The Sun.
London, England, 1839-09-30 00:00:00

JUDGE.

Alderman WHITE said that he had a question to put
to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who occasionally
presided as a Judge in the Central Criminal Court. No
person in Court could pretend to be ignorant that the
Recorder had made some observations from the Bench
of a strong political tendency. These observations had
been the subject of comments in the newspapers of the
day, exhibiting a violent party spirit, and appeared to
him to be calculated to interfere prejudicially with the
judicial character and functions. In the columns of the
Times the remarks attributed to the Learned Recorder
were commented upon in an article a day or two ago,
and in terms of high admiration. That, however, was
not the point. What he (Alderman White) was desirous
to know, was, whether the Learned Gentleman had
given utterance to the sentiments contained in the report
of the Times newspaper, on which the editor had made
observations.

The Recorder not appearing at all disposed to notice
he question,

Alderman WHITE said that he had already shown the
report to the Recorder, and he would, if the Court
pleased, read it.—(Cries of No, no.) He requested that
the Learned Gentleman would say whether the report
referred to by the editor of the Times was substantially
correct.

The Lord Mayor Elect (Sir CHAPMAN MARSHALL)
said surely the Hon. Alderman could not mean that
observations made by a newspaper for party purposes
should be taken hold of as ground for bringing charges
against a Judge. Such an interference would be quite
intolerable.

Alderman VENABLES declared that nothing could
possibly be more inconvenient than the idea of calling a
Judge to account for what he considered himself bound
to say in his judicial capacity. He was sure that if the
Hon. Alderman had reflected a little he would not have
brought forward such a subject.
Alderman WHITE said that in all probability if the
expressions made use of by the Learned Recorder, or al-
leged to have been made use of by him, had not been
commented upon gravely in the Times newspaper in
terms of great praise, he would not have considered it
necessary to advert to them at ail. H.! pressed for an
answer ; for he considered that a Judge who made po-
litical allusions from the bench—

The RECORDER-Political ! How does the Hon.
Alderman know that my observations were political ?
The LORD MAYOR—HOW can the Hon. Alderman
question the motives of the Recorder for any observa-
tions made from the judicial seat ?
Alderman WHITE wished that his question should
be answered. He looked upon this matter to be one
of paramount importance to the citizens of London, who
appointed the Learned Gentleman to the situation
which he held. if I do not receive an answer let it
go forth to the world that the Recorder refused to
say whether he did or did not use certain expressions
attributed to him in the Times, whose reports have at-
tained a high character for accuracy.
The LORI) MAYOR—The question is one which it is
not at all proper to ask here. The subject may per-
haps be referred to when the Commissioners of the
Central Criminal Court assemble at the Old Bailey to
make their annual arrangements.
The COMMON SERGEANT submitted that the first
question was whether the Court were authorised to
take such a question into consideration.
The LORD MAYOR—The question cannot be put here.
The RECORDER—WouId it not be assuming the
power of both Houses of Parliament to interfere thus
with the functions of a Judge?
Alderman WHITE said he would give notice of a mo-
tion on the subject to the Court. He accordingly read
the notice of motion, which was expressed in terms,
taking for granted that the Recorder had made political
allusions, and deprecating any language of the kind
from the seat of justice,

There were strong manifestations of displeasure in the
Court when the motion, which was said by the Common
Sergeant to contain libellous matter was read.
The RECORDER hoped that, if such a motion was
brought forward, an amendment, calculated to meet its
merits, would he prepared. The motion was (as we
understood the Learned Gentleman) in the language of
the Globe, from which he concluded the phraseology was
adopted.

The LORD MAYoli could not think of receiving such
a notice.

It was here suggested to his Lordship to put the
question whether such a notice should he received.

The Loan MAvott was willing to take upon himself
the responsibility of refusing to receive the notice.
The Court had no right at all to discuss the question
of the right of a Judge to address what appeared to
him to be necessary for the ends of justice to be deli-
vered from the Bench.

The COMMON SERGEANT submitted to the Court
that the terms of the notice drew an inference con-
demnatory of the acts of the Recorder on the Bench,
and could not be properly entertained.

Alderman IN HITE-I look upon the subject as pe-
culiarly important ; and I only regret that some older
member did not bring it forward. I wish that Sir
Peter Laurie, whose standing has been sa much longer,
had introduced the question.
Alderman VENABLES—If it be incorrect in the Court
to debate on the question, surely it must be incorrect
to give notice of a motion. I have always deprecated
politics in the addresses of a Judge ; but I am aware
that it is not the province of this Court to discuss
the matter.

The LORD MAYOR said that Lord Abinger was a
Commissioner of the Central Criminal Court, and
that Noble and Learned Lord considered himself jus-
tified in making allusions to matters having reference
to acts of the Government.

1 he LORD MAYOR Elect looked upon any interference
of the kind proposed by the Hon. Alderman as an in-
fringement upon the independence of the judicial cha-
racter—a principle which formed a distinguished feature
of the reign of George 111.
The RECORDER declared that nothing was more dis-
tressing or annoying to those whose sentiments Alder
man White had recited, than the independence of the
Judges—nothing could be more distasteful to them than
that the Judges should act independently.
Alderman WHITE—The Judges! Why, the difference
is this—they formerly were the slaves of a Court, and
now they appeared to be the slaves of a faction.
An ALDERMAN said that the notice was rejected by
the Lord Mayor, and every word uttered upon the sub-
ject was irregular.

THE REV. MR. CATOR'S SERMON EEFORE THE COURT OF

ALDERMEN.
Sir C. S. HUNTER said that after the excitement oc-
casioned by the convetsation which had just taken
place, it was agreeable to call the attention of the
Court to a motion of thanks which he was about to
submit, to the Rev. Mr. Cator, the Lord Mayor's
chaplain, for the admirable sermon he had preached
before his Lordship, and the Court of Aldermen
in the morning. The Hon. Baronet regretted that the
Rev. Gentleman had thought proper to use the lan-
guage of condemnation towards two such advocates of
religion and morality as Wesley and Whitfield, but

The Dutch steamers are again allowed by the
Prussian Government to navigate the Rhine.

Secondly—lf my first cause of hope for the re-
peal be laughed at and ridiculed, the grave impor-
tance of the second must be admitted. It is this—
the Union was not a compact between two nations
or two Governments. It was not a bargain made
by Ireland, to which the Irish people ever assented
it was brought about by the most foul, flagitious,
and abominable means—no wickedness that ever yet
was perpetrated was spared in carrying that measure
—bribery, con uption, intimidation, annihilation of
all law, imprisonment, exile, murder. It is needless
to dilate upon it. Every crime in the catalogue of
human delinquency was committed' to bring about
the Union with England.—(Hear, hear.)
Thirdly—The next reason for expecting
the re-
peal is founded on the conviction that the Irish