The Sun.
London, England, 1801-01-26 00:00:00

Cl p rilAns.

Fab. John Braitirwsite, ni Watbrook, London, faelor.
Rithard Roger, of Newark-upon-Trent, Nottingiwin
*hire, rhilh,r.
George Alerc.life, of the Town of Kingstoh-upon-
de:fter.'
William Smart, of Birmingham, currier.
Villiana NLinth, Rnche ter, Kott,
Michael Itry.tn,'of Sheerness, };.ent, stopticlicr.
John Bailey, porter. merchant;

LAW REPORT.

COURT or KING'S BENCH,. S.k.t t“LoAY, ,lAN. 2..

Mr. ERSKINE mowed for leave to fil6a
Crimi-
nal Infortnation against 'Mr. Roberrßligh, a near
ielation ot'st Nohin Varl (the Fall of,l)mtwtav),
on whose behalf be iii,„ta it, and who, he said,
was under the painful nccesity of:ntaking this
application to.the Court,•altur every conciliatory
means, which was con3istbra' with tb goodness
and also the dignity of the Noble ,Earl, had been
tried, to re,tore a good uthlerstanding between
him and that Gentleman, and had been tried in
vain. 114 to Mr. bliksarwr recited some passages
out of certain Letter, in which. some: opprobri_
ous langnage• was direeled against the Noble
Earl,. and which he- had answered us had Kamm
his utukrstanding, rank, and prudence, the par.
ticulars of which ought not to appear until the
cast shall have been heard fttfly on both
Lord KENVoN said, that, unexplained, this
syttaa flagrant Case indeed.—Rule granted,
lug the Defendant to shew cause why a Criminal
information should not issue. ' • '

K tic V.

This wax' a Rule calling on the Derendant to
*hew cause why a Ciiminal Informarioi) Rhnttld
not be
.ftletl aijainst him, upon the application of
person of the name of Pratt, alledgtng, by his
affidavit, that Emoh had colleded at Yarmouth,
it t' the Lie of Wight, ‘viwrc Mr. Pratt is a Meal-
wan, and that Mr. Rusliworth, being a Magi-
strate living in that neighliourhond, was sent for
with a view of his exercising his authority to
quell the riot, or put an end to the turbulent
vroccedings of the mob, who, through prejudict
and .rnisguided foal, had direaed their fury

n
opolist Corn 4ea Flour ; and that the De.
fendant,. RushwOith, caoi there, • but that
instead of aa.ng-as sr Magistrate, he aced as a
party against it. Pratt, ,saying tr, him, in the
hearing of a mob of people, ,‘ You are a rogue
and havegiven more than Was
, necessary' far Flour—you have entered into a
" Combinari,:n with others to raise the price;
" and Tyon have. adalurated the Flonr,"4—
whereby he in-creased instead of allaying the fury
of the mob against,Mr.- Pratt, and by which he
was • put 'into dithger of his some of the
'crowd crying out that they wonld hang him, and
pull his mill down •i* that the mob followed and
hooted him out of tlta Town of Yarmouth. to a
great di'Aance, &C. to his great terror, &e.
wa., d Substance of the chaige agalnst
Mr. Rushworth. .
On the part of the Defendant, •it appeared by
affidavits that this happened in August last, and
that„the2,iotion for this Rule was,made only the
last day but one of the lasCretiii, -whichwas the
27th of November ; that during ~that intervA,
and even down to the prettent period, no one in::
dividual molested Mr. Pratt in his pectipationS,
which are thase of a Miller, Mealtnan,, and Ba-
ker, in the Isle of Wight, carrying an these
three trades at different parts of the.4lands; that
the; people who had gathered ,together at Yin._
mouth had indeed charged-,Mr.. Pratt with very
unfair pradice,s, and.,were Very angry with hitu ;
but that Mr. Rushworth was so far from inciting
,or encoUraging*them to Violence; that he exerted
all his authority in the best way
.he was able,- to
preserve order, and that for that purpose he de.
sired Mr. Pratt to•, go with him 'into the Inn,
which he, did, and there Mr.- Rushworth:expos-
tulated 'with him upon the impropriety of his
condu& in the purchase and keeping back of Corn
and Flour ; and that he was. so far frour profiting
by the advice giVen to him, that he tbllowed
Mr: Rusliwortb, into the street, and spoke to
him 'very provokingly ; upon which,Mr. Rush.
worth answered him with some warmth,", but by
no means in a 'way to, incite the, populace to any
violence against him ; that,' in truth, no 'actual
violence was shewn to him ; that he called for.
his horse and rode away, not so much as a single
person going after him forty yards out est the
Town, a few peoplettnlY hOoting as he 'passed
that as to the charge Of Mr. Pratt having adyl.
terated Flour, and given a higher price for it
than was even asked for some, the Defendant
protessed a readiness to .tender to him an issue
upon these fads, if Mi. Pratt 41 any inclination
to discuss it ; for that the Surgeon, and many of
the. Inhabitants of Yarmouth had sworn to the
one, and those who had Sold to hiM Meal at New.
port, had. deposed to the Lithe? ; and-that the gal.
ion loaf was 7d. dearer at Yarmouth than at Ly.
mington, the opposite shore.—That as 'to Mr.
Rushwbrth,. ho • aware most positively, he tad,
ther did, nor intended to do, any ihing'to injure
Pratt;Mv. that 'as to the Mob threatening to
pull down Mr. Pratt's mill, Mr. Rushworth had
the best interest in the world in preventing that,
for he was the Landlord of
It was contended, -on the part of 'MN' Pratt,
that Mr. Rushworth had mlacondated himself in
this.particular instance, although his contikt in
general, as a Magistrate, was , most laudable
that as to the, 'danger to which Mr. Pratt
was' -exposed, the Court would: not measure
that upon the affidavits of the parties ; neither
would the Court inquire whether there was or
W;18 not, any troth, in' the charges against Mr.
Pratt, whether he was a Monopolist or not, or
whether he adulterated Flour ; for that if he had
mixed ar,cnic,with ir, that would not be any an.
suer to this accusation'; for chic was -a complaitii
against Mr. Rushworth for partiality against
Mr: Pratt in the charaaer of, a MagisTrate.-r
The Rule was supported by. Mr: ERMINE, Mr.
tunas,' and Mr. ciAZELVY4

Mr. ERSKINE, among many things, said this :
cc I apprehend that a Magistrate, like any othtr
individual, must answer Charges that are exhi-
bited against him, only that the Court will take
(ate to psoted him if he does nor err. It is, in-
deed, the dirty of a. Magi:trate to do every thing
in his' power to avojd the distres-s of the Poor„
and to keep the peace of the Country ; the very
language of his. COMMiShiOTI includes this.-1 say
.11,,0 again, that there is in this Country a
scandalous traffic in the necessaries of life,
whereby the price is enhanced.—l believe
there is some scarcity in this Country,-hecau,c
I see upon the Reports of the two Houses tit
Parliament, that there is ; but ksay that no man
living can deny, that there is in this Country
such 'a combination of inhuman men, who avail
ahemselves of their own strengh by means of
Ilticre„in .the situation in, which they stand, by
Which the price of Provisions is greatly' enhanced,
.heyonti what they Would be if there were no such
Combivation ; but in proportion as there arc such
perpons, in proportion to the iniquity of "their
praOires, and the anger
,which they excite; should
;.Vidgistrates take care to provide, as far as they
'ard able,' against popular tumult, which we say,
Mr. Rushworth has not done in this case."
On the part of Mr. Rushworth, Mr. GAR It ow
and Mr. BOND contended that the Rnle ought to
be discharged with costs) because he had answer-
ed the whole charge fully, and because, if the
whole truth -had been disclosed at the time of
mOving for the Rule, the Court would not have
granted it.

, Lord Kexvox took a comprehensive view of
the subje4t, but for the detail of,whieh we have
no rootu at present. He censured the modern
dairine by which the oki Laws against Mono.
poly had been treated as musty records, which
ought to be digested chiefly by the moths that
feed upon them;---such flippant observations were
not the better, in his mind, because they might
be said a little wittily, nor more reverend, because
it might come, rom st Protium's Clint Whether

tEliies of Miller, Wlealimn, and Raker, shonid
be carried on by ono roan, be won't,' not presume
to determine, •ticttougth in the reign of King

of Tanner and Currier ought not to be carried
on by one individual. Whedierthq moticrn Kac-
tice of.dealing in Corn, or any of the-Necd*s.
sdries of `Life, to any atnount, be. the.enet of
That upon the mass of the People what it might,
should he covered by the magicwords " freedom
of trade," he knew not ; he was not wise enough
to alter the Law. Parliament would 'do whaz_
ever was wise and just upon all these-subjeas.—
He would not discuss these subjects. in that Aare.
His Lordship then went o‘er the merits Of
this particular Case, and wa: dearly of opinior
that no blame was imputable to Mr. Rushworth,
and therefore the Rule ought to be, discharged
with costs.

The oche! Judges colicurred.—Rtile dii,ch:Lrg
cd with COsth.

• Dunreas and 7. ihi-arr;;; con via ed of a des-
.
berate ASault on an Officer of theße..enue in the
due execution of his auty, were ,senten('ed to' be
imprisoned in the common Gaol of the County
of Cc;rnwall, each for two years.
.• .Eitthi and T. Dilflitall wercf sentenced for
another ofrenee °e a siniihar kind, btii not equal in
degree, to .be imptisoned.,in the saute Ciol for
one year. . e

,w