alfred, when every one was obliged to give pledges—to give security. The whole kingdom was divided into districts of ten hottselialtiers each, and time were pledges for each other ; and therefore the Torn, which probably had its origin in that, has since come into disuse =- but the Court Leet being a local privilege, and generally connected with the rights, of the Manor, there has been some local interest to sustain it, and therefore it still exists—hut there is no book that mentions the Sheriff's Torn, and states that the King'e subjects were en titled to summons. They were bound to attend, and if so, who were to choose the Jury ? Why certa i n ly the, Sheriffs; if the Sheriff, hi order to make sure of the Jury attending, and ding, chose to send his Bailiff to summ on the Jury it was just as much his nomination as if the Sheriff 'dime!f lied done it. If we go by analogy from the Sheriff's Torn to the beet, and sub stitute the Steward for the Sheriff—as every man is bound to attend the beet, unless he can spew that his attendance at the Torn has exempted hint, that chews lie was bound to attend the beet without summons. If he attended without summons, who kto choose the Jur" ? re hend the Steward. I a Mr. Justice Beerr---' here is pp a case hi Cornyn entit le d C ourt le'et ; it is said in Comyn the Steward may compel a stranger passing in view of the Torn to be sworn. Mr. SeeneETT—l was coining to that to shew the practice. Having disposed of the analogy; let us look at the practice of the Leet, that is better. undeistood, because It is more modern, but every body must know' the object of getting all the suitors to• attend it, may be a matter of very tr ill i ng importance—the only object frequently is to keep alive a right. ,The Lord, if he wants to prove the existence of his franchise over a particu lar tenement, is in the habit of sending a summons to that par ticular individual to amerce him for not attending. That is in a - case where the I,ord may think it important for the limits of the manor or a market, but that is not important,. The Leet it proclaimed as the Torn is proclaimed ; but that is not a autn.. mons. The law does right to amerce every man who does not attend, and that is generally a penny —generally not levied. It is a mere matter of form, unless the lewd has notice that they intend to dispute his right. Then why summon the jurors? For this reason—as the interest for attending the leet has ceased in most parts of England, the Steward, to make sure of the Jury, thinks right to give notice to particular persons ; hut suppose, that instead of doing that he was to make a general proclama tion, or summon every individual to do suit and service at the beet, without desiring the Bailiff to summon any particular individual—when they all attend who is to choose the Jury ? is the Bailiff? it ;teems to me to be an absurdity to suppose that ; and all the analogy and rearm go to shew the Steward, as the Sheriff of the Torn. was the person to select the Jury, but in /his case it is a par icular absurdity to make the Bailiff" choose the Jury, because they choose the Bailiff; and choose all . the officers connected with the Leet. The officer called the Mayor, now, is nothing more than what was called the Bomughrceve— the head of the Borough from whence he comes to be the re turning officer, but in most places where the Leet exists in its pristine form, the Constable, the Ileadborough, which is an great strictness, an othcr name for the cons table, as in the Township of MAN chosen by the Reeve is now e l h A os et en i is kept e t a ti r i by the L yet Jury, and thetehi e l 1; T O p 'E u n i t t g; 1 t w e r e h o e n e ; s e e t a the e e formerly cluisen by the Jury. In Petersfield he is called the Mayor, and lie is of very little use, except as the returning officer.— The Jury choose also the inferior officers—they choose the Bai. liff, and would it not be a very extraordinary thing that it should be left to the bailiff to select them--the thing appears ,much more absurd than to leave it to the st eward to select the is the impropriety of it, if the Sheriff chooses jury. writ of inquiry Where the Sheriff acts as j u d ge P rhe ß j u o t r w y h i e o re o He chooses the Jury, that Is an instance given in many of the books. My Lord, there may, be a particular custom in a par. ticular place, as to particular individuals, ited as to the Steward choosing the Jury ; but that is governed by general principles, Why should the Bailiff s elect the Jury es vi tern - 414)1 He is but I can see one of the officers whom the Jury nominate. I cannot conceive that it is below the dignity of Judge to exeente a ministerial office, Generally speaking, all ministerial offices are consi dered to be kept separate, because, in case of any „ thing *tat jury should be left rather to the ministerial,officee than to the judge. nworanrea.gsobneiinngtldiecmiLtrltdh°wtdtgliee i s s e tA le ) c B t e it t in i s t r o lg f in Mr. Justice would be imposeible for the Judge to summon the jury ; he can know nothin g of them. Mr. SCA ntETT — St i pp OSC the Sheriff w as to take thel'ury de eireurnstautihus ; —that th e w h o le count was to attend the Judge at the Assizes, there would be no objection, having the names returned to him, and saying return such and such per- sons, all the names being presentei ; at least it would be less objectionable than selection by a more obscure person, and of less responsibility, who might have motives in summing a par cicalal. jury which a Judge cannot. have. It is in general a mutter of responsibility, and the higher the person the greater' the security. In the Jury Court in Scotland, the Judge does summon the jury—a number is returned by the Sheriff; Ido not mean to say any thing for or against the practice, but there is nothing in the principle of the common law against it; by the statute the Judge is directed to form the panel.— Mr. Justice Ilot.nosir—To correct the panel. Mr. SCAIMETT—There are cases, where if both the Sheriff and Coroner be inadequate„ the Judge appoints elisors. I ap prehend it is quite clear in all cases where the Sheriff is to act as judge, he also is a ministerial officer, and his bailiff ap pointed by him is no more than himself. The law takes no notice of the Sheriff's Bailiff Every act done by him is the act of the Sheriff ; and that • the way . that all Courts of Justice treat them ; and if, a Sheriff chose to say, I will have no under Sheriff or Bailiff, but choose to do the duty myself, he would 'summon them and swear the Jury in. Therefore, wherever the Sheriff acts as Judge, and the jury come before him, it is in effect exactly the same thing as if' lie had summoned them. There is no doubt he does summon the jury. lam sorry my Learned Friend, Mr. Merewether, is not here-Ate had a case which he furnished me with, and 1 returned it to him. There is a case in Croke Charles, in which the objection was made, the Mayor and bailiff of a corporation having a court. It appeared the jury were summoned by, the bailiff'; an objection was taken and overruled several reasons were given—one was, that the Mayor was a judge, and therefore that the Judge should not summon the jury • but another argument was, that if you did not allow the bailiff to summon the jury, you destroyed the constitution of many courts where there were no other officers. Since this case has been agitated, a Gentleman at the bar, I believe, has published a book of reports upon this subject,— the book has evidently been written, a part of it at least, with a view to this case: he has bestowed some labour in finding out some objection to this proceeding; and 'r has endeavoured, by a hard-strained inference, to prove,. Jett - the proceeding is illegal ; but there is no one case, as to the Sheriff's Torn, that the Gentleman has adduced in support of it ;—I submit there is no colour for saying that this verdict ought to be entered for the Crown, the custom being found, according to the Issue, for the defendant ; and it appearing to be the uniform custom, it is too, much fury our Lordships to say that the decision is so contrary to law that you would order the verdict to be entered for the Crown in opposition to the verdict found by the Jury. Mr. GASELEE—I am quite taken by surprise: certainly I did not catch the report as the .Judge read it; but it was under stood at the trial, that there was to be a special verdict, and my Learned Friend, Mr. Serjeant Pell, so stated in his opening. Lord Chief Justice Anuovr—You desire to have a special verdict ; I do not see how that can help you, it will find the issues. Mr. GASELEE—Yes, but we might state any thing that ap peared in the mode of election on the Judge's notes. I should ray p Lord Chief Justice A unoTT—I do not see what a special verdict would do as to the prescription that the jury must find. If ,you stated the evidence, your special verdict would be bad. Mr. SCABLETT—It is exactly the same. . Lord Chief Justice ABBOTT—If you state your evidence one way or another, your special verdict will be good for nothing; you must state facts. This objection upon the record is open to writ of error. Mr. GasEt.im —There are some facts respecting another issue, that the jury were not properly summoned. Lord Chief Justice AnnoTT—l can find nothing of that in the report. Mr. GaszLEE—The facts might lie stated under which the jury were summoned and returned. Lord Chief - Justice ABBOTT-4 can see no evidence that can properly be made the foundation of a special verdict; I cannot find it. Mr. Justice BEST—The Learned Judge says, if the Court think fit you are to have a special verdict ; but he says, I can not discover there was any ground upon which the Iterator could have a verdict. Lord Chief Justice ABBOTT--I can discover none. Mr. OASELEE—It occurred to us thst it would be more so- lernnly argued. • Lord Chief Justice A nnovr—T cannot frame a special ver. dict, or see in what manner it is to be done ; it must be found by the jury. .You must state facts, you must not state the evidence: • Mr. Amst—l propose to trouble your Lordships very shortly upon this case. The fact having been found of the custom, I apprehend the only question is, whether that custom is in itself so unreasonable as to be held illegal i There were two ways in which this case was to be presented. The one upon general principles, and the other upon the particular circumstances as applicable to those general principles. My Lord, with respect to the general principle, it is con tended it was impossible, in point of law, that the person to preside in the Court should do the ministerial office of sum. tnoning the jury; first, upon the ground that the judge was not the person ; he having to decide upon points of law, and the jury to decide upon points of fact. That was the ground upon which it was thrown nut, that there might be some question as to the legality of it; but wneu your Lordships advert to that superior jurisdiction, out of which, 1 apprehend, it Must be ad mitted that the Court Leet had been framed—when your Lord ships see, according to the argument and analogy which Mr. Scarlett has stated to your Lordships, that the Judgei in the Sherifrs"rorn, out of which this has been carved, did from its very outset what it is contended on the other side, the Judge of the Court Leet cannot pertbrin, we have gone the whole way of satisfying your Lordships, that the law is as we contend. I will not occupy more of your Lordships time upon this point, I cannot make it plainer. 1 mid lit render it more obscure. My Lords, as to the facts of the ease, the argument inclined to our side ; because the consequence must be, If the Steward is not entitled to summon the Jury, it must be done by the Bailiff'. Either it must be done by the Steward or the Bailiff . ; and the Steward appears to me to be much more independent, both as to the Jury and with respect to that person, whose in terests it was argued at the trial, and here, upon moving for this Rule, are to be benefited by the Jury, being selected by the Steward. Here the Bailiff is chosen by the Jury; the 'UMW is a man going.out of office every year, and is elected by that very body whom he is to be chosen to select. If your Lordship is to look to the chance of improper conduct, it is much more reason able to expect it from the man, whose existence in e.n office of profit is to depend upon a . particular set of men—the Steward not having any interest in it. lie is appointed by the Lord of the Leet, and in every respect Independent of the Jury. My . Lords, with respect to the other branch of the case, how far the interests of the Lord of the Leet are to be affected, I would submit is not a ground upon which your Lordship could exercise jurisdiction as to these points —certainly not as to the Courts Leet in general, nor as it seems to me as to this Court. The_ Steward is not neces. eerily to be inferred to be a person likely to assist the views of the Lord of the Leet, whatever those views may be ; nor can your Lordships come to a different decision in this case than you would in any other, where the function was to be per formed by another person. My Lords, it is said in this case that the Bailiff was in all respects to be considered as inde pendent of the Lord of the Lect ; but your Lordships will see tf the Bailiff, being from his situation in life a person much inferior to that class out of which the Steward is chosen, he would be much more liable to objection ; but at all events you cannot decide this case upon points such as these, whether one individual was more likely to be affected by interest than ano ther. \'our Lordships cannot attend to that, but these are the grounds upon which this case was put at the trial and now. My Lords, I propose to call your Lordships' attention to the points of mentioned in the early part of this discussion, as shewing your Lordships that the Steward could not be per. milted to summon the Jury to the Court Leet. One word will put an end' to that. The first Statute is the Ilth of Henry IV., the Statute first relied upon, and which is to this effect. Also because, that now of late inquests were taken at Westminster by persons named to the Justices, without due return of the Sheriff, of which persons, some were outlawed before the said Justices of Record, and some fled to sanctuary fur treason, and some for felony, there to have refuge, by whom, as well many offenders, were indicted as other lawful liege people of our Lord the King, not guilty by conspiracy, abetment, and false hint. ' gination of other persons for their special advantage and sin gular Lucre against the course of the common law used and accustomed before this time. Our said Lord the King, for the greater ease and quietness of his people, willeth anti granteth that the said indictment so made, with all the dependencies thereof, be revoked, annulled, void, and holden for none for ever ; and that from henceforth no indictment be made by any such persons, but by inquests of the King's lawful liege people in manner as was used In the tune of his noble progenitors; duly returned by the Sheriffs or Bailiffs of Franchises, with. out any manner of nomination to the said Sheriffit or Bailiffs of Franchises first made by any person of the names, which by him should be impanelled, except it be by the Officers of the said Sheriffs, or Bailiffs of franchisee, sworn and appointed so to do, and other officers to whom it pertaineth to do the same." I submit, on the very statement of this Act, it is quite clear it applies to the case of ordinary Courts, because the wards of the Statute are that they are to be returned by the Bailiffs of franchises, they being those persons who have the process within a particular limited franchise, into which the Sheriff by virtue of his office has no right to intrude—it had no relation to the Sheriff's Torn, but it went on to say that the Sheriff in his county, and the Bailiff in his limited franthises, and in which the Sheriff had no right to enter, should have the liberty of pointing out those names, but that left the Sheriirs authority where it was. My Lords, trim is another Statute to which I shall have occasion to call your attention, it is the first cf Rizhard 111., chapter 4. ti ere the recital " that great in • conveniences and perjuries do daily happen by untrue verdicts given in inquisitions and inquiries before Sheriffs in the Tains, by persons elm substance nor reputation, and it enacts," That no Bailiff, nor other officer, from henceforth return or impanel any such person in any shire in England, to be taken or pet in; or upon any such inquiry in any of the said Turns." That Statute undoubtedly refers to Courts Leet. Lord Chief .Justice • A nnovr— What Statute is that? 31r. ADAM—The! first of Richard 111. chapter 4. The title - is, " Of what credit and estate those Jurors must be which shall be empannelled in the Sheriff's Torn," and after reciting the inconveniences and perjuries that daily happen by untrue vet_ diets, it is enacted, " That ntt Bailiff or other officer froriehenCe forth return or empannel any such person in any shire of F.ng land, to be taken or put in or upon any such inquiry in any of. the said Turns, but such as be of good name and fame, and having lands and tenements of freehold within the same shires to the yearly value of twenty shillings at the least." But the object of this was not to regulate the persons to be returned on the Juries, but the amount of the property which the Jury should have to prevent the trials 'being. carried on by person* • incompetent to perfortu the duty, and the same Act fur. titer says, that the Bailiff shall summon the persons ; but is it to be construed that nobody hut the Bailiff shall sum— mon the Jury at all ? • I submit this has no reference to the _- subject matter, it was passed alio intatitx, it was by no means the intention of the Legislature to point out who , was to summon the Jury, it may be, that it lacing the burrness of the Bailiff usually to make this return, the Legis'a. ture may have taken the description of persons usually .en.- ployed, because it may be said that the Bailiff usually does make the returns,—it was only saying that that officer, whose duty it is usually to return the' Juries, shall return them after a particular mode; that cannot apply, I • apprehend, , in either point of view, either to chew that the Legislature meant to say who was the officer— Lord Chief Justice AntlOTT—The words arc. "--nO Bailiff or other officer from henceforth return or impanel." Mr. ADAM—Yes, my Lord, " that no Bailiff or otherofficer shall return or impanel any such person in any shire of 'Eng land." Now the argument there would be, that inasmuch as the bailiff is the person first mentioned in the Statute,. your Lordships must consider him as the person autlibrized, but I apprehend that is not applicable here. Then I was going to conclude by referring to the return of a Jury of another descrip'. tion, and not a Jury sumttioned in this way, to make present. meats in a Court beet. Your Lordships know, however, it might have been long ago when there were both a grand Jury and a petty Jury sworn to perform the duties of the Court Leet. At present, at least, the jury of the Court beet only perform the functions of a grand jury—they merely present. Your Lord. ships will see that these juries are not to be impanelled, and therefore that is an expression which, .1 submit, sheers it is re ferahle to another description of jury and not this leet jury— This applies to the Sheriff's Torn, not to the Court beet, but that from which the beet was drawn. I therefore consider this Act of Parliament is wholly inapplicable. I only trouble your Lordships with these observations, because the Acti have been used before, and will be used again. I now beg to draw your Lordships' attention to the lit of Elizabeth, chapter ifi, which seems to me to be more decisive, and to shew that the Steward is the proper summoning officer of the Jury in a Court beet. It is a Statute that your Lord ships will hardly think applicable to this matter; it is an Act for the preservation of the spawn of fish, and which is referred to in the book mentioned by Mr. Scarlett : it gives the Courts beet power to inquire into the guilt of those persons'who may have destroyed the spawn of fish, and there it this clause ; That if the first Jury shall be found to have concealed, or made default in presentment, or that they do hot present the offence and °Moder", that then it shall be lawful to the Steward or Bailiff of the Leet to summon another, so that if the Acts hear upon the point at all, this one I have now cited dots. Lord Chief Justice A BDOTT—W hat Section is it Mr. ADAlf—.lt is either Section 8,9, or 10, 1 think it is the 10th ;—" And if any Jury sworn in any Leet, and being charged to inquire of the offences committed within the pie. cinct of that Leet, do wilfully and willingly conceal, and make default in presentment, or do not present the °Knee and of. fenders, that then it shall be lawful to the Steward or Bailiff of this Leet, or his or their deputy for the time being, to impenel one other Jury within the saki Leet, and to inquire of such concealment and default for non-presentment ;"—So that htre, your Lordships see, it was considered that the Steward was the proper Officer to summon the Jury in the Court Leet ; that was indeed a Jury which was to determine, in consequence of the misconduct of the former Jury. It does not give any par. ticular power to the Steward, but it recognises him as an of.• ' ficer who should have the power to return the Jury, as well as the Bailiff. Without saying anymore upon tins part of the case, which has been better handled by my Learned Friend, Mr. Scarlett, than by any thing 1 can say, I would merely add, that there is nothing to chew there is any thing illegal in the Steward nominating the Jury. As to the practice, it is nit new, we know the Jury were not summoned originally at i 11; the precepts in the old books are to warn the inhabttants at large. It is only of late years that there has been any thing in the precept to call upon the Sheriff to return the Jury at all; but when the resiants were returned into the Court, the Sheriff teketed all the Jurors just as he would now; in the rase of a default of Jurors ; he chose them "de eireamstaatitou," or sent into the highways, and detained any person who was ri ding through the place, and made him serve ; and, therefore, as it appears, .the Steward has the power ; and as the dare-ter of Bailiff is of modern origin comparatively, I apprehend therns nothing inconsistent in a Judge being the nominator of the Jury, where he knows who they are. ' Mr. C. F. Wix.i.rasta—My Lords, lam on the tame side with my Learned Friends Mr. Scarlett and Mr. Adam; Mr. Scarlett has discussed the only general principle that arises i n the case so fully, and Mr. Adam has called your Lordshirrs' at. tendon to the three Statutes that bear upon the ease, that think I shall best discharge my duty in not trespassing further upon your Lordships' time. Lard Chief Justice A namerT 7r Now, Mr. Gaselee. _ _ Mr. Gasur.tv—My Lords, I am very sorry that Mr. Sera jeant Pell, who made this motion, and whom 1 expect here every moment, has not ytt arrived. My herds, 1 would wish to set Mr. Scarlet right as to the evidence of Shoell, who spoke to the practice of the Court Leet for forty-five years. Ido not think that the evidence wholly warrants that deduction from it, that the Jury were chosen in the same way. Lord Chief Justice Annor•r—lt is certainly questionable whether he meant to say that things were done in the same manner forty-five years ago, but I do not rely upon that; here are twenty years of continued practice proceeding in one and the same form, and nothing to the contrary. OASMEE—There were two prominent complaints made upon this occasion, the one for returning the Jury in the way in which it has been done, and the other for the bteward retire ing with the Jury ; therefore all that Shoell could speak to was that the Steward did retire with them as far back as 20 years, and that that is evidence to be left to the Jury, is it point 1 can not, by any means, feel myselfentitled to dispute; but the way in which we state this is, that it was not merely left to the Jury as evidence of the fact, but as evidence upon which they ought to find a verdict for the defendant. _ Mr. Justice BEST—Thlit is not the way in which it was left, as appears by the Report ; the Learned Judge only told them it was very cogent evidence. Lord Chief Justice ABBOTT—And if he did tell them that, he did right. Mr. elAetexe.--if it had been a private right, I should agree with that ; hut the Court Leet being an immemorial Court, it might have been carried further back, when the Steward was in Court, and when the Steward had with hint other prosentrnente. Ilir. Ari s ar—That was nos so.' Mr. Gael: i•FIE--The Steward was not culled to state w hetiutr there were others, hut attire were a greet number of documents in (_'uttrt ; and the best evidence was not called that might have been called ; and therefore it was not left to the jury to infer whether he the absence of all that evidence that might naturally be A e i x r i . ie jt et l e s d ti — ce B E 6 T.....1i ad yon an order to insptct the Rolls? Mr. 0-asEt.EE—No, my Lord. Mr. Wit.t.tests—The ',earned Judge told 'the Jury thiY might call that evidence if they had it. Lord Chief Justice ArinoTT—lf the verdict- had been the other way ; if the Jury had negatived the custom, and there had been an application to set aside the verdict, the ground of the will dispose of this point, as h application would have been, that the verdict was c ontrary t o all the evidence. Mt. 6 ASELgE—Your Lordship . . of all the °there, in finch way as you s all see tit. after Lhasa made the few observations have to make, and I ehall -not quarrel with it.--I was merely going to say, that this is not like a - private right where you could not expect more than a c..r tdin degree of evidence. Your Lordships know that the dot:- trine of presumption has been very much narrowed of late years. I need not call 3/our Lordechips' attention to the ease .1 Pe! - wick v. Reid, where a stop has been put to that.; I do not think now it would be add that a Jury might. presume Alt Act of Parliament:--it is ttpon these grounds we luau bly submit to your Lordships, that as there wail probably older evidence whether it should not have been left to the JAW ' to say if there tens not , an innovation. Mr. wati,voto sap., the Judge told 113 we might have called the Steward; 1 au not aware whether be did so Or not, but the Judge w ks , I 1 at dist we hail .'/ , ' , 1- aware of this fact, which tit)* Learned Friend rind myself were aware 0 f tot tits time. The Learned - dui:4w . was H uta:Taro o f 4 1,, plained against the P- ,n ~. T ., 1 d Judge diet d. %emir of the Steward humor. e 4terne know there was an application t epetiduili in this Court, u. Lave to ilic a Criniiiiia inforination against hem upon this wee situatieu its which that S i te o w e a t r n el la t a ttri t, a T il t e e- hiracter ana beoa. lion ; and is it to be thrown en our teeth, that having the ritew , me d in m eet a site:aim - 4 we did nut think tit to cull tarn, wreev r .; I I t