The Express.
London, England, 1850-06-03 00:00:00

111.03 f ntelltecncr.

COUItT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.— BATos.DAT.
amines is hum.
Tun tannin e. °win.
Tllis twee-me befoul the eons' is the form of • speeisl
violist Salon epee the trial of a quo vrarranto, wlifok bed
bees teemed miasma& to William Owe. emliag apes him
teem by whet eethindityM esereised the !mein, of &eh
of the Gamey Comm el Merioasthelins. Assayer Ma bets
&sad by a. epeelel Vefdiet was this—that the ass had
=bees nod by ens Humphrey Vold Wiliam
bees removed by um judge kw inability, smiler the
Gath esetioa of the Comaty Cows Act. Tee inability geese
flrees:embarresemest is his circumstemess ; sad on his removal
Me elMembut was pat ism his plus. Oa the trial of the
quo warmers, he which Mr. Williams bad apersegi; the
jam/ found the specialverdict whisk wee DOW the
mart. ladies that the inability for whisk he wee
remand wee am • physical iaability. from Wag
k psYos er say other a .use, but simply from pecoutimy
uslierreseteent, end want of money to pay his debts. Ha
rementl was afterwasdo approved of by the Lord Chaamlier,
erbe, however, did not bur Mr. Williams.
TM Ausisey-Oeseral sow intended on the pert et Mr.
Willies", that Mu taability contemploted by Wet was
sot seek as was in this um made the groused of romovaL
It was tree that the clerks of the chanty courts were 's-
heeted with the receipt and melody of maxim; bed the
dlaadities which might arbor from three aireameganies were
@hoisted by the 44th section of the aid, which euipmeared
the Leeds of the Treasury to take security for aLL ems
width might be in the headed the takers of Ike stmts.
It might bo be Id that as the clerk was to be appointed by
W judge. subject to the Lord Chtinorlloes approval, end
le be removable by the judge for inability, 'ablest to the
same arpmioal, this court could not try the genii=
of inability over agaio, by quo warrant., in a ease like
this, is which the removalhad bees who by
the party competent to make it and afterwards approved of
by the Lord Chancellor. But in this case it wee seta :dent
to say that the proceedings before the Lord Chancellor were
entirely ex parte, Williams hsvicg had no opportunity of
appearing and oppcaing the continuation of his removal.
Sir P. Kelly, on the other slue, contended that the decision
of the Lord Chancellor was final, and that this court could not
sit in appeal from the decioion of that high functionary. In
additisa to this, he untended that • party is a state of pica-
Wary esaberrasuneet and hopeless insolvency was labouring
nailer 'mobility to perform lb* duties of as cake like that in
quietism. the incumbent of which wee (mewed, @streaked
with the custody of considerable sumo of money.
Lord Campbell, in deliveries judgment, Owned that the •
wart mess, is tins case, look to the facts which bad been
bend by the jury, as thou facts oosld alone be tb• foiseda-
doe of its pediment. Had the jury found any inability, be
should hue been of opinion that Um decision of the judge of
the County Court wu conclusive, and that this court should
not inquire by quo warrant* iato the deems of inability.
With regard to the approval of the Lord Chancellor, that
appeared to him to be • decides recognising the power of a
removal by the County Court judge, and sot as one giving
teethes vaidiry to that act. In cuts of inability the County
Court judge had power to remove ; ;but it was only in cages
of (ability, sad where doe power was exercised the, exis-
tence of inability mut be shown. In this cue the jury, se
far from finding the existence of inability, found, on the
other bud, that there wu actual ability, Williams having
performed all the duties of his office down to the time
of lie dismissal. They found that he bad been dismissed
foe an alleged inability, but that that alleged inability arms
simply from pecunlety embarreousents, which had produced
no eahmoorable effect epee his mind, or given Mae to any
other circumstance which prevented him from properly dis-
charging the duties of big office. Ms embarrassments had
not interfered to prevent his attendance. The aurae against
kiss, therefore, limp y amounted to this, that he was is •
mete of perm' iary embarrassment. Did this in itself consti-
tute an inability suffdient to justify the removal ? He
thought that that alone could not be so regarded. It woe
well known that the younger Pitt was, whilst he was adding
to the prosperity and glory of his coestry, in great pecuniary
easbarraasmento, from which be was relieved by a grateful
segantry. But these embarrassments were never regarded as
utilities him for the ex- miss of the high functions imposed
upon him by his w.vergige. He (Lord Campbell) was of
=ion, therefore, that *west in this MC must be for
Crown.
Mr. Justice Erle tioscuned, sad judgment accordingly.