The Express.
London, England, 1853-08-26 00:00:00

TILE CHARGE AGAINST MR. NORMAN

WILKINSON.

Yesterday having been appointed as the day on
which the Lord Mayor was to deliver hie decision in the
matter of the charge preferred by the East India Company
against Mr. Norman Wilkinson, of having been concerned
with a person whose name is unknown in trafficking for an
appointment in the gift of the East India Company, the
justice-room was densely crowded, as on the former neat
sions, with members of the Stock Exchangeonerchanta, and
other persons of influence in the City. Messrs. Lawford
appeared as solicitors to the East India Company, with
Mr. Clarkson as their counsel. The defendant was repro-
tented by Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Hawkins ; and Mr. Willes
appeared on the post of Mr. W. A. Wilkinson, the brother
of the defendant.

The Lsrd Mayor then proceeded to deliver the following
judgment :—This was a proceeding instituted by the East
_ .

India Company under the 49th Geo. lll.,chapter 126,which
constitutes the negotiation for the purchase and sale of
civil and military appointments under the company a mis-
demeanor. I have heard the evidence for the prosecution,
beeenae under the 11th and h Vizt., c. 42, it was my
duty so to do, seeing that the accused party carried on his
business within the City ; and by this statute, having
heard this evidence, I am of opinion that I have no juris-
diction to proceed further with the case. No evidence has
boss brought forward to prove that the transactions charged
en es offence took place within the City ; and in my opi.
talon this is indispensable to give me jurisdiction to act
further than I have done. I do not mean by saying
this to have it implied that sufficient evidence
has been given to satisfy me that the offence has
been committed if it had taken place within my
jurisdiction. lam not called upon to express an opinion
upon this point. All parties have borne testimony to the
honour and integrity as well of the gentleman against
whom the summons has been obtained as of Mr. Wilkin-
son, upon whose evidence it has been sought to establish
the charge. I entirely concur in the opinions thus ex
pressed, and it is due to the defendant ;that I should say,
whatever construction the law might have put upon the
conduct of this gentleman, if it had been proved that this
treaty, as far as it went, was conducted in the City of Lon-
don, I am quite satisfied that, until apprised by a friend
that such a proceeding was Hiegel, he was not conscious of
it, and that as soon as he discovered it was so he retired
from any participation in it.
Mr. Clarkson—My Lord Mayor,—The remaining portion
of my duty is of a much more painful character, and al-
though I am not without my forebodings of your lordship's
opinion, from what has already passed, inasmuch as it Is
the privilege of a person in my position not only occa-
sionally to disagree with my friend, but sometimes to dis-
agree with a higher authority ; and when I feel that I am
not satisfied in point of law that the decision that has been
come to has been correct, with every possible respect for
the authority of the court, which I am the first to say I
believe is desirous of discharging its duty to the public, not
alone to their satisfaction, with humanity and forbearance,
but at the same time, with firmness and sternness, if it
become necessary, irrespective of persons end places, except
when places are material for the subject matter
of the charge—l shall rely with confidence upon your lord-
ship's fun and earnest consideration of the reasons that I
shall adduce to you, why I venture to submit that your
lordship is called upon to commit Mr. William Arthur Wil-
kinson, under the 16th section of the II and 12 Vic.,
cap. 42, for seven days, for his contumacious con-
tempt of this court. Of course it is not to be
understood that I am dealing with Mr. Wilkin-
son in any other manner than as my duty. professionally
imposes upon me, but there is no difficulty to saying, that
whatever may be the reasons assignable in private society
for the withholding of any portion of the truth, of which
whole truth a man has taken his oath to deliver himself—'
I think I am justified in saying that in this particular
case I have used no stronger expression than is required
at my hands, and that Mr. William Arthur Wilkinson
for his contempt ought to be made the subject of this 16th
clause of the act of parliament.
Mr. Wiles then addressed the court on behalf of Mr. W.
A. Wilkinson, and stated that, notwithstanding the re-
marks which had been made by his learned friend Mr.
Clarkson. he could not avoid charging the East India Com-
pany with acting in a vindictive as well as in an unfounded
MUM' with reference to the transaction in question. So
fax frees his client and friend deserving the character which
bad been given to him, of being an unwilling and hostile
witness, he had attended when called upon to appear, and
had stated everything he knew relative to the al-
leged negotiation between his brother and the
party whose name had not transpired; all that
he I:ad refused to do was to disclose the name
of that party, and any person who did not feel some degree
of unwilliness in being brought forward to give evidence
upon a criminal charge affecting so near a relative as a bro-
ther, must be totally void of feeling. The part which his
(the learned counsel's) client had taken in the transaction,
so far from being discreditable to him, and only worthy of
being characterised as a subterfuge, would redound to his
honour and credit to the latest period of his existence. The
learned counsel proceeded at considerable length to argue
the law of the case, and submitted that there was nothing
in the act of parliament which would justify the Loral
Mayor in acceeding to the application.
Mr. Clarkson, in reply, observed that his learned friend
had gone a little oat of his way to impute to the gentlemen
who were prosecutors a spirit of vindictiveness. He regret-
ted the tone that had been adopted, because Mr. William
Arthur Wilkinson was the very last person who ought to
complain of the conduct of the E tot India Company. Mr.
' Wilkinson had been the source of a most grievous and
scandalous libel against the Board of Directors of that Com-
pany in the great council of the nation ; and, when called
upon as a witness, hail chosen to prevent the company from
having the only opportunity which the public justice of the
country afforded them of proving the falsehood of the asser-
tions which he had made.
The Lord Mayor—ln regard to the application to me to
commit Mr. W. A. Wilkinson for refusing to divulge the
name of the party who made the proposition to his brother,
lam of opinion that entirely fails. This is a special appli-
cation under the pacers conferred by the 16th sectioa of
the act. That section requires as the foundation for the
summons that there are grounds for believing that the wit-
ness is likely to give material evidence and will not volun-
tarily attend. Mr. W. Wilkinson's conduct disposes of
this altogether. Ile has always voluntarily attended upon
every occsaion, and has been examined to the mat trial
question put to him to determine whether I had jurisdic-
tion. He has frankly answered, and if from the want of a
venue its which the act is stated to have taken place, I have
no power to commit, I think, however, the witness has
reasonable ground for the course itursued.
The summons was then dismissed.
The following is the correspondence that passed brtween
the Directors of the East India Company and the Messrs.
W. A. and Norman Wilkinson. The two first documents
were objected to, and not received in evidence.
"East India House, 23rd July, 18-53.
" Sir,—lt being reported in the pnlcdie journals of this
day, that you have stated that an offer to sell an appoint-
ment in the service of the East India Company was made
to a brother of. yours, I am c ,mmantled by the Court of
Directors to request that }Oil will have the goodness to in-
form me if such report is eon( ct. lam directed further to
request that you will communicate to me the name and
address of your brother.—l have the honour to he, &c.,
(Signed) " JAstrA C. MxtviLL, Secretary.
" W. A. Wilkinson, Esq., M.P."
" 5, Bennett-street, St. James's, July 23, 1853.
" Sir,—ln reply to your letter of this date, I have to in-