The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-05-20 00:00:00

IMIIIMI

r 4 one ever heard of such a course being taken by any professional
'Eon as that of informing the person against whom he was em-
aloycd to issue a warrant, on which lie was liable to be arrested
criminally, that such were his irstructions .Mr. Taylor returned
o answer to the second letter, and the ildictinents were
&3011 after preferred. A circumstance wl.ich would show
that thee proceedings had been concerted by the defendant,
was afforded by an indorsement on the indictment of &inlay,
white it sould be seen the name of nmitli lied been writteu,
but was subsequently struck out. This showed, indeed, that
Smith • was not examined before the Grand Jury, but it war
equally plain front it, that he was connected with theprooteding.
When these indictments were preferred, • communteation was
trade to Mr. Taylor from Hollingborry, through the medium of a
person named Swayne, desiring tin interview, but this Mr. Taylor
declined; and it was then proposed that Taylor should give 3,000/.
so compromise the business. Mr Taylor's solicitor (Mr. Tatham)
finding that this was a negotiation of a criminal nature, lie, whether
with a view to prosecute the parties, or for any other purpose it was
not material to consider, thought it advisable his deck should
attend Hollingberry as a friend of Mr. Taylor. Thatelpartier met,
aid it was arranged that upon Taylor's paying 3,0,00/ Hollings
Ituy's clients, as lie called them, Howley and Smith should exc.
rate general releases of all actions and proceeding.. and that they
should allow the indictments to proceed, but that on the trial no
evidence should, be produced, so that Taylor might obtain his
aemit tad. In order to show that the terms thus offered by Honing.
berry were known to and sanctioned by the other defendants, he
(Mr. Scarlet;) had two letters, addressed by Hollingberry to Cap.
fain Swayne, the one dated the tnh of December, 11333, and the
other the Ilth, in which he stated that he had prevailed on his
client, to agree tothe terms proposed, but that they would not accept
a I ss sum than 3.000/., because they were well aware that if they
prove:tint to obtain a conviction they should be entitled to one-
third of Übe penalty from the treasury, which would exceed the
sum cffierran to be taken. The interview between Mr. Tatham's
deck aid Mr. Hollinghorry took place on the 12th of February,
18:,1, and another on the following day, when the latter produced
two release", purpoeting to be signed by Bowles and Smith , Hob
hlngberry was very importunate to receive the money, but as it was
proposed to put him off to another day, he began to suspect his
scheme was discovered, and he then went to Mr. Taylor's house
and insisted either on having the money or his papers, but this
was refused him, and his conduct becoming very obstreperous, 14
was eventually turned out of the House. All that could be done,
then, was co pursue the indictments; for this he (Mr. Searlett) did
not blame him ; he had a right to do so; the consequence was,
that Mr. Taylor having pleaded his formal acquittal, and not rely-
ing on his merits, was brought to this Coutt to receive its judg-
ment. The Learned Counsel then mentioned the nature of the evi-
dence lie should produce to prove the facts, to show that throughout
Ho lingberry had acted, not as an attorney, but as a party in the
iniquitous designs of Rowley and Smith, and that he was to share
in their dishonest gains. This was a conspiracy on their parts to
extort money for their own ptivate emolument, and if he should
prose their guilt it was a species of crime which could not be too
severely visited by thensws of the country. He knew of no crime
113, was so monstrously wicked as that of ptrsor.s instituting
criminal proceedings with no regard to public utility or public jus.
tine. but with the infamous view of making use of the crises of
other individuals for their own private emolument. In times by
past there was an instance of persons haring been convicted of this
species of crime, and capitally punished. The instal ce occurred in
the time of Henry VIII., when a man named Dudley and anoints'
suffered death for their avarice and wicked rapacity. If he should
prove the guilt of the present defendants, they would most justly
deserve the severest punishment that the law coal I innia. Ile,
therefore called on the Jury to evince their detestation of the crime
by the verdict they should this day give.
Win. Samuel Jones produced the indictment preferred by BOW,
ley against the prosecutor at the Quarter Sessions, nt Clerkeowell,
on the Bth April, 4th George IV. rid which was rsmoved into the
Court of King's Bench, in Easter Term, 1823 ; he also produced
the indictment preferred by Smith against the same person on the
lUth May 1823:
Charles Molloy Westmscott examined by Mr. Ilaonnatox: I
was formerly the Proprietor and Editor of a publication called the
Casette of Fashion, which I disposed of in the early part of 1823
about that time 31r. Hollingbcrry introduced himself to me, and in.
vited me to dine with him at his chambers in Fumivars-Inn ; 31r.
Bartley was present at this interview; I had seen him frequently
before that tinte. and always considered hint to be a respectable
Mao, pursuing the business of his father, an auctioneer; Paisley
informed ma that he heel preferred an indictment against ore of the
gaming-houses in St. James's-street, and that he either had settled
it or was about to do io, hut 1 canr.ot charge my memory sith the
precise words. . I
The witness here appealed to his Lordship to know whether he
was bound to disclose a conversation which passed at a orirate
party.
His Lordship said he was.
Howley, lioningberry, and Smith, were at the dinner,naral, while
I was there, I discovered that the reason of my-being invited was
to obtain from me some information respecting the houses of 'faylor
and Fielder, it beirg known that I had written a good de:l on the
subject, and that Fielder had applied to this Court, but without
success, for a criminal information agair.st me for a libel. flolling-
berry stated that his intention was to prosecute Taylor for keeping
a gaining-house. One of the party (but I do not remember which)
numbed which was the best mode to obtain an entrance into Taylor
and Fielder's boosts. I gave them information relative to Fielder's,
but not ever having been to Taylor's, I could only tell them that I
'understood there was great difficulty in gaining admission, it being
It • yto obtain an introduction. Smith said he had experienced
that difficulty. Howley and Smith professed it to be their intention
to proceed against both, and that Hollingberry was to roam them,
The latter observing that " they were rich, and could bleed well."
They said they knew an Irishman who had been into one of the
houses, but upon whose services they could not depend.
-Crose-examined by Mr. Coxwow SEIWEANT.—I war formerly
Editor of the Gazette of Fashitm, which was a weekly publication.
Is do not believe it is published now ; certainly I am not the cell or
of ir. I have got my living for the last two years by the publica-
tioowf various wanks. One of those works is the catalogue which is
selling outside hornets t House.
Mr. COMXOX SERGEANT—It if • sham catalogue, is it not?
Witness—l should not say so, and I think you are wrong in
Sitying so.
It has been before this Court before, has it not ?

Witness—Not the present one. -
It is profitable to you, is it not, beyond the mere Lewitt profits of
the publication ?
Witness—l never received a bribe, either directly er indirectly, In
my life; and 1 repel the remark with indignation. (A laugh.)
Do you know a person of the name of Yates'
Witness—No.
Do you know a young artist related to an attorney in tl:c Temple?
Witness—Not to the beet of my knowledge.
Was there never an application made to you on the part of an
attorney in the Temple to keep his son's name out of poor cats-
torte?
Wltnies—Certainly not. I have been asked to notice pictures,
bat I never have received any money for doing so.
You mean, then, to swear that you never received TrAney from
Ray person either for keeping out of or introducing their names into
your catelogue ?
Witness—l certainly do.
Did you ever receive any money from Mr. Taylor ?—I bare tad
transactions with him.
Did you ever receive any money from him ?
Witness—Never by way of gift, either directly or ithreclly.
Have you not received money to keep his name out of the
Gazette of Fealsion 9
Witness—Certainly not. On the contrary, his name sass ex-
posed in it.
Did you not threaten Rowley that his name should appear in the
Gazette of Fashion jibe tin-weeded against Taylor ?
Witness—Certainly not. I receJect going to Fielder's, and I
stated that I had been there ; but I do not know that I ever said I
had gone there with pistols. I beg to explain. Illy life had been
threatened, and was in danger in consequence of the exposures
which I had made regarding the gaming-houses, and I certainly
did for some time carry pistols about me. I never said I had re.
ceived money from Fielder to keep his name out of the Gazette
upPozbion. i hail not seen Taylor for 18 months previous to his
being brought up for judgment ; but on that occasion I was at the
Cheshire Cheese, in Drury-lane, when the subject was spoken of,
and knowing as I did, something of the case, I expressed my opi-
nion of the severity of the judgment that was passed upon him by
this Court, and it wan in consequence of that that I am sobparned
here to-day. Many respectable persons were present, but neither
Mr. Taylor nor his attorneys were among them. I took a note of
the conversation that passed at Mr. Holliagberry's Chambers, in
my memorandum book but but my books soots after underwent a re-
volution. anti I dare say that book went with the re..t. I never
went to Taylor's in my life to Flee ; the exposures which I nude
were founded upon the best information I could collect.
Pray who were the persons who gore you the information upon
which you wrote?
Witntrss—l do not conceive that I am bound to answer that
question.
The -boen Cnirr Jos-ruck did not consider the point at all
relevant to the que,tion before the Court.
Witness.-1 think it was Hollingberry who said " these people
-were rich, and could bleed well." I have reason to believe that
Taylor will rich, but not by any any transactions which I have ever
had with him. I am sure I sob not the person who used that ex-
preasiea. -I lived in Jermyn.etreet about the time I went to the
dinner party. I remember sending to Rowley to come to me. I
bad-heard from his father that he had had some connection with
the gamieg houses, and I was desirous to obtain inforhation from
him ; I therefore reuested his father to tell him that I should be
harpy to see him. )ie accordingly came, and told me that be bad
pros:el:AM a person, and had settled it by a compromise. 1 ad-
vised him not to proceed against Taylor as he had done ageinst
other houses. as it was a dangerous thing, and the couzequenecs
Right be serious.
Did you mu advise him not to meted against your friend
vier ?—I have no hesitation in say in I did, et the dinner.
vier
by Mr. Jessoe, on behalf of the defendant
'h.—Thedinecr was in Mardi 1823 I either verbally or hy
eporieed Taylor on the following day of- what passed at the
Upon recollecion I beg to correct myself—l believe
wrote a note saying that en indictment was about to be
against him, but I did not say by whoa.
were you so reluctant in stating the conversation now after
constnunirsod it at the Cheshire Cheese four months ago ?
e a person, when in conversation with friends at a dinner
nut so tenacious of what he says as he is in a Court of Justice
his words may operate to the prejudice of those persons
names; he is obliged to mention ; and I think this is DO
idea that gendemanly feeling *Diet; ought to regulate

every man's conduct in society. I wee never in any gaming-house
when there was any play goingon ; I sea once in shown in Park- ,
lave which belonged to Fielder; I obtained admission by a strata-
gem
u hick I t insight WM quite fair to use against Fielder, berausel
wanted :.formation ii) order to prosecute hint. he having applied to
the Coon of King's Bench for a criminal information against me
for a libel in the Gtr-Tetie 111 Par/Jinn.
ite•exaniiind by Mr. SCARI.I.TT—When Bowler came to me
in eonecquence of toy message by his father, when he had informed
me that he bad indicted some gaming houses bemuse they had re-
' fused to lend Lim money, and that he bad afterwards received
money f one them by way of compromise, I advised him not
to proceed in that course, knowing that it was a dangerous one.
For the last 18 months before be was sentenced, 1 had not seen
31r. Taylor, but before that time I know lie had some dealings in
pictures. ET 1 had myself souse transactions with loin in that wag.
Mr. Brookes. an attorney of Lincoln's Inn, proved the Land.
writing of Ilnlii rgberry, who had served his time with him, and
to whose general good character and respectable connections he bore
testimony.
Two letters from Hollingberry to Mr. Taylor, apprising him
that two indictments were about to be preferred against him, and
requesting to be informed of the name of his protessional adviser,
were then rut in and read.
Peter Perry, the conductor of the Bow-street Patml, proved that
two warrants of the Lord Chief Justice were placed in his bandit,
to tyke Mr. Taylor. lie knew the defendants, who mine to him
for the writs, its they thought they could take Taylor early in the
moreang as he was going to Ascot Races. He was present at
Jterice Bayley's chambers when bail was put in ; aced all the de-
fendant's were present.
Crum-examined-11e never knew that Ta;lor kept a gaming
home ; he had heard of it, but he never went either to 511, Pall-
mail, or to Fishmonger's Hall, in St. Jamet's-street, nor to the
Watches, in Piccadilly. Mr. Hollingsberry put the warrants into
his hands. '
The warrants were then put in and read.
John Banks, police-officer, on the queen-square establishment,
proved that be had a warrant given to him by Hollingberry against
Taylor and the defendants. Told him they had another warrant
against him. Smith and Rowley accompanied witness to Taylor's
house, but they could not sec him, and witness left word that he
held a warrant against him. Witness was present when Taylor
put in ball at Judges' Chambers, and all three defendants were
pre sent.
Charles Swayne was called, but not answering.
Mr. ScattLETT eequeered that he blight be called upon his
subp.aa. whicit was accordingly done.
Samuel Stanlsnd, clerk to Mr. Tatham, formerly attorney to
31r. Taylor, examined—He knew a person of the name of Swsyne,
who made a communication to him respecting the two indictments
against Taylor. The first was Made on the eve of Thursday, the
19th of February, 11324.
Two letters front Mr. Hollingberry to Captain Swayne were then
put in and read. The first was dated the nth of December, 1893,
sod was to the following purport :
" Dear Sir—Having informed you the terms on which to settle
the two actions against Mr. Taylor, 1 hereby authorise you to
arrange the same with that person, and I undertake that toy clients
shall confirm it. I am, lee."
The other letter was dated 13th December, 1823, and was to the
following effect :
" Dear Sir—ln reply to your letter respecting the pleas that have
been put in, I beg to say, that there is sufficient time to arrange
that part of the business. I have now seen my clients, and had
some difficulty in getting them to accede to the terms I mentioned
to you, lent they say they must have the money immediately, as
the, well know that on application to the Treasury they would re-
ceive one third of the nun in which the defendant would be lined,
and therefore i would be useless for them to agree for a leis sum
titan one third of what that fine would he."
Witness did not know of any actions against Taylor by these
defendants.
Were any terms mentioned by Swayne to you for the settlement
of those indictments ?
Mr. Commox Sractaxo objected to the question. He con.
tended that whatever Swayne said to the witness it could not affect
the defendants. It was quite uncertain whether those terms were
what Hollingberry &Petted to or had authorised.
Mr. SCAR L ETT said he sltould be able to prove that the terms
mentioned by Swayne to the witness had been sanctioned by 1101-
lingberty. `
31r. COMMON SERGEANT begged his Lordship to take a note
of his objection.
Did Swayne State to you any terms which he was authorised
to propose for the settlement of those indletnients ?—A. No, he in-
troduced ate to liollingberry.
Witness then proceeded to state that this introduction took place
at Hammitt's'. chop-house in May's-buildings, St. Mertin'slatse,
on the 12th February 1024; Swayne knew he was Mr. Tatham's
clerk, but he ws4 introcluced to Hollingberry as the private friend
of Taylor. Hollingberry said his clients were willing to give tip
the indictments if Taylor would pay them 3,0001.; that he had that
rimming received a letter from them regretting that he had given 1
in that sum, because a ciressnistance had since come to their kpow-
ledge which would have induced them to require a .auch larger
sum. He further said, that an acquittal at the Court of King's
Bench would be much better than at the Quarter Sessions, and
that Taylor might rely on his not pr/cording further, for he had
settled such matters i^ the same way with other persons whose
names Ise mentioned, and they always found his conduct to be cog.
rect. The way in which he proposed to dispose of the indictments,
he said, would b: to let them be regularly brought into Court, but
no witnesses would be brought forward, and ellen Mr. Taylor
would obtain his acquittal for want of evidence. To secure this be
proposed that his clients should give separate releases, which to
would get executed the next day, and that he would also give his
undertaking to bold the money, which was to be paid into his
hands by way of deposit, until the acquittal had been obtained as
proposed. Ile wished the witness to communicate these terms to
Taylor, which he did, and on witness's return Hollingberry gave
him a draft of the undertaking he proposed to sign. Witness
seemed to entertain the pnieosition, and an appointment was made
for the following day. When witness went according to appoint-
ment, Hollingberry showed him two releases, which appeared to be
duly stamped and executed by Bosley and Smith.
The undertaking of Hollingberry was then put in and read.
Hollingberry gave witness a draft of a release, and desired him to
take it to Mr. Taylor and to procure the money. Witness was re-
quested MT Holliegberry to make haste, as his time was precious,
and that if the matter was not settled that day, his clients would re-
spire 5,001/. the next. Witness took the papers to Mr. Taylor's.
After some time, Swayne fume to rile. Taylor's, and said that Ho'.
lingherry was very impatient at witness's not returning; and soon
atterwaseie, on the same day, Hollingberry himself came and said he
was tr.fied with, that his time was Precious, and that if the matter
was not settled that day he should proceed to trial. Hollingberry
expressed a desire to see Mr. Taylor, but Mr. T. would not see hint.
Hollingberry gave witness Bewley's release to show to Taylor, that
he might see ell was right ; the other release he kept. Taylor
wished to see it, which witness told Hollingberry, who said they
were both right, end that he would let Taylor have it on his re-
tuning the other, or sending hint down the 3,0001. Witless told
him 'Jr. Taylor would not ply hint any money, and would keep
the peens to lay before the Attorney-General, and prosecute them
for LI conspiracy. Ile said lie would not go away without his
Papers ; Mrs 'Taylor then sent for.* uneatable, and he was imme-
diately turned nut of the house. Witness bad seen Smith write
orco, and lie believed the release now produced to be signed by hint.
Cross-examined by Mr. COMSION-SERGEANT—Mr. Tatham
is not any relation of Mr. Taylor's. Witness was never in'a gam-
ing. house In his life.
The LORD Crime JusTicx.—You will act right, young man,
never to go to any.
Wienesea—Sivarne was a friend of Mr. Taylor's. Mr. T. desired
witness to meet Swayne ; he did not authorise witness to negotiate
with the defendants. 'I aylor said he knew nothing of these men,
and he believed their object was to extort money from him, and he
therefpre wished witness to cooperate with Captain Swsyne to ob-
tain a knowledge of their motives, in order that he might prosecute
them.. Taylor told witness to obtain the releases, under the pre-
tence that he should lark at them. Swayne and witness went be-
fore the eirand Jury on the pees. at indictment. Swayne was in
Count on Tuesday ; he had not been subrened to attend to-day.
Witness believed Swayne lived at 25, Duke-street, Grosvenor.
square, which was a private house, and not a gaming house, kept
by Taylor. .
Re-examined,—Taylor said that Swayne had first proposed to
take 2.0001,
The signature of Howley to the release was then proved, which
was title wards put in and read.
Thomas Parker, of Lambeth, linen-draper—Remembered Smith
iving at Lambeth ; had sold some goods to him ; had seen Smith
in King's Bench, who promised to pay hint his money, and said he
expected to receive one-third of the money which Mr. Taylor was
" curl" for, which was 5,0001*
1 Mr. Ilaesore (Attorney) produced the °free copy of Rowley's
selialule, who had been discharged under the Insolvent Debtors'
Act, by which it appeared that Howley was indebted to Hollins.
berry in a sum of 230/. foe payments and acceptances, bat not for
any bill of costs for prosecuting the indictment against Taylor.
Croes-examined—Witness gather conducted the present praline-
' tion as attorney foe Mr. Taylor.
Mr. COUNON-SERGEANT sow addressed the Jury on behalf
of the defendant Rowley. It became his duty to address the Jury
on behalf of his client, and be conceived that, on the evidence be-
fore VICIT, it was impossible they could convict him of conspiracy.
With regard to the best count he thought he might not stir one
step to convince diem that he uses entitled to their acquittaL That
count imputed to the defendant the crime of having conspired
Brother 'he proeccutor, to eaten, obtain, and procure a large sum' f
--money front him to appropriate to their own use, and then of hav-
ing faheely Indicted him for that purpose.
The Loan Ciller JlGsTtcy avid these were not the words of
the indictment. His Lordship then read the words as set out in
the indictment.
31r. Comatose SEM:eV:ANT—But atIU it was equally essential
that lie should ask the verdict* of the Jury on the overt art which
was alleged, namely—of the defendant's havieg extorted money
falsely to prefer an indictment against Taylor, who, if he wire not
guilty of the crime tor which his client had prosecuted him, might
have appeared in Court to-civy to have given evidence in this muse.
'But no ; the falsehood or the indictment preferred by the defendant
Bosley, was completely negatived by the tact. that Taylor had
appealed, not as witness, but to receive the judgment of the Court.
and to be sentenced to one yee's imprisonment, and to pay a tine
of five thooeand pounds for that very charge for which the de.
fcndant was now arraigned before then, as having falsely made
against hint. On the part of every lover of morality and
foe to vice—on die part of every parent aad guardian who
regarded the peace of families and the happiness of indivi-
cluale—he would say, that whatever these Individuals esight

THE BRITISH PRESS.

have subjected themselves to by any conduct they migh
have subseeucutly pursued, they had, in the instituting those
procealings against the man, the gambler—Taylor, done a great
benefit to society. Who was this prosecutor? He came before
them convicted of keeping • oontmorlganting-house--a nursery of
every vice—a ban: to society—a common miteance, which it be-
hoved every good subject to oppose, and if puasible to suppress.
Mr. Taylor stood before them as a man whotit justice could not
allow to ea...cape; whose guilt was of that dye which merited and
received the severe but just visitation of one year's imprison.
meoraend a tine of 5,0001. Enormous as the fine was, it was
bat yin moderate to him, when it was remembered how many
thousands he had plundered his victims of, whose follies and
indiscretions were the materials by which he sought to work their
ruin to his own aggrandisement. It was not wonderful then that a
person of such a description should try to effect the ruin of those
individuals who should endeavour to prevent him from working
the ruin of others, and of pursuing Ins crimes to the destruc-
tion of the peace and happiness of whole families. lie con.
sidered those endeavours to be moat laudable, but it seemed
that the parties for sixth endeavours were to be made the victims of
this man. In his judgment pawns might be well employed in
exposing the enormities of these gaming-houses, and of bonging
their keepers to justice. But should the present indictment suc-
ceed, who would ever again make the attempt ? This was an effort
on the part of these panders to the vices of men to deter others
from enforcing the laws of the country against them. It held cut
a language of intimidation. It said. beware you do not attempt to
carry the law into effect; take care how you touch high. aid
splendid, and rich houses of gaming'; for if you eo, a charge of
conspiracy will be trumped up, and you sill be retaliated
upon with tenfold vengeance. But the present charge was of
a very peculiar description : it was that ales Hollingberry had
conspired with two of his clients to indict these men for the pile.
pose of extorting money. Now the fact was, that Smith preferred
his own indictment and Bosley his, but both had employed the
same attorney; but because they did so it was argued that they
were all three concerned in attempting to extort money from the
prosecutor ; and this was attempted to be supported by tha most
disgraceful evidence that be had ever heard exhibited before a
Grand Jury. But if this charge should succeed. only see what a
state of society we "tete in, when the law could not be resorted to
without being liable to be brought into a Court of Justice, although
the prosecution was for the benefit of the public, and to bring those
great public criminals to that punishment which the magnitude of
their guilt deserved. ta hen the penal statutes were enacted they
were intended to be carried into effect, not to remain a dead letter in
the statue bock. But those laws were only to be enforced by in-
formers; to designate therefore the conduct or informers as infamous
warts libel on the law. It was not to be aenied that these defend-
ants did a great public service by preferring the indictment against
Taylor ; but it appeared that Mr. Hollingberry had offered not to
proceed to trial upon his receiving a sum of money front that in.
dividual. Supporting this to be so, how did it affect Howley ?
And yet in what way could lie prove that Bosley was not concerned
in it, since all the persons who were in any way. connected with the
transactions were included in the present indictment ? It was not
an uncommon notion that three persons were neeessary to make
out a charge of conspiracy. and it might have been thought proper
to connect the names of Smith and Marley with Mr. Hollingberry.
But the fact of 3lr. llopirjeberry having been concerned in making
up the indictment with Taylor, by no means brought home
the offence to the other defendants, of haring united to extort
money in the first ins.ance, by preferring that indictment. But
what wits there to show that Stni.h and Bewley knew that Hot.
lingberry was making terms with 'Taylors What Mr. Honing-
berry said of his clients was no cvidente against them ; there must
be something at the time to show that they were co-operating with
him to extort money. He would state boldly, that supposing they
were to believe the whole that had been stated by the wieriessee, yet
Mr. Hollingberry could not fix his clients by his assertions. it was
not by hearsay, but by the testimony of incredible witnesses, that
such a charge could be sustained. Tlie releases did not even allude
:o any indictments; they spoke only of actions which were to be
compromised. Then what evidence had we of any gonspiracy ?
None but that of Mr. Westmacott, a man who in appearance
seemed to possess some talent, but who in every other respect was
one much to be commiserated, because by long habit he appeared
not to be aware of the very degrading nature of the transactions in
which he was engnaed. The ',earned Counsel then proceeded to
comment with very great severity upon the conduct and character
of this individual, and observed, that the idea of an anonymous
slanderer, string in his garret, and looking out for food to sate
hie appetite for calumny, was a picture that must excite indignation
and contempt in the breast of every honourable man. Then for
such a ene to spurn at the charge of taking a bribe, and to remon-
strate with Howley for proceeding against Taylor, at the' very
time lie was aiding them with his counsel at the dinner
table, presented a creature of the basest hypocrisy. If it was
true that lie did attend such a party, then his conduct was
most infamous; if it was false, then the whole case fell to
the ground ? Why was rot Mr. Taylor produced as a witness?
His Learned Friend Mr. Scarlett had said he did not wish to put
hint forward as a witness; no, he was too base a wretch fora wit-
ness, though he was s very good prosecutor, but if he had been
produced, many very curious lacts would have been elicited in his
cross-examination. Mr. Westmacott then stood alone, uncontirm-
cal by any individual whaisoever.to prove the conspiracy of the three
defendants. The transactions were distinct, and if O.: parties tic-
reeved to be prosecuted at all, they ought to have been prosecuted
separately. The Learned Gentleman then cotnniented on the
miter pans of the evidence, and warned the Jury from giving a
gond anti easy faith to those charges of conspiracy ettainat the par-
ties whose conduct might. hrve been perfectly consistent with in-
nocence, even Vail the facts alleged were taken to be true. He had
no respect for keepers of gaming-houses, nor for informers, not for,
compounders, but the question was here whether the evidence would
satisfy their minds in consigning these defendafits to irretrievable
ruin. It was not fur their crimes that they were punished. but
tor their public services had the prosecutor sought their degradation.
It would not be unreasonable to remind the Jury that there had
been eases of conspiracy where the verdict had convicted parties
who were afterwards proved to be innocent : it therefore behoved
them to deliberate well before they convicted the defendants. With
these observations he should leave the case in their hands—feeling
satisfied there was nothing which could bring home the charge of
conspiracy to his client.
Mr. Jessor addressed the Joey on behalf of the defendant
Smith, and
Mr. CHITTT On behalf of the defendant Hollingberry.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE summed up the evidence, re-
marking that unless the Jury should believe that two of the de-
fendants, at least, were guilty of extorting money from the prose.
norm-, they must acquit them all three, as the law requires there
should be at least two in the crime of conspiracy. His Lordship
then went through the evidence, and left it to the Jury to say, whir.
they the parties were guilty of a corspiracy, anti also whether the
indictments preferred by Rowley and Smith were „falsely" prefer-
red, that point having been raised by Mr. Chitty, although his
Lordship stated that it was not a material allegation in the present
indictment, and therefore rill not require to be proved.
The Jury, after consulting about ten minutes, found all three of
the defendants Grilly, and that the indictments were not falsely
preferred-

COURT OF CO3IMON PLEAS, TIII7I3DAY, 31.ty 19.

THORPE V. OISBORRE.

This was an action to recover a compensation for the keep, care,
&c. of a brood mare and filly, front the 17th of May, 11121, to the
12th of July, 1024, at Newmarket. The defendant had paid 1221.
into Court, but the plaintiff' demanded 1611/. Is. The mare had
been purchased at the sale of Sir Charles Bunbury, and sent to be
covered at Newmarket.
Witnesses were called to prove the manner in which the mare and
filly had been fed, and the rate of charge. It appeared that 10a. rid.
was charged for hay and grass, and is. for corn, per week. for the
hrat year, and one guinea to 245. was considered the usual charge
tw both for the next two yetrs.
One witness had gone to Epsom Races, and was called on his
subpoena.
51r. Sergeant Vavc mot addressed the Jury for the defendant.
Ile thought the plaintiff had paid enough into Court for the keep of
the mare and tiny. Much stress had been laid on the quality of
the grass at Newmarket, and the dearness of corn. lle did not
like witnesses from Newmarket—he wished fir fair play, but no
jockeyship. Of course the Races at Epsom were far more im-
portant to the witness who went there, than attending In a Court
of Justice.
Verdict for the defendant.

I I'nlin- -••
croca.el
f..4nith. --I
rule, army
meeting.
1 merely
{ prefevy%l 1
Why s
taring co
Btcause
i, t.s4le, is tv
wan hie
We. OMB 1111
' GO. sr the
i 1