The National Register.
London, England, 1820-03-26 00:00:00

SUNDAY, MARCH 26, 1820.

question, he said h. believed it to he the hand-writing of
the defendant— it came to hint through the hands of Mr.
Bickersteth, a professional gentleman; it was in an enve-
lope which had been mislaid—he liadformerly looked for it,
bttt could not find its it was not sealed.; he did not look
at the envelope to see whether it had a post-mark on it ;
Mould not recoiled, gik,4e4p.ing reesigeak it ; theilati
I*e"ekuirtaliiiliiiTliehiliotis to item; iit nt•l'clY 011[1';
Birkersteth, to paA it to his. Wtep be received it, he
supposed that it we, intended that Isk elmatil publish it.
He sew it to several papers, and eflerst4e,fs saw it in The
Time., but mold not recollect when. The letter leas
dated the nil of Anvil', and he believed he might reolivo
it a day or trio afteresids.
. Mr. Tooke, an attorney of London, was then railed, and
proved the hand-writing of Sir Francis Burdett to the en-
velope.
W. Simpkin, the keeper of the toll-gateomer Kirfty,
bring ea11.,1, said, that he saw Sir Francis Burdett near
the gate on the 22,1 of August last. The gave was about
lOU yards from the 'louse of Sir Francis Burdett, He saw
him again the following day about the same• place. This
was in the county of Leicester.
The witness having retired from the box, was recalled,
and asked some questions by Sir Francis Burdett. He
did not know that Kirby farm was on the burders of se-
veral counties. He knew that it was lu the county of
Leicester.
Mr. Brooks waillealled Again. said, that be had in-

pod W.-,
witted the letter of Sir Francis ►IBA-deft in several papers,
and among others the British Press. This paper was pro.
dewed. When he sent the letter to tho newspapers the
publication was left to their own discretion. They Were
sot paid for it.
' [Here this letter was read, and also that addressed to
Lord Sidnunith ]
Mr. Sergeant VAT/GHAT/I stated that this was the case on
the part of the Crown.
Mr. I)rastatt then rose, and took a penal objection,
because the pubfleation had not been sufficiently proved
to have taken place in Leicestershire/ he was supported
' by Mr. Phillips, hut
Mr.Justiew Herr over-ruled the objection, tickling, how-
ever, that its weight, in case of a verdict of t udiy, might
be argued before the fledges, out a motion to set aside 'the
Aneviict. • , •
Sir Francis Burdett, before he proceeded to address
himself more particularly in the Jury, thought it neces-
sary, in the first place, to return his thanks to the gen-
tleman who had conducted the prosecution on the [tart
of the Crown, for the handsome manner its nhich he
had acted; air! in any observations he should have to
make respecting ex-officio prosecnitons, he beaged it to
be miderstood that he meant them to apply to the nature
of the office. and not to individuals. I-It should, how-
ever, have been glad, had the Attorney General been
present himself, as it was always most pleasant to hare
the person with whom one has to contend, face to face.
He must now observe, that he was placed in a very pe-
culiar situation. It seemed to be a doubt—a doubt even
in sonic measure with his limiship, win-tiler he agii
to be standing in that Court on the present charge. This
would not have been the case had the charge been
brought by indictment before the Grand Jury of the
coontv where the publication took place. He should
then ()Ave been saved miry unpleasant circumstances,
and the Jory would no: have been required to decide a
very doubtful question of fact. This would not have
been the case had he beets tried at ‘Vestiniiister, where
the offence, if there was any, was connuittcrl. Circ•iiii-
stances of a %Try extraordinary nature had ()centred at
Manchester, no which he felt it to be his .11111'10 addnss
his cotiaitilients. On those circ tenet's he should
afierwards have occasion to speak The leit-r lie
thought it his duty to write hail been made the sulject
of an ex-officio information ; and here he must observe,
that the power 4ex-officio informations had crept into
prae;ice in a manner contrary to lilt' spirit of the consti-
totimi. They had always Imen discountenanced hy the
greatest statesmen and the best judges. Sir F.lViniiiitz-
tote and Mr. Justice II vle were decide(ll% agantu
hecattzie tinyyq, were contrary to Magna Charts old 111,
spirit of the British laws 11111C01111tIll1111/11. The A i
General iv called an officer of the Crown, but he .I.surted
that he teas the officer of Adiniiiistration and nothing
else. Tile !cattier! gentleman who acted :here had gives'
various interpretati )))) sof parts of the letter, which, if
meant in he insisted on, ought, in fairness to 111111, to
have been explained as inttendoes in 'lir information.
The Attorney General (he spoke of the nature of the
Mike) wags a person looking forward for preferment. To
succeed, lie mishit be induced to become toe titbit unient
or persons woo hadsoine malignity to gratify.—
the Attorney GNteral was the creature of the breath,
and expires with the frown of aNI inister. The present
Was one of the ttttt st scandalous abuses of ex-oflicio
informations that mid ever occurred. lie !th0111(1 II Ive
expected that, in en ttttt fairness the quitsion) would
lust have been broti.,lit before a Graild Jury; for es-
officio btforma intssconld upon no principle he enrolled,
except lha of public safety. He would Ma th s subject
refer to Blackstone. Front what that author hail writ-
teit, the Jun might percene that he was no friend to
ex•officin p rosectit ions, and he intimates that hely
should only be resorted to in cases in tae punishment of
winch a ntooretb's delay mould be flange . .1 hit.
Was the only remain aiwgited its justification for surds a
course of proceeditia; but, in fact, ex-officio iishorroa-,1
sinus caused 4re.st delay; for he should ticve been tried

~~"~~-_