The National Register.
London, England, 1817-11-17 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Warrausrria, Nov. 1.
SIR MATRIX MIKES T. JOHN MORGAN.
This very protracted cause, which was fixed for a hearing
this day, was called in the usual manner.
Mr. Agar, leading Counsel for Sir Welkin, bring absent in
the Court of Chancery, and nut immediately arriving, Mr.
Blake, as junior was called on to proceed with the
plaint cue.
Mr. Blake then moved the Court for an order to put Sir
Watkin Lewes in possession of his estates, it appearing that
the ojiginal mortgages icon then. had heel' liquidated ; and
also for an order to compel Mr. John Morgan to pay into the
bands of the plaintiff the amount of rents and other monies
tee produce of these estates since the year 1894. The learn-
ed gentleman stated to the Court the facts on which he
gi ()waded his motion, and enumerated the legal proceedings
that had been had in this case for a great number of years
past. He Mated, that Sir Watkin Lewes, so ter back as
17/5, had obtained rooadea on certain deeds from Messrs.
Morgan and others. Mortgages were. afterwards assigned,
and in the year 1778, the Messrs. Morgans posaessol them-
selves of the estates, and Mr. Joke Morgan, the present de-
fendant, was appointed a reerker for the mortgagees, at a
salary. In the year 1783, Sir Watkin filed his original bill in
this Court, praying that an account should be taken of the
whole account, and that he 'tumid be let into the possesaion
of his estates, on paying up the amount in arrear. The Court
then appointed a receiver, and referred the accounts to the
Deputy Remembrancer. This was accordingly dine. In
1801, the Court Ordered a separate report tasitie made with
respect to the transactions of Mr. John Morgan. He did so;
exceptions were taken to it, and sebsequently allowed in the
House of Lords. The report was sent back to the Deputy
Remembrencer, who made another, to which exceptions were
again taken and allowed. In 1818. the Depitty Itentem•
hnorcer was ordered to compute the interest on a certain
sum of mosey, ind to set otl against it the rents and profits
arising out of the etudes. Ile accoriliogly again examined
and reviewed the accomits ; and from his report it appeared
that the whole of the original mortgage was paid Of in the
year 1814, and that Mr. John Morgan hail since received
4,9931. This report their lordships had confirmed. It there-
fore appeared that the original mortgage, by virtue of which
Sir Watkin Lewes, was alone dispossessed of his estates, hail
been paid off in 1891, and that since that period these estates
were forcibly held by Mr. John Morgan, who was only there
as a receiver for the Mortgagees, and not as a principal, for
the payment of a private claim fie had upon Sir Watkin.
Baron Graham.—ls your motion that Sir Watkin Lewes
be let into the possession of all his estates, settled tend unset-
tled ? You know that there were estates differently situated ;
there were estates in Glamorgaushice, Pembrokeshire, and
other places.
Mr. Blake resumed, and said that his motion embraced the
letting into possession of all; and for this lesson, that Mr.
John Morgan's connexion with them, as receiver, natal ally
ceased, when the mortgage under which he received was fully
paid off; after that he had no more right to walk in and retain
possession for his own private purpose than any other cre-
ditor. His private account was wholly collateral and distinct
from that under which he had been appointed teceiverosith
a salary. It was nionetrous injustice and nonsense for him to
attempt to convert a security, which hail been given for one
purpose to another never coeteinplated by the party origi-
nally giving it. The Court, tiropeily acting 'llion this princi •
ple, had ordered o separate report, which it would have been
useless to call for if a manifest distinction were not meant to
be drawn between Mr. John Mot ean's situation as a receiver
ands the mortgage, and a private creditor. This distinction
was clearly laid down in the House of Lords, by the Lord
Chancellor and Lord Redeadate.
Bat on Graham inquired whether Mr. John Morgan, though
originally receive' under the agage, had not been since,
on the application °isle W Atli Leo es, appoititi d receiver
a- art officer of the Court, and thus divested of kis original
sititatioil
Mr. Blake replied, that this was not the case. Mr. J. Mor.
gust had certainly been this oiled of his situation as receiver,
under the original contract, and another hail Loren appointed,
who rail away. Mr. J. Mot gait then repossessed himself in
that capacity, as under the first engagement.
Sir Watkin Lewes.—This is the case ; the receiver at that
I' • alit tech rim away with 6,0001. of my money.
Baron fit 4114111.—Mr . Blake's eXpliiiiililolll is important.
Thin, to t nth, iliVic is DO receiver by older of the Court.
Mr. Agar, who had just entered the Court, was livaid on
the same side w Ult Mr. Blake.
liarun Graham asked, whether it was not contended that
the present defendant stood iii the capacity of agent, not to
the mortgagees since Val, lint to Sir Watkin Les es r In
smelt a case, then, if au action a: law were brought against
it VIII for rents and profits, would he lint have a right to set oil
11.• claim on his principal! file lem lied Judge added, that
I: e_ should requite much argument to edify lure him of the
centrary.
replied. that the rlcfimdant could not take ailvair
til 4e ut its own wrong. Ile 11...1 no right to retain pos.essimi,
after Ina I, meter any circostusiance.
Mr. Datitieey, on the part of the defendant, solicited a
short time to prepare his reply to a subject that, lie submit-
ted, was very momentous and exceedingly complicated.
The Coort allowed him nitil the next open day.
rriilay, Mr. Danncey replied to the arguments of Mr. Agar
and Mr. Blake, contending that a final judgment could not
be gis en by the Court, swill the general report was made mit.
Or. Saturday, Mr. Nearby, un the part of the defendant,
Morgan, went over the amine arguments at great length ; but
th it a chum ge of pt ocrastination might not he fixed upon his
crew, lie was instructed to say, that if sufficient securities
woe given by Sir Watkin Lewes for the payment of any
sums which night Intimately be proved to be due by hint to
ist,,reae, possessiun °Nip estates would be immediately given.
Baron Graliani—•` What security can you have? Ton take
all a roan has in the would, and then say, give us something
morel—lt is idle to talk so."
Mr. Agar was proeeeding to reply to Mr. Naseby, when
the Court intimated that it must proceed to the criminal eases
and appointed Tuesday fur the final consideration.

RIISIBIAI4 SQUADRON.—ExtrAct from a letter from the agent to
I.loyd's at Gottenburgh, dated the sth instant :—" A Russian squa-
dron, commanded by Rear Admiral Ilollet, reported to ise bound to
Cadiz, consisting of five line-of battle sups, and three frigates, an-
chored in NA' ingo Sound, hating expezieheed heavy gales of wind in
the ('attegat ; they have susinined but little damage, with the los.,
however, of 6111 C anchors and cables. The INemiritti frigate, one
of the above three, parted company, from the squadron in the Cane-
pt. and some doubts are entertain... 4 for her safety, she not having
get gutchvi the appointed anchurat,e."

THE NATIONAL REGISTER.

TRIAL OF WARING.

The following is a fuller detail *an we before had room for
of the principal points of the croft-elimination of Mr.
O'Connor. The part relating to his creed we have already
given at length :
Were you ever in the county of Cavan ? I was ; ouly once
—How long !ago? I cannot tell in what year.—l tell you
it was in spring, 1814? I do nut know.—What brought you
there? 1 was brought there upon this occasion :—Michael
Oweus had been taken up fur fuming notes, or for some
dealing of that bind • his mother came, and said, her son
would be hanged if did nut gu and and say something fur
him at Cavan.

(By Mr. Justice Dalv.]—Did you attend at Cavan,
and for what purpose? l did attend, my lord, but did not
know for what purpose. She said generally to attend, and
I did not know the purpose.—You swear, that when you
went to Cavan, you did nut know for what purpose yon
went? No, nut when the woman came to me.—When yon
went to Cavan did yott know conceived it was to ac.
quaint the jury that he was acquitted of the robbery chat ged
upon him, and that he lised in my neighbourhood, I eon.
ceivwd his mother to say to me, that it 1 did nut say some-
thing of him [I will say ut hit character], he would be
hanged.—i Mr. Justice Daly.] —I Was going to ask you, %%lie
Bier you did not observe to her, that merely stating his being
in the neighbourhood would not he enough? My lord, I
told her I thought it would not ; but she was so very im-
portunate that I did not like to refost . —Then you tuld her
yoer goieg would be of no use? Yes, but she was so impor-
tunate that I did not wish to refuse.—Then yet: went? I
did; and at great trouble and expense.—Of course, then,
you took a powerful interest in the trial? No, not the least—
noire whatever. I neither knew the inan's lawyer nor his
agent—Were you esainined? I was.—Vere yen cross-
examined ? I cannot now say.—Did yon givo Owens a cha_
ratter? No, not what I should call one.— IV kat did yl7ll say
WAS asked if I knew Michael Owens ; I 3,1•41, I could
not
correctly say I knew him. I was then asked if lie was not
accused of a mail-coach robbery at my gate, (so the lawyer'
at the triafatated it; lie brought Cappagh-hill, which is ten
miles off, up to my gate, and I corrected hint.) —1..11r. Justice
Daly, .j—Were you produced as a witness on the part of the
Ciown ? No, my Lord. —On whose part? Ou the part of
Owens.—W' hat was the first question put to you? Whether
I knew Michael Owens ; and 1 answered that I could nut
correctly say I did.—Did you say any thing further i I did.
—What ? I was asked whether lie was a MAO Of goad
cha-
racier. I said lie had been accused of a mail.evarit re:, het v,
but had been acquitted, and that I nevi r heard any 'leer el,e
to his disadvantage.—[By Mr. Josticeepalyl Tli —cii vou were
asked as to his character? I was my Lori. 1 heard la had
been accused of passing notes robbed out of the mail. The
name ut Michael ()went{ was IRA mcutioned during the trial.
—k By a Jitter.) Were yon not examined to lilt Chitrileis r ?
I was not.--(By a Juror,) why I don't know. I ant not 5,_
countable fur the conduct of the lawyer.—Did you go to tLe
dock to that man ? By the virtue of my oath, I did nut.—
Did you go to the gaol to him ? Never —Did you thank hits
counsel fur his exertions? Nut that I remember. I might
have said something complimentary to Mr. Deering. I niet
him, and claimed consangutuity with him, my grandmother's
name being Deering.—Did you thank him for his exertions
I am confident I did not thank kiln, though I might have com-
plimented him fur his exertions.—What exertion could there
be for them:in, if his name was not mentioned? I said," Mr.
Deering you have shown great skill and ability," or to that
effect.—Will you now tay, that you did not feel an
iota of interest about the trial? I will say no such
thing : for I never saw a man, fur whom, till he was.con-
vicied, 1 should not feel a very lively interest. Such is my
disposition.

Now we shall leaveCavan, where you' wont in March, 1814.
Did you ever attend at Tina', for the purpose of being of
use to >liehael ()%% ens r Never.—You sw ear that ? I do.—
Now Mr. O'Connor, in 1816, you attended at Naas?—Yes, it
was in lelB.—Who desired you to go there ? At present I
(wool tell. I was served with a paper, but I could nut
bring to my recollection who served it.—Did yon guess by
whom, or for what purpose you were brought Here? I
could not conceive for what purpose I should be bruti4lit to
the trial of Michael Owens.--%t e dud you in the different
towns every time this man is tried—at Cavan iu 1814—at
Naas in 1816 —you attended there at the time you had the
conversation with Mr. Thompson i 111 1:0111•CIIIIVIMe
of a paper being delivered to yon? Ye...—But you cutout
recollect by whom,? No.—Did you rAtil it ? Yes. —What wits
it ? It was to call 1:11011 Inc to appear and give evidence for
Owens.—Did you guess what erideuve you could give ? I
',mid not furin an upinion.—Did you guess ? I might guess it
would 1m to give him a character.—Did.' on guess it ? 1 can-
not say.--At the time you got the paper, upon guessing it was
to five hint a character, were you satisfied in your own
mind that you conlil give him a good character? I was satis-
fied in my own pitied that I could nut give him a good cha-
racter.- Then yon would not_ give lino the same character
you did in spraig, 1314 ? No.—You would have given Imo a
worse %I ivueld.—Did you, when you went to Naas, apprise
Owens:: Cionhel or his agent nut to call ilium you, as your
evidence would net he of use to him? I did nut; I never
said a word about it.--Were you called ? I was.—Were you
examined? I was.—Were you cross-examined? Yes.—Were
cots examined to any thing but character? I was not.—Mr.
O'Contior(to the Court.) —My Lord I am anxious to explain
this. I dill go to Nita{ upon the summons, and I met
this g,enticietan, Mr. Thompson, at the stable door at the inn.
I kuew his pet son, but bad never spoken to him before. After
saying !something about others matter, " I suppose (said lie)
you ate corning here about Owens." ..I aiu. " To give him a
character:" " Ido not know; but if he thinks I will give
him a character, be is mistaken' for 1 will not." I was a little
testy at the time, and said to him, " I know you would have
saved me a great deal of trouble, if you had transported him
five years ago."—(By Mr. Justice Daly.)—You said you were
produced to nothing but character, and that you never com.
naunicated to ()wens's counsel or agent what you communi-
cated to Mr. Thompson ? I did not know his agent.—Then
being supsened on the part of the prisoner, you never com-
municated to those who subpanaed you, what you could
swear?—No, my Lord.—That is very extraordinary?
fact is so.—Then you gave in evidence exactly
what you said to Mr. Thompson ? Yes.—lt was intended you
should give him a good character, but you gave him a had t
why were you cross examined 1 was asked whether I knew
Michael Owens, and I said I could not correctly say I did.—
What character did you give him? I said some gentlemen of
the country spoke well and some ill of him.—Did you say
upon your oath on that occassion, that *heti you spoke
as you have mentioned to Mr. Thompson, you were joking?
Nut at all.—(By a Juror.)—Dial you swear what you said to

NOY 17

Me. Thompson was in a joke? I said no such thing.—(By
Mr. Justice Daly.)--What was the further substance of your
evidence ? What is your own opinion of the prisoner ?,Such as
will not allow of my giving him a character. Having said so
I turned about to the Jury and said, that I didaot dacha.
giving him a character from any knowledge wh h I Myself
had of his unworthiness. But, said 1,1 have an impression
on my mind which will not allow toe to do so. Besides it is
a good maxim steseitur a smile. Mr. Jebb begged I would
translate it for the jury, and 1 did," that a man is known by
the company be keeps ," and 1 added, that the prisoner kept
bad company. Mr. Jebb said to me, " Don't you think that
any person whom you wished to be hanged, or who you said
deserved to be hanged, would deserve a bad character ?''
" lie might." I said if you made use of such an expression
with regard to Owens, would you not consider yourself
hound to give a character of him accordingly? Certainly.—
Did you not say to Mr. Thompson, that Owens deserved to
be hanged ? You are on your oath. I said I never did ; and
that if I had, I should despise myself. Upon which Mr.
Thompson said, he must have misunderstood me.—( By Mr.
Justice Daly.(—The answer you gave to Mr. Serjeaut Jebb
was, that such a man would deserve a bad character, but
you never had any such conversation with Thompson as that
Owens ought to be hanged.' Did you say transported )—Av.
Rid yon tell the jr.ry even that? No my lord, I don't think I
did.

Let me ask yon, Mr. O'Connor, whether, after March. 1816,
you ever showed any mark of kindness to Michael Owens?
Never in all my life to my knowledge.—Did you know that
Michael Owens was convicted at the Commission here of a
capital offence? I did hear so, and believe it.—And that be
was to be executed ? Yes, as I heard, on the 29th of March last.
Did you ever propose to provide him with a coffin? Never—
You would call that an act of kindness? I do not know that.
should.—Did you ever giv c a coffin to a felon before? No.
Do you know a man of the name of William Allen? Yes.--
Did you ever ask that William Allen to lend vou a dray to
bring up a coffin for poor Nlichael Owens? Never.—Then
you dou't remember his saying, that his horses were killed
with ploughing; and you then saying, that you Would send up
Ned Cot r with a dray of your own? No ; and I would not
have suffered Ned Corr to go outside of my gate with a car of
I wish tin say a little about this coffia. John Owens,
Michael's brother, had been in my employment, and Was taken
up in the month of September lin- an alledgial robbery. I
knew he was innocent, but he lay in the prison six months,
when I bailed bins. After be got out of prison lie was is. great
distmess. He cask• no to mc, and said, he was going to his
unfortunate brother who was condemned, and that he did not
know what to do Miry him. I said I could do nothing, sod
could give him nothing. He said he must pledge his great
coat to buy a coffin. I said I had done a great deal
eady, and could do uo inure. He said there were some
windfalls in the plantation, and asked my leave to get as many
as would buy a coffin. I felt for the brother Jahn, and told
the creature, 'By ill means.'—You did not feel for Michael
Owens at all? Nu; they are men of very different characters.
.When did you first know, us when had you first reason to
believe, that convicted felons under sentence of death took
refuge in yonr demesne? I never knew it.- -Did you ever
hear it ? I did.—When did you first hear it 1 cannot say.- -
How many years ago? I do not know•.—wlio gave yon the
first information of it e Mr•. %Wade, the High Sherd' fur the
county of Xleatli.—Yon heard that in o whim were taking
.refuge iu your &memo.? I did.—Had you any reason to be-
lieve it? No; I had reason to believe the ellialEary.—What do
aim believe now? I can limn no belief on the subjeet.—Did
you poll s-lf ever tell any man thatyuu would set Savage, and
have him? No; never. The morning alter the robbety. I
lies rd that Savage was asleep in my woods, and I sent to John
who was brusher-imlaw to the gaoler of 'lron. I asked
him if he could be the means of securing one of the men ss
had broken out orTi ins caul. [I might have asked lb st whe-
ther lie Was seem ity for his tootherAo.law.J His answer
war, that he coui:d Hot get any one. I then said to him,
" %►'ben I eat my breakfast, I will go myse;f, and if I suc-
ceed is in seeming him, I n ill send to you." " Thank on Sit,"
said lie. The red book I hail in my hand was a:•y at lile, which
I was mailing, and which I ant now engaged in arising on.—
Did you send fur hint ? I did.—At what hour did yon eat your
breaktitsi that morning ? At My usual hour, about 9 o'clock.
--It was a sagacious think in you to take your breakfast first,
iii order to Imo you into Malt far the pos.:nit. Did yon cub
upon any Alagistrate w tutee c.pect to Savage at litery ? I did
told you that Savage was asleep .iu the demesne?
email not now trtl yoli.—Yon know now that Savage Wriiicon•
eviller' in tile robbery ? I hear lie was.—You cannot say who
toll you? No.—Was it a man or woman ? It was a man, but
I do not know who.—lle acid he saw him lyiug down in the
woods.—When was that? About e o'cluek.—Did you know
what Savage Was meant ? I heard it was the Savage who had
played the devil, and made a noise and disturbance at Dan-
gan-gwe the night before.—Did you know it was the man who
had woken gaol? J did.—What had Savage been doing the
night before? Riutilig and drinking.—Did you go to look for
him after you.ate your break-fast ?—I dad.—Was he theie ?
He was nut. if lie was I would have secured him.—What
words did you use about him to Allen—did you say you would
have him set No. I said I would secure him.—Yon had a
Bible in your hand ? Yes.—Did you mention the word " se-
crecy ?" No. Perhaps I might say "Don't say a word abont
it, and we shall secure him."—But what necessity was there
for imposing secrecy upon John Allen, nho was security for
the gaoler? I said I would ►ecure him.—Do you now believe
that Savage was in the demesne? I can form no opinion.—
After all you have read and heard, Mr. O'Connor, do you
mean to say that you cannot form au opinion whether Savage
seas concealed in the demesne? No. I have heat d it, but can-
not form any opinion about it.—You do believe what you
have heard :Mont it ? I do not disbelieve it. —Then you believe
it ? No ;lean form no opinion about it.—Do yon now believe
he was ever in the demesne? I believe he was amongst the
robbers. but not hiding in the demesne.—Do you believe the
information which was given to you? I did.—You waited till
after breakfast? Ycs ; I went home to breakfast.—You
applied to no Magistrate? No.—You made no other search ?
No.

Now how many bags did you find? I cannot tell ; to the best
of my judgment three or four large hags and a hundred small
ones.—Would it require a horse to carry them all ? I think not,
because three men carried them in a bog-barrows.—Did you
ever say there was a horse-load? I might ; one man could not
carry them.—Where any blunderbusses round? There was
one.—Where? Among the mail•coach articles.— What became
of it? I gave it to Mr. M'Nabb.—Was these any stamp or
mark upon it ? Yes ; it was marked with a number, seemingly
a mail-coach stainp.—Any other arms? Not that I saw.—Did
you read what was on the blunderbuss? Yes; lam sure it
was a mail coach mark, with some number cm it. —Where any
guns found found at your son Roderick's house/ 1 do not