The Sun.
London, England, 1812-11-19 00:00:00

MR. FAWKES.

We ilesire the 'public to comp'a're the following
speech of this gentleman, which we have extract-
ed from The Leeds Intelligencer, with 'the latter
which he recently addressed to Lord MILTON,
and which has appeared in some of the opposition
Journals.

PEACE

The follOiving speech Mr. Fawkes delivered
at York; at the County Meeting, on the com-
mencement of 'the present war, in August
1803 :
Mr. Fawkes said that this was one of the most
awful and serious occasions th:'t ever engaged . the
attention of an assembly of Englishinen.. Happily
little difference of opinion .no.,v existed on the
justice and necessity of the present .war, and he
'for one, believed that no moderation or forbear=
ance, ,on our part, short of absolute submission,
could have preserved us from it.—No man la-
mented more than himself the miseries attendant
on war in general, but the vast objects of the
present contest, must make every mind thrill with
horror. Circumstances might hoWever arise \to
render war a. necessary evil ; .and he did, in his
soul, believe, that those. cirdurnstances had now
arisen in this country,. Malta, we had been told;
Was the occasion of the present war; but he be-
lieved, the war must have taken place, had the
name of Malta never been mentioned in the
Treaty..
The English Ministers, he believed, made peace
in ~the spirit of peace ; while with the French
Government all was hollowness and duplicity.
Scarcely 'was the ink dry with which the treaty
was signed,' before the French Government began
a more determined warfare against our. commerce
than they had ever exercised in the most rancorous
period, of the' late struggle ; they would have no
treaty of commerce, 'but we were to have their

Commercial Agents or rather their political spies,
it having been proved to demonstration, that the
commission of one of these accredited agents of
that treacherous Government, wa.F; to take sound-
ings of Dublin harbour. lATlrat could be the effect
of this baseness and treat' ery, but to rouse the
noble feelings' of Englishmen, and to teach theni
that had we submitted, every thing would have
been put in requisition, to gratify the exorbitant
demands of these French cormorants.. And what
were we to haVe in return ? Why, forsooth we
were to have the Treaty of Amiens, the whole of
the Treaty of Amiens, and. nothing but the Treaty
opliniels. And with this Treaty, we were to be
gagged and muffled, and shut ont not only of
France, but to be prohibited.ali interference in
continental affairs.

Not content with this, Buonaparte bad the con-
fidence, so far to interfere with our own national
affairs, as to attempt to shackle the liberty of the
British Press—that. grand palladium of British
knowledge-Lot British enjoyment—and above all,
of British liberty—lastly, if there ever could be an
end to thistyrant's outrages—he had the audacity
to charge that King wive) reigns, not more over
the persons than in the hearts of his subjects, with
erh.ouraging assassins.; and then to degrade us,
as he thinks, in the eyes of the rest of Europe, he
has posted us as a nation of shopfieepers
After these accumnlated wrongs and insults, we
had no alternative but an appeal to arms, and said,,.
Mr. Fawkes, I vote for war because we cannot
have peace, and he is a dastard who would not sa-
crifice a few, or even all his conveniences,' for so
just a cause. This war is to determine, not whe-
ther you hold this Or that distant possession ; but,
it• is to decide, whether you are to sit under your
own vire, a;:d your own fig tree, or to rest under
the pestilential and baneful influence of the tree of
liberfv.—to decide, whether you are to enjoy that
from whence you draw. all your. sublime
peasures in life, and all your animating consolations
in the hour of death : or to be satisfied with the,
meagre hopes inspired by modern philosophy,
and dictated to by a host of, blasphemous French-
men, thirsting for blood and gold, beaded by a
renegado leader who has not blushed to declare
himself a Christian one day, and a,Mahometan the
next.

The die is now cast, and these interesting goes-
tions are now to.be determined. I cannot let. this
opportunity pass, without addressing a few, Words
of advice to the lower orders who may suppose (if
any such there be) that the arrival of -the French
would put an end to all their taxes, to all their
toils, and to all their miseries. Do not deceive
yourselves, my countrymen; by any such idle
hopes. Could I call to this bar the inhabitants
of Italy,.Switzerland, and of Holland—Could I
propose to them the question—" What taxes,:
-What toils,or what miseries did French invaders-
deliver you from ?"—their answer would be—
" From none ; they doubled and tripled all our
misfortunes, and steeped us in.poverty and misery
up to. the very lips." And would • you not, then
suffer death rather than permit these plunderers,
these violaters, and these murderers; to wrench
from you every thing that is dear; every thing in
which you live and move, r and have your being.—
Prepare then to receive these invaders, apply
yourselves to the use of arms, and consider no sa-
crifice too great in so great a cause; sink not into
apathy from an opinion that the danger is distant,
and mayneyer be realized ; the danger is at your
very gates.—Reinember, and let the remembrance
animate ye, the battle of Agincourt—the Fort of
Acre—the Plains of Egypi—the Heights of Abra-
ham—and the Bay of Aboukir. I, have done,--ybu.
feel, and•l feel theenthusiasm, which, like a shock
of electricity, I trust will spread to every corner
of the island. One word more, and I hare done.
Let this day be harmony—let no party' recollec-
tions obtrude—let the present situation of our
country, and the best means of our security, be our
only object, and let us from this day sacrifice
every party jealousy on the altar of British una-
nimity.

Letters from Messina, of the 22. d of October,
•
state that the HEREDITARY PRINCE is so ill, his
recovery is despaired of. His iodisposition is sus-
pected to have been caused by poison.
During the night of Monday, a gentleman, of

the name of Reeks, was upset in a single-borse
chase, about two miles from Watford, by another
chaise running against him, and was so much

hurt, that he died yesterday front a contusion on
the head.

LAW REPORT.

COURT OF CHANCERY; Nev. 19.

HAYMAIiKET THEATRE

MORRIS V. CODS N.

This was the day -fixed for judginexit in this
case, to decide. Whether. the Plaintiff had a right
tb a Second vote; be having purchased Mr% T -
.
hOurdin's share Of the Theatre. The I.4O.RD,CHAN--
'CELLOR did nOt deliver his iudguient, hut intimated
an opinion that Mr:Coltrian had.giveh a conditional
consent to the transfer Of Tahourdin's share to
Morris; bUt.he apprehended that the effect of the
transfer would be that Of neutralizing the votes
of the proprietors,' and th'at- the law Nveuld he •
obliged ultimately to exercise the -pwers
nag-en-lent. lie, therefore, recOmmended the *-
ties to WithdraW the matter froM the Conrt, as
Otherwise his judgment, if he was compelled
to give it, would be attended with consequebees,
*which perhaps none of the 'parties at present
foresaw. •
Judgment postponed to Friday. •

MORRIS V. CQLMAII..

Mfr. BELT, stated, that this ease had, been refer-
red to the Master,. to inquire whether-the Defen-
dant had parformed the duty of Manager to the
Theatre ? and the Master, by his report, states,
that he had performed, the duty of Manager to the
Theatre since the year 1805 ; to which report the
Plaintiff, excepted, that it was impossible the De-
fendant Could have performed the duty, as be bad
been confined in the Rules of the King's Bench
Prison near the whOle of the period.-
Sir Sa-:-u at, RoMILLY stated,- that the repOrt
rose out of a' motion, on behalf of the Plaintiff, to
remove the defendant froui being Manager 'of the
Theatre, when the other Proprietors agreed to the
defendant's being the principal Manager ; they
knew hirn.to be a person of great skill and know-
ledge as a Theatrical Manager, and that he had 15
years experience. It .was necessary for a person,
to be able to fill the situation, to have great taste,
and to watch; nightly and Weekly, the taste of the
public, and to see whether theY appoved or dis-
approved ; it was impassible for the defendant to
do this in St. George's-fields. It was also laic
duty to see every performer come out, ;and to
from the opinion Of the audience of his me-
rits For instance, Mr. Betty, who is now per-
forming at Covent-garden Theatre, when he
first made his appearance, and was denominated
the, Young Roscius, ,some critics Were of opinion
that be was an excellent perfbrmer ; others, that he
was so much the contrary, that they thought lie did
not deserve criticism ; the defendant might be
one of the latter. Thepublie, however, were of,
a different opinion, and he'brought full houses
and filled the treasury of the theatre was also
the duty of the Manager to attend at the. first
performance of every new play, and watch the
opinion of the audience. For instance, Mr. She-
, ridan's celebrated play of The Rivals, was con-
demned on the" Srstniight of its representation,
but by some judicious alterations it became a de-
served favourite with the public. Then, was it
possible for the defendant to perform those duties,
he being obliged to live in Surrey since the year
130 G, and not able to attend the Theatre, except
by a day-rule, which was issued only in Term
time, and obliged the prisoner to return before
464 nine 0' at night, which Would only allow
'him to see the first and second acts of the play ?
the duty 'of the Manager to direct
the decorations .necessary for every representa-
tion, and- perhaps more so at the present day
than ,any - other period—show being the ' pre-
dominant taste. It was true, the dresses of the
actresses might he carried in a hackney-coach to
St. George's-fields' for the defendant's, inspection,
but the scenery and other, decorations could not
beicarried there, without great inconveniency.. The
Plaintiff had been obliged to call before the naster,
as witnesses, 'persons under the controul of the
defendant ; for, from his situation, as Manager,
• he was a theatrical monarch, and. had the engag-
ing of performers, prompter, scene-painters, inn-
, sicians, &ca They all say, the theatre has been
very welt mriaged, and has gone on very well—
that is, they have received their salaries. But one
year the profits of the Theatre, were 4,4001 ; and
on the following year the loss was 1,100/. Messrs.
Kew Me, Wrong!) ton ; and Waldegrave, all of whom
are well versed in theatrical management, have,
given it as their opinion, before the Master, that it
was physically iinpossible that a manager of a thea-
tre could perform the duties attached' to it, with-
out personal attendance. To counteract tills tes-
timony, Mr. ,Pritchard, the Under-Treasurer,
says, he saw the defendant once in the fore part
the day, and once in the evening at the Theatre,
hut it, was three years ago. Mr. Meredith's (the
Prompter)evidence went to the same e47fect; and
Mr. liawlinscn, the carpenterahad some_ faint re-
collectiOn that the defendant did attend a re-
hearsal at -the Theatre. Was it possible to con-
ceive that this eastern monarch would not have
made a greater impression on 'the mind of the
carpenter., than to have only given him a faint re-
collection of whether he sa',v bin' Or nut ? The
defendant, even by the depositions of those, might
as well have managed it by post, or be the manager
of the Dublin or Edinburgh Theatres, residing in
Surrey.

1 fie LoRD CHANCELLOR—" We must stop
here to-day ; I will hear .you again on this day
week. Sir Samuel Romiily, hand me up the affi-
davits."

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Nov. 18.

MURRAY 2►. HARDMAN AND OTHERS.

This was a case in which the defendants appear-
ed as trustees of the estate of Mr. Robinson, mer-
chant, some time deceased, .and the 'plaintiff was
a person with whoM Mr. Robinson, during his
lifetime,-, had dealings to a considerable extent... In
the present situation of the case; a plea.of excep-
tion was put in against an answer returned to a
a bill of interrogatories by the defendants, be-
cause it was not according to the usage of the
Court. The mode of answer required by the
Court w's, that the deposing, party should set
forth, according to the best of his '' knowledge,
information, or belief," all the intelligence he
could give an the' subject of inquiry ; but in the
present instance, the deposing party had only set

forth so. far as he was "able," an expression that
dropped infinitely short of the ample mode requir-
ed by the Court.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE asked—" Did he
expect a man.to.set. forth beyond the limits Of his
ability.?"

The Learned Counsel replied, that the expres-
sion made use of 'by the party deposing, not only
fell short of the strict' custornary language
listed upon by the Court, but ,the ordinary and
common language anpea-ced studiously nvodr.:3, so
that the. reply, to the best of his `ocher, might be
avoided.

The LORD ClrrEF ;USTICE dt"...H.(1 the oppcsit
Counsel, who insisted tipOn the prop-::ety s!f. the
expressions employo?, to get the interrogatories
answered a.Ocordhig to uSizal triode; ;or id-
though no eva.io!). of the Jaw might be intent ed
-by the party, it it;W necessary taahide by the cus-
tomary and ElTict !-erm of expres-.:ion.-
The Court rwie at one o'clock, after haviv:
posed of, some. uninteresting cases of bail.

COURT OF EillNG'z; BENCH, Icer.
BUILDING ACT._
Mr. jEKYLL nibved for a Mandanzits, dir;:-2t-cd
to the Justicis ofr'' th.e Peace for the county of
;Middlesex, enioining theta to hear/and determine.
a question under the Act of the 14th of the King,
chap. 78, commonly called the Building Act, in
which there is a right of appeal from the judg-
inent•of the Mayor, cr two justices, to the .6f.neli
of. Justices, at the Quarter Sessions. The object
of this Act was not only to protect the lives
property Of the inhabitants of this great metropo-
lis against the rava4es of lire, but also to preserve
some degree of uniformity in the' buildings to be
c-rccted, particubirly in the great public streets
and squares. it provided " that uo bow window
or other building should be erected in a house c:
the first class, so as to project bevond the general
line of the fronts of the louses.'' Mr. Kinnaird,
the person in wose behalf the present motion was
made, was Surveyor of the District within %winch
a projection of this kind had been erected ; turd,
as such Surveyor, it became his duty to .apply by
information, under this Act, to two Magistrates,
and if they were satisfied . that the projection in
question was a violation of the law, then to hare
the nuisance abated.
,Mr. Kinnard was, by the
nature of his office,sworn not to neglect his duty;
and if he did neglect it, he was to be dismissed
front his oifice. From the sentence of the two Ma-
gistrates there was a right of appeal granted, by
the 96th .section of, the Act, to the Justices at tbte
Quartet. Sessions.

Mr. Justice BAILEY asked what were the words
of the•clause allowing the appeal ?
Mr. JEKYLt answered they were " from any
conviction, cominitment; distress, order, or.judg-
.ment of the said Mayor or Justices." Mr. Kin-
nard had obserVed on the North side of Lincoln's
Inn-fields, being within the district over which he
was Surveyor, anew erection which projected 3
feet beyond the generAl line of the fronts of the
houses, there being theresmall courts before each
house, mid a wall in front. It being his bounden
duty, as Surveyor of the District, to see that .the.
Act was not infringed on, he accordingly applied
.by information, complaining of the projection in
question, and the information came to be heard
before Mr. Read and Mr. Noires, two of the Ma=
gistrates.

Lord ELLENBMOUGH asked, what was the na-
ture of the projection Was•it a bow window ?
Mr. JEKYLL said no. It was what was called
'a viranda—a vhanda of stone.
Lord ELLENT3O.IIOUGH asked, what .were the
words of the Act ? Beyond the line of the street
. Mr. jEKYLL answ erect no. " Beyond the ge-
neral line of fronts of the houses." Those were
. the words-of the Act. A great deal passed on the
trial of the information by way of admission. Mr.
Soane, the Gentleman complained of, admitted
that the projection in question had been Made by
him in front' of his house, and that it extended
three and a half feet beyond the general fonts of
the houses. Hi's main defence, however, rested
on this fact, that the place where the erection
wasniade was his own freehold. And so he (Mr.,
Jekyll) admittedsit was to the very front wall.—
But was he, on this account, to be entitled to pro-
ject any building he chose, to the whole of that
'extent, " beyond the general line of the fronts
of the houses," in the very face of the Act of Par-
liament? The Magistrates, however, on this de-
fence being made, came to an 'adjudication, by
which they declared that it appearing to them
that the said projection was not ..vithjn the mean-
ing of the Act, nor prohibited by it, thefdid
therefore adjudge it not to be within the meaning,
nor protected by the Said Act. r. Kinnard was
dissatisfied with this judgment, as he reasonably
might, ,no defence having been set up except one,
which was perfectly irreievant, and had nothing,
to do \vith the question. There might be fifty dif-
ferent sorts of projections, many cf them most dis-
agreeable in their nature, it the unrtrained
right and privilege of building could be asserted
and maintained, wherever one bad a freellold.--•
Here the Act was perfectly explicit,, and declared.
that no prejcctions should he suffered " beyond
the general line of the fronts of the houses."--.
Mr. Kinnard was so dissatisfied and aggrieved bp'_
this erroneous judgment, that he resolved to ap-
peal, as the Act authorized him.

Mr. Justice BAILEY again wished the words of
the cause allowing an appeal to be read, which
being done,

Mt". jEKYLL said the words Conviction, Com-
mittal, Distress, and even Order, might aptly
only to the ueteadant, and to give a, right of ap-
peal to him only. But, he. submitted, the coma
plainant too had this right, under the word
" Judgment,."

Lord ELLE NBOROUGH Sa;(1 " the party aggriev-
ed" might appeal, Mr. Kinnard's grief could
only be for the public. Whi;t grievance had he
to complain of more than any other subject had
from the, violation of the law, supposing this to
be a violation of it 3. The appeal must he _taken
to apply to cases where the information was sue-

eessiiil; and the party complained tit might con-
ceive himself aggrieved, not to cases where the
information was dismissed.. If Mr. Kinnard
thought the opinion of these two Magistrates
was wrong, he might apply to other two, Who
might probably be of a different. opinion 4; tq
'viranclas.

Mr. JEKYLL said, the present acquittal might be
held ," to any other application as to the

;i1111:"

Lo"d LL!..EI4BOROUGII said, no ; it conid not.

Mr. JEZYLL sunmitted, that,' as a public officer,
Mr. Kinnard -ot*lght to be esteemed as aggrieved
by an errnneous judgment in a case in which the
public was ire :stca.
ELLENTWROUG said,' supposing a case to
bere:.,.oved from the Court of King's BenCh into
thelExche4 tier Chrmher, -and 'there to receive a
;udrient .‘rhieh be :(LordElleuborougb) might
thih:; wrong;
_could he be entitled' to go into a
Court of Appellant Jurisdietion; and complain of
that decision 'AS one by which he was personally
•
aggrieve. 7 •
r.r C clank allowing the right of appeal related
to orders or judgments in Cases where something
.was done which might be ineothenient or grievous
to the party. llere there was no such thing. '
Mr. Justice BAILEY thought the clause meant
only to apply to the party against whom.the infor-
mation was laid.

•
Mr. Justice LE BLANC said, that the preceding
.clause in the. Act which gave power toMagistrates
to order projections which. were decmej,l improper
to be removed, added•strength-t6.thisViulon. '
Lord' ELLENBOROUGLI added, 'if the' cause in
question w`as so' defective as. not to give to Mr.
Kinnard or others in his situation, that relief, uy
way of appeli, to, which the Learned Counsel
seemed to think them entitled, that was a farther
reason why commendation should be given to the
Act of Parliament in question, with some reserve.
Mandamus refused.