The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1851-11-18 00:00:00

INQUIRY AT PRESTON, (BEFORE THE EARL OF CARLISLE,) INTO the CHARGES AGAINST MR. RAMSHAY, JUDGE of the LIVERPOOL COUNTY COURT. On Tuesday, the court was opened at half-past ten o'clock, the Earl of Carlisle, accompanied by the learned assessor, Mr. Ellice, taking his seat precisely at that hour. The counsel present were—Mr. Monk and Mr. Tindal Atkinson for the memorialists ; and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins, Mr. Ovens, Mr. Sowler, and Mr. Thorburne for Mr. Ramshay.—The court was crowded to excess; the gallery was filled with ladies ; some ladies also were on the bench, which was filled, in addition, by the magistracy and clergy of the county, whose residences were situated in the im mediate locality.—As soon as the Earl of Carlisle had taken his seat. Mr. Sergeant WILKINS said : My lord, there are seve ral protessional gentlemen from Liverpool, solicitors and others, who will be called by us to speak as to Mr. Ram shay's deportment and demeanour in his court, and they rmitted to be present this day, if the nu . s to he other side hive no objection. Mr. Mosx.—l cannot interpose in respect to this mat ter at all, niv lord. After gentlemen of It , sition were Permission to be present, and after the other side refused to hear the testimony of Mr. S;mon, a barrister, simply because he was in court for a short time whilst another professional gentleman was under examination, I do not tl Mr. Ser yeant WILKINS.—That is not the question. —Well, I cannot interfere ; that is all I Mr. MONK have to say The order w s then given, by the chancellor's decision, that any witnesses who were to be examined for Mr. Ramshay should leave the court. Mr. Sergeant WILKINS commenced the defence on the part of Mr. Ramshay. After some prefatory remarks, he contended that the persons who got up the memorial were engaged in a conspiracy against Mr. Ramshay, and that Mr. Whitty and the persons who were engaged with him were the persons who ought to be punished. He did not wish to restrict the press ; but the press of Liverpool had, in this instance, degenerated into license and tyranny. He stood there to oppose the tyranny which had nearly destroyed Mr. Ramshay. The memorial was a mass of hypocrisy and falsehood. The case against Hai had already tumbled to pieces. He would show that Mr. Ramshay had been maligned and misrepresented, and that in all he had done he had only acted within the law. He contended that a warrant for the apprehension of Mr. Whitty was not necessary, and that the object of Mr. Whitty was to drive Mr. Ramshay from the town, be cause he had been appointed by the Earl of Carliele, contrary to the views of the Guardian Society. The object of the placard, which had bee❑ called an innocent one, was to bring Mr. Ramshay into hatred and con tempt. He then eondemned the observations of Sir George Stephen, and argued that the conduct of Mr. Ramshay bad been in every respect proper and dignified, and that he had acted with perfect legality, and that the memorialists had long been endeavouring to crush Mr. Ramshay, and this at a time when he was suffering under intense bodily pain. Mr. Whitty had chuckled over his pain, and had derided his sufferings. The memorial boasted that it expressed the opinion of the people of Liverpool; but it was only signed by 2,000 persons, although the population of the town and suburbs amounted to 400,000, and all that the Guardian Society could raise to support this proceeding was the paltry sum of £3OO. He (the learned sergeant) would say that Mr. Ramshay was an amiable and honest man, and he was an equally sound lawyer. The learned sergeant then com mented upon the evidence which had been adduced. With reference to the observation about the fist, Mr. Ramshay's object was only explanatory. Mr. Ramshay, 80 far from oppressing the poor, had an utter disregard to persons. The case about the tailor and the baker had been very unfairly put. No doubt that Brown, the tailor, had committed a contempt of court; but Mr. Caldwell, the baker, behaved very differently—he apolo gised to Mr. Ramshay, and was thereford not punished so severely. The outcry raised was an ad captandum sen timent, and would lead to rebellion, bloodshed, and a resistance of the law. Mr. Ramshay did not consult the rank in life of the two persons, but had treated them differently because they had acted differently. Although tle-v had hunted mobs to his house to threaten his life, Mr. Ramshay was so esteemed that there was a great in crease in the business of his court. He had decided up wards of 2,000 cases since the last investigation, and there were now 300 cases waiting for decision. It had been said in one case that the jury had been coerced. He should call the foreman of that jury, who would tell them that they had only made up their minds from the evidence and the merits of the case. If the judge had a strong view of the case, it was his duty to step in between the two attorneys, who were dividing the oyster to the disad vantage of the clients. Not only should he show that the business had increased, but the character of the business had improved. The real reason of the complaint was, that the town could not get the appointment of the judge. They wanted to rot) the judge of his privilege of appointment. They, in fact, wanted a judge who would constantly " have the fear of his maker before his eyes." The learned sergeant next commented upon the case as presented by Mr. Monk, and said he should prove that Mr. Ramshay did possess those very qualities which Mr. Monk described as so essential to a judge. Mr. Ramshay, however, was day by day assailed with rancour and perso nality. The business of Mr. Whitty, for eighteen months, was to assail Mr. Ramshay with obloquy, and to bring him into contempt with the town. Mr. Ramshay, how ever, had never injured Mr. Whitty with a look. There was not a stronger proof of the absence of charity in our nature than the avidity for slander. Mr. Whitty's paper went into circles where the law was not likely to be respected, and it was calculated to mislead public opinion in regard to Mr. Ramshay. He (the Sergeant) was a sen sitive man, and if he had to choose between such news paper attacks and open violence, he would rather say kill me at once, for such venomous attacks would drive him mad. The learned sergeant next argued that the offence was a common law offence ; but if only a statutable offence, and if the means and mode of punishing it were pointed out, and the judge had adopted them, why should he be exposed to censure ? He knew not what Mr. Whitty's pedigree was, but he (Mr. Wilkins) observed that in every town where he went, the loud-talking repub licans were always the first to disparage those who were not nobly born. It reminded him of the Irishman who said that pedigree was like the potato. The best part of it was under ground. (A. laugh.) When they came to quote cases, he should prove that the law mooted on the other side was not tenable. Mr. Ramshay had not seen Mr. Whitty's paper at the time of the placard, but he knew that he had not given any opinion of the people of Liverpool, and he therefore knew that it must contain some misrepresentation. Again pursuing his commentary upon the evidence, Mr. Sergeant Wilkins argued that it had by no means supported the case of the memorialists. —The court was here adjourned for a short time. On resuming— Mr. Sergeant WrLKINs proceeded. He again adverted to the speech of Mr. Monk, and said he trusted his lord ship would excuse him when he said that from the im portance of the case, he should be compelled to trespass for a very long time. Indeed his observations would ex tend over a great part of the following day (Wednesday). He should presently read various opinions as to the duties of a judge, and when he had done so, he believed it would be felt that if there were any madness it was on the part of those who joined in these accusations. While Mr. Ramshay bad been made the object of attack and calumny, he had been quietly pursuing his studies up'n the nature, character, and extent of his powers and his duties. On the other hand, the object of Mr. Whitty was to court notoriety and sell his newspaper. How the people stared when they knew that Mr. Michael James Whitty was going to Lancaster Castle. The arrest of Mr. Whitty was a famous catch-line for a newspaper. In his (the learned sergeant's) opinion it was a great pity that the act of parliament had not given the judge more exten sive powers to protect himself. He remarked upon the fleeting nature of popularity. Pompey, admired to-day, was killed on the morrow, and the same voice which called " Hosannah to the Highest" one day, to-morrow called out " Crucify him, crucify him." Nothing was so destructive to the vitality of our law as this attempt to put down a judge and to coerce his lordship to give up his privilege of appointment. Where were the accusers, where Mr. Evans, and Mr. Reay ? Mr. Jeffery it was true was there ; he could not stay at home. He came to Preston and sat day after day, leaving his shop for the benefit of his country, for he thought himself a patriot, and bad a soul above muslin. Immortal Mr. Jeffery ; he should say hereafter much more about his evidence. Mr. Jeffery here rose and appealed to his lordship, whe ther there was anything in his evidence to justify such a course of observation. Mr. Sergeant WILKINS.—I think I shall satisfy the court that there was. The Earl of CARLISLE said he was not at liberty to in terfere with the learned counsel. Mr. Sergeant WILKINS.—I have always found that those peoplewho are the first to attack others, are the first to wince when they are themselves made the object of censure. The learned sergeant, in continuation, ad verted to the remark that Mr. Ramshay sometimes ground his teeth. The explanation was this. He had had an illness, and having lost some of his teeth, was compelled to keep his mouth shut sometimes while speaking, lest the spring of the teeth should give way. He admitted there was a peculiarity in Mr. Ramshay's manner, for only three nights ago, while Mr. Ramshay was speaking to him, if he had not known him, he should have thought he was in a p ass i on , a l t h ough he was speaking on a pleasing subject, and was by no means angry. This case had been very much distorted upon many points, to which he should hereafter advert. The learned sergeant now came to what he considered wa s th e l aw o f the case, and read some authorities in reference to the law as regarded contempt. (These authorities were rather voluminous. One of them went to shew that Mr. Monk was not cor rect in assuming that contempt could only be com mitted in the presence of th e j udge. In the case of the trial of Thistlewood and Ings for high trea treason, proceedings had been institut e d against William Innel Clement, the proprietor of the Observer, for pub lishing the proceedings contrary to the prohibition of the court. The courts in other cases held that contempt might be committed out of court.) When the readin g o f these authorities (which occupied a considerable time) was concluded, the learned sergeant proceeded to say interposed, that Mr. Whitty had be gu n as a libeller, continued as a libel ler, and, at the time Mr. Ramshay that hap. pened to be the large part of the libel which Mr. Whitty was publishing. He (Mr. Wilkins) contended that de -,titration was not requisite, but if Mr. Ramshay saw -.tiafy A reasoning man to call upon Mr. Sway Ais conduct, be was justified ..iram9R him before bun? :no enough to ___ Whitty to explain - in sending his officer to Mr. Ramshay's order was to bring the party into court, and until he made out the warrant for com mitment, all that was necessary was a request from the judge. Having characterised the arraignment of Mr. Ramshay, as the arraignment of Lord Car lisle, the learned council accused the memorialists of being determined to rise above the constitution ; determined to exercise, if they could, those powers which did not belong to them ; and all men of reason and sense consider, for the very reason which they urged, that those other persons ought not to be appointed. The learned sergeant warmly commended the appointment, by Lord Carlisle, of Mr. Ramshav, whom he characterised as a man unshackled by local sympathies or prejudices. All that Arr. Whitty was called upon to appear and prove was, whether he was guilty or innocent; and that was all that Mr. Ramshay asked. He called upon Mr Whitty to come, and he answered with a knife. The Judge was the only person who had the power of deciding whether the conduct of any one amounted to a contempt or not ; the judge was the only one who had the power of fine or imprisonment,—yet this had been said to be unconstitutional ; it had been urged against Mr. Ramshay by a flourish of the pen that he was both judge, witness, and accuser in his own case. The person of the judge was under protection, and why not his character also. He contended that the words on the placard issued by Mr Whitty were derogatory and in sulting to Mr. Ramshay, because he had given " no opinion," whatever " of the people of Liverpool," but merely in the discharge of his duties had commented upon an awful display of perjury which had occurred before him that week, and he had felt called upon to express his hor ror at the amount. When this had been construed into his opinion of the town itself, he had a right to treat that as a contempt and insult to himself. In addition to this, the newspapers were week after week branding Mr. Ram shay's name about, and that was a contempt which should not be tolerated by any man who had a jealous care of the purity and dignity of his court. No rational man could come to any other conclusion than that the words con tainer', in the placard were an insult to the judge, and therefore Mr. Ramshay was not only justified but bound to send for Mr. Whitty, not to punish him, but require him to explain prima facie his intention to insult. The question for his lordship to decide was, whether there was reasonable evidence to justifv him in the belief that Mr. Ramshay had acted bona' fide, having been insulted by that man ? If the contempt was made out, then the punishment was by no means adequate to the offence. If Mr. Whitty had attended like Mr. Caldwell, and apo logised, he did not know Mr. Ramshay if the matter would not have ended there, by his discharge. The Court, a little after five o'clock, adjourned to a quarter-past ten on the following morning. WEDNESDAY. At a quarter past ten o'clock the Earl of Carlisle took his seat, upon the bench. The court was as crowded as on the previous day, the gallery being entirely occupied by ladies. Sergeant WILKINS resumed his address, and after again calling his lordship's attention to the case of the King and Clement. Price, p. 85, where the reason for not em ploying formal process was fully explained, he (Mr. Sergeant Wilkins) submitted that unless his lordship was prepared to adopt the most absurd views of the witnesses, and to believe that Mr. Ramshay was a monomaniac, that his mental faculties had become impaired, or that there was some apprehension he might become so morally unfit for his office as to anticipate some dishonesty on his part ; unless this were the case, there was not, he submitted, the shadow of a shade of ground to say that there was any inability, mental or bodily, on the part of Mr. Ramshay. He would also submit, with regard to the word misbe haviour, that it meant some flagrant and daring miscon duct ; and it would be for his lordship to say, when the whole conduct of Mr. Ramshay had been laid before him, whether it was such as this. He (the learned sergeant) was of opinion, that Mr. Ramshay's main fault had been in forbearing too long, and by that forbearance inducing these persons to suppose that they could insult him, as a judge in his court, while discharging his duties in the best possible manner for the public interest. The learned sergeant, then, at considerable length, directed attention to the evidence adduced on the other side; begging his lordship to remember that, except in reference to Mr. Whitty, they had not been able to impugn Mr. Ram shay's conduct in one single instance, and that, with two exceptions, not a single witness called before his lordship ever saw or knew Mr. Ramshay before the Whitty trial. The learned sergeant then called attention to the speech of Mr. Ramshay, on the occasion of his presenting to him (Mr. Wilkins) a mark of esteem, for his exertions on Mr. Ramshay's former trial, and also to an article which first appeared in the Liverpool Journal of the 4th of October. After going through the article in detail ; and commenting upon it at length and with great severity, the learned sergeant proceeded to say, " I read that speech, first of all, to show what the object of that man was. I defy his council and his best friends to justify that object; 1 defy them to find in that address of Mr. Whitty to the people of Liverpool one single sentence that is not condemnatory of him and his motives. It originated in hatred of his lordship (Carlisle). To carry out that hatred he attacked Mr. Ramshay, the effect of which was to bring him into contempt in the eyes of those who read the articles, and who were, consequently, bound to believe them." The learned sergeant then proceeded to compare, in some points, the shorthand writer's notes of the County Court proceedings (which had been furnished to him by the other side) with the statements of some of the witnesses. Mr. Gladstone stated that the judge, in examining a witness, put words in his mouth ; Mr. Jeffery, that the judge, in answer to a question of Sir George Stephen, put words into the mouth of the witness. Both these versions were uttered without foundation. Comment ing still further upon the notes of the proceedings, the learned sergeant asked if he had satisfied his lord ship that Mr. Ramshay had acted legally up to this particular point, what greater outrage upon the sanctity of the law could there be than that of which Mr. Whitty had been guilty ? Alluding to the fine of ss. imposed upon Madden, the learned sergeant said he would prove that the man was under sentence of im prisonment ; not for contempt of court, but under a debt warrant; that he attempted to escape, and interrupting in so doing the proceedings of the court, he was treated in the way described by the witness. It was palpable that on the day in question, persons were coming in and out of the court during the whole time, for the purpose of insulting Mr. Ramshay : this he should prove by dis interested witnesses. There was no hardship in the case of John Jones, and his being committed to Lancaster, which the other side had urged so strongly. If a man were to escape fining and imprisonment by saying he was poor, we should have offences committed with impunity. As to the committal to Lancaster his lordship was no doubt very well aware that Mr. Ramshay had made every effort to obtain Kirkdale as a place of committal from the County Court but unavailingly, and he had no power to commit but to Lancaster. With respect to the demeanour of Mr. Ramshay, Mr. Gladstone had described him as bursting with passion; Dr. M'lntyre described his expression of face as unnatural; Mr. Gladstone had said that his eyes were red—flaming with fire ; and Mr. Jeffery and the other parties described him in the same way. He (the learned sergeant) asked for words and ac tions to justify these inferences. Was Mr. Ramshay's the language of a man who had no control over his judgment ? Did not, in fact, the examination show that Mr. Ramshay had all his faculties about him, and was conducting the inquiry as a reasonable man ? Did Sir George Stephen complain ? No ; the only imputation cast by him was, that the judge was very much excited and that his manner was not calm and dignified. The learned sergeant, after commenting upon Sir George Stephen's defence of Mr. Whitty, before Mr. Ramshay, proceeded to contend that Mr. Ramshay was the person who had to decide whether the placard issued by Mr. Whitty amounted to an insult or not. The question his lordship had to argue was, whether Mr. Ramshay acted bond fide ? did he, when he sent for Michael James Whitty to explain to him the con duct of which be had been guilty, did he believe that Mr. Whittv had insulted him ? and if he did, he (Mr. Ser geant Wilkins) submitted that no power upon earth could remove Mr. Ramshay on that ground. True, the words in the bill were not libelling and insulting per se, but taken in connection with what had gone before, they were undoubtedly so. According to the act of parliament, a judge was protected in going to and from the court. If it was an insult to the judge, the judge beyond all question had a power to act in the way in which Mr. Ramshay had done. He referred to several law cases in support of his view. A short adjournment here took place, and at its close Mr. Sergeant WILKINS resumed his address.—That Mr. Ramshay had made enemies, there could be no ques tion—amongst the dishonest and fraudulent men whose views he had thwarted. What, was the main opposition to him as far as the Guardian Society had been con cerned ? That he insisted, in all cases, upon having legal proof of a claim before he admitted it. There could be no doubt in the world that Mr. Ramshay succeeded one who had been too lenient in enforcing the laws of evidence, and that he must have disappointed the expectations of many, and created thus many enemies. The learned ser- Meant then commented at great length on the speech of Sir George Stephen, and strongly animadverted on the license of the press. He then proceeded to contend that the judge of the county court was insulted by the posting of the placard, according to the words of the clause in the act of parliament, " whilst going to and from the court," and that Mr. Ramshay was perfectly justified in describing Mr. Whitty's case as one of great enormity, and that the punishment awarded him was by no means inadequate to the offence. Coercion, he said, would serve with mean trial of Mr. Whitty, in the county court, was then read, and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins proceeded to comment upon it at very great length, taking the evidence of each witness separately. After thus commenting for a considerable time, the learned sergeant asked his lordship (as he said from sheer exhaustion) to allow him to conclude his re marks on the following morning. This was agreed to, and the court then adjourned. THURSDAY. The Earl of Carlisle took his seat on Thursday morning at ten o'clock, and immediately after Mr. Sergeant Wil kins resumed his address. The court was not as well attended as on tha previous days. After continuing his comments upon the evidence respecting what passed when Mr. `Witty was brought before Mr. Ramshay, in the County (;ourt, Mr. Wilkins proceeded to say, that he had now called attention to the evidence of every wit ness, with the exception of Mr. Lowndes, and there was not a single witness who saw any part of Mr. Ramshav's conduct on any other occasion: 'They saw him on that day—a day of all others most calculated to irritate, and provoke, and excite. They seemed to be parties having no business in the court, but what they chose to term curiosity ; and a great many of them were the avowed friends and admirers of Mr. Whitty, and those who were not his friends suddenly became so. There was not one of them who had the slightest knowledge of Mr. Ramshay's ordinary mode of conducting his business; yet they dared to come and endeavour to dismiss him from his office for manifesting feelings which only gave proof that lie belonged to our common species—that he had feelings, and that they were lacerated until he could hear no longer. He thought this was a most important fact, that not one of the witnesses was able to give any evidence as to the ordinary mode of transacting the busi ness of the court. This concluded the observations he had to make so far as the case of the Whittys was con cerned. He now came to the charges of misconduct against Mr. Ramshay as a judge. As to the witness John Jones, he should be able to prove that first and all Mr. Ramshay had several times during the course of that day complained of parties coming into court with their hats on, and had given notice that he should visit the offence as it ought to be visited ; and that this man, as well as others, was distinctly told what would be the effect of this. He would prove also that as soon as he was placed in the court, he put his hat on his head with an air of defiance, and that he went out of the court in a man ner which he (Sergeant Wilkins) could not describe, but which left no doubt on the minds of those who saw it that it was his intention to insult the judge, and that his manner was most insolent. The next witness was Mr. Wareing, licensed victualler; but he would call Mr. Clough, the solicitor on the other side, and he would be able to show that this was an infamous attempt to de: fraud the landlord. The learned sergeant proceeded to comment on the case brought forward by Mr. Evans, in which Mr. Ramshay, after a jury had given a verdict for the plaintiff, requested them to find for the defendant, and intimated that be would grant a new trial, and try the case over and over again. It was said the jury were coerced, but he would call the foreman of the jury and the plaintiff's agent, and the foreman would tell them how far they were coerced, and would tell them what he thought of the prima fade case set up by Mr. Evans. The learned sergeant here reca pitulated the circumstances of Mr. Whitty's being sent for by the judge, and his subsequent trial and committal. Mr. Ramshay had only acted as he had a right to do, and if Mr. Whitty had attended in the first instance to the request made by the judge, all difficulty would have been avoided. Magistrates frequently sent for witnesses and others, but they did not consider it necessary to issue warrants, except under very peculiar circumstances. He did not inquire whether Mr. Whitty did really insult Mr. Ramshay or not ; if the circumstances were such as to justify Mr. Ramshay in the belief that he bad insulted him on his way to the court, he was the sole judge ; he sent for Mr. Whitty, who refused to obey, threatened murder, and effected his escape. Then followed the scene at court, and all men who love the law and wish to follow the obedience of that law, must regret that the pages of our history should be sullied by such a scene. After such a scene, it was no wonder that Mr. Ramsbay exhibited some excitement, and that he made use of the words in reference to Mr. Whitty when he passed sen tence. And if Mr. Ramshay did make use of the expres sions attributed to him on the occasion alluded to, cir cumstances and judicial dignity justified them. He saw before him an enemy whom he sought to make a friend — a foe whom he sought to reconcile—a man who made the most sacred feelings of his heart a subject of ribaldry and jest—who assailed and maligned his benefactor—and if (said the learned sergeant) there be a man on the face of the world whom that man loves it is —(here the learned sergeant, casting a glance at Mr. Ramshay, sat down, buried his face in his hands, and shed tears. Mr. Ram shay also placed his head on the table, and seemed deeply affected.) Mr. Sergeant Wilkins then resumed. After observing that allowance ought to be made for an ebullition of infirmity, he proceeded to state what the case of the defendant would be. He would first call before his lordship fourteen or fifteen gentlemen who had practised in Mr. Ramshay's court as advocates. They would all say that not only was Mr. Ramshay free from blame, but he was a most exemplary judge. His manner had always been courteous and kind to every one in the court. He would call thirteen suitors to bear these gentlemen out in their statements. He would call nine agents, engaged in practising in the court. He would also call the treasurers and secretaries of four loan socie ties, and persons who had gone to that court to decide for themselves ; having heard the calumnies and misre presentations which had been put forward against the judge. They went for the sole purpose of ascertaining what Mr. Ramshay's conduct was ; they would tell his lordship that his conduct had been on all occasions most correct and proper. He a ould call parties connected with the immediate cases on which the question rested, and who would satisfy his lordship that his conduct could not be otherwise than proper and courteous. These persons had no object to serve. He would call Mr. J. Stewart, who would say that on one occasion he attended, and the pa tience of the judge was particularly observable. The wit ness was so satisfied of this, that his exclamation was, " That an angel from heaven would not please these men." If all this were proved, what would become of the charges on the other side ? After some further remarks, the learned counsel concluded by saying, " I have only endea voured, throughout the whole of the case, to deal with facts as they presented themselves. I think I have rea soned fairly on those facts, and if, in the course of my duty, I have been compelled from the stress of circum stances to give pain to others, I bitterly—l deeply de plore it ; if I lose their friendship I shall lament it through life,—l shall lament that I was placed in a position by them in which I was compelled to inflict pain. But I shall have the all-sustaining reflection, that in the discharge of my duty to one whom in my soul I believe to be a cruelly persecuted man, I have done no more than justice. A few words, and I sit down. This is a case of the utmost pos sible importance to the kingdom at large in which we live. Although he merely be the judge of a county court, yet I regard this inquiry as one of greater importance than one attended with more pomp and circumstance,—l mean the impeachment of Warren Hastings. If we test it by its consequences—if we are to regard it by its extent and in fluence throughout the length and breadth of the land, a more important inquiry could not come before any judge. The judge of every county court in the land is looking with breathless expectation and anxiety to the result of this inquiry. They are asking, is their authority to be set at nought ; whether the majesty of the law is to be trampled under foot; whether these courts are tobe strangled in their infancy by physical force, and brute power, and prejudice, and clamour; and whether the wisdom propounded in the judgment I read yesterday—whether it is to be venerated and respected, and whether the temples of justice are to be kept sacred and unpolluted. My lord, concession to faction is a bribe to treason and rebellion. And when Charles signed the death-warrant of Strafford, he justified the tragedy which succeeded in Whitehall. Yield not, my lord, to those men, unless their claim be just ;—yield not to men, though they come in myriads and their name be legion, though their powers may be formidable, though their clamour may seek to drown the " still small voice of reason." I implore, I entreat your lordship, in the name of the God we worship, whose law is order, whose law fur nishes the principles upon which the laws of this land are based, I entreat you in the name of heaven, in the name of earth, in the name of her whom we love and venerate as the Queen of our country ; in the name of all that is right, and righteous, and true, I entreat your lordship, for the sake of those who shall succeed and survive us, for the sake of posterity, for the sake of the permanence of our liberties, our rights, and all that we boast of, I implore, I entreat that you yield not to clamour and faction, that which justice, reason, and truth require that your lordship should for ever maintain." (The learned sergeant then resumed his seat amidst applause.) A manifesto of the Guardian Society, on the decision given by the Earl of Carlisle after the first inquiry, was read, as were also several articles from the Journal and the Chronicle, commenting on the conduct of Mr. Ram shay. Witnesses for the defence were then called, the first of whom was Mr. John Stewart, architect, of Liverpool, and a mem ber of the town council. He was in the County Court during the hearing of the case Swallow v. Waring, a few days before Mr. Whitty's trial. He heard the judge give a strong opinion against calling witnesses for the defence. as unnecessary, but he did not prevent witnesses being called. The conduct of the judge seemed to him proper, and very courteous. minds, when forbearance would not ; and he would show, Mr. W. Hoskins, estate agent of Liverpool, heard a by some of the merchants in the town of Liverpool, by number of cases tried before Mr. Ramshay during two respectable tradesmen, by solicitors, by suitors, and by days in September. The demeanor of the judge was atten jurors, that Mr. Ramshay's court was a model court ; and tive, calm, and impartial. He remembered the case of if the tradesmen of Liverpool looked to their own inter- Broster v. Mercer, in which he was a witness. In that ests, they would scout the feelings of Mr. Whitty and the case the judge attended to all the points fully, and did Guardian Society, and encourage Mr. Ramshay in his notexerciseanythinglikecoercion on the minds of the jury. office. He would prove beyond demonstration that Mr. Mr. Lawrence Green, a solicitor, frequently practising Ramshay's was a model court, and that Mr. Ramshay in the County Court, gave similar testimony to the general was pre-eminently qualified to be the judge of a county deportment and manner of the judge. If anything, he court. Since he had been in the town of Liverpool there was too patient ; it sometimes amounted to tedium. His had been placards, squibs, pasquinades, and lampoons on decisions were sound and legal, in the opinion of witness. Mr. Ramshay, posted continually on the walls of the Mr. Maurice, managing clerk to Mr. Holden, solicitor, town ; and he regretted to say that, amongst the contri- of Liverpool, had had frequent opportunities of observing butors of this trash, there were to be found members of Mr. Ramshay's manner on the bench, and thought it the bar. He should produce evidence to satisfy his lord- uniformly calm, courteous, and dignified. ship—evidence of merchants (some of them the first in Mr. John Jones, attorney, never saw any want of tern- Liverpool) ; evidence of solicitors practising in the county per, but a little displeasure occasionally, when the wit court ; evidence of jurors who had sat in that court; evi- nesses prevaricated. The judne always paid the greatest dence of suitors—be would undertake to satisfy his lord- attention to the case ; nine men out of ten would not take ship, and satisfy all but Mr. Whitty and the members of the same pains. the Guardian Society, that if the tradesmen of Liverpool Mr. John Gore Dewhurst, also a Liverpool solicitor, sought to promote their own interest, they would encou- considered Mr. Ramshay to be patient, extremely pains rage the man who bad made his court well conducted. taking, and of great ability as a lawyer, Never saw any- The. decorum lately manifest in tkat court would speak for thing in his c o n d uc t b u t w h a t was cons i s t en t w ith that of itself ; and there could not be found a sin g le hon es t su it or a jud ge . to complain of the conduct of the man who presided there. Mr. John Greatley, solicitor, spoke of Mr. Ramshay's —The evidence of the witnesses examined respecting the general deportment in equally high terms. Mr. John Yates, senior, the oldest solicitor hi Liver pool, had practised in all the courts of the kingdom, and in the Liverpool County Court. From what he had seen of Mr. Ramshay, he thought that he bad conducted him self with great propriety, and never saw him out of temper. Mr. Charles Frederic Parsons, also a solicitor of many years standing, gave similar evidence, • Mr. Charles Hughes, solicitor, had had opportunities of observing Mr. Ramshay's conduct, and thought him patient, affable, and kind, particularly to the poorer suitors. Was present when Mr. Whitty was before the court. The expression of Mr. Whitty's countenance seemed to be that of a man rather unrelenting. He ap. peered to be setting the judge at defiance. Mr. Ran-shay was merely in earnest, and conducted himself in a proper manner; he was doing no more than keeping his dignity fled. The mode in which business has been conducted ever since Mr. Ramshay's appointment has been con siderably improved. The business during Mr. Ramshay's time has increased materially for the last three months, both in the number of the cases and in the quality of the business. I produce a return of the number of causes be fore Mr. Ramshay, copied from the books of the court. [We understand that the return referred to was sub sequently handed in, and was as follows :—Number of causes entered for hearing in the Liverpool County Court, from the Ist day of January to the 31st day of October. 1851 :—January,numberof causes entered,6ol; February, March, and April, 2205, of which 397 were above £5 ; May, June, and July, number of causes entered, 2303, of which 444 were above £5 ; August, September, and October, 2360, of which 495 were above £s.] Mr. Stone's examination continued :—I have seen pla cards on the walls in Liverpool, and in the Liverpool pa pers, with regard to Mr. Ramshoy and his court. I was present in court on Saturday, September 27th, Monday, the 29th, and, I think, Wednesday, the Ist of October, during the trials of the Whittys. I was there the greater part of those days. On the Monday I was there nearly the whole of the day. I was there but for a very short time on the Saturday. Mr. Ramshay's demeanour and manner on the Monday was that of a dignified judge, of a judge determined to keep order in his court, and to make it respectable • and, I think, had he acted in any other manner than he did on the Monday, it would have been undignified to the office he holds and not respectable to the court. I was present, too, at the burst of applause by the audience after Sir G. Stephen's remark. It was one general burst of applause and hurrah. It was a scene I had never before seen in courts of justice during my expe rience of nearly twenty years. It was a very discreditable scene, and, in my opinion, the observations that produced that cheering were more discreditable. I was sitting by Mr. Ramshay whilst it was going on. I saw and noticed as a judge. Mr. Edward Wilford, an attorney, who had attended the County Court, was in the court during Slater's case, when Mr. Simon was apprehended. Mr. Simon's conduct was exceedingly uncourteous, but the judge took it with his usual dignity and courtesy of manner. He was also kind to the suitors, particularly to the poor. Mr. Ramshay was one of the best judges that ever sat in the County Court. His conduct was never despotic. He never de livered an opinion as to the people of Liverpool. Mr. John Walden and Mr. John Davies, both solicitors, spoke in similar terms oc Mr. Ramshay's legal acquire ments and high judicial qaulities. Rev. George Aspinall, a clergyman of the established church in Liverpool, said : I have attended the County Court, and witnessal the calmness, dignity, and temper of the judge. His decisions seemed to me to be based on perfect justice and fairness. Mr. Wm. Beattie and Mr. John Forbes deposed sepa rately that they had attended with an impression that the judge must be an extraordinary man, and, after hearing the cases, were convinced that serious injury was done him in the public estimation. His conduct was calm, temperate, and judgelike. The court then adjourned at a quarter to six. FRIDAY. the whole deineanour of Mr. Ramshay, but I don't know that I noticed his countenance. I was present when sen tence was passed on Mr. Whitty. Mr. Ramshay com menced the passing of the sentence, and, after he had pro ceeded for perhaps a few minutes, I found there was an extra degree of earnestness in his voice. I did not see his face at the time; I was looking before me. Mr. Whitty was on my left hand, within two yards from me. I turned to Mr. Whitty, and then I found what, in my opinion, must have caused the extra degree of earnestness I have described; and that was a look of scorn and defiance on the brow of Mr. Whitty,—in the appearance altogether of Mr. Whitty, there was a scornful smile of defiance. That continued as long as I looked, which was only for two or three minutes. I know that Mr. Ramshay has ra- The proceedings commenced this morning at ten o'clock. The first witness was Mr. Wm. Wheeler, a solicitor, who gave his opinion that Mr. Ramshay acted fairly to suitors, especially to the poor, and that he was a sound and able lawyer.—On cross-examination, the witness said he did not practise in the court during February, March, and April last, as he was in gaol. He was remanded for not paying a debt. When the judge sentenced Mr. Whitty, he was calm. unruffled, and dignified.—Re-examined by Sergeant Wilkins: Mr. Ramshay was caricatured all over the town, and there was a great demand for the caricatures. Robert Core, an accountant, gave his opinion that Mr. Ramshay always sifted the cases so as to get at the truth, and that he was a dignified and courteous judge. He had made excellent rules for the government of his court. He never in his life saw a man more collected than 111 r. Ram. shay was during Mr. Whitty's case, but he was annoyed at the cries of hear, hear, and the clapping of hands at the sentiments of Sir George Stephen. He heard the expres sion about a fisr. but he did not hear the judge call a man an ass. Mr. Whitty had a smile of derision and defiance on his countenance.—On cross-examination by Mr. Monk, the witness said he had been in Lancaster Castle for debt; but at the time he could have paid 40s. in the pound. He had been in the navy, and had also worked a marble quarry in Galway. He took the benefit of the act in 1849. He did not hear Mr. Ramshay say to Mr. Simon, " Take care, sir. you are nibbling at the offensive." Mr. Ram shay was always good tempered, except when severe with witnesses who prevaricated. The judge said to Hartley, " Man, this is a fist." Witness thought he could swear he did not call him an ass. Richard Beckett said he was a leather seller, at Liver pool, and foreman of the jury in the case of Mercer and Roskell. (This was the case in which it was alleged that Mr. Ramshay would not hear the evidence for the de fendant, and that he coerced the jury.) The witness said the jury had been induced to give their verdict for the plaintiff only by the evidence. The witness described the conduct of Mr. Ramshay as being very proper on the occasion.—Cross-examined : Mr. Ramshay told the jury he could grant a new trial a hundred times. Witn:ss had not acted as a juryman in that court since, and did not wish. (A laugh.)—Sergeant Wilkins : You mean, I sup pose, that you don't wish to act as a juryman again in any court. Witness : Yes, that is my meaning. Mr. Thomas Clough, a solicitor, who had acted in the case of Swallow and Waring, a claim for rent, described the conduct of Mr. Ramshay, on that occasion, as legal and proper. Mr. Ramshay did not refuse to allow Mr. Dodd, the solicitor, to call evidence, but had merely referred him to the strong documentary evidence on the other side. Mr. Ramshay had granted immediate execu tion on the application of witness, because the defendant had said he would never pay a farthing.—Cross-examined by Mr. Monk : Mr. Ramshay did not say that Mr. Swal low seemed a very respectable man, and that he should not allow any evidence to be called to contradict him.—Re examined : In my opinion Mr. Ramshay acted with great talent and great propriety. Henry Boardman, an auctioneer and appraiser at Liverpool, said the statements in the newspapers against Mr. Ramshay had produced an unfavourable impression on his mind, but that impression had been removed after he had visited the court. ther a peculiar manner. The teeth, when Mr. Ramshay speaks, especially with any degree of earnestness, are.close together. He has false tenth. Some people would sup pose his peculiar manner arose from temper, but I, who know him so well, know it is not so, out that it is his manner. I was present on the occasion when Mr. Ram shay held up his fist. It was during Hartley's examina tion. There was a good deal of difficulty in getting from Hartley, the bailiff, answers to Mr. Ramshay's questions. Mr. MONK.—There is no difference between us on that point. • Mr. Ramsbay.—Never mind (addressing his counsel), we will have the evidence. Mr. Stone, in continuation.—There was evidently an appearance, a desire on the part of Mr. Hartley not to give the information he was possessed of. The Earl of CARLISLE.—You admit, I think, Mr. Monk, that it was an explanatory gesture. You are agreed on that point. Mr. MONK.—That is one of the questions I intend to set right when I come to address your lordship. Mr. Stone continued.—l did not hear the word '• ass" used by Mr. Ramshay. lam satisfied it was not used ; and if it had been used I most have heard it. I was within a yard of the judge at the time of the examination. Mr. ECUs.—That is your reason; but were you so near that as a matter of fact you must have heard if it had been used ? The witness.—Yes, I am sure. The Earl of CARLISLE.—Was the word man used ? The witness.—My impression is that it was. There was, however, no expression used by the judge to call forth anything that attracted my attention. Cross-examined by Mr. MoNx.—l have been high bailiff of the County Court since the commencement of the operation of the County Courts' Act, I think in 1846 or 1847, lam not sure ; 1847 perhaps. I have interested myself once i❑ the appointment of a judge of this court. I did not carry at any time memorials about for signatures. I did not appeal to any one to sign a memorial. My recollection is sufficiently good, that 1 would not hesitate to swear it on my oath I never carried a memorial round, nor invited any one to sign it. Mr. Snowball had the memorial on the one side, and Mr. Evans on the other, I believe. Mr. MONK.—I don't want your belief. The witness.—But I only state my belief unless I am assured of the facts. Mr. MoNx.—Don't give us your belief. I have not the confidence in it that the other side have. The witness.—l am much obliged to you. Mr. OVENS offered some remarks to the court, to the effect that this course of cross-examination was very irregular; but it elicited no reply. Mr. MONK.—NOW, Mr. Stone, you are a professional man ; give your answers, as you know such is the proper mode of giving evidence, and not your beliefs. The witness, in reply to questions.—l was not employed in any way by the Guardian Society in respect of that memorial. I signed the memorial that was signed by the legal profession in favour of Mr. Blair. Mr. Henry Robinson, a silversmith, said he had been six or seven times to the court. He bad been prejudiced against the court, but when he went there the prejudice was removed. In his opinion, the conduct of the judge was marked by great perception, true judgment, and pro priety. Some of the persons in the conrt were very rude, and he heard them call the judge fool, and ass, and say he was mad to sit there. The judge threatened to fine people if they wore their hats. Witness's opinion from the placard was, that Mr. Ramshay had given an unfa vourable opinion of the people of Liverpool.—Cross examined.—Had been in the court at times for six or seven hours. He was positive that the man who was fined put on his hat in the inner court.—Re-examined : The man's name was John Jones. Did not hear Jones's cause tried. Mr. Charles Green, a solicitor, who was present in Mr. Whitty's case, gave his opinion that there was nothing in Mr. Ramshay's manner inconsistent with the character of a judge or a gentleman. He never saw him bursting with rage. He was angry at the manner of Mr. Whitty, who put on a look of defiance and impertinence.—Cross. examined : He believed Mr. Whitty to be a very good tempered man. Here the court adjourned for a short time. The next witness was Mr. John Carr, a journeyman ropemaker at Liverpool, who described the conduct of the people in court, when Mr. Whitty was there, as very rough. One man called the judge an old ass. Mr. Ram. shay was calm and collected. There was nothing but bother. It was more like a playhouse than anything else. Mr. Frederick Elliot, an appraiser, gave some corrobo rative evidence as to the mild demeanour of Mr. Ramshay. William Charles Bew, coal agent, Crum-street, Liver pool, described the manner and conduct of Mr. Ramshay to suitors to very calm, courteous, and attentive.—Cross examined : Mr. Ramshay was a little excited sometimes, but he never saw any violent ebullitions. Robert Williams, a tailor and draper in Liverpool, said he went to the court very much prejudiced ; but his opi nion now was, that he never saw a better judge sit in a court. He had been to all the courts, and he never saw a court better managed. It had been much improved. There used to be so many " lopers" and flatcatchers, who offered their services to suitors. He had seen these vaga bonds about, but none were there now. They had been sent away. (The witness here described the various pla cards issued, and the articles in the Liverpool papers.) In his opinion, Mr. Ramshay was the personification of justice. Cross-examined : He had come here volunta rily, and he would sell the coat off his back in such a cause. He thought the judge had been very ill-used. He had been subject to the bankruptcy laws. Mrs. Fox, the wife of a tradesman at Rainhill ; Walter Wheeler, secretary to several friendly societies ; Dr. Eager, a retired physician, formerly practising in St. Pe ter's-square, Manchester; Thomas Calder, secretary of the Liverpool Operative Loan Society ; James Farquhar, treasurer for twelve years to the Imperial Loan Society ; Richard Jones, a retired ironmonger; Thomas Carpenter, shopkeeper; William Midgley, an accountant, of Liver pool ; John Wood, coal-merchant, Great Homer-street, Liverpool ; John Cill, publican ; George Lee, formerly a provision-merchant, but now retired ; John Mainwaring, a coal-merchant, of Liverpool; Mary Ann Lennox, a widow; Hugh Carmichael, accountant and collector, of Liverpool ; gave evidence as to Mr. Ramshay's extreme ability, and proper demeanour as a judge. Mr. Sergeant Wit.xiNs then stated that he had exa mined all the witnesses but two—Mr. Stone and Mr. O'Donnell. The former he did not think it would be ne cessary to examine, and the latter was not in attendance. He would state also that Mr. Ramshay was most anxious to be examined and cross-examined himself, but this he (the learned sergeant) could not allow while he had the conduct of the case. He asked, therefore, that his lord ship would allow him to conduct the remainder of the examination on the following morning. The request was granted, and at half-past six o'clock the court adjourned until eleven o'clock on Saturday. SATURDAY. MoNx.—There is no necessity for introducing gentlemen's names in this way; we all well know to whom the memorial I am alluding to referred. The witness.—The town does not know. I did not prepare the memorial myself, nor settle it. Mr. Monk, don't be mistaken, there were two memorials, and I did not draw up the one I signed. I did not draw up any memorial to that gentleman. I believe I asked some of the legal gentlemen and professional gentlemen to sign the other memorial. Will you permit me to correct my self in the answer I gave a moment or two ago ? Mr. MONK.—Oh, certainly. _ _ The Witness.—ln addition to asking some of the legal profession to sign the memorial, I also saw Mr. Evans and Mr. Reay, of the Guardian Society. I went to them on the subject. The object of my visit was to induce them to interfere in behalf of the gentleman I have mentioned. I presented one to the noble lord (the Lord Chancellor) and refused to present the other, but enclosed it in a letter. Mr. Thurs.—You brought one to me. The Witness.—l may mention, it was my opinion that the second memorial _ Mr. MONK.—Don ' t give us your opinion on that which does not arise. The Witness.—l think it does arise. I was not preparing a lease of some premises on the 27th of September for a person named Caldwell ; and if you will permit me I will explain. _ The Chancellor of the Duchy entered the court and resumed his seat at five minutes to eleven o'clock this morning. There was but a very thin attendance of audi tors in the body of the court compared with some of the previous sittings. _ Mr. OvEss, - brfore any other business wasentered upon, mentioned that he had been requested by his learned friend, Mr. Sergeant Wilkins, to inform his lordship that it was out of no disrespect to his lordship that he did not appear in court this morning. His learned friend had been detained from London, during this inquiry, at very considerable inconvenience to himself, to which he had submitted, no less from a feeling of the importance of the case than from the respect he felt due to Mr. Ramshay, whom he was proud to acknowledge as his friend. The learned sergeant felt that he had done every justice in his power to Mr. Ramshay, and his attendance being impe ratively required in town, he had been compelled to leave. There was one, or at most but two witnesses more to be examined on Mr. Ramshay's behalf, and the conducting of that examination had been left to Mr. Sowler and himself. After some little delay, in the course of which Mr. Ramshay entered the court, with the note-books of the trials that had taken place before him, and the judgments on which were impugned by the memorialists, under his arm, Mr. George Stone, high-bailiff of the court, was called and examined by Mr. OVENS.—After stating that he had been a solicitor practising in Liverpool for nearly twenty years, this witness added, T have had every opportunity of noticing and considering Mr. Ramahay's conduct and demeanour since his appointment as judge of the Liverpool County Court. I consider it calm, deliberate, and digni- Mr. MONK.—No, no ; we must not have a speech every time you answer. _ _ The Witness.—l had instructions to prepare a lease in which Caldwell was interested ; but the instructions were not given by Caldwell. Most distinctly it was not agreed that part of the expense was to fall on Caldwell. The agent gave me instructions, and not Caldwell. Cald well afterwards met me in the street, and said, offering me a guinea, " Mr. Stone, here is my part of the expenses of the lease ;" but I refused it, and said I knew nothing about his paying. There is a practice, I believe, in Liver pool, as to who shall bear the expenses of the lease. The practice is, unless parties agree to the contrary, that each party bear their own expenses, that is, their equal share of them. When I received instructions not one word was said to me either pro or con., and I did not look at all at Caldwell as my client. We had prepared the lease pre viously for the succeeding tenant, and they came to us because, I suppose, we had done so. The ASSESSOR.—MereIy to change the name ? The Witness.—Just so ; merely to change the names. Mr. MONlC.—Were these the only memorials you have had anything to do with connected with this matter ? The Witness.—They were the only memorials. The ASSESSOR.—What memorials ? The Witness.—The memorial respecting the appoint ment of Mr. Blair, and the memorial I enclosed to your lordship. Mr. MONK.—I did not suggest to Mr. Reay and the Guardian Society to interest themselves as to the appoint ment of the judge. I called on Mr. Reay, and asked him if the Guardian Society had any objection to present a memorial. Mr. MONK.—Yon don't call that a suggestion ? The Witness.—l have mentioned the circumstance and have given the reason. Except the two I have named, I have not been interested in any memorial. I have not suggested the getting up of a memorial for Mr. Ramshay as a counter memorial to that complaining of his conduct. Not in any way, either directly or indirectly. . . . Mr. MONK.L4f it has been said such a memorial has been gotten up by you, and only received two signatures, that is false. The Witness.—l know nothing of the memorial. You are referring to what has appeared in the newspapers ; but it is not true ; they are erroneous on that point. Mr. MONK.—I am not referring to the papers, but to my instructions. Be kind enough, Mr. Stone, to confine yourself to answering the question. Cross-examination continued : The police are not usually at the County Court. I believe six is the greatest number of policemen I have known to be in attendance at the County Count. Permit me to explain ? Mr. MONK.-11 you wish to explain, please to address his lordship, but I do not see what there is to explain. The Earl of CARLISLE.—Give your answers, Mr. Stone, if you please ; your counsel will cross-examine you, if re quisite, on any point that he thinks requires explanation. The witness resumed : The impression may be sent wrongly abroad, and that is the reason I wish to explain. Mr. James, during the illness of Mr. Ramshav, sat in three or four courts. Subsequently to that Mr. Lowndes sat in the court for either two or three sittings. During the period those gentlemen were there no policemen were required at the court : at least, there were none there whether they were required or not. I was not in the court for so long a time whilst those gentlemen sat as when Mr. Ramshay was sitting. I was there some two or three times during the day. I will explain. When Mr. Ram shay was appointed, and for many weeks afterwards, his state of health was very indifferent, and his pain during nearly the whole of the time was most excruciating, and he had little or no use in his hands for writing. He had asked on several occasions for assistance from Mr. Statham, the clerk of the County Court, but none was rendered: and I volunteered, as a matter of feeling, more than anything else, to become Mr. Rainshay's amanuensis; and I was therefore almost necessarily in attendance there during almost every court he sat, for that purpose. Since Mr. Ramshay's resumption of the business and restoration to health, I have not been there either as often or so long; and I sometimes go for two or three hours every day, and then go away as my other duties call for my attention; for it is not necessary I should be in the court during tha whole of the day, nor is it required by the Act of Parlia ment. The fines do not pass through my hands; I have nothing whatever to do with them. Tam not able to tell you how many persons Mr. James fined. He fined some, T believe. I don't know how many Mr. Lowndes fined; I don't know that Mr. Lowndes did or did not fine and body. Mr. Lowndes sat after Mr. James. Mr. James has not sat since Mr. Lowndes came. The police-officers have been in the court since Mr. Whitty's affair, but not before. At the time of the sickness of Mr. Ramshay, which I have described to you, the latter part of that time Mr. Ramshay resided in the County Court, and sometimes he has done so since he resumed his business. He did so in August last. He slept in the court. I believe he re mained there during the whole of the August court; but I think not after that. I was at the dinner given by Mr• Ramshay. Mr. MONK.—And you had the honour of receiving a piece of plate from Mr. Ramshay The witness made no audible answer, but merely bowed in assent to the question. Mr. Mors.—l am glad to see that you bow in acknow ledgment of the honour ; but bows cannot be taken in evidence. Was it not presented to you for the interest you had taken in Mr. Ramshay's behalf ? The Witness.—Nothing of the kind was said to me. I will give you the inscription on the plate presented. It was ' 7 Presented to (myself) by Mr. Ramshay, his friend, as a slight testimony or token for the service's rendered to him in a state of sickness and infirmity." I have knows Mr. Ram,hay very intimately during the period he has held office here. Mr. MoNK.—Do you consider him a placid, good-teal.. perM man ? The Witness.—l do not consider him good-tempered or bad-tempered, but the average temper of men. Mr. MONK. —Not easily excitable? The Witness.—He is a man of strong feelings and opinions. Mr. MONIC.—I do not ask you whether he has strong feelings or not ; but is he easily excitable ? The Witness: I don't know that he is more easily ex cited than the average of men. Mr. MoNK.—And that you state as a gentleman $ your opinion? The Witness.—l do so. Mr. Morts.—And if on your oath, you would state the same thing? The Witness.—l would as my opinion; and I believe, more than that, I should be more easily excited than Mr• Ramshay. Mr. MONK.—You are not judge of the County Court yet, Mr. Stone. You say he has these strong feelings and strong opinions ; do they lead him to strong expreS sions ? The Witness.—l don't know what you mean ; those terms, strong expressions, are so equivocal. Mr. MONK.—You don't; very well. Does he use strong expressions sometimes ? The Witness.—l don't know what you mean by those words. Mr. MoNK.—Very well ; I won't demur from your opinion ?_. 'The Witness.—l am not aware that it is so, or that ha makes use of stronger expressions than the ordinary class of men. Mr. MoNx.—Have you never known any instances in which Mr. Ramshay has suggested actions for damages; when parties were before the court, I mean. Mr. OvEtcs objected to so general a question : the rule had been laid down that the inquiry must be confined be tween August 25 and October 10. Mr. SOWLER also objected. Mr. Ramshay.-1 had much rather they be heard. Mr. MONK. 2 -Mr. Stone has been in court and heard everything that has taken place, and, therefore, it would be a waste of words to explain what date I was confined to. You understand, Mr. Stone, the date, and will noir please answer the question ? The Witness.—l have been there on a few occasions; One was the instance of a poor girl, or woman rather, _a woman who, in the evidence given, had b een ro bbed, literally robbed, by some one who had got money on her account and appropriated it to his own purposes; and Mr. Ramshay, as the evidence came out, recommended her to bring an action against this man for the money he had misappropriated. She said she had ilot the means, and Mr. Ramshay said, " Very well; if you have not the means, I will give it you.' The other was the case of Joyce which you have heard about ; and another was servant girl, who had been badly treated, and had not the means of bringing an action, and Mr. Ramshay gave di rections that the expenses of bringing the action should be paid out of his own purse; and it was done. In the case of Joyce it was urged he could not bring an action, as he was not one of the officers of the court, and Mr. Ramshay then said, " If you bring an action against this party, and the same facts are proved to me that are proved to-day, I don't know that I should be at liberty to give less amount of damages than the Act of Parliament enables me." I don't remember whether in the other two causes he confined the bringing of the action to, or recommended it to be brought in, his own court. I can not recollect whether one of those actions was an action to be brought by a servant girl against her former master and mistress. Mr. MONK.—Now, on the 29th of September you say= Mr. Ramshay was quite cool ? The Witness.—Yes ; with the exception of the time when the burst of applause took place. Mr. MONK.—Was Mr. Ramshay's manner then not only collected but cool ? The Witness.—He evinced such collectedness that day that I think other judges, under such circumstances, would not have evinced. Mr. MoNK.—That you would not have evinced if you had been a judge ? The Witness.—l think I should not have been so col lected ; that is my impression. _ _ Re-examined by Mr. SOWLER.—I never saw Caldwell with reference to the drawing of that lease ; he was not my client. My business was with the agent, and not with Caldwell. I have seen six policemen in court on one occasion. I applied to Mr. Dowling, the superintendent of police, for them, and that was either on the day or the day after the 29th. It was after the disturbances occa. sioned by the Whitty case that any policemen were asked for ; none were asked before. With regard to one of those actions suggested by Mr. Ramshay, the judge paid £5 out of his own pocket because the party was poor. r have not seen Dr. O'Donnell this morning. Mr. SOWLER. — This, my lord, closes the case. Mr. Ramshay, (addressing the Chancellor).—Some of the causes tried before me have been referred to, and I wish your lordship to see my notes on these causes. Mr. MONK objected. When these notes were called for, notice having been given for the production of certain documents, they were refused. The AssEssoa.—lf that notice had been complied with, then they would have been received, you mean ? Mr. Ramshay.—They were never asked for. The ASSESSOR.—The notes, in truth, are not evidence at all. Mr. MONK.—They would have been evidenee if we had called for them. The AssEssoß.—And the other side had assented. Mr. Ramshay.—We are not trying an action, my lord? we are but sitting as a court of inquiry. The ASSESSOR.—We had better hear from Mr. Sow ler what his application is. Mr. SOWLER.—WeII, then, I tender the notes, and I wish it to be on your notes that they are tendered, a nd that Mr. Monk objects. Mr. Ramshay.—l have tendered these notes, as I wish them to be in the hands of your lordship. One more observation, my lord, before I retire from court. should not wish to volunteer myself as a witness in nil own cause ; but I wish to put myself here open to cross examination by Mr. Monk on any point connected with this matter, if he chooses to ask me any questions. The Earl of CARLISLE.—I understood you had ex pressed an anxiety to become a witness ; and that you , were not called upon because your counsel, who has con ducted your case with a great deal of ability and zeal, had advised that you should not give evidence. Mr. Ramshay.—l merely tender myself as a witneSS , if Mr. Monk chooses to ask me any questions. Mr. TINDAL ATICINSON.-If your lordship recollects , there was an article in the Journal, referred to yesterdalf which was to be read this morning, and I now wish to read it. Mr. Ramshay.—lt was alluded to, not for the purpose of being read, but that it might be handed in to your lordship. Mr. SOWLER.-I object to its being read, unless i t opens the other side to another reply. The ASSESSOR.-It does, but merely on that particular point. sooMnrir,MONK., m fr y lord, umdu I doing so. t t I o m ha u v s e t n in u t w er ta fe e r li s cl : tion that the rule is, when a party is represented u 7 counsel, he cannot appear by himself. Mr. Ramshay.—Yes, but Mr. Sergeant Wilkins beie_gt absent, and this being a matter of which I am cognise l ; myself, I have the right . to interfere ; and I may stag that I wish the article to be put in. The Earl of CARLISLE.—My impression is, that it wag arranged last night this article was to be given in and rea to -day. — aa That e i n s so, read th myl e following ord. extract fr°lll the Journal, of August 30 : M 1 ‘ I r r.. M AT ° : I K. /4 The . " A little event of our own has got into general historY• . 01 1* small affair of Mr. Ramshay has been found to involve marts,ri principle, namely, the responsibility of judges of Countyor It is doubtful, when they misconduct themselves, whethertiPio are amenable to any authority inferior to that of the Ingt a r- Parliament ; and it is no longer a secret that the Earl of Lord lisle, in his recent judgment, was guided Folely by tile __ al te Chancellor, and that the question of responsibility will ens the attention of Government. w ith Mr. Ramshay has returned to us, we rejoice to sal: , s is improved health and in better temper. The proceedin_gaire his court during the week have been of a nature to give e wer satisfaction ; and a perseverance in that mode and In„ the which befits his place and standing will secure hiMjl"osed commendation it is in our power to bestow. We aria isl: vas s even to hope that his opening address on Monday ' iv elaa' last effort of expiring bad taste, as it assured l y wag! a ~,„t s choly proof of his utter want of tact. It is amusing 14 .!:„a.. idle gentleman of Mr. Ramshay's parts, not to mention lulise rience, should be guilty of the folly of supposing that u ., _ ro ., threats of prosecuting the tradesmen of Liverpool cant f,ing yoke anything but laughter in the . public, or cause _r'est, but win to his friends. If he be wise he will let the Pe" and persevere in improved manners." othiog Mr. SOWLER.—I have only t o sa y that I have n to say upon that. Per haP5 Mr. Ramshay again rose , and observed, that is a adre o ' his lordship, before Mr. M onk commenced li. . _o f would allow him to return thanks on behalffo of nia. r the g res Mr. Sergeant Wilkins, and his counsel, THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1851,