The Sun. — London, England, 1824-07-06 00:00:00

INTELLIGENCIL COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JULY 3. BOROUGH OF PETERSFIELD. THE KING V. CURUIZ, GENT. SCAILLETT.—My Lords, I am to shew cause against a rule which has been obtained against a Gentleman of the name of Currie, who is the Steward of the Court Leet of the Borough of Peterstield calling upon him to 'thew cause why a criminal information should not be filed against him. My Lords, the defendant is a young man of highly respectable connections, end gentlemanlike manner;_ and I should feel exceedingly concerned, if, in the issue of this case, your Lordships should feel yourselves called upon either to make this rule absolute, or to pass the slightest censure upon him. My Lords, the affi davits, upon which the application is made, are very long, very tedious, very minute, and very full. The Borough of Peters field and the Manor, which are en-extensive I believe, have been for many years vestedein the family of a Gentleman of the name of Jolliffe. It is stated to me, that four-fifths of the property in the Manor belong to that family. I do not mean tq conceal from the Court, that for a vast many years the repre. 'mutation of that Borough in Parliament has been very much influenced by, that family, and that persons supported by their interest have represented it. My Lords, some years ago, a . Gentleman of the name of Atcheson. having taken a house in the Borough, and being desirous of restoring that Borough to that state of independence, which 1 hare no doubt is exceed ingly agreeable to his feelings, as well as to the feelings of a great number of other persons in other parts of the kingdom (ant each party thinks his own views of independence arc the most correct), endeavoured to undermine the interests of this family of the Jolliffea, and he first commenced by being a Candulate f'or the Borough, but he failed, and presented a petition to Parliament, in order to bring in question the right of Election. There was a Petition of Appeal from the decision of the first Committee, and the Committee to whom it was re. ! - erred, determined that th e right, of election was in the free- Seeders, and that the freeholds might be divided ad infinitum. Mr. Atcheson having thus gained a step, thought it right to endeavour to get your Lordships high authority in aid of his views, and he began by a very legitimate mode of proceed ing upon every question of a like kind, by moving for and obtaining an information in the nature of a quo warrantm— There have been several successive quo warrants informations. Now I ant very far from complaining of all these proceedings % I think Mr. Atcheson was handling the proper weapons m such a controversy ; but what I am now going to state is going a little beyond that which is usual upon these occasions. Hay ing.obtained these several Holes, he thought it right to apply against a Gentleman of the name of Hector, the Steward to Air. JollifFe at the time, by a criminal information for adhering to that very custom that lie heel been questioning by quo.wan ranto. The ground of his application was, that although the- Court had thought the point sufficiently doubtful to grant a .sere wirrrauto to try it, he had thought proper to adhere to the old custom, and he had selected the Jury himself, and that he, being the servant of Mr. Jahn, had actually selected the Jury not. out of the quarters Of Mr. Jolliffe's enemies. The Court egranCed that Rule, but they enlarged it till after the quo war rant° information was tried, and upon the decision of that .in- tbrmation they discharge I it. Your Lordships will now see Atcheson's actkity. Having obtained these quo tear rautos, and this information against Mr. Hector, and as these proceedings were not brought' judicially to a termination, it was . thought proper to el e ct ano th er M ayor ; an d as t h e Steward must either from the experience of all these proceedings, fly into the arms of Mr. Atcheson, or take the risk of adhering to ear old custom, he thought it most discreet to adhere to the old custom, and select a Jury as his predecessors had done. Upon .vhich ground Mr. Atcheson in the course of last Hilary Term, and before your Lordships had pronounced judgment either - upon the informatios in the quo warranto, upon the motion for ea new trial, or the information against Mr. liector, applied for and obtained this rule. Now, my Lord, I will state part of the gravamen of Mr. Cutriest crime. It is, that Mr. Currie ven. *tared, notwithstanding the Court had granted a Rule against Hector, to pursue the saute custom that had been chalked out by his predecessors. Mr. Currie was at that time a clerk in the office of Messrs. Ilanrot and Metcalfe, Solicitors, than - whom Done can be named of greater respectability. It seems is was a great offence in hint, being a clerk to Messrs. Hermit ~ and Metcalfe, Attornies of Mr. Jolliffe, and engaged in the proceedings respecting this Borough, that this young man accepted the appointment of Mr. Jollilfe as his steward, and pursued the same course - that former stewards had done. It is stated that he wildly gave a list of the Jury to the Bailiff, 'and that the Bailiff returned that Jury. It is then stated that - there were a great many oche , / persons to the Borough who were equally ht to serve upon the Jury, and there were forty petsona who, in Mr. A tchetton'e opinion, were fitter. We have a very long affidavit, filed by a person of the name of Brewer, who does not state that he was a partizan of Mr. Atcheson's. lie has not the candour to state that he was made constable by this very Jury, and dined with the Jury at Mr. Jolliffe's ex. *pence, according to custom. It takes the whole of the Jury summoned and sworn in, and gives a history of each of them with great partictileriey, to thew that each had at dif- Terene times done something to indicate his attachment to the eittiliffeintereet ; that they held some property under Mr. Jol liffe ; or that they held property under au agent of Mr. Jot litre ; or that they were employed by Mr. Jolliffa or his agent (such an ent as Mr. !lector); that some of them were leis tenants. ag these particulars arc brought forward as argent. meteors of criminatton against this youpg Gentleman, •ivfio went to the Borough with the. guilty; intention of selecting persons Lieu appeared to be attached to the Jolliffe interest. :f t appears that Mr. Atcheson was in the Court at the time of the eleetior“—tbat the Court was exceedingly crowded with a Treat number of other most respectable, persons ; but. that the ury were . for the most part sworn from the friends of Mr. Jolla Fl. That three or four not attending, Mr. Currie called three or four others from those standing by, nod .then it Is 'swots ' that a number of other persons were fitter men, or as fit. My , Lords, proceed further to state, that in order to ea. • tier the Court of the influence of the Jolliffe'it in the Borough of 'Petersfiehi, a Gentleman of the name of James Andrew Afinaliu, whose affidavit was made in Al ichaelmas Term, 1019, has even detailed u letter, written by Mr. Jollifre's father or grandfather to games Andrews, who probably from the name was an ancestor of the Gentleman meleing the affidavit. It hears date the leth January, 1001. ,This is the letter of the Lord of the Manor to his own Steward J enclose a list of Woe fary-el think fourteen ertough ; but I leave it to Mr. An drews. The dinner niust be a fixed mint, 2s. fal. each, includ ing room, fire, bread, beer, and dinner. The liquor must be ale and punch. As to that, I leave It to your discretion , to do what you think right. I would not spare, and there is no need of waste. As to the houee, I have no one of my own, and therefore leave it to youe but the Alton beer is so much better 'than anyother, it should be at some house where titat beer is drawn. Letlhe bill be got in the et xt day, end %end it to me to return to Mi. Andrews for payment. Young Mr. Fylee, I Itelleve, will lie Mayor ; and then:fare my beet should be aired and made up for hint, and the room ready, as he will be there either Seto rday or Smulity. I am your ntuth obliged, (Signed) * WILLIAM. 301.1APEE.-4 should think the tolls of the fairs • soil markets must now be worth 201. a year at the least. If the Jury tire sixteen, there will be two, Mr. Ryles, Sir Joseph, sod Mr. Andrews. in all twenty." lie is particular about the moldier, as the custom is, that the Lord of the Manor pays fofelfe dinner. It appears that this Gentleman line thought pro per to bring this letter thrward, either to drew that they p a id 211. fidsonic . a head, or for other purpose, I ir a show that be inter. feted in the arrangement for the dinner. But there is anteater in 1791 It gives the history of Mr. Aletets. It seems lie had been fonnerly Mayor, that he had serv ed upon several Juries ; and a history is given-of him to strew that he was so connected with theidollifie family that a reference was made by Mr. Jolliffe to Mm as far hark as 1798 : so that it is quite clear he is a pat etesn of Mr. Jolliffe.—My Lords, I will now state the eillarit of Mr. Currie, answer to all dme elleeationm. In thr first Otte°, I hardly need e ntertain a doubt that the Court will'con ceivrethat, though Mr. (horde acted at some risk in what he did, yet that, under the eireumstancee, he could not do other. e wine than pursue the custom that had not been declared 'to be illegal • and as to his keying in the room with the Jury, as he swears ' he did nothing, nor say any thing, that in that reepeet he did nothing wrong. Ile swears, after giving a history of owes! informations, "• That in consequence of the proceedings nnf tire said Nadia - hid Ateheson, in the Borough of Petersfield, tine inhabitants at the Borough have become divided into two fort` the said Ilylten Jolliffe, and the other for the said Natheillivl Atcheson ; and, according to the best of his hetet; there are very few persons who are not the partizans a tire one side or ki te other. That he was appointed Steward attic said Court [sect by Mr. Jolliffe, in Januury, 1023 ; anti that in tire tame rncrnth,m the tienal and actevuorned manner, he nomi nated the Jury Ad remained with them in order to assist them, if necessary, whilethey deliberated as their presentments, art he understood end believed to have been the invariable mode of all leis predecemsors. TI baton the 19di January last pest, ire Also held 14:01aurt Led for the said Borough, in the usual manner, and that is the exercise of the right of nomirestion vested in him, as Steward, he selected such persons as uppeared to him fit and proper to he Jurymen ; and that although wane of Om were, as he believes, the supporters of the interest ofltlr..lelliflie he wait informed, and verily believes, that several of them veers not the decided partirris of either side ; and he then ; be lieved, and now verily believes, dint all 'the said ',tritons would do their duty conscientiously and honourably, as Jurors that he appointed Mr. Meeres foreman of the Jura, because he had heard that it was usual to nominate a person of hlti Tucker and property, and who had before served the office of Mayor to be foreman—that ha believes that Mr. Mecrea is quite. independent of Mr. JoMire, and is possessed of considerable landed and personal property—that he had no communication previously to holding the Court with any of the Jury, nor did he directly or indirectly, either before or at the Court, influ ence them in the election of any person to be Mayor of the' borough ; nor did he during the time he remained with them have any conversation with them on the subject, but that the election of Mr. William Blunt, as Mayor, was their free and spontaneous act." .Qtie . of the crimes charged is, that Mr. Blunt is also stronl J Y , suspected of having a favourable, disposi tion towards Mr. affe, although at the time when that elec tion was made, it was not likely that any Parliamentary elec tion would take place. Mr. Justice BAYLEY—Did the steward act on his own judg ment, or at the suggestion of any other person ? Mr. Scan LETT—I am reading his affidavit. " That the se veral persons, named in the affidavits of the said Francis Brewer and of George Leer, sworn in this matter, as being eligible and as well qualified, in point of rank and estate, to serve on the Leet Jury as the late John Meeres and the several other persons who served on the Jury, are, ns deponent is informed and believes, all the decided and active supporters and parti zans of the interest of the said Nathaniel Atcheson, except one or two thereof, and also except John Edward Shacklethrd, Thomas Bonham, Fielder.Kiag, and William Binstead, who are (as deponent is informed and believes) old and infirm, and who did not attend, nor were likely, if eummoned upon • the Jury, to have attended as Jurymen at the said Court Leet." becomes material, because the affidavits on the other side enumerate a'good many persons, whom they say were as independent and as fit persona. to serve as those that did serve. They enumerate Shackleford, Bonnham, King, and Binstead, whom they say were not the partizans of either side. We admit that to be true, but we say they were old and infirm, and would not have attended if they had been 'summoned.— The deponent solemnly denies, that in selecting the Jury, he was influenced by any criminal or corrupt motive ; he never theless admits that he did not think it any part of his duty, as the steward of Mr. .lollitre, to select the Jury with a view to exclude therefrom his tenants, who form the great majority of the said borough ; and he further says, he " believes the said Nathaniel Atcheson and his partiians would - not have been satisfied with any Jury, except the same had been composed either wholly or for the greater part of persons attached to his party and interest." 34 Lords, I have also the affidavits of several other persons to the seine effect. Now, the question is this, !nether or not the steward of Mr. Joni% ut the peril of having an inforthation filed against him, to be bound to throw all the influence he possesses from that situation into the arms of Mr. Atcheson . l'our Lordships can easily conceive the great probability there is, that this, whatever the final event may be, is likely to produce violent party divisions in the place ; and how difficult it is, in the midst of those divisions, so find a sufficient neutral number to do justice to. both parties. 'We know, that at, before, and after u contested election, the most innocent acts of either party are supposed by -their op ponents to conceal a wicked design. Mr. Atcheson is no, - doubt warmed with patriotic zeal to enlarge the rights of this borough, and a very laudable zeal it was—.as long as h e con fined himself to the legal means •of warfare; but it is very hard that he should come to the Court. and endeavour to put a criminal colouring until' the acts of the avowed agent of the other party, and to treat it as a crime, that Mr. Jolliffe's own Attorney should be the steward of Ilk manor, and also a crime that that steward should net sel.,et the persons that Mr. Atcheson likes. I conceive myself, that whether st:ly thing is to he gained or lost by the selection of the Jury, p ers on placed in the situa tion of Mr. Currie, the servant of Mr. Jolliffe, is under no obligation of any rt whatever to accept from Mr. Atcheson the person he recommends. It is sworn here, and I have no doubt your Lordships will thin!: it very probable, that the 80-, rough Is divided into two vioknt factions. Now, I ask, put ting aside whether the selection of the jury arose from an im proper feeling or not, whether Air. Jollifl'e's Steward is to be considered as committing a crime, because he does not select the persons that Mr. A tcheson'a party choose to name. Now, my Lords, when this application was first made, it w a s impos sible the Court should not grant it, because there had been a former application,-which was then depending, against the for mer Steward, Km! the Court, not having heartlthlly discussed the merits of that application, could not but grant this rule, because it appeared that this Gentlernahwas acting in the same way that his predecessors had done. . - . Mr. OAsELE::.—The former rule was discharged before this application was made. This information was • not ap. plied for, while hfr. Elector's rule 'was depending, but after it was discharged. The Court granted the rule on the ground that Mr. Currie had pursued the same course that Mr. Hec tor had done, in nominating the Jury only from Mr. Jolliffe's party. . Mr. St A 11.1.1: 1 I.—Tbm I. am , very sorry you did not state that the circumstances' had been conshlered in Mr. (lector's ease as furnishing no ground for the application. I pray the I Coort to Snow every possible indulge nee to the passions and • feelings of men, hut I do entreat you would arm no party with your great authority in a case of this kind. 1 think they ought to be content with that species of warfare, justifiable and left!. tintate, and not to borrow the aid of this Court on the One side or the other to carry a political point. ' The sole object of Mr. Atcheson .is, if he can have information after information against these parties, to get a Jury of his own and a Mayor of his own. Mr. Anase.—Notrithstanding the very full and conclusive manner in which my Learned Friend, Mr. Searlett, has stated this case, I trust the Court will sufFer me to 'make a few observations, as It is a case of deep importance to the young Gentleman who is concerned. The question for your Lord ships to determine, I apprehend to he, whether sufficient grounds have been• whewn for supposing criminality upon the part of Mr., Currie. and to call upon the Court to in terpose in this particular and special manner. What are the facts of the case, to which your Lordships' rule is to be applied ? four Lordships see, both Orion the affida v i ts of Mr. Currie and of Mr. Atcheson and his friends, that political parties in this Borough are as high as they can well be ; that the town is so divided between the parties, that. persons. eligible to th e s i tua ti on o f J urors, can be few persons. attached to one party Or the oth er . I t appears from mr. Curries statement, that, in his jud gment , t h e Jury found,very f e ' he selected was as impartial as under the circumstances of the case could be found. Ile does not /Orem to say there were not friends of Mr. Jolliffe neon it; because ho says, without apply ing to the friends of one or the other party. a sufficient number could not be found to constit u t e a J ury. What course was Mr. C ur rie to pursue? Was he to choose all the Jury front the Mends of 111 r. Jolliffe, or the friends of .31r. Atcheson : or to compose a Jury of half of the friends of Mr. Atcheson, and the other half of the friend* of Mr. Jnllifll., in which event no busi. news could be done at all ; for although, with respect to the elec tion of Mayor, there is but one view in which to consider this case, namely, that the Mayor is the returning officer, there are oth important services to be performed by the Jury. 1n'1023 AMC. Currie held a Court led, manner as his predecessors; had done, and in the same manner to which he nroceeded in the same as in . 13.24. or tho4l proceedings in 11323 no complaint was made by Mr. Atcheson; therefore he proceeded upon the second occasion in the sante way as he bed done at first; for he had the sancion of Mt. Atcheson. I theseritessohmit to your Lord 41iPs' it is impossible to infer any criminal intent in Mr. Currie's mind from the course he has taken. Mr. MEREWVPIIHR.-1 am also to chew your Lordships cause against this rule. and J think your Lordships will he ra ther surprised to find that, although Mr. Atcheson refers to the former proceedings against Mr. Ilector, which were precisely of the same desatintion, and, although he now mien some of the affidavits used on that occasion, he has not the candour to inform your Lordships that the rule was discharged. I believe, on these occasions, it is usual to bring forward the whole case. I woad add one other observation, that this is a case referring to a great variety of' facts. and if them is any thing in this Gen tleman's conduct these parties can impute to him as nn offence, that they might go to the ordinary tribun a l s o f t h e country. r trust your Lordshipa, in considering all the facts of the case, will think, that if the grand Jury would not have fonta the bill upon this occasion,-you will not grant a criminal information, and particularly where the person so called upon is an Officer having a discretion to exercise in the Court where he presides. Sin GAiir.r.r.E.—l am to address your Lordships in sup port of this little, which, I apprehend, when you have heard the affidavits a little more fully stated, you will feel yourselves'i called on to make it absolute. My Learned Friend, who has just sat down, has complained, that Mr. Atcheson has ben guilty of ward of candour in not informing your Lordships that the Hole against Mr. Hector was discharged. Mr. Atche son, in his affidavit, has not referred to the application against Mr. Hector, and he could not, therefore, without stating the acts which were alleged agrainat this Gentleman have stared that the rule was discharged. My Learned Friend, when he complains of want of candour, might as well have himself stated, that, though it was discharged, the circumstances under which it wan brought forward wertsuch, that the Court thought it right to discharge it without costs. Mr. Currie is a young man, and as far as his general character is concerned, if it had depended on that, your I.prdships would not havebeen troubled with this motion • but our complaint is, that, with a full know ledge of all that Lid passed, he thought fit to pursue the same course which it appeared Mr. !Teeter, brid done ; and I think your Lordship will find that Mr. Currie, ham one of the faults which young men usually have--u certain degree of courage (to use no other tear} that led hint, at all hazards, to follow the saute vatie which his predeetasor had pursued, and which the Court, though they aid not grant the ruleag a i ns t thought a fit subject for much animadversion, . My 'Lords, though Mr. Currie k a . young man, hi is not no* for the first time acquainted with the proceedings in ibis borough.,, It, ap , pears that a great number of proceedings haVe taken place re-- specting the elections in this borough, the whole of which were conducted by Messrs. Iranrott and Metcalfe, "for Mr. JAM; Mr. Currie had not, therefore, on his appointment, to learn what the situation of the Borough was. My Learned Friend, Mr. Searlett, is a little mistaken in point of_time, when he states that the application for this rule was made before the quo warrant o was tried, or the discussion upon the rule against Mr. 11 ector disposed of. The quo warrant° was tried in 11122. It decided the point of law which had been litigated, namely, whether the custom was good for the Steward to select and nominate the Jury. There was an application to set aside the verdict, but judgment was given against the prosecutor long since. -The Rule against Mr. Hector has also long been disposed of, and we complain that Mr. Currie, after lie was appointed Steward, has pursued the same conduct which this Court thought fit to animadvert upon in the case of his pre decessor. My Learned Friend Mr. Adam urges it as a charge against Mr. Atcheson that he slid not apply to this Court on the occasion of the first Court Leet held by Mr. Currie, which was in 11123. I think your Lordships will be of opinion that ' Mr. Atcheson is entitled to souse merit that he did not com plain of this first attempt, as he might have done. Ile gives Mr. Currie, it' he had any doubts on the duties he had to per form, time to loo'.: around him, and to consider whether he would repeat the offence a second time, after the proceedings and the notice which he had had in the case of his predecessor, and therefore one of the greztt complaints that is made against Mr. Currie is, that after this forbearance, and with a full know ledge of all these facts, he chose to pursue the same course, and to persevere in an undue and partial selection of the Jury. I think yoor Lordships will find by Mr. Currie's affidavit, that according to his account there were no impartial persons in this Borough. They are almost all the partizans either of Mr. or of Mr. Atcheson, and that in consequence he has thought fit to Select only the dependants and partizans of 111 r. Jollitfe. My Learned Friend says, what would 'you have them tin? would you have them take all of the one side or of the other, or would you have them, take half and half? the conse quence of which he says would biz, that- no business would he done. To this I answer, that if they chose to summon 23 on the Jury instead of 12 or 13,' they would have their business done; but if they pm.tist in 'going' S') narrowly to work, and only to summon •and provide a tlinner for thirteen, instead of twenty-three, they must , t,%e pare that they are impartially selected. My Learned FriendAtays:it was not his duty to exclude the tennants of Mr. Jolliffe hit was it his duty to exclude persons because he ilunight they; were the partisans of Mr. Atcheson? Certainly not. -It is said that we have detailed the history of the persons summoned on the Jury. Undoubtedly we have, and from it we shew the corrupt motives of the person who appointed them, by tracing- in this manner the connection with Mr; Jolliffe, awl the sort of influence he can exercise over them. My Learned Friend has thought fit to direct your • Lordships' attention to an institution in Petersfield, called Churcher's College, by reading one of the letters stated in our affidavits, but he did not inform your Lordships that the trus tees have a right of supplying vacancies In that College, nor did he tell you who those trustees are, and the persons from whom the vacancies are supplied. My Lords, it appears that Mr. Jolliffe, the Lord of the Manor, is the first of these tau. tees ; the second is the brother of this Mr. Jolliffe ; a third is Mr. Twyford, his relation or connection ; a fourth is the son of that Mr. Twyford, and a fifth is Mr. Jolliffe's nephew. All the trustees therefore of this Churcher's College are under the in fluence of Mr. Jolliffe, and those persons who have voted on this occasion, and were summoned for the .Jury, were persons who.had sons put into this Institution, under the influence of Mr. Jolliffe. Mr. SCARVETT-1 wish you to distinguish between what are stated as facts in the affidavits, and what you state merely as your belief. fIASF.LrE—I won't trouble your Lordships with the detail of the affidavits. I will leave that to my. Learned Friends who are with me, and will content myself with stating the general nature of the case. It is stated as a breach of confi dence in bringing forward the first letter, because it is a letter which was written to the Steward, of the name of Andrews, from the custody of his desecnile9ts. But it appeirs that the letter was not directed to the Steward, Mr. Richard Andrews, for lie says, " Let Mr. Andrews do s and so, and do you pro vide me a bed." Is it likely that he would direct the Steward and Attorney to get his bed ready ?. That he would. give such directions to the Steward ? The person who broultht forward this letter is not the descendent of 3lr. Richard Andrews, and it does not appear that he came into possession of that letter in any confidential capacity whatever. It has certainly serv ed my Learned Friend's (31 r. Scarlett's) purpose, to excite. a little merriment by turning it into ridicule, but lie forgot to re mark the intimation it conveyed of the person to be proposed as Mayor. Your Lordships see that it is not necessary for the Steward to name the Mayor, for it is the custom for the person to be pro posed to come from the Head-quarters. It is communi cated through another channel, and the housekeeper in told that Mr. Eyles will he the Mayo r ; so that the decision arid election of the Jury, who are sworn to a proper person, is fore stallud by the land of the Manor, before he cou ld k now whom the y would appoint. Before ever they exercise, or even-know that they ate to have an authority in the election of a Mayor, the bard tali sir lious 3 Jkeepev.--" Get the bed ready for Mr. Eyles, for this Gentleman the Jury are to present as the Mayor for the next year." 'Mr. SCA ItLETT—What is the date of that ? GAsELEE—thoz, Mr. SCA I.EI:T —l l ll - Zit is before Mr. Currie was born. Mr. GASELEE—One of the complaints is that this letter has been produced on a former occasion. Mr. Currie, therefore, has.not for the first time Saentbis letter. Ile saw it before be became Steward. lle knew. thr. business very well. lie knew it was not necessary the the StetVard to point out the particular person who was to be the 111:!yor. Your Lordships know there arc a thousand modes of designating wh o a particul a r p erson is, and what is meant, and when the Lord who is living at person, I dare say th e h ouse k ee p er d oes , Merstham, in Surrey, sends to his housekeeper. to have a bed ready fora particular rson, Lot keep 14 B SeCr q• . 11 9 111 the mere circumstance,, that an illustrious stranger is corning down to take a b e d, which lie is i to have aired for bin! , t would be pretty well known for whet eemniit ...We do not swear that they, .are Aunt, but we swear that we believe Mr. IA that they would name persons agreeslile to the Lord the purpose , w o h i o e t tl i l w e d ct no ri t l i r. ll;e. Manor. So much for the letter of 1801. 111 y Learned Meved that Jury if he had not behev. having alluded to the connection between Air.Jolliffe and Chun:bees College, I ShoUld ObServe, that it is said in the letter he has referred to, that if any thing is wanted for the College in the way of Meere's basiness, let him .have the mom." Mr. Justice BAYLLY.—Doeti the Steward take arty oath of office ? Mr. GASELEE.--I understand net. Mr. ScAnLETT—IIe is the mere private agent of the Lord. Mr. GAsELEr.—I dolt% know how far a• Steward of Court Lea Is said to be the mere private agent of the Lord, for he has certain things to do which are not dependent on the will of the Lord. Ile Tuts important public duties to perform, which lie is bound to discharge impartially, particularly that of select ing Juries. On word on the office of Constable. My Learned Friends say, that though we have thought fit to charge them with packing this Jury, this very Jury choose one of Mr. Atcheson's partizans to be Constable. but where is the impar tiality of that ?. To the troublesome and onerous office of Constable, Mr. Atcheson's partizan is chosen, whilst the Mayor, who has no . troublesome . .duties to Iserlohn, who is the returning officer of the Borough', is-reserved for Mr. Jollifle's friends, It is stated that Mr. Atcheson presented a list: Mr. Ateheson presented no list ; the only thing said was, we object to this Jury, appoint some other, persons, this Jury has served too often already. My Lords, independent of the persons who h ave b ee n named, anti who have served on the last six, seven, or eight Juries, there are upwards of three hundred persona in the Borough, who have nevaelaCen summoned at all, whilst those who have been appointed do not amount to more than thirty persons. some of whom have served five times.-some times, and-some loth. times. Your Lordships will allow me to call your mention to what was said by one of your Lordships' in Mr. 'lector's case, for our affidavits. have been framed with a view of corn}?lying with wh at the Courtilten threW out. One of your Lordships' said " 'they may he equally eligible, because the highest freeholder and the lowest are equally eli gible, but if you shew ten men similar in point of estate, and so on, and that five are on one side and five on another, and that the five of one side are all selected, and the tire of the other party are omitted, that would. furnish strong grounds for in ferring that they were cor r up tl y se l ecte d and mated," The .history and connection s , t h ere f ore, Of these persons - who were on the Jury, which was omitted on. the former occasion, are now stated, and vat have, given the names of Mr. Patrick, a banker there, and a number of other persons, some of whom are superior in point of rank and estate, and all equal in those respects, who have neve r been s u mm oned. Your hardships' d'rection, therefore, has been complied with. 'We have shewn that Mr. Atcheson's friends are ell excluded, and the friends of Mr. Jollifib only admitted. Mr. Justice BAYLEY—The Steward and the Jury are to dis charge a duty, in which the public are interested. They are not to act for Mr. Jolliffb. Mr. 6Asl~LEE—Certainly, my Lord. There is no excuse for the Steward. When your Lordship comes to strip this case of all the extraneous and entertaining matter which my friend has thrown into it,. you will find that we have laid a very strong case before you. Even putting it in their way, it comes to this, there nre live one way and five the other, and they take their own five and excluded the other. But whati right have they to do this ? The Ste Ward in the diseharge of his duty is to guard tgainst the eff:Tt of the division of the town into two parties, Gy a4lecting the Jury fairl/ from both parties, and making it the interest of to do their duty. lie has it in his power to neutralize the effect of party feeling by keeping them together till they have agreed upon the election, and their prejudices have given way to their feelings of duty. My Learned Friend has read Mr. Currie's affidavit, and he has desireit me, in laying my affidavits before your Lordships, to state what is sworn to as belief, and what is sworn to positively. If your Lordships attended to the manner in which Mr. Scarlett read this affidavit, in answer to mine, you must have imagined that he was swearing to facts on his own knowledge, and not resting on information and belief; but on looking into them, 'ou will find every thing qualified 'by reference to his belief of the information- of other persons. He is in formed and believes, that the persons actually selected, were as impartial as any others ; but the fact is, that those persons whom he thought so impartial; are known to be violent and decided partizans of Mr. Jolliffe. In the affidavits in support of this rule, facts are particularly stated to slim, that an im proper influence was exercised by Mr. Currie on the behalf of Mr. Jolliffe, and he has not condescended to answer any one ofehe allegations distinctly ; but contents himself by swearing generally, that they are all equally respectable and impartial. He does not 'venture to deny the assertion that' is made in these affidavits, namely, that it is believed that Aleeres was ap. pointed Foreman of the Jury, because-he would propose a Mayor agreeable to Mr. Jolliffe. Then as to Mr. Blunt, who is the Mayor, it is stated that he is a respectable man, but they have not ventured to answer this-L-that upon one of the elections for the Borough he was so far under the influence and command of Mr. Jolliffe, that he voted in respect of a free. hold which was Alr..lolliffe's, and for which he paid no consi deration. Air. Currie swears that he had no reason to believe that in the course of the year there would be an election for a Member of Parliament. Perhaps he had not ; but he took goad care that he would be provided for it, if there was. The name of the Mayor does not signify, so long as it is a person that is sent down for a particular purpose. It is sworn, that it, the recollection of the deponents who have lived all their lives in the town, there never has been a Mayor elected, who was not the creature or zealous partizan of Mr. Jolliffe. So far as Alr. Currie's affidavit goes, T do not mean to quarrel with it.—lle says, that he did not think it his duty to exclude the tenants of Mr. Jolliffe. We charge that he seleeted none but the ten. ants and partizans of Mr. Jolliffe. I _wish he had gone on to say, that he had not studiously excluded all but the partizans of Air. Jolliffe. I submit that on these affidavits there is suffi cient to call upon your Lordships to make this rule absolute. It is not the casual or inadvertent act of a young man that is brought to your Lordships' notice, but the act of a Gentleman who, however otherwise respectable, must have known that he was acting in violation of an important public duty.— I have no instructions to impeach the general character of Alr. Currie ; but, I submit, that in this case enough is shewn to Impute corrupt conduct to him in point of, law. Ido not use the word in any other than its legal sense; I should say it was that sort of rash conduct which is marked by a defiance of all example, by not taking a hint from the lesson which was read by this Court upon a former occasion in the case of his predecessor, and which most probably would have been visited by an infor mation' if your Lordships had not supposed that the party might have been led to adopt it, in consequence of a custom that had prevailed. Upon these grounds I call upon your Lordships to make this rule absolute. Mr. Coneretme—My Lord, I am with Mr. Gaselee, and I submit to your Lordship that this is a case which calls on your Lordship to make this rule absolute. It is said by my Learned Friend, Alr. Scarlett, that it has been endeavoured to make it a crime, that Mr. Currie has pursued the same course as his predecessor. Undoubtedly, Air. Scarlett speaks truly, for that is the charge against Mr. Currie:--that there is in this 80. rough d systematic violation of the law, which takes place as often a Court Leet is summoned ! My Friend has read and endeavoured to throw some ridicule on the letter written in 1801. He has stated, that it is the constant course fOr the Lord of the Manor to entertain the Jury, and so it may be. But if it is the constant course for the Steward to nomi nate a biassed and prejudiced Jury, and to throw the appoint. ment of the Mayor into Mr. Jolliffe's hands, it ought to be put a stop to. The course of proceeding in this Borough appears from the affidavits of Brewer and Leer, in which It is stated, how the appointment of the Mayor has always been brought about. They say " that no person has, within the recollection of these Deponents, both of whom have resided for many years in the Borouh, been elected for the office of Mayor, who was not notoriously the friend or partizan, or dependant of Mr. Jolliffe, and that such elections have always been considered as having been effected by the controul and management exer cised in regard to the Leet -Juries by the person holding the office of Steward of the said Court beet." That is the custom which has prevailed in the Borough, which they do not affect to deny, by mentioning any instance in which it has not prevailed. It is stated that Thomas Holland, in. 1823, was summoned on a beet Jury, to attend as a Juryman, but on a previous intima quarter, that he was to be chosent Vein i g a y g o i v r vit in this case, he does not deny the fact. That was in th e n he to it i a li i m d away fnl t so a in n e d though he makes an affida vit 1823—the first essay of Mr. Currie in the art of making Mayors ! It is said, no persons can be found in the Borough who are free from bias; but that is no answer to this case whatever. The Steward is not to look to flue political feelings of the party, but to his fitness in other respects to fill the office of Juror. Then lie mentions, by way of show ing the fairness by which, in 1824, Mr. Currie conducted himself, that there were twelve Jurors eummoned—twelve or thirteen. Three did not attend ; and then he says that he (Alr. Currie) casually, from the bye-standers, selected five others.— I just bad the curiosity to look who these persons were that were selected. I find the first person who was selected is John Parsons! It is sworn that,,as to him, his son was made Postmaster by Air. Jollities influence.—Henry Cawley is the next person ; he is a painter and glazier regularly eutlyloeed by Air. Jolliffe and Air. Hector, and a notorious and active partizan of Air. Jollifilfs.—Franeis Ilartlett is the next, and as to him, I find he is a bricklayer regularly employed by Mr. Jolliffe and Mr. Hector.— Richard Young is the next ; lie is a clerk of Mr. Hector's, and he is sworn to be what is called a 4‘ Faggot Voter," that is, a person who is qualified to vote' in the election under title deeds which he holds in his hand, and which are returned as soon as the election is over ! Ashford is the next • he keeps the Crown Inn, and is a tenant of Hec tor's and his house is the place here the voters for Mr. Jolliffe resort; he is the avowed and active partizan of Alr. Jolliffe. Now it does appear to me that the selection of thes e five persons is the most fortunate casualty that ever occurred ! Nothing could be more lucky than pitching upon five of Mr. Jolliffe's most subservient partizans. Mr. Scarlett says, the custom which Mr. Currie has pursued has been established in the case of Mr. Hector. That was the fallacy, if I may b e allowed the expression, that ran throiegli the arguments of Air. Scarlett—the supposing that we objected to Mr. Currie's selecting the Jury; we did not do so. We could not do so, after the decision which has taken place. But we do object, Juryman, and I w V it e h h A' a l v f e j tal l e i n fre e ' v m er e y r J el u y r e ar h e av n e ot o s ic o w c n on ti n m ee t t e e v d e .— ry that he should have rejected persons who are not connected one of the persons was connected with Air. Jolliffe or Alr. Hector. In various parts of our affidavits we charge that the Jury were returned by Mr. Currie, as being well known to him, to he the partisans of Air. Jolliffe. It is sworn to in five different places, that they were returned with a view to the election of some partisan of Air. Jollifie—it is sworn to in five different places by five different persons. To that no answer has been given at all. It would have been extremely easy for Alr. Currie to have met that, by saying that he had no such object in view; but Mr. Currie felt that he never could have held up his face where honest men resort, after making such an affidavit. Any use who looks at the facts of the case must see that he could not, as a decent man who expected to be looked on well in society, have made such an affidavit. Then there is another thing which we call on him to answer in thiiecase.— How happens it that the same persons are selected so often ? That sonic have served on every Jury. It is sworn that for the last six years (we only go back to the commencement of the present contests in the Borough), the Jurors have been selected from a small number of persons, all of whom have served more than once, except one man. Alany of them have served several times; some on every Jury that has been impannelled. Then, my Lords, by way of showing that there is no necessity for this, we give a list of thirty-three persons who are all sworn to be persons of property and respectability in the Borough, specify ing their respective situations, added to whom there are be tween one hundred and fifty and two hundred residents, not one of whom has ever been summoned on the Jury ' • so that there were upwards of two hundred persons qualified to serve on the Jury who have been invariably excluded, and a con stant selection made from about thirty individuals, who are all the partizans and dependants of Mr. Jolliffe. Mr. Currie gives no answer to this; he says he did not think himself bound to select Mr. Atcheson's friends. But he should have taken care not to select from one party only • he should have taken any one he laid his finger on. One of your Lordships said, that if there were five of one party who were systematically ex cluded, and five of another who were constantly selected, it would afford strong ground for the inference of corruption. Now that is the very case rested on by the other side. They say that these thirty-three were the friends of Mr. Atcheson, and that the Steward was not bound to take them. What right has the Steward to attend to political feelings ? As to political feeling he ought not to consider it. He is to select those who are most fit in other respects.—My Lords, I apprehend that your Lordships will consider, that it' a Steward has the power of selecting a Jury, and he selects them for any other purpose than that of their public duty, he is a person justly to be visited by a criminal information, and I trust that your Lord ships will think there are ample grounds for your interposition in this case. Mr. CARTER.—My Lord, I am on the same side, and I think sufficient has been shewn to induce your Lordships to make this rule absolute. The Mayor of the place is the returning officer, he is elected by the Jury, and the Jury is nominated by the Steward. It has been decided that the right of nomina tion by the Steward is correct. We endeavoured to point out certain inconveniences and mischief's, which would follow it' that decision was established; but the Conn thought it should pre vail under the custom, and it is now considered to he a legal cus tom. We therefore now come to the Court, and call upon it to take care, that those inconveniences should not follow, which we had pointed out, as th e na t ura l consequences o f the custom, and that the custom which the Court has sanctioned shall not work to the injury of the inhabitants of this place. What is the clues. lion ? I say it is, whether the Steward has acted in the nomina tion of this Jury in the fair discharge of his duty, by selecting only fit persons to be the Jury of the Leet ; or whether he made his selection with reference to the political feelings of the lath. victuals, in order that a returning officer might be elected who would be partial to the interests of the Lord ? Who is the Steward ? You find he is the agent of the Lord. It is not thought fit to continue the former agent, Mr. Hector, and they put in his place a young man, the managing clerk of the Lord's Solicitors in London, who knows the situation of the parties in the llorough—they put him in as Steward during the pendency of the rule against Hector, for Mr. Hector did not choose to persevere in his old course while the rule was pending. My Learned Friends complain that we are very particular in point ing out the grounds on which we come to the conclusion that the selection was corruptly Riede t but they have not ques tioned the accuracy of a ny of the facts we have stated, or de nied the inferences we have drawn from them. Under - these circumstances your Lordships will feel, that the proper infe rence is the inference which the persons on • our side have come to, namely, that the Steward must have made his se lection in ' order to obtain an election favourable to the Lord. Mr. Currie does not attempt to deny it. I agree thitt he is an honest man for not denying it, but it adapts the justness of our inference, and the grounds upon which we call for the interposition of the Court, who are peculiarly bound to take care that the custom, which they have sane dolled, shall be fairly and properly exercised, and that the in habitants of this town shall not, by its establ;shment, be de prived of the benefit of an impartial sztetion of the Jury.- 1 submit that a prudent steward, looking to what has passed in this Court, h av i ng no ot h er w i s h t h an to do ri f ett, would not have adhered to the practices of his prz.deeLor, which had called forth the animadversion of this Court, but would have sought some mode of relieving himself from all sus picion, and selected men of intelligence and honesty, fit for the duties required of them ; but having persevercd in an illegal course, I conceive your Lordships are bound to interfere, and to prevent the office which Mr. Currie holds being perverted and rendered subservient to the purposes of an individual. The Chief Justice ABBOTT.—The affidavits in this case are of considerable length, and as this subject well deserves the attention of the Court, we will look into the affidavits before we pronounce our opinion. JULY 5. LIM, IN TUE BRISTOL. MERCURY. THE KING V. DIANCHEE. Mr. Sergeant PE t. r. rk.id that thi; . ca;e - 1;d been mentioned the other day, and that he had acquainted the defendant with the suggestion of the Court, but the parties not having agreed to refer the case to the Master, the. defendant now appeared to receive .iudgme.!.t. . _ _ 3lr. ,Justice BAYLEY delivered the judgment of the Court. The defendant had published two libels reflecting on the cha racter and courage of Sir Alexander Wilson, who, as a Mili tary Gentleman, must be feelingly alive to such imputa. tions. The libels were published without the defendant knowing► whether they were true or false; and it was in. cumbent on the managers of newspapers not to insert any thing before they knew the truth of it, or at least on anony. mous information, which the present libel appeared to be.— Taking all the circumstances of the case into consideration— the defendant's former good character—having a wife and chit. dren dependent on him for support—and the expences incurred, the Court adjudged the defendant to be imprisoned for one month in the Marshalsea, to pay a fine of one hundred pounds to the King, give security for his good behaviour for three years, himself in 2001. and two sureties in 1001. each, and that hi be imprisoned till such fine be paid and security given. Mr. Justice BAYLEY discharged the Grand Jury. • ARCHES COURT, JULY 5. • JOHNS V. JOHNS. Dr. SWART said, this was a suit instituted by Samuel Johns. Esq. of Aladdon, in the county of Cornwall, praying a divorce from his wife by reason of adultery. The Learned Doctor stated the particulars of an adulterous intercourse between Mrs. Johns and Mr. G. R. Foster, an apothecary, between the years 1810 and 1816, when Mr. F. married. The lady then became intimate with the Rev. Andrew Sheppard Weyland, curate of Kirton, and after Mr. Forster was married Mr. Nireyland fre quently visited her, and kept up an ad u lt erous connex i on w i t h her this part of the allegation was .pleaded with considerable spEcilittation. _ Dr. JEN NER addressed the Court on behalf of Mr& John's. Dr. J ESSE A DAMS then read the evidence on behalf of Mr.. Johns, in which it was replied, that on the occasions of Mi. Foster having visited her, he did so only as a medical attend. ant, and the visits of Mr. Weyhind were only for the purpose of giving her spiritual advice, and that he has on sev era l occa sions administered the Holy Sacrament to her. The witnesses in their testimony deposed, that they had never witnessed any improper conduct between Mr. Forster, the Rev. Mr. Wey land, and Mrs. Johns. At three o'clock Sir Joint Ntottor. declined hearing any further argument for the day, and ordcred the case to stand over. CREEK SUBSCRIPTION. We have great pleasure in rendering public the following letter, lb rittt'u by a boy of fourteen, on behalf of his equally juvenile associates. Sixty pounds is a noble sum to be sent from one private school; and we should like to see the example followed by our public ones:— " " Hazelwood S c h oo l, J une 20, 1824. Sill—l have the honour of transmitting to you, by the hands of Mr. Buckingham ' in behalf of th e esta bli s h me nt a t Hazelwood, the sum of 59/.68. ld., for the aid of the distressed Greeks. Part of this subscription (20 guineas) was raised by the Teachers and Pupils ; the remainder by a collection made at the present Midsummer after our Annual Public Exercises. " Had our power equalled our wishes, the sum would, have been much greater • we are happy, however, to assist in the smallest degree in alleviating the sufferings of an injured and brave people. " 1 have the honour to subscribe myself, " With great respect, your obedient servant, 46 JOHN JONES, " Chairman of the Hazelwood Commitee.'t PASTORAL LETTER OF THE POPE. There is in the Mode of Sunday a very curiout document, the " Encyclic Letter" of the present Pope Leo XII. " to his venerable brethren Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, and Bishops :"—a sort of pastoral charge, which each new Pope delivers to the Bishops of all the Catholic Churches on his elevation, and which, in the present instance, has been long delayed by the illness of his Holiness. The most remarkable . part of this document is an admonition against " A sect which, arrogating to itself the false name of philosophy, has re.ani. mated from their ashes the dispersed phalanxes of almost all errors." " This sect," continues the Pope, " covered exit:Tul ly with the flattering appearances of piety soft liberty, prof. x • tolerantism (so they call or indifermism, and extends it not only to civil affairs, of which we do not , p.ltalc, bat even to those of religion, teaching that God has given men an entire liberty ; so that every one may, without danger to his salva tion, embrace or adopt the sect or opinion which pleases him according to his private judgment. **** It is true this error is not new, but in our days it is let loose with more audacity against the stability and purity of the Catholic faith ; for Eine hius relates after Rhodon, that this mad idea was propagated by a certain Apelles heretic of the secor,tl century, who main tained that it was not necessary entirely to search out (apprf finidir) entirely the f a ith, b ut t h at eac h person s h ou ld remain tirm in the opinion he had once formed. Apelles affirmed that : those were to he saved who put their trust in Jesus Christ, pro vided always that death surprised them in good works." After recapitulating some o:iier heresies, the part of the En cyclic Letter which is given in the Etoile concludes thus-- " God, who confounds the wisdom of the wise, seems to have given up the enemies of his church, and the detractors of super natural revelation, to a reprobate sense, and to that mystery of iniquity which was written on the forehead of the shameless woman, of whom the Apostle St. John speaketh ; for what greater iniquity than to see these proud men not only Atraticion the trite religion, but attempt to surprise the simple by sophisms of all sorts, bywords and writings full of artifice ? Let God arise, let him repress, let him confound, let hint annihilate, this unbridled licentiousnetet of speaking, writing, and publishing writings 1"