The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-02-22 00:00:00

FOR PRESERVINO THE TEETH AND GUMS.

rIABINET-NIA K E RS' 140 C lETY.—CHEAP
CABINKT and UPHOLSTERY, at the LONDON
REPOSITORY for the CABINET-MAYERS' /SOCIETY,
being the only real one now existing hi London, No. 71, corner of
LEADENHALL-STREET, opposite Alilgate Pump, anti which
has been established upwards of Six years. For Ready Money,
and no Abatement.

The Trustees and Committee respectfully inform the Nobility
and Gentry, that they still conduct the above Establishment fur
the Benefit of industnous and ingenious Mechanics ( who have large
families), by offering their Manufactured Articles in the Cabinet
line of the best workmanship, and cheaper than by any House in
London, no other profit being required than to satisfy the warehouse
rent and incidental expenses ; being satisfied with constant employ.
' incur to enable them to support their families, the number of whom
appear by the Books of the last Quarterly Meeting to be 148.
From the great patronage the Committee have received, they are
in hopes of increasing that number.
The following is a-Specimen of the Low Prices asked aU Goods
warranted : a. d.
Five feet Mahogany Bedstead, four.post 410 0
Tent ditto • - - - 1 8 0
Bordered Mattress to fit - 1 1 0
Mahogany Drawers with solid ends - 3 i 0
Eight Mahogany Chairs . . 610 0
Mahogany Petribroke Table - . 2 0 0
Feather 1, free from dust and smell.
from J:2 12 0 to 8 8 0
Drawing-room Sofa, from 63 6 0 to 7 7 0
both Bedstead 3 8 It
Mahogany llorae.llair Sofa 6 10 ii upwards
A quantity of Paper Hangings for Bed, Dining, atid Drawing.
rooms, at nearly llalf.price. The Trade will find it worth their
attention.
Houses Furnished at a fcw days' notice, and Apartments in a
few hours.—Goods packed free of expense except the matting.
Old Furniture taken in Exchange, Appraisementa in Town and
Country : and Estates valued.

COMMITTEE.
T.Corder J. WilAtou I J. Carter
T. Hasler J. Until W. Waghorn
THURNELLA, Agent. J. HASLER, Secretary.

SUPERIOR FOOD FOR CHILDREN, INVALIDS, AND
OTHERS.

• ............
-I;OI3INSON'S PATENT BARLEY, for making su-
perior Barley Water in ten minutes, and Patent GROATS,
for making superim Oruel in ten minutes. The Patentee solicits
attention to the following document :
(Copy.)
" Apothecaries' Hall, Loadon, Feb. 8, 1828.
" Sir,—l have analyzed your Groats and Barley Powder, which
you, having his Majesty's Letters Patent for the sole manufacturing
of the same, properly deroininate ' Patent Barley and Patent
01010%, I have no hesitation in declaring them to be genuine
powders of the finest Barley and Oats I ever saw. I consider It a '
public advantage. and of great importance in the medical world,
that, by your mode of preparation, a valuable, tine, mucilaginous
beverage and food may be obtained in a few minutes.
" I have also analyzed some samples—imitations of your articles
—which are ' warranted free from adulteration,' these I pronounce
to be compositions of different meals, consequently, neither pure
barley water nor oat gruel can be made from them.
4. 1 am, Sir, your obedient servant,
" To Mr. M. Robinson. " HIOBARD CLARKE.
Red Lion-street. Holborn."
The above testimonial. from a gentleman who has already Ten-
dered the public much service by exposing various deleterious mix.
tures and adulterations in articles of general consumption, added to
the recommendation of the Medical profession. make it unnecessary
for the proprietors to do more than state, that none are genuine'
which do not bear the words" Robinenn's Patent," the Royal Arms,
and the signature of" Mutts. Robinson."
Sold retail in papers of Ilh. and canisters of 21b., by most et.
reb
able druggists anti grocers in every town throughout the kin E oen ;
and wholesale by the patentee and manufacturers, Matthias in.
son and Co., No. 64, Red Lion-street, Holborn, London.

Sill:N(11ft PARISIAN FURNITURE.,
Costly and Elegant Clocks, Magnificent Assemblage of Porcc
Superb Bronzes anti Casts, Ancient Buhl Cabinets, Marqueterie
Cuntmodes, Matchless Crystal Chandelier, &c. &c.
Art. CAI3TY has the honour respectfully to announce
to the Nobility and ()entry, that he will offer w SALE by
AUCTION, at his (heat Rooms, No. BD, Pall. mall, on WED-
NESDAY, March 15, and tolluwing Days, each day at I o'clock :
an unusually grand and interesting assemblage of I'ARISIAN
FURNITURE; comprising armoires, commodes, consoles, and
cabinet!, in moern and ancient buhl ; richly decorated Frcbch
bedsteads and toilets, bronze, marble and scagliula tables, corbellles.
work-boxes, portfeuilies, caskets and musical insuumetits ; an ex•
tensive anti splendid assomnent of Old Seve, Dresden, and other
china, in vases, and items of taste, of great variety and beauty ; up.
wards of twenty magnificent clocks, presenting various devices, in
bronze and ormolu ; a collection of bronzes, casts, and carvings ;
several fine specimens of ancient marqueterie„ a magnificent24.light
crystal chandelier, and a variety of items of singular beauty and
.interest.
May be viewed tvro days pieced at by Catalogues only (at 2s. fal.
each), to be had at the Rooms.

- -
COFFEE and COCOA MADE: in ONE MINUTE
from the ESISENCE of COFFEE and COCOA PASTE,
sold by F. (GRAIIAM. at his Tea and Foreign Fruit Warehouse*,
owner of the Belle Sausage Inn. 37, LUDGATE-BILE, aced 16,
PIC KET T.ST REET, Temple-bar.
Cf /PFEE in bottle* 35., 3s. ltd., and 4a ca., and Cocos in ;Km
Is. end 2a. each ; Essence of Ginger and all other Spices. Is. tid.
per bottle; Pulverised Jamaica Ginger, prepared bean the interim'
of the root, in cases, Is. 2d. cash ; Prepared Chocolate in pun,'
ro. each ; Ilickson's Anchovy Paste, It. 64. a pet; and Orange
Marmalade, Is. ea. per lh.; Robinson's Patent Barley and Grosso,
gd. each ; Lard's Farinaceous Food, 1«. per packet ; the p. Ana.
ham's ,Patent Cocoa, 30. per lb., and Sassafras Cocoa, as. per lb. ;
India Arrow Root, 2a. 61 per lb.; and
India Preserved Ginger,
7s. per lb.: Tamarinds, 21. per lb. ; Portugal Grapes, Is. per lb. ;
and all Foreign Fruits at reduced prices. (iinger-flavoured Bar.
ley Sugar and real Pontefract Licorice Cakes.
111. B.—Free Labour Saga.

V HE. VEGETABLE TOOTH POIVDER h4s .F 0
1. long been In general use, thnt it is almost unnecessary to
offer any further peoramentiation of it. Composed of vegetables.
without the admixture of any mineral or pernicious ingredient
whatever, it is free from the usual objection against the use of other
Dentifrices. Its detersive power is just sufficient to arubibilste
those destructive particles which adhere to the Gums and the hater-
mice: of the Teeth ; healing injuries in the former, and proinotig
a new enamel (where it has been injured or corroded) on the latter.
It likewise imparts a firmness and healthy redness to the Gnms I
and if used regularly, will pteserve the Teeth in a sound state to
old age.
Sold in Boxes, at 2s. Pd., by Ruder. Chemist, 4. Cheapside,
ISt. Paul's; Savory and Co. I36,New Bond-street. London t and
by the principal Perfumers and Medicine Venders throughout the
United Kingdom.
IBa. :J eachTT it ;EE
ivs
very Of whom may be had.
n aRo'dssuperiorSILVER.IVIRED TOOTH BM'S
fragrant LAVENDER WATER, in half.
pints. at 3a. Pd.
•.• Be careful to ask the Butler's Vegetable ToothrOwiler.-
and to observe the name and riddress of " Butler, 4, Cheapsice."
are engraved on the Stamp attached to etch Box of this esteemed
Dentitrice, to distinguish it front Imitations undtr similar titles.

No. 3s, STRAND.
DETER FROST, OR THE POLAR LINLii:IST.
To draw a long bow is a Marinerliglini,
That is, to Imitate a most marvellout %tory.
A jolly ,lack Tar, who all dangers had sheet!
W i brave Captain Parry, a Fact thurtleclat'd :-,- •
Ice-bound timing *lnter, and little 10 AO,
We pnlish'd our Boots, and went forth to pursue
Amusement on shore ; but the frost so intense,
Induced us to build a snug hot for defence :
Now mind me,---mot long were we houti'd when we found
That all our jaw-tackle had run fast aground.
(tor words were all froze in the air !—'ds no joke.
And not a voice heard, although tv`rY man spoke.
'Tees strange, but not knowing whet then was the matter,
We thought Polar wistards set spell on our chum. .
hasten'il on board. Well. six months after that
The very same hut tn. some Esquimatte aut.
On shore as we etroll'd, and a thaw jue began.
When forth, talking English. they presently ran
You've been to the Strand,' they said. *judgmentnot Iseking,
your Boots are illumin'd by Warren's Jet Blacking '
These words by the natives were often repotted,—
When entering the hut oar amaze was completed.
For, thawed into utterance we heard the lull flow
(if sentences spoken there six months ago !
We breaded not a syllable, tongue-tied Kith awe,
A learn'd Polar !Angola to duel in the thaw.
And oft in the air while ere voices were clacking.
'f hi dissolving words pronoun ea • Warreii%Jet
The'Esquirnauttaught thus our langusge. and may
Behet4 Warreti's Waking," to Times latest day,
• Whatisionts Attlee Parry will guess, front the who(o,
Thar Whelan grafiltiown from the South to North Ptile !
TAN Huy tthining • and •Brillient IfLA ("CI NU; prepared bj
ROBERT. WARREN, 3U, Strand. London; android in every
Town in the kingdom.
Liquid, in bottles- 6d. Ifil. Md. and lied. sock. Also Paste
Blacking, in Pots, 6d. I2d. sad 181. each. A Shilling Pot o
Paste is squat to Four la. Bottles of Liquid.

1
jl 1

I

.`

PARLIAMENTART INTELLIGENCE.

11011 SE OF LORDS, TusinAY, FtsILAaT 21.

JOINT—STOCK COMPANIES.
Lord KING rose to present a petition from an individual 'who
complained of the Mexican Mining Company. The petitioner's
name vu Bernard Roca, and he prayed the House to order a Com-
luauce to inquire into the practical of Joint-stock Companies ge-
ncrailly.
SLAVERY.

Lord CARRINGTON presentad a Petition from Gsinehomagb
agunst Slavery.
The Bishop of BATH and W ELLS presented a petition from
*lse easy of Bath, signed by three thousand rums. who, his Lord•
allay observed, were very respectable. The petitintfers prayed for
the extinction of slavery by an early and safe course. They also
ruled that an equitable consideration might be given to such as
fright staler by the change.
1111 SH BANK-NOTES.
Mr. Tomlin", from the Treasury. presented an account of the
number of Irish Country Bankers Notes stamped from 1919 to
to 1823, distinguishing the quarters.
alr. Johnson, from the Office of the Chief Secretary for Ireland,
re..tented an accouat of the Number of 11.4nk of Irelsr.tl Note. 4 in
circulation from the 15th of February. 1819. to the I:ith February,
18'28. distinguishing the amount on the 1:oth of February, :Gay,
r►ugust. and November of each yaw.
Adjourned.

Mares appott- innod to the Girectors4 Auditors, &e. ; and at this time
very few of those shares were in the possession of those penons.
The petitioner stated that five ll:revert sold their shares at
,181. premium, making a profit of 3,6001. to each pertain ;
that circumstance was denied, and those gentlemen stated
that the account was much saaggetated. It was impossible,
however, to deny that those circumstances led to an en-
couragement of speculation and gambling. The Honourable
Gentleman said he wished very much to bear from his Majesty's
Attorney-General, whether it was his intention to subinik any meg,.
sure to the House on the subject. It was true that last session
' that Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said, if a fraud were corn.
' milted they were liable to indictment, but that observation would
attach only to original shareholders, and not to those who became
so at • subsequent period. The Bubble Act had been repealed last
session, and what was the consequence? Why, that the mania for
bubbles increased, sod was it not necessary therefore to inquire
who had caused the evils ? He ( flr. llobhouse) would beg to refer
to what had taken place in that (louse on the rabject of the South
Sea Bubble, when an address wee inured to his Majesty, praying
foe an inquiry. hoed Molesworth, who was a leader of the oppo-
sition of that day, moved that his Majesty would be pleastd to
direct Parliament to inquire Into the causes of the evil, and that
punishment might be Inflicted on the offenders; that motion was
carried unanimously. The answer of his Msjeaty George I. was,
that punishment should be inflicted on the individuals, and it was
well known to the House that such had taken place. There was
some difference in the description of persists in that case and the
one now before the House, Inasmuch as then the principal parties
were Member,' of that House; it was, however, quite clear that a
great evil had beets done, and quite necessary that an inquiry
should take piste. The Hon. Gentleman said he would not men-
tion the names of the parties char;;ed in the case before the House,
that would appear invidious, and he should therefore couclude by
wring that the petition be received.
The petition was then brought up : it was from Bernard Ross, of
Billiter.street, in the city of London, raying that the House
would appoint • Committee to Inquire into the conduct of joint.
stack companies, particularly that of the Mexican Company.—
Ordered to be printed.
COMMITTEE OP PRIVILEGES.
Mr. C. W. WYNN brought up the report of the Committee of
Prinleges,which was read. It stated that it appeared to theComrait.
tee that no Sleuth& should be called to attend other questions during
the sitting of Parliament. Several cases were then cited from
the records of Parliament, whereby it appeared that the Sergeant
at Arms had been sent to Courts of • Law on various occasions,
to demand that certain Members of Parliament should be released
from attendance, in order to enable them to fultil their Parliamen.
tary functions. Among others, Sir John Ivey, in the year 1606,
and Sir Thomas lliggs, in 1608, were thus summoned by the
Sergeant at Arms from the Court of King's Bench, to go and
discharge their duties in the House of Commons.
Mr. 'W. WYNN said the principle of the proceeding was so
evident from the Act of-Parliament, that he thought no Cmn-
mittee could in future experience any difficulty in acting on the

pr;%::ege. At present it 'might be 'sufficient in expressibe eon•
cum nee of the (louse in the existence of the principle.
3lr. CHOKER thought that a distinction might be taken on
the subject ; for the House ((tight not be considered abstractedly
as a High Court of Parliament, though it etas a particular
branch of it.

that amendment should he carried. With respect to the question
which had been proposed two years .ago by the Hon. Gentleman
as to the illegality of acting •ith cruelty towards a bull, he could
only repeat the opinion he had then given, that a bull wc. pro-
tected by that law. The circumstance Mated by the Honourable
Member for I)dver (Mr. Butterworth), relative to the pritc fight,
was certainly of a most extraordinary character, and he hid no he.
sitation in saylrg that it was an illegal assemblage, and ought to
have been dispersed by the magistracy. 11u11•bairir,g he viewed
in the same light, and an assemblage I-It:persona haring that object
in view laugh; also to be dispersed. He would not oppose the bill
in its present stage, though he would neither patrohise nor advocate
it; and he wished to state also, that his reason for opposing the
meaaurenpon a former occasion was, because he thought it by no
means calculated 'a secure the object at which it aimed; an be
believed it would have been the cause of many petty vexations.
(pear, hear.) The difficulty that be telt in agreeing with the ho-
nourable Bentleman was, that be knew not where legislation was
to stop in these matters. becalm he (Mr. Martin) laid down no
Principle for his guidance. It would he impossible to draw the
line if they were to legislate with reference to the animal and not to
the property. Some general principle should be acted upon before
they could discuss the propriety of anv particular or isolated mea-
sure. One thing, however, he could nut help remarking, which
was, that the Honourable Member came down to the House with
statements which, he doubted not, were fully believed in by him-
self; but which, notwithstanding, turned out upon examination to
be totally unfounded. (Hear, hear.) It was unsafe, therefore, to
make one or two individual instances the basis of great legislation.
11r. MARTIN replied.
After which the motion was agreed to without a division.
SMALL

- - -
Mr. SYKES, after a few observationv, which were Inaudible in
the xallery. moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend the 7th
and Bth of William 111., relative to the collection of 11111011 tithes.
Leave given.
!UR. KENRI(K.

Mr. DENMAN moved the order of the day for the consideration
of the Report upon the charge against Mr. Kenriek.
Mr. BUrrEAWORTH said that he had no feeling one way
or the other with regard to the charge against Mr. Kenrick ; but he
wished to ask a question of the Right Honourable Gentleman oppo-
site (Mr. Peel). He had heard that Mr. Kenrick had been ap-
pointed Recorder of Dover. and he wished to know if it was true
that he had bcco displaced from that situation by his Majcity's
Ministers in consequence of the charge against him relative to
Franks.

Mr. Secretary PEEL rose, but spoke in so low a tone of voice
that it was difficult to hear him ; we, however. understood him to
say that he was not aware that Mr. Kenrick had been made Re-
corder of Dover, but that at all events he had not been displaced
by his Msjesty'a Ministers. lie also expressed his surprise at the
question corning from the quarter it did, as from the Honourable
Gentleman's connexion with Dover he ought to be intiti.ately
acquainted with the transactions of the Corporation.
Mr. DENMAN said that Mr. Kenrick had not been appointed
Recorder of Dover at all. He had only been created If!gh
Steward.
. _

Mr. Kenrick's Counsel were then called in, and %Ir. Gamey
addressed the Hous.; ; 3lr. Holland declined doing so. Counsel
were then ordered to withdraw.

Mr. DENMAN rose, and said the period was now arrived when
it wee permitted to him in detail to expose the grounds and prin-
ciples upon which these changes hail been trade. in fact it was
absolutely necessary to do so, because it was impossible to conceive
greater misconceptions than had been entertained by several Gen-
tlemen in that House on the subject. He thought in bringing
these charges he stood there upon the best grounds of the Cotten.
tution. it was the duty of the two !louses of Parliament ,o over.
look the conduct of the Judges of the land, and in case it appeared
that any of them had acted unjustly, Or in any manner derogatory !
to the high station they held, it became imperative on Parliament
strictly to inquire into the nature of such conduct, and if the facts
were established against the party, it became them to exercise the
privilege that belonged to them, and to address his Majesty, that
the Judge thus implicated might be removed from an office lie had
proved himself no longer worthy to hold. It was well known that in
former times the commissions of the Judges were held for different
periods. It sometimes happened to be during the good pleasure of the
Crown alone, durante bent placilo, and sometimes during good be.
haviour, gunmdim belle se gesserint. Previous to and during the
reign of James the First, the former tenor prevailed. The Judges
were not only removable from office for misconduct, but at :he
will of the Crown, let their integrity be ever so great. The conse-
quence was, that ofterulmea by that very conduct which would en-
title them to the dignity of their station, they incurred the dis-
pleasure of the Crown, and were removed from office. After the
Revolution that practice was put an end to; and by the Act of
Settlement, 13 William 111, c. 2, the commissions f Judges
were no longer durance bens piaci:o. but guaradiu lute sit gesserint ;
but it was provided that on an address from both Housed of Par-
liament it should be lawful for his Majesty to remove any Judge
from office. In the first year of his late Majesty it was enacted, by
the earnest recommendation of the King himself from the throne,
that the Judges should continue in their offices during their good
behaviour, notwithstanding any demise of the Crown, which was
formerly held immediately to vacate their seats ; and when a pro-
vision was made for this object, there was also a clause particularly
added in that Act, declaring that it should be lawful for big Ma.
kitty to remove enyJudge from office upon an address for that pur-
pose from both Housesel Parliament. Therefore it appeared that
those preliminary attacks,which had been made against the charges
now brought forward, had been at best but thrown away ; because
It was quite clear that it was one of the great privilege' of the
House to inquire into any misconduct on the part of the Judges,
and whenever it was proved that any of them hod been guilty of
conduct that tended to disgrace the important office they filled, to
address his Majesty that they might be removed. That was the
tenor of the twelve Judges! of England. With regard to the eight
Judges of the Principality of Wales, their tenor was precisely the
same. They held their office by virtue of the 34th and 35th Henry
VIII, which settled the polity of the Principality on its total re.
duction by England. By that Statute the Judges to be appointed
by the Crown for Wales were invested with as full powers to hold
places of the Crown, and also the same powers in all actions real,
personal, or mixed. as the Judges of the Court of Common Pleas,
or any other Justices of' the kingdom then possessed by law. It
was perfectly well known that they exercised also the equitable jar's.
diction of Chancellor in Wales. The grounds of this authority he
could not ascertain, and he believed it was considered to be founded
in custom. Therefore it appeared that every Judge of Wales
was delegated with as extensive powers as all the Judges of
the Courts of %Westminster ; in addition to which he exer-
cised that enlarged and over-ruling equitable jurisdiction in Wales
in as full and unlimited a manner as wits exercised by the Lord
Chancellor in England. Surely these powers furnished sonic
grounds for the eye of Parliament to be watchful, and afforded seine
degree of right fur the conduct of those who possessed them o be
looked at wish jealousy ; there could be no reason for the liouee to
observe their proceedings with leas vigilance than the conduct of
those Judges who preside in Westmlnster.hall. Such being the
case, Mr. Kenrick came before the House as a Judge of the Great
Sessions of Wales ; he filled indeed, two characters, being a ma-
gistrate for the county of Surrey, besides another office, which he
represented himself, though as he (Mr. I).) had formerly shown
somewhat erroneously, to be holding, namely, tile Recordership of
the town of Dover. This, however, was not quite correct, for his
appointment, supposing it to have taken place, had not received the
approbation of his Majesty, which it was essential it should do
before the office could be considered to be filled. Coming, then,
as Mr. Kenrick did before the House, its these characters, cape.
cially that of Judge of the Great Sessions of %Valets, It was clear
that he came within the jurisdiction of Parliament. The meaning
of the Acts to which he had referred was clearly this, that the ap.
pointment of no Judge should be revoked. quatridiss brae se ges.
scriut, but that at the same time, that discretion which formerly
belonged to the Crown for the removal of the Judges, was to be
vested In the two Houses of Parliament, upon proof of the
unfitness of the Judge to continue in office. He therefore
apprehended that any circumstance that would formerly
have enabled his Majesty to revoke the patent of a Judge, would,
upon an Inquiry instituted upon facts established, and improper
conduct ascertained by the two Houses of Parliament, in whom
that power was vested, form the same grounds for removal now.
That being the me, he quite agreed with the observation of those
who had said that this must be a question o% degree. It was en.
tirely for the House to consider whether the charges partook so
much of crime, so much of scandal and disgrace, as to make the
person guilty of it no longer fit to hold his office. It was true the
House had not hitherto been called upon to exercise this power, be.
cause conduct of the kind now in evidence before them was not fee.
quent of occurrence. Its frequency, indeed, was rendered in the
highest degree improbable by the high moral characters of those
who so worthily filled the seats of justice. If the House, however,
were to refuse to go into an inquiry now, it would be to give up the
most valuable portion of the duty they had .o discharge. Now,
the question was, whether the facie In this case were of such a na.
Lure as to bring disgrace upon the office of a Judge, and whether
therefore Mr. Kenrick was a fit person to continue in the exercise
of its duties? In eerier to prove that Mr. Kenrick had forfeited all
right to the good opinion-of the House, and that he was a person
most unfit to hold the office of a Judge, he would proceed to ani-
madvert on the evidence that had been produced, and so eloquently
commented on by the Learned Counsel at the bar. It was trite
that the animadversions in the newspaper (the Morning Chronicle)
were strong, and were perhaps, as the Learned Counsel had styled
them, atrocious libels. But these animadversions were published
in the month of August 1824. Between August and November,
therefore, in that year, Mr. Kenrick had to consider the propriety
of melting an application to the Court of King's Bench for a cri.
minal information against this paper. Most undoubtedly it was
the duty of any man who bad the slightest regard for his character
to bring such an application forward. It would be a little singular
to be told of any Judge having made an application to the Court of
King's Bench for a criminal information against a person who had
grossly libelled him, in imputing improper conduct to his character
as Judge, and that that criminal information was refused by the
Court. Such Intelligence would certainly sound rather strangely
to our ears. But that was the fact in the case of Mr. Kennck,
and upon this some observations might be made. Perhaps he might
be allowed to revert to another fact, namely, that this same person
had prosecuted a poor labouring man for stealing a worthless slab
of wood not worth a shilling, and that he was acquitted of the
charge, and the cost of the prosecution refused to the Judge who
had prosecuted hint. (Ilea;' heir.) These were the two singular
positions in which a Judge had been placed in a Court of Justice.
((fear, hear.) In order to obtain a criminal information for a libel,
it was necessary that the party applying shoultedistinctly deny upon
oath every fact that was charged as libellous. The more atrucions
the libel the greater was the ease of contradiction ; the more atm-
eious the libel the more desirous was the Court to grant the appli.
cation ; the more eirocions the libel the weaker must be the

lrle
inteatted tithe: it
tist imputation
o IleOtrY
caseub,i7,Kwould
trei
wiurOdicoetf
uh:a
the
ehbi
dleu.etirthpa:ti :::::gtthanhl
htonwittunlehvi
tibieopie could
le
wit
ruaycitarnrilemtotiasohnoien,:njla, Iffit;:nrndfdniaoliivernEigTatiCtphd:ouaiin;ltn:
been printed and laid before the House, and he h 1,,d
en application for a
(Mr. Denman) looked with an
eyes for the eenteaofiajnat ul
puled. The first ard the last of it was thie—tt yo,--h;" °edit.
that poor man because you granted to get his isaar-n..etluil
but at the end of It he in general terms denied ot den
.„--,e'Rt;
motives. Had he made any denial that he pr • %drier
to get the freehold ? He made no such denial. DTA k 4 ^li.
of that poor manohe?trwialifle;eonbfluedFt
Franks
en
kt,iisomsui cohn
limit he did rot then or at any time expect to et - i'T
e e_.-
dtehneiaocl.c2iifeor
three:o°th.:
being rt:rdouwgihhton r huossa
not send the poor rob,.
son for four months ? Did he not deprive him of his emoTo- tn';
have him committed arroeg the worst of characters to Lel -7'1%
contaniinated, deluded. and ruined, for thin pu ; cw9ted,
newspaper said, for the purpose of extorting the freehold
And all this he never denied. Nay, in another place he a 5000,,, -T,'
fur if the House looked to the letter he sent to the Vlonifie'
was there mated that he had offered Franks another close t t
mitten he owned, but that he (Franks) declined tn tuban
'o °Tr;
that from that time to his corning out of gaol, he (Mr.golil
never made any application to him. He bought another
pit a
land, and had no desire then to have possession tio; j;‘,";
" otherwise than to get rid of a bad neighbour." Here, tide
Kenrick admitted that he wanted to get aid of a bad
and by this miserable dirty &lab, not worth a coulirf=s
on Franks's premise., which, in the minds of ch.ery mss
not excite any suspicion against him, it was that the effen:-,-
cotnplish this object was male. lie was happy that the deo;
lions had been read upon which the warrant ma granted, ar.sm:
entreated that the House would read them, for sure lie sal es- -
ally one. afer perusing those depositions, iruiy!
cence of Franks. he most be a man of wonder. The
Learned Gendennut then read parts of the deposition ot
the servant of Mr. Kenrick, who deposal to his having used rte
slab of wood on the day preceding its bring lost, and tlot iie sfLet
wards found it on the premises of Franks; but which the Ho..
pourable and Learned Gentleman stated dal no; an,„„,,t to ttto
slightest evidence, that be hi.d either seen the slab or knew of es
being on his premises. But if' he had seen it, what proof would itthr e
Unwanted to, but that sonic one or other unknown to hint the bah.
log a family of seven of eight childrer.), had put it there, with*
his knowledge or direetion ? Was it possible that such evidete
could have prevailed even against the moot infamous and diabetes'
charade" io the world ? both of which qualities, however, Mr. Kern.
rick had imputed to Franks OthoffOod veils it possible to suppes
that the liberty of all the subjects of this country was lobe at state,
if a piece of timber was found on his, premises of no value whom
alihough not found at all in his possession ? Ile ventured tow,
that not only the sligheet knowledge of the law, but the least tier,
rise of common sense proved that there was no case aping
Franks, lie did not believe there was any undue means lied ones
the mind of Me. Burgess, the committing magistrate: hot it vu
remarkable that Mr. Burgess made no affidavit in the Court of
King'. Bench, and had not been called to the bar of that Row.
It was stated in the Morning Chronicle, that Mr. Burgess cam,
mitted Franks with regret, but that he felt bound to do au, hewn,
the fact had been sworn to. Nothing but the infittewe of a judo,
that was the influence of authority and opinion, lie (31r. Denim,
did not mean to say that it was any improper lams,
could have induced a magistrate to have committed ape,
son upon such depositions as those before the lima
In all ills statements he (Mr. Denman) confined himself to thee.
formation lie had gleaned from the affidavits of Mr. Kenriek
self, filed by him when he applied to the Courts below for a nisi.
nal information. With respect therefore to the nature of theen.
dente brought against him, Mr. Kenrick had nothing to vampish,
and this evidence plainly convicted him of most inconsistent ex.
duct. Among the bad motives assigned to Mr. Kenrick byte
Morning Chroaiek was the wish to dispossess Franks of his fir,
hold. Now this Mr. Kenrick in some degree admitted. Iliad.
nutted that he wished to possess the freehold arid to get ride('
troublesome neighbour. To prove Franks a bad neighbour was tbs
object of many of his subsequent proceedings. There was a sisb
or piece of timber found on Franks's premises. and this eireurc.
stance was converted into a strong Imputation on his character. All
these little details were published in the Stamford News, and the
letter in which they were recounted was sent by 3lre.Kenrick. In
defence of the character of Franks, it deserved to be noticed tit;
the statements which appeared in the Morning Chroniek, in Am
vindication, were accompanied by small sums of money, the con-
tributions of charity for one who was deemed a deserving object;
and during this time Mr. Kenriek was inserting his libel in the
StanYbrd News ; at least he never attempted to disprove or deny it;
and the neglect of a gentleman to vindicate himself from a chirp
may be taken as an admission that he cannot. When commencing
his prosecution of Franks, Mr. Kenrick drew up what he called a
sketch of an affidavit, containing charges not one of which was at.
terwards inserted in his affidavits. He stated that ho had received
hints respecting the misconduct of Franks, and finding those tom.
plaints well founded, he consequently discharged hint from his an-
ployment. He also cruelly stated and amplified the offence of a
child of Franks, a little girl only ten years old. This offence was
the concealment of some trifles, fragments of silk and a pair of
scissors, which the child had hidden in her father's bed-room. Of
this incident Air. Kenrick remarked that the offence had been coat-
witted before the Act was passed for the punishment of abettor.
Was not this rousing the supposition that Franks himself was an
abettor of this childish theft ?—a sup posh ion at once cruel and an.
founded. But all these circumstances injurious to Franks's cha.
tamer had been already before the Court of King's Bench,
and were neither proved nor attempted to be proved ; aha
this was demonstration, accotding to the ordinary principles of rca.
seeing, that they were not true. Mr. Kenrick also stated that Frank
stole two fat Sher?, but that the gentleman who lost them, al.t
though he had aoundant evidence, was unwilling to prosecute.
How extraordinary that any one who could find evidence to con-
vict would decline prosecuting a sheep-stealer; it was indeed too
extraordinary to be believed. Time fact was, Mr. Peters had lost 38
sheep. but the suspicion that attached to Franks was of se 1113 k
and fallible a nature, dial time magistrate before whom he ess
brought rejected the evidence altogether, as unfit to raise a aims.
nal accusation ; it might indeed have availed two months {men-
sonment to the accused if he had been brought before Mr. Burgess,
but it Could nut have procured his conviction before a jury of his
country. However, the fact was that Mr. Peters afterwards found
and convicted the teal culprit, while ip the mean tire Mr. Kenrick
was diffusing the imputation by means of the Stamford News.
Sow it was a matter of great importance that gentlentea "hookt
not level accusations without endeavouring to ascertain their truth;
but in this case they were launched forth unceasingly, without the
slightest attempt to corroborate them. Again, Mr. Kenrick said
that he had no doubt that Franks had been in the habit of com-
mitting daily and nightly depredations on his property for the
lipase of ten years ; but where was the proof of this There was
abundant testimony from all sides of Franks's good character, and
Mr. Kenrick never produced a witness to prove the contrary. But
he would reduce Mr. Kenrick to a dilemnta. lie would ask filet,
if Franks had a bad character why withdraw the prosecution if
a good one, why publish a libel on him in the Stamford New!
Wily did he keep back the witnesses, after he had brought against
him so many charges ? Atter he had called his daughter a thief,
himself the abetter, a sheep-stealer and habitual depredator, yet in
time same page lie says, " for the above reasons I wished him to get
off" Now he (Mr. Denman) put it to the House weethes it was
not evident that 3lr. Kenrick only wished to get rid of his neigh.
hour. With this view he strove to induce him to plead guilty of
felony; knowing that Brier such a plea the poor man could
never return to the parish. Mr. Kenrick, In his letter to
the gaoler, begged to be informed " how Franks conducted him-
self," and added, " that the facet against him were so clear eft .t
ho could not hope for an acquittal," and to this threatening, polo-
he subjoined a promise, that if Franks pleaded guilty he wcull
prevail with the Court to mum a lenient sentence. Now ha (Mr.
Denman) could not conceive an instance of more flagrant injustice
than when a Magistrate endeavoured to make a man plead guilty.
knowing at the same time that the accused was beyond the danger
of conviction. But the answer of Franks to Mr. hentiek woe also
worthy of attention. Ile said, "He was sorry for the loss of the
property, and for the offeuce of hie children. With respect in the
timber, he knew nothing of it till he heard the accusation." It
was evident that Mr. Kenrick sought to obtain Franks's freehold
from his gratitude, since he could not have it by his conviction.
Nor did Mr. Kenrick deny this distinctly ? Among the self.
laudatory motives he assigned for his conduct, it would have been
f
well If he haul given a clear disavowal of this one. 'With all those
acts In view, it was for the House to consider whether This gentle.
man ought to retain the power of life wet death. The admi.
nistratiun of justice ought to be not only fair but satisfactory, act
free from all leaning to rank and fortune. It appeared to him that
whatever misconduct would suttice to exclude a man from an office
ought also to deprive hint of it ; and no one would say, if Mt.
Kenrick were now about to be advanced in a judicial capacity, that
the country would not cry out against his promotion. It was
strange to hear this styled a private investigation ; as if a Judge
could not incapacitate himself by tnisconduct unless he disgraced
the Bench openly, and before the eyes of the public. The feelings
of the public in this case were well known. Wherever he (Mr.
Denman) went he was generally accosted with the exclamatiee
" Good God! is Mr. Kenrick still to retain his situation 9" He
had heard it objected to him, that a lawyer and a person in a ju-
dicial capacity uuglat nut to have brought forward that modem.
With respect to the first objection, it appeared to him that no
one but a lawyer, who had the habit of collecting and simpering
the details of evidence, could have brought it forward; and with
respect to the second, he found that the administration or jusfce
had the effect of equally extending his sympathies to all station!
of society, and rendering him impatient of judicial tytatiny art
oppression. He would therefore conclude by moving," That It
appears to the House that the charges against Wm. Kenrick,
one of the Judges of the Great Session in Wales, have been
fully established by evidence, except so far as they impute to
hint an attempt to withdraw his prosecution of Franks on ru•
tence of his good character ; and that 51 r. Kenrick halt shown him-
self an improper person to fill his sintation ; and that an humhte
address be therefore prevented to his Majesty, playing that he will
remove time said Wm. Kenriek from his judicial situation."
The ATTORNEr.GENERAL said he did not stand there to
advocate Mr. Kenrick, but merely to state the impression on his
intuit with reference to the charge'. • He did not know how his
lion, and Learned Friend was justified In preferring one charge
and establishing another. He did not charge Mr. Kenrick with
malice in his conduct towards Franks, or at least his observations
were inapplicable. To prosecute with insufficient evident% we. no
proof of malice; it could not be the ground of a civil action, much
lee' of &criminal proceeding. But the evidence which weigh's' with

IW
or_
al e
omit
tt •
tom
'se;
r°Pll
Mk,
' say
40a1
It be
band
I ID%
'lnd I
ted,
?
ed
1.. t:
Pre.
apd
of
• 31f.
and
ele'd
0 ee.
rd ke
thu
iron.
's• std
dote
stet.
r Ho.
to om
!Huse
e hat.
'Mom(
ider.4
Kn.
UPPOIe
Meet,
latent
10 My,
t tine
meting I
sd Otte •
it WO
hot of
II Me. s
beeaoit
tud,cr,
maw,
flume,
a Pa.
) the it.
ek h st.
a attest.
'heat.
CDPlsiala
nit cot-
t by the
his fret.
lit ed.
rid ots
was the
a slah
et rem:.
ter. AU
and the
ck. la
red Hat
r, in Am
in the
deny it:
l theiwa charge
t l
eas sr.g
c a o
object;. ti
received
ce com.
his ern.
Ica of a -
nee was
Pair of