The Sun.
London, England, 1825-07-30 00:00:00

se-evicted, -as he bad been, of an armee of such magnitude
*oat A fell within the limits of those that were ordered by the
hw •to receive capital !punishment. He should not properly
discharge that duty which he owed to the public justice of the
country, if he permitted the prisoner to entertain any hope that,
leis sentence would: be remitted. The prisoner had not brought
forward any person to give any account of his previous con-
filet, nor had he shewn that by any unhappy circumstances,
ever which he had little or no controul, he had been reduced to
.skie necessity of doing that which had placed him in the dis-
graceful situation in which he now stood. Many other persons
s,ight have pleaded in excuse--so far as such a plea could be
;en excuse in such a case, .that they had been driven by poverty
to commit this crime; but even of that excuse—poor and weak
as it was—the prisoner,-it seemed, could not avail himself. His
l'.i.ords,hip would not-now do mate than simply allude to the pro-
, which had taken place early in the morning, and which,
tat for the accidental almence of a witness, must have gone far-
t•,er. What.might have been its result, it was not for hire to
sly. Unless .the prisoner could shew any thing that wcnrld prove
t'ie public justice of the country could be satisfied by an
atievition of the punishment, or unless he could produce some
circumstances that could be laid befirre the source from which
snercy was to be expected, the Learned Judge could not pro-
wise him any remission of his sentence. If' any of these cir-
cumstances existed; if there was any thing that could be alleged
in extenuation of the prisoner's offence, it would give his Lord-
-snip great pleasure to, lay it before that authority who always
r'ceived such representations with the greatest attention, and
the delight of whose reign it was, to extend mercy wherever
publiC justice would permit. Should the prisoner, however, be
atnifl,:. to do this, he could hope for no mitigation of his
punishment. His Lordship, after advising the prisoner to pre-
y ire to quit this world, passed sentence on him in the usual

iorm.
The case excited considerable interest, as it was stated the
orisoner was the on of a respectable Dissenting Clergyman.—
was dressed in a full suit of black, and appeared to listen to
trial with the greatest-anxiety. When the Jury were den-
t rating, he fixed his eyes upon them, and watched them with
I'. • mast intense earnestness. During the address of the Judge,
i.ovr the verdict had been recorded, he was extremely affected ;
rembled cxceedirgly, and wept; but when the awful sen-
t nce was pronounced, he seemed almost to be in convulsions ;
h,s frame became powerfully agitated, and when he attempted
to descend from the dock, he was so unnerved that he could not
rn,ve a sty, and must have fallen down had he not been as-
sisted and supported by the gaoler's men who were attending
him.

AIDSTONE, ' UItSDAY JULY 28.
( aihric Lard Chief Justicc BEST and a Special Jury.)
THI: KIND v. ABRAHAM CONSTABLE, ESQ.
This IVPS an indictment for a misdemeanour. The indict
meat status tkls the defendant, as one of the Justices of the
Peace for canny of Kent, having no regard to justice or to
the duty of his office, but unlawfully intending to aggrieve
and oppress John Baker, and to expose him to ignominy,
shelve, scandal, and disgrace, on the 30th of July, 1822,
without any reasonable or probable cause, and under mere
cahittr and pretence of his office, did sign a warrant directed to
the keeper of the House of Correction at Maidstone, reciting
thst het naker) had been duly convicted before him (defend-
er:), by the oath of Joseph Abbott and Thomas Ferguson, of
eing a rogue and vagabond—to wit, by indecently exposing his
lemon naked before a girl named Harriet Hall, ten years old,
;n Greenwien-park, and that he (defendant) had, for his said
e.i'ence, adjudged him (Baker) to be imprisoned and kept to
I_rd labour for three months; and by the said warrant did com-
e. e :assn. the said.keeper to detain him for the term therein speci-
e -f.ed ; whereas, in, truth and in fact, the said J. Baker had not,
at the thne of the sigeing of the said warrant, been duly con-
- by the oath of the persons therein named, or by the oath
of any other peisons,,hert on the contrary, defendant had signed
. tiie.said warrant, withOuneeeing the said J. Baker, and without
giving }Mew-I:opportunity of making his defence, or of exa-
mining the. witnesses.t6 -the said supposed offence, &c. There
were other counts, varying the charge in particulars not neces.
wary to mention. The last count was for false imprisonment.
Thhi case excited extraordinary interest, and the Court was
crowded to excess. The ..cause was appointed to be tried by a
special jury at the instance of the .prosecutor.
Mr. GURN F. Y stated the case tinethe prosecution. He said
it was necessary for him to draw.the, most serious attention of
the jury to the case he had to latelett:aze them, after having
beard that the indictment, ,which had .been opened by his
1,0-earned Friend, imputed to the,tiefenclant the grave offence of
having abused his office of a Magistrate. !The defendant had
long been in the commission of the. peace. :lie was not an in-
expe•rienced Magistrate; for he (Alr..Qurney) had for many
iters observed his name cutting a.eonspictioun figure in the
%gaol calendars at the. Assizes. Formerly he had been a brewer,
'sett having retired from business. he became a Nagistrate, and
resided at Lewisham, where he had an office,for the transacting.
Ai' business which came before him for judgment as. a justice.
Theyrosecutor was a man in a humble situationof life, hut bore
al irreproachable character. carrying on busiaess.as„as a green-
grocer at. Deptford. lie was a married man, and had ke family.
.4 'fnt It 3:11i ot. July, 1f;22, in passing through Greenwieh-park
-.on business, he had occasion, to turn aside tbr a certain purpose.
Ile was proceeding on his way when he was accosted by
a little
girl about nine or ten years of age, who was crying.' He was
acquiring into the cause of her grief, when a cpuple of loon
fellows, who appeared to have been lurking about the
esask, came .up and accused him of having indecently exposed his
person to the girl. The prosecutor would be examined,on- his
iteith, and he would declare solemnly that the charge was..ab-
....whitely false. Whether it was true or false was, however,
:a
-q iestion wholly irrelevant to the present inquiry ; for, wile-
. her Baker was innocent or guilty, the conduct of Mr. Con-
anableethe 'Magistrate, was equally unjustienthle. :In vain did
Baker protest his innocence ; his accusers charged him in cus-
s telly of the park-keeper; who was also a constable, for the.
,aeirpose ef taking him before a Magistrate. By, the proyi-:
viiona of the Vagrant Act, which was then in force, a small
. .r2ward was given to persons instrumental in the apprelten.
R.,AI and conviction of vagrants. Happily that Act was no
.1 mger in existence. Its enactments were found to have such
a, tendency to produce oppresSion and injustice, that the Le-
arielature wisely repealed it in a subsequent Session. The
airesecutor was immediately taken to the house of Colonel
Ihrerean, a Magistrate, but that gentleman being from home;
lie was then carried to the house of the defendant, who was
*.iao from home, but being then spending the day with Mr.
I:rown, his nephew, .the prisoner was carried to the house of
the latter. The defendant,-on being apprized of the nature of
e :tile business, ordered the parties to go to, the clerk's office at
I,reocwich. Accordingly the prisoner was taken to Mr. lick-
ni:ll's office, when that gentleman's clerk, after taking the de-
, yraitio::s, made out a commitment, and delivered it to the
ecanstable, who itatuediately carried it to the defendant for sig-
nature.. Without examining any of the witnesses, inquiring
-'into the nature of the charge, or even seeing any of the parties,
the defendant forthwith signed the warrant of commitment, by,
the uefartunate prosecutor was doomed to three months'
dinpretonrnent arid hard. labour. The constable, not having int-
. roediate means of- conveying his prisoner to Maidstone, locked
Lisa up fnethe night,,in the cage. There he remained until
melt day, -withouteven the common necessaries • and conyeni-
-ances of lodging, until the next morning. It happening, how-
. ft, er,- that toe Maidstonecoach was full, and the constable hay-.
hing ro mode of removing him to his destination, he was again
returned to the citeee.to.await his passage by the following day's
.ceaoh. By• this time &great stir was raised in the neighbour-
, J•ood in consequence of this. extraordinary proceeding, founded
'ta it was upon a.charge made by persons whom nobody knew.
itfrur or five of the constables of Greenwich, who had known
sglah.er to be it man of goad .character, and cf perfectly moral •
habits, waited Upon the defendant, and represented him . to
be alierson in their opinion incapable af the alleged indecencies
.with which he was charged, and theievanviction that it was a
-talse-charge, made by some idle vaeisonds who had imposed
non him. The defendant, upon this representation, sent. a
messenger to the magistrate's clerk, .ordering hint to" I
c discharge
Cie prisoner. The clerk -.very .naturally seid, an't
discharge him ; he is committed in execeion of his sen-
tence, and 1 have no power to discharge hint." In the result,
The unfortunate man' was. sent t 9 Maidstone gait!, and placed
GO the trcatl-null for three reenthg. Isis wren hit wife had in
the interval apislied to the defendant,erepresenthig die injus-
tice which had 'been done her husbande.and7 itureating some
anitigation of his fate. This application was repeated sev..iral
times. The defendant promised that I:er husband should be
liberated. She came down to the Summe?..Assizeain -1822, and
toeit the defendant; who was attending the Court -as a Magis-
trate, affected to pity her situation, and told her slieuwight de-
,..pettd upon his sending her husband home with .her.
prorwise, however, was not performed, and thee unlearspy- man
ectually underwent three mouths' imprisonnahnt and ,least=
lai,our in the House of Correction. It migh,t be asked,
why did he not appeal to the Quarter Sessions The an-
. infer was obvious. His term of imprisonment woe'ld nearly,
• Isere expired bcfpre the Quarter Sessions arrived, an d there-,
tee it would avail him little to appeal against an unju v. sen-
tence, which would have been suffered before redress ..earl
he afforded. Again, it might be asked, why did he cot
Li irg hiei action instead of preferring .this 'indictment ? T:tle
fact was,.that he had brought an.actinne but in consequence in'
e formal defect in the notice of action ,required by the statute
in the- case of a Magistrate, he was obliged to discontinue the
action, whereby he was compelled by the defendant to pay
treble coats, which amounted to 30/. It was then too late to
bring a fresh action, ar.d thus the prosecutor was defeated of
justice in that mode. Indeed, from the indigence of his cir-
.cemstances, ruin having been entailed upon hug by this
ini-
alaitous proceeding, he was in no condition tc cope with the de-
fendant, a man of wealth and influence. The only remedy left
him was to iestitute the present indictment, which would have
en brought to trial at tire last assizes, bat for the sudded an.