The National Register.
London, England, 1822-11-10 00:00:00

IS THE MATTER OF GEORGE JARED.

Mr. Brougham moved fur the judgment of the Court on the
defendant, declared guilty in the Alaster's report of having
practised as an attorney in the name of one Thackery, an attor-
ney, contrary to the provisions of at 22d of George 11.
Mr. Brougham, nu a former dav, brought the matter before
the Court, and the Judges referred it to the Master, who decided
chiefly on the following fact. It was slated that Thackery re-
ceived from Jaques • guinea a week for perm:salon to practise
in his name. 'The charge was denied, hut a book was produced,
in which ennies had been made of the money alleged to hat 43
been paid. Out the motion of the Master, Thackery wa• struck
oil the Rolls of the Court, and Jaques in this instance appeared
to receive punishment fur having eltereieed the right of au
attorney. 'the affidavits imputed a series of acting by Jaques,
in the name of Thackery, fur his own benefit.
The defendant appeared in Court.
Chief Justice—You are the person named Jaques I—Yes,
my Lord.
_ . . . .

Are you aware of the application that is made against you ?
Yrs.

Then you are to allow cause why the Court should not com-
mit) )nu.

The defendant wished to have a long written defence read.
Chief Justice—llave you any affidavits?
The defendant said lie had very lung affidavits, and be was
led to believe the Court could not get through them that day
lie complained that it bail been referred to the Master. It
was an alleged offence arising out of a particular statute, and
the Court ought to have decided it.
Mr. lliougliato said, the defendant's Counsel, .111 r. Scarlett,
consentA to go before the Master.
Chief Justice—There is no doubt this Court, in the exatnina-
lion of a matter of fact, could proceed by reference to the Master,
Mr. Ileougham then directed the attention of the Court to
the facts proved before the Nast..r.
The Lord Chief Justice observed, that the Court ought to
Lave the book before them %Inch the Master had examined.

Mr. Br:afghans then suggested that the matter might his
brought on again upon motion when the book was in Court.

The Lord eldefJuvtice—Let it stand over till to-morrow.
Jaques WAS ordered to attend to-morrow.

Mr. Justice Ilolrotd took his seat 111 is morning in the Hail
Conrt, and a great nutulier of actions VitfC justified without op-
position.

Re VOI:NG ats. r.l.Aciuronn.

Mr. Watford addressed his Lordship at considerable length,
and submitted that the bail could not be aliowed to justify, for
the following reasons the first place there had been a
change of attorneys since the commencemot of the action, ■nd
in the next place it was a Lail by Habeas Corpus, and the writ
ought to he annexed to the bail piece ; be submitted that the
present attorney bad no rii,lot to the returns, his name not being
affixed to the proceedings connected w ith the cause of /101011.
his Lordship ordered the writ of Habeas Corpus to Ice fetched,
in corder to ascertain whether he had that jurisdiction which Mr.
Watford contended was not rested in him, because if lie had
not that power he should be admistoing an unlawful oath.
In the course of the morning the writ of Habeas Corpus was
produced, when Mr. %% afford contended, that it was not pro-
cured by it.2,ilinsate Rumor..
Mr. Justice flulroyd said, that although the learned gentle-
man (Mr. 1Vallord) doubted Lis power, he should exercise it
on this ocartsion, and proceed to justification.
Mr. Watford said, that if such was his Lordship's determi-
nation, lie should nut oppose the hail, as his objection rested on
point.; ()florin which the Court had over-ruled.
int: KING, ON THU, PROSICUIIoN OF RIR T. CHAMTNFTN.