The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-03-02 00:00:00

FASHIONAnLE INTELLIGENCE.

The Right Ron. Robert PeVI will have • grar.,l dinner forty on
Saturday, at M. house in Great Svatiliope.atreei.
The tarl of Westmorland entertained Vail Falmouth. and •
party of friends, at dinner on SuLday, at his house in iiroavosor-
•aqu 4F..
Lail Rivers arrived y emit! wilily house in Grovvenor.pinee.
from !O. ae: t, Ilarr Park. Newmarket.
.

Ihmagev Lady Nerve had a ...het party yotEnlay evening. et
her horse in Alhemarly-street..

tiNtersl floss eniertained a distinguished ratty at dinner !fester.
day, in his house in Portland. pla, r.
deals .Palm anti Ge.trge Ilentincs !etre arrived at their father's
(the Puke of Portland) in st../ames',i.smisre. from a tour
Gime! Raker. 11th Light Progoons. has arrived at the Rural
Ilatnl. St. James'.-street. from `lee lk:partiwes finm
ditto: Esq. M.P. for Cirencester ; J. .1. Iluest,
Esq fur his seat in %Vales.
A. Nun's, Esq. has left Fenton's Hotel. S:. Jame!, vmet, for his
/CAI. iieliTlAlll.h4l4lllt, Hants.
Captain Itillson, and Mr. Iticards, arrived yesterday at Ratl-
ine's 11014. Jormyn-street. from Southampton.
Loyd mod Lady 11. Cavendish, and family. are expected in town
IS Tlstnailay neat, fniat their seat. 1101kar. Lane.olme.
*Mimi% at Klrkham's lintel. Lower 14ronk 411 Tel Thu.
inas Cecil front his brother (the NlANuis seat) Itnr
Arti, Lincolnshire ; and tieneral IValpnio.

MR. CHARLES FLINTS PETITION.

To dio Rea the House of commons of the United Kiogdom of

. -
direst Britain and Iceland.
The humble Petition of Charles Flint, of l'ttoicter, In the
County of Stu/fiord, Bent.,
flheweth- -That your petitioner was, on or snout the month of
August, 18111, articled to his brother, Mr. Abraham Flint, of
Uttoxeter ahiresaid, one of the attorneys or hi.. lajesty's ("mint of
King's Bench, foe the term of five years, and bath now served op.
wards of four years thereof, anti in twenty-six years of•ii.e, or
thereabouts.
That your petitioner hath hitherto lived in strict observance of,
and in conformity to the laws of his country ; and bath at all times
been a peaceable and quiet subject of this realm. and bath not at
any , until the time after mentioned, been charged with, or re-
cant' of any breach of the peace or violation of the law whatever.
That previous to the 11th day of June last past, a person of the
name of Richard Staflierci Cook, together with his brother and
ageats, appeared at Staffrd, in the County of Stafford, and laid ,
claim to the title of laird Seaford and the Barony of S•afroril, and
also to ocrtain lands and estatrs there, then possessed by Sir fieorge
Jeniinginista ; ami in pursttanri of such claim took various tuna.
soma and proceedings, which were, by the 31agistratiy of the said
C y, and the generality of the inhabitants thereof, deemed un-
lawful and outrageous, and they formed the foundation of dillirent
proceedings In the Conti of Quarter Sessions. held at Staffonl,
previous to the month of October last past, and also in his Ila-
jes's l'oitrts at IVestininster.
That amongst such tninsactions, a person of the name of John
tt'ilkes, (*timed to be unreal u. the IMPie•Otiiill of, and to hold a
piece of land iv Stafford aftessuiid, under, and as tenant to the said
Itichard SiaNUrtl Cook, which piece of laud, and the possession
thereof, WAR also claimed by a perms' of the name of Joseph Pickier,
an tenant to the said Sir thine Jerningliant.
That dispunis arose between the said John (Yolks-. and Joseph
Piekin, in Tel:l4'l4 the posses,itin of die said piece of land, and
each of thrill rX(71.1..1.11 acts of ownership thereon, when on the
Ml' dm of June last past, the said John Wilkes having *0 done)
the said Joseph Pickin caused bun to he apprelieraled by the con-
stables and peace tinkers, as a person committing wilittl trespass
DO his land anti property, and to he conveyed to a newly erected
prison, or lock-np-lioutse there, although, as your rtitiolter sub-
mits the rase of the ssitl John 11 tikes, if in fact, a trespass, was
not within the statute of the I st licorice IV.
That in consequence of the proe..dings before detailed, and of
the apprehending and conveying to orison of 'bestial John If likes,
and the Interest excites' in the public thereby, numerous persons
assembled to ste'the said John Wilkes conveyed to prison, which
assembly formed the ground of the prosecution after mentioned.
That tin the said II th day of June, your petitioner was at Staf-
ford, upon professional Nuances, unconnected with the said It.
Stafford look, or any proceeding in relation to his clnim, to the din-
poten aforesaid, Ibv the order and direction of his brother and eni-
ployero and that at the time die said J. 11'ilkes was apprehended,
your petitioner WAS taking his supper as his lodging% in Shama,
quite ',tomato of such apprehension, and sinaripiainted with the
circumstances which gave rise thereto. and while so engaged he wits
applied to on behalf of the said John Waken (who was a client of
)o ir petitioner's ssid master and employer), and requested to go and
see by what authority he was sot apprehended and taken to prison,
whereupon your petitioner instantly left his said supper, and went
towatda ihr said prison, and met the constahlis with the said John '
Irilkes in custody, on their way there, when your peliti.mer, act.
ing, as he considered, as the profetsiiimal friend of the said John
Vi tikes, applied to the said constables, and r it;itestesl to see by
what uuthority he was apprehended and taken to prison, when they
requested your pditioner to %an until they had lodged hint in the
tomtit-house, and they would then produce same, and &sited your
petinimer (0 KO IS ills 1111.111 i.et that purpose, which your petitioner
did, and having inspected such authority as the said constables
produced, your petitioner returned to his said lodgings, and took
no part whatever in the said asseeibly, otherwise titan as aforesaid,
and in repeatedly requesting the persons there to remain quiet and
peaceably.
.I'hat in a few days after the said nth tiny of June, various per-
sons were charged by the low Agent of the said Sir l3eivege Jer-
nloghlint, before the Re,. Thomas 11.1iithy, clerk. one of his Ma-
jesty's Justices of the Peace, in anti for the said county, with a
riot upon the said 11th day of June, anti with obstructing the
officers in apprehending the said John tVilkes, when the said
Magistrate went fully into die snide plaint, anti dismissed the
MOM.
.

That no charge was then made af:ainst your petitioner by the
Raid Law Agent of Sir Renege Jerningliam, who, on the contrary
thereof, then declared that there was no ground whatever low in-
cluding your petitioner therein, and your petitioner was vercupon
examined as a witness fur the several other persons then charged.
That although the charge an made before the said 31agiatrate,
had been dismissed an aforesaid, and no charge had then been
made against your petitioner, yet at the then next ensiling Quarter
SISSIIIIIII for the maid ronuty 41i Stafford.; thesaid law Axon of the
said Sir IL Jerninghttin, preferred a Dill of Indictment, not only
against the several persona who had been charged before the said
51agistrate, but also against your petitioner, against whom no
charge had lien then math..
That titer pc.i.hster is informed, and verily believes it to he
true, that tarp ledicttacntwas preferred, and your petitioner in-
cluded therein, tinder the advice and direction of the Chairman of
the Raid Quarter Sessions, who afterwards pr Bided upon the trial
thereof.

That the said Indictment came on to be tried at thelsst Michael-
mas Quarter sessions held In and for the said county of Stafti.rd,
when a venlict of guilty was returned against your petitioner and
the other-defendants therein, arid they were each of them stntereav!
Ito three months imprismintmt, and to hard labour in his Majesty's
gaol for the arid Comity of Staflind.
That your petitioner, very humbly anti with great deference, but
yet with entire confidence, submits that the coin trial of your said
petitioner was not a liar impartial trial, and such a one as he was by
the las, anal constitution of this ,calm entitled to ; and that the
verdict of the Jury was against the evidence then adduced, and was
procured by the partial and improper condurt of I ieorge Chetwynd.
Esq. the Chairman it the said t,!atarter Sessions, who, together with
•he Itet..lnhn flare. were the only Magistrates who were present
thereat ; and that the sentence of the raid (nun against your said
petitioner, if he lint been guilty of the offence charged. was 1101
proportioned to or in accordance with the share ire part which your,
PClllttaner could by any weans be found to have had or taken in the
transaction isasmi which the said prosecution was founded, but that
the sAnse prneended from a feeling of malice.anal resentment which
the said Mr. Chetwystil had imbibed against your petitioner, and
horn prejudices conceived on aceount of the proceedings of due
said Richard Statford l'onk and hi. agents.
That your petitioner. with a view to submitting his case to such
consideeation and att i ttt advendon Air he was by the laws and consti-
tution of his country entitled to, caused an application to be made
to the Chairman of the Quarter Sessions, for a copy of his note.,
taken on the said trial, atui of his summing up to the Jury, which
be doelined to give ; hut your petitioner has, nevertheless, been
enabled to obtain a faithful report of the said trial, with a copy of
the indictment upon which the sante was had, which he submits to
the consideration of your lionottrable House, in the schedule here-
unto annexed.

That die said trial was not a fair and impartial trial, in proof
whereof your petitioner shews, amongst other reasons app. aring
upon the fare a the said report, that the said two Magistrates who
prodded thereat sullived themselves to he greatly prejudiced against
your petilionty and the said defentuita, by reason of the proceed-
ings of the said iti-hartl Statfunl Cook and his agerts, with whom
they erroneously ciaijectunml 'cur petitioner and 'heather deism-
&Mato be connes!ed.
That the said Richard Stafrwtl Cook also claims varituts estates
'in the ilahl county of Stafford, Mon riwesocti by some of the Ma-
gistracy there, who ni,ght be also, on that account, greatly preju-
diced Mott the trial of this ear.
. .

That'the ('hairsnau of the mid Quarry Session. summed up the
evidence, anti gave his charge to the Jury with great partiality,
omitting. until rt•niimied by your petitioner's Counsel, very nut.
serial evidence on his behalf, and isia.ang no comment or observe-
tioas thermal—but. oar the contrary, atrougly Mine:sing upon the
da tits the Jury his own conviction that yotwpetitioe or, at well as
the sad defendants, was guilty of the offence charged • designating
it its a tout outrageous breach of the peace ; and also in his mid
summing up totally abstaining front making a single observation
in favour of ;he petitioner, or any one of the mid &residents.
'Dud he also told the said Jury, in answer to the argument of
the petitioner's Counsel, that it did not appear that the petitioner
was acting as the preii-ssional adviser el the said John ;
wrereas ) ur petitioner charges that at a fact diwitictly admit-
feel by the Coursel her the prmniticm, in his 'Telling a the case, or
that your petitioner would otherwise have roved the ware, being
then prepared with witnesses FM' that purpom
That the said l'hairman very improve'', R.valed to the feelings
anti prejudices of the .fury, to obtain a verdict against your peti.
names and the other defendants. by observing to them that they had
tenants. or were tenants themselves, and that such proceedings
loosening the proceedings of the said Richard Stall-.ml Cook and
his party) to obtain possession of Sir tieorge Jerninghaites estates.
were 1101 to be toiciatted ; thereby connecting your petitiontr and
the other defendants case with the dispute,' and proceedings be-
tween the said Richard Stedroni Cook and Sir Goirge Jannis-
! limo.

hat the said l'haimum ntio-atated the law of the case to the
Jury ; hie that your petitioner anti the other tlefetldalits were in-
dicted far a riot, a rout. and orlawful assembly, three distinct
off nt es. of any one of which the Jurt ittizlit kart: found your peti.
'toner owl the other dclent'ints gushy.
That the law as applir tole to th- said three offences is different ;
but that the s ad t %airman stated the law as applicable to the lesser
or tumor etfence. ctiontly. that of an unlawful assembly only,
mut took the return of guilty generally front the Jury, without
having even turd what constituted the other two ~ti encesof a rout
and tint. Or without having called their attentirm to the difference'
in the said three offences. or the law as applteelde thereto.
That if the law as applicable to the said three offences hash been
properly stated to the Jury, and their attention properly called'
thereto, they aught have found your petitioner and the other it..
fendarts potty of an unlawful a wnhly mi.; and rout petitioner
humbly submits they must hare done so (it they had returned a
Veld,' t of guilty). and that there was no evidence to prove thew
guilty of the offence itfriot.
That :he 0011011 T passed upon your petitioner and the other the.
I fondants (being to hard labour) could only he justititd under the
:statute of 11 tiro. IV. e. III; and by their !wing convicted of a
riot, to to which ittlisoce the law was not mated to the Jury, but
I that applicable to an unlawful towerobly only, for which offence
the caul N:atute does not anthiwier the passing of sentence to hard
lahottr.

'l'hat in passing the said sentence the xsiil announerd,
that the sentenee to hard labour was for that the defendants had
assaulted the tainstahles in the execution of their duty. whereas
you' petitiencr charges that they were not indicted for ani such
ett:..nicei and that the sentence could not thertlhre be justified on
that Kr.nutd.

That the frclings and prrjudicis of the said 3lattistrates against

your petitioner and the other defendants, is further evidenced by
the sentence passed upon them, when contrasted with that of an-
other case of the same nature, tried at the same Sessions, wherein
the defendants were proved to have violently assaulted and beat the
constables, broke open the room where the pruumm were confined,
and forcibly rescued them from and out of the custody of the law
(a short report of which is alas annexed hereto, and humbly sub-
' mined to the considerati'm of your lionourahle house); upon
whmil, although the ofligice charged was so widely difrerent from
that charged against your petitioner, a much more lenient sentence
was passed.
alter the verdict of the Joey had been returned, your peti-
tioner, well knowing the fatal consequences that would follow to
hint front a sentence of imprisonment. as the sir • might affect
his health and vitiate his articles of clerkship, caused his Counsel
is, signify to the raid ('curt of Quarter Sessions, that your petitioner
was ready to submit to any fine which they might consider the jus-
tice of the case repaired to hue inflicted upon him, notwithstanding
which no fine was imposed upon your petitioner, but the sentence
aforrsaill.

That the said sentcnre was in effect doubly severe upon your
petitioner, when compared with iu effects upon the other der -M-
-anta, who were labouring persons. moving in a very dill-trent I,ta-
Ono and sphere in life to that of your petitioner.
l'hat utter the passing of the said sentence, your petitioner was
taken to the common gioil, and immediately divested of his own
clothing, and clothed in a gaol dress, and was classed and aro-
ciaied with vagrants and (dons, and the worst description of
offe-41ers.

That he was for a length of time after his first imprisonment,
and until within s short periol of its termination, refused permis.
snit to procure or have any other nourishment or food than the
gaol ullowanc-, consisting of bread and water and a few potatoes
;11l day, together with • little warm moll and water, the latter
which your petitioner found it impossible to eat or to partake of.
(To be continuo!.)