The Express.
London, England, 1846-11-03 00:00:00

COURT OF QUEEN'SBENCII.

This being the first day of Michaelmas term, the Lord
Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Coleridge, Mr. Justice Wight-
man, and Mr. Justice Erle, who has been appointed to this
court, took their seats on the bench at half-past one o'clock.
Mr. Serjeant Talfourd and Mr. Serjeaut Manning were then
invited to take theirseats'as Quceu'a serjeants, and Mr. Ser-
jeant Murphy and Mr. Serjeant 13yles, who have received
patents of precedence; and Messrs. Humphrey, Bacon, Bolt,
and Walpole, of the Equity bar, who have been appointed
Queen's counsel, were called within the bar.
IN RE BOUtiFIELD FERRAND, Es a., M.P, CRIMINAL
rOILMATION.—Sir F. The-' r, Q.C., moved fur a rule
that should call on Bousfield errand, Esq., M.P., to thew
cause why a criminal information should nut be tied against
him, for having published two letters in the Times news-
' paper, one on the Bth, and one on the 10th of August last, re-
flecting on the character of G. C. Lewis,Esq., one of the Poor-
law Commissioners. From the statement, in support of the
application, it appeared that in the early part of the year
1842, the poor-law commissioners were confidentially in-
formed of certain irregularities in the administration of the
poor-laws by the guardians of the Keighl, y Union, in the
West Riding of Yorkshire, of which Mr, Ferrand was chair-
man. Mr. Lewis, therefore, wrote to Mr. Mott, the Assist-
ant-Commissioner for the district, desiring him to inquire
into and report on the truth of the representations so mi.de.
On the 23rd of April, 1842, Mr. Mott made a report, w Melt
induced the poor-law commissioners to issue, on the 30th of
April, an order for establishing an out-door labour test, and
for abolishing the practice of paying rents and giving relief
in money, without requiring work. Mr. Ferrand shortly
afterwards put a notice on the order-book of the House of
Commons, fur an address to her Majesty, praying that she
would command the poor-law commissioners to re-
scind their order of the 30th of April. In con-
sequence of this, a communication was male to
Sir James Graham, who directed that steps should be taken
for ascertaining the accuracy of Mr. Mutt's report. Sir
J. Walsham was accordingly appointed to visit the Keigh-
ley Union, and, on the 9th of June, 1812, ho made a report,
which confirmed that of Mr. Mott, and more especially those
portions of it which related to the irregularities in the
licighlcy Union-house. A committee of the House of
Commons was appointed in consequence of the motion of
Mr. Ferrand ; the accuracy of Mr. Mott's report was inquired
into, and ultimately a report was made which, while it anim-
adverted ou the too great generality of some expressions used
by Mr. Mott, stated that the very witnesses who had been
called to impugn the statement made by him respecting the
proceedings of previous boards, had, in fact, confirmed them;
that the general accuracy of his report had been confirmed ;
and that the fact of relief having been given by payment of
rent, and in money w ithout requiring work, had been made
out. In the month of August last, Mr. 0. C. Lewis
was examined before a committee of the House of
Commons, appointed to inquire into the administration
of the poor laws is the Andover Union : some inquiries were
made of him respecting the steps which had born adopted in
consequence of the notice of motion given by Mr. Ferrand in
1842, and, the learned counsel was understood to say, in his
answers he confounded Mr. Mott with Sir John Waltham.
Immediately afterwards the first of the two letters now com-
plained of, the authorship of which is admitted by Mr.
Ferrand, appeared in the Times. The letter, which the
learned counsel read, began by alluding to certain resolutions
condemnatory of Mr. Ferrand's proceedings in the matter of
Mr. Mott's report, and then launched out into invective
highly libellous, accusing both Mr. Lewis and Sir James
Graham of deliberate falsehood, and declaring " the Graham-
Lewis-Mott infamous report" a " foul and infamous con-
spiracy on the part of Sir James Graham and Mr. Lewis to
crush" the writer " in the House of Commons." The second
letter charged Mr. Lewis with " the most deliberate false-
hood for the purpose of deceiving the House of Commons "1
and accused him of prevarication, which, if he had been
guilty of it at a police office would hare caused him " to be
packed off in the prison van, and indicted for perjury." The
learned counsel then said that he moved on affidavits made
by Sir James Graham and Mr. Lewis, which distinctly
negatived the charges brought against them, and submitted
that in such a case the court could nut for a moment hesitate
about granting the application.—Lord Denman : Take a rule
to show cause.