The Sun.
London, England, 1824-06-09 00:00:00

PARIS; PAPERS.

( Prom the Maniteur of Sunday.—( Nothing. Official.)
COPENHAGEN, MAY 25.—( Extrupl from a
• Private Letter.)-'--The French frigate Arethusa,
and the Egeria and Seine corvettes, winch sailed
from Brest on the lqth May, arrived in the road
of Copenhagen on the 22d,after a fine passage of
ten days. This division, commanded by Captaia
Lecoupe, is going to 'the Baltic. His Majesty
the King 'of Denmark being informed 'of the ani
rival of these vessels, has been pleased to signify
to the Marquess de Saint Simon, the French Am-
bassador, that he would give audience to the
Commanders and Officers on the 2‘6th May. His
Majesty has given orders that the arsenals and
naval establishments shall be °pew to their in.
spection, ‘vhenever they think fit to visit them.
The Magistrates and the inhabitants on. their
part have paid every mark of attention to the
officers. Several Foreign Ministers having ex-
pressed a wish to visit the Arethusa, M' Lecoupe
has invited him on board his ship on the 27th,
when they will be accompanied by the Marquess
de St. Simon. The division will sail the day
folloWing.

[This Paper contains a notice from the Di-
'rector of the Indirect Taxes, that the samples of
foreign leaf tobacco from the Royal Manufacto-
ries not having been received in time, the time
for deciding on the offers made by those who de-
sire to contract, -is deferred from the 9th June
till the 23d.

(From the Constitutiognet •
, • PA.MS, JUNE 6.-A partial change of the Mi-
nistry is ~till spoken of, and what is very strange,
precisely that Minister who appears to have re-
ceived the most direct defeat by the law on the
Renter being rejected, will,, according to report,
obtain more intluenco.thaw ever in the Cabinet,
while some. of his colleagues, who have hardly
taken part in the discussions, are, according to
the Ondits of the salons, of the 'change, and of the
coteries, to be removed. Perhaps things will
remain as they are, and each will retain his
place, but as the people amuse themselves by
supposing some vacancies in the Ministry, each
party has fOr its candidates whom it prefers, and
whom it point.s out as the successors, and whom
it is ready to compliment. Some speak of the
Prince de Polignac, others of M. de Martignac,
and others 'mention M.- de Montmorency again,
and even M. Simeon, whilst most agree that M.
de Corbieres will retire.. As to M. de Villele,
it is generally supposed that he will continue to
preserve the i'resideticy of the Council, and that
his influence will still be preponderant. The
wits, however, Sayl that precisely because he
thinks himself sure of remaining, he is less firmly
seated than ever.

CHAMBER OF DEPUTIES, JUNE 5.
The lace manufacturers of Novion, a department of Aisne,
demand a prohibition of lace corning from foreign countries, or
an increase of duty on their entering France, in order that they
might be able to sustain a competition,-
M. Mechin supported the decision of the Commission, which
was, that the petition be scent to the Illinisters of the Interior
and Finance.

31. Basterreche, on the contrary, thought that the demand of
sucn a prohibition was not to be treated so lightly as the pro-
sperity of our foreign commerce was so greatly concered ; and
concluded with the Order of the Day.
The Order of the Day was reported, and a reference was
again pronounced. -• • •

THE ARMY.

The 2d Regiment of Dragoons received orders to march ou
Monday from Newcastle-upon-Tyne to Manchester, where it
will arrive on the Ilith instant.

The squadron of the 6th Regiment of Dragoons marched u
Monday from Glasgow to Carlisle where it will arrive on the
12th instant.

The Ist Regiment of Dragoons has arrived at Piershill Bar-
racks, from Newcastle.
The Ist Regiment of Dragoon Guards is ordered to march
from
.Piershill to Newcastle-upon-Tyne, where it wilt arrive=
the 11th instant.

The depot of the 94th Regiment of Foot arrived in London
on the 3d from Leith, and marched for Albany Barracks, where
it will arrive to-day.
The depOt of the Ist battalion (Royal American) Rifle Corps
marched on the 4th from Portsmouth for Chatham, where it
will arrive on the 11th instant.

The ;id Regiment of Dragoon Guards has received orders to
march from Manchester to Liverpool, there to embark for
Ireland. .

[From the LONDON GAZETTE of Yesterday.]
Commissions signed by the Lord-Lieutenant of the County of

Dorset.

Dorsetshire Militia-,Edward Earl of Digby to be. Colonel;
vice Bingham, deceased._

Sadborow Cavalry—Thomas Barnes Gem., to be. Cana"
vice Wills.

Commissions signed by the Lord-Lieutenant of the CoUnty of

Sorset.
North Somerset Regiment o mef
Yeomanry Cavalry—Charles
Robert Fitzgerald, Gent., ft be Cornet.
Wells Troop of Yeomanry Cavalry—Robert Charles Tud..
way, Gent., to be Cornet. . ,

Frerinc courier,Rj
p_ortance. for thea
s there.have been a great variety
i within' opent
h e boat,
last twloviotiri
urrN,frEeena7,
ih.n—aEnlmAoabpsaestnsyboefavnt,enLowiintnhgdodAnis.pr.actucilAoecTsic,o,ftitlmsie;
King's Messenger, arrived with dispatches for Mr. CA24NING.
STUART to Mr. CANTNING, came across this morning, and
of expresses.from the other side• Sailed the Monarch steam_
vessel to Boulogne, and the Medusa steam-vessel to Calais,
with passengers and a carriage.
specialtlay dispatch fron? Sir -cruiluxs
'tharee

followingAyTr hes
isPea
vpaenerc :::::: p lhaie es
wolife., gives tI en otstit
y_ General Lecor into Monte
leaDil :o:he
h. A—. I aAor cehn,l3e.l
_.
The leTtrlyi‘o'Flofitbitielceaenßn'rtarozfiloiSfanuGritdraloirs into Mon t r deo
has given us some.
. _
a deputatiolnvoef the Town?
,for
( oun-
the faith of oar correspondents in that quarter, n 4'"115 uPon
that the mourn-
ing with which the. population received th •
err Imperial guestoll
furnishes an irresistible proof of the 'ay •
Never ersion which they en-
tertain towards foreign dominion
Monte Video so mournful a spec. t l was there 'seen in
ac e. In the streets• gene-
rally, nobody was seen : in that
church, whence he retiatred to his house along
a small number of peOple collected called Porton,. there/was only
e to witness the entry. In
the great square, no house had any spectators, but that of senor
Gomez. square,
net,Proes
~ and young people, were the only
spectators of the entry.
resi-
dence the COuncil where
The General proceeded to the resz-
ce_dVine:tt Video
sl: oß—afitT;tieh4sUnGdEe
di jrbos called
e oil::
ririgit°iholeNl T2osEdft -ao:t the
, . he left his wife to proceed. to
To amuse this lad— there was a play in the evening: but only
three boxes were fifl inea
filled, and those were occupied with wowed
and ree7e-eomen.,, with his wife.

INDIA.

THE BAR.

RECORDER'S COURT-BOMBAY, TUESDAY, OCT. 7, 1823.

The RECORDER observed,• that he had now to
advert to a very serious subject, and one which he was bound
to take notice of not only in order to vindicate the authority and
dignity of the Court, but as necessary to the due administra-
tion o:' justice. It was in regard to a Memorial, which had
been presented to the Court by the Gentlemen of the Bart He
would state the circumstances. On the 10th of last month he
was sitting in Court with Mr. Meriton, when the Memorial
was handed up to him by Mr. Irwin, in the name of himself
and the rest of the Bar. On that day all the Bar, he believed,
were present, with the exception of Mr. Le Messurier. But,
although he was not present, his name was subscribed to the
Memorial.

lir. LE illEssuninß rose, and acknowledged the sigiature

to be his.

The RECORDER.—This document, which was called a Me-
morial, contained certainly, -to say no more of it, matter of the
most offensive description, alleging, •in all and every page of it,
that certain rules were not warranted by the barter.; and that
the practice of the Court, in certain particul&rs, was warranted
by neither the one nor the other. It was the bar who had put
into his hands that Memorial, so libelous as he said it was, and
as he should chew by anti bye, that if it had been published,
or circulated by any gentleman not a Barrister, the Court
would have been called upon to punish him, not by going be-
fore
a Grand Jury, or before a Petty Jury, but summarily
and, both by fine and imprisonment. That Memorial .had
been handed up by the Gentlemen of the Bar, whose
duty and whose interest it was to pay respect to the
-Court; for they ought to know that their own characters
rose wrth that of the Gourt. It was by the Gentlemen of the
Bar that that Memorial had been put into his hands, as the
President of the Court. In the beginning it claimed a privi-
lege as belonging to the Bar which he- was not before aware of :
nor was there ir► fact any such privilege. It stated, that it was
competent to the Gentlemen of the Bar forsooth to bring to the
notice of the Court.

31r. :ADVOCATE GENERAL here interposed, and stated that,
as' far as concerned himself, and he believed, he might add the
rest of the Bar, they had no desire or intention that the Memo-
rial should be publicly read, nor was it presented with that

view.

Mr. IRwIN observed- that he had it -in commission from the
Bar to communicate-to the Court, that the Memorial was pre-'
sented merely for the private consideration of the members of
-the Court, and that the Bar never contemplated any publication
of it, or a public reading of it in open Court.
The RECORDEIL—Then Mr. Irwin had thought himself
justified in putting -into his hands. as-the President -of the
Court, a paper which he acknowledged to be unfit to be read
-in Court. The Gentlemen of the Bar had considered it com-
- petent for them to present to the private consideration of the
Court what they acknoWledged to be unfit tobe read in public.
They would presume to insult the Court with—
Mr. ADVOCATE-GENERAL here again Interposed, and de-
dared that he and the rest of -the Gentlemen of the-Bar had to
disavow any consciousness of the Memorial being an insult, or
in any way improper, and that they had not the smallest ob-
jection whatever to its ,being all openly read in Court, if that
-.was his Lordship's wish. They merely meant to say, that
such public reading was not their wish or intention.
The RECORDER.—In the first instance, the Memorial claim-
ed a privilege, that it was competent to them, as Banisters of
your Hon. Court, •to bring to its notice any existing; variance
. between the rules and the practice, and between the rules and
-the charter 4 and to tell the Court that such rules and practice
-were illegal. He never dreamt th,tt there was any such privi-
dege existing in the Bar. This was a new doctrine to him. lie
knew of no such privilege in the Bar; nor would the Court al-
. low of their questioning the course the Court adopted in ad.
ministering justice. Would it have been fitting to have pre-
sented to the Court of King's Bench such a Memorial as this ?
The Court here were the sole Judges of their own conduct.
They alone had the power of judging whether they
-were acting. according to the Charter or not—it was
. matter in their discretion, and in their's alone.—
' There wax here no power under heaven that had a right to find
• fault with the proceedings of the Court. If the Court did not
act in conformity with the Charter, the only remedy was an
'impeachment in the House of-Commons. 'They were not to
- be told by any set of men, and far less by persons of the Bar,
- that they were not actingin conformity with the Charter. He
would call, the attention of the Court to another passage. It
--went on to say—but he would first.state what was the mode of
application which he had pointed out. In the memorial it was
-said, that a representation from the Bar would be heard by the
Court either on a deputation from the Bar personally or in the
shave of a written Memorial. • Ile had said, that if the Bar
hadany application to make to the favour of the Court, they
ewoald be willing to listen to it. In consequence of what had
_fallen from Mr. Irwin, when lie presented the Memorial, it
might be ceneelacal that it had been presented by the Bar at
.his (the Recorder's) desire. In that they were wholly mistaken.
Upon some Gentlemen getting up. one after the other.
-Mr. Alderman Meriton— Yes, my Lord, three Gentlemen.
RECORDER.—Upon three Gentlemen --getting up, one
after the other, to object to the course in which the Court was
.-carrying on • its business, he had told them that it was
_impossible to suffer the business of the Court to be interrupted,
day after day, in that manner. If the Gentlemen of the Bar
head any tiling to ask from the favour of the Court, if there
.were any particular rules, or any parts of the practice of the
Court, winch were prejudicial to the interests of the Bar, and
the- Bar chose to make an application to the favour of the ourt,
.the Court would attend to tile propositions of the Bar, if they
could do so consistently with the right of the public. The Court
.would suffer neither the bar, nor any other persons, to arraign
-their conduct and to say it was not legal, or that the rules which
had been framed by other Recorders, were inconsistent with
the rules of the Charter of the Court. The Memorial went on
ato state with regard to the small Cause Court, in the concluding
paragraph, that that Court appears to your Memorialists to have
a tendency
jto create confusion and irregularity in the adminis-
tration of justice, by referring each case to the discretion of the
Judge, and to a.judgment to be given upon the individual cir-
cumstances of each case, rather than to one to be pronounced
i.pon known and established authorities and decided cases; and
in as much also as it appears to have a tendency to subvert
those principles. of law on which alone your Memorialists are
prepared to conduct their practice, and in general to depreciate
the character of the Honourable Court.
This was the character given by the Gentlemen of the bar of
those rules which had been adopted by Sir Wen. Syer, the first
Recorder of the Court in 1799, which had been sent home, and
sanctioned' by his 'Majesty in Council,—which had been after-
,wards recognized and acted upon by every succeeding Re-
corder, and to which the former barristers of the Court had ne-
ver thought of raising objections.
Mr. ADVOCATE-GENERAL here intimated a different im-
pression.
-The RECORDER knew of no such representation ever having
been made. -If the allusion in the Memorial meant to refer to
a Memorial sent home to the King in Council by an individual
on the subject, he had this to say that he had certainly heard
of such a thing ; but he could tell the Gentlemen of the Bar that
it had not met with any consideration, and ,that an answer had
never been returned.
Mr. ADVOCATE-GENERAL observed, that he was not al-
lading to that Memorial, but to his leaving heard that some
doubts had always existed on the subject.
The. RECORDER. Of that Court, and those rules, Which
had been framed by Sir William Sver, the first Re-
.corder," had been sancttoned by his Majesty in Coun-
cils had been adopted and acted upon by every suc-
ceeding Recorder, and never before objected 'to by Coon-
Messurier, forsooth, and by Mr. Cleland,
. Party, and Mr. Irwin, and Mr. Norton, had thought
lit to state that they had'
a tendency to. create c '
and
irregularity in the administration of Justice. Mr. Norton, after
a few weeks residenecrieei;n:cetheiland, and- with the very limited
knowledge and cap, oiehhe could acuire in that time,
brolt, in upon then,. with a'An'ew loilt and discovered,that what
had
.bent acted upon by all the magistrates of the ;ourt from
its first establishment, anti had bcur
adopted by the first and
till sul;sNu all ent -Recorders,. was Wrong. After twenty-five

days practice, lie took upon himself to say, that those rules were
warranted, neither by law, nor by the Charter, and that they
tended to create confusion and irregularity, and'to subvert the
principles of law. But this was not the most offensive part of
the Memorial, although what he had now stated was mostlibel-
loos. The Court would not allow any part of • its Jurisdic-
tion to be attacked :—and that for very potent reasons, not
merely to maintain the authority and-dignity of the Court, but
as necessary for the administration of Justice. What would
the public think of a Court; which they heard the Bar had de-
clared to• be illegal ? A Suitor comes into the Small Causes
Court;—lie learns, that those to whom he is accustomed to
look for advice had unanimously declared the Court to be illegal
in its very foundation,—would he be inclined to submit with
deference to the Court and be satisfied with its judgments ? It
would be necessary for the Ccurt to resort to brute force, when
it was requisite to enforce its orders.
But this was riot the most offensive part of the libel. They
had ventured to assert, that the practice of the Court was not
in conformity with the rules of the small cause Court, or the
Charter of Justice. Your Memorialists beg to submit that, in
some ether particulars, connected with the practice of the small
cause Court, their interests are still more prejudiced, in regard
to which, neither the rules of the small cause Court, as at
present framed, nor the Charter of Justice, according to the
best construction they are capable of making, afford any autho-
rity or explanation. And then it went on. And in allusion
to those particulars your Memorialists scrupulously confine
themselves to such facts, as they are acquainted with their own
knowledge, and which they believe to be incontestable. It
appears to your Memorialists, from the repeated instances in
which those Courts have been held in private, for the exami.
nation and punishment of alleged offences, in respect to
matters proceeding under the jurisdiction of this Court. lie
asserted that the allegation was utterly unfounded, that small
cause Courts were held in private for the examination
and punishment of alleged offences., It was the Judges of that
Court (Recorder's Court) sitting in Chambers : and not the
small cause Court. It was the Court sitting in Chamber, as
they had a right to do and as necessary for justice, and as he
might have done by himself. But that the small Cause Court
had ever sat privately was unfounded. „That it was held with.
out any rules made for such purpose or any public notice given,
his friends, who were sitting with him knew to be utterly un-
founded. Jut he should not condescend to explain, or answer,
any more of the charges against the Court. It was what was
due to others, as well as to the Court that he should not. The
Court were satisfied that they had done their duty and it was a
sufficient satisfaction to them to be conscious, that they had
done their duty.
The Memorial went on to say, that both the manner and
time of holding such Courts depend altogether upon the casual
discretion of your Honourable Court.' There were other un-
founded allegations which he would not read, because it was not
incumbent upon him to read a libel. There was a charge of
examining the parties viva core.
That the partieshad ever been examined viva voce was unfound-
ed. That the plaintiff was examined, under particular circum-
stances, was certainly true and it was grounded on a rule of
Court, under which it was done: and he had before shown on
what clause of the Charter the rule was founded. The parties
mean both plaintiff and defendant, and that the parties had
been examined had not been the fact. The plaintiff had been
examined, and that was under a rule of the small Cause Court,
-which rule was sanctioned by a clause of the Charter.
As to the Petition Court, which formed the subject of another
part of the Memorial, he would only say that Petitions might
be heard in chambers when he pleased, and that he should
continue to hear them in chambers whenever he pleased.
The Memorial concluded stating your ..ilemorirlists beg leave
respectfully to submit to the consideration of youf Hon. Court,
that such a course of proceedings calculated to introduce irre-
gularity, confusion, and discretionary principles into the ad- ;
ministration of Justice, through the medium of your Hon.
-Court. So that these gentlemen ventured to say that it was
through the medium of the Cons t, and they accuse the Court
of introducing irregularity, confusion, and discretionary
;principles into the administration of justice. And the humble
requests of these persons is, that the institution of the small
cause Court, and all the rules upon which its proceedings
are founded, as far as such rules and proceedings are at
variance with the course of proceedings laid down in the
Charter, may be abolished and vacated." But lie should
not state the insinuations, which were meant to be conveyed by
the prayer of the Memorial ; nor the implications, which those
sentences conveyed. Ile would now call upon the gentlemen
of the bar to state, what excuse or urology they had to offer for
having presented a Memorial containing aspersions so libellous
and unfounded, and for having put such a Memorial into his
hands, as the President of the Court.
_ _

Mr: lawn; rose in answertOTiaordships call, to state on
behalf of the Bar, those sentiments on the subject of the Me'-
morial, which he believed they entertained in common with
himself, but should he omit to state any thing material to be
mentioned, he would claim for each of his Learned Friends to •
speak for himself to that charge, which effected them all indi-
vidually. He would first advert to the commencing pazagraph
of the Memorial, upon which his Lordship had observed that
it claimed a right hitherto unknown to hts Lordship for the
Barristeis to bring to the notice of the Court any rule of
Court, or practice of the same, which was at variance with the
charter.

To this he had to say, that he had frequently known Bar-
risters of that Court, in cases when the interests of a client in
a suit were affected by any rule or rules to shew to the
Court, in what respect such rules were contrary to the Charter
—he had known that principle admitted by the Court, and be
then said that it was scarcely to he supposed that that right,
which they, the Bar, claimed on behalf of others, should not
be available in their own case, and when their own interests
were affected—it was in fact contrary to human nature that
they should not insist upon it. He was bound in duty to
himself and his Learned Friends, to say that that memorial I
read and extracted in parts as it had
.been by his Lordship,
might assume a very offensive and libellous aspect; but he
would have it all taken together and as a whole, and not to be
judged of by insulated paragraphs whsse meaning and effect
was dependent on the context of the whole memorial. He had
now to express his sincere regret that any thing they (the Bar)
might have said or done should have produced on the minds
of the Court, an impression so very unfavourable to them and
so foreign to their intentions; and, as Ins Lordship had pro-
nounced the memorial to be libellous and aspersive to sub-
mit to the decision of the Court, and to express a hearty
sorrow that such was dig Court's opinion of it. Put he
must distinctly, on behalf of his Learned Friends and
himself, say, that they had not the most remote intention
of giving the slightest offence, or of .offering either openly
or covertly, any disrespect to the Court. They (the Bar) wished
to draw his Lordship's attention to circumstances which effected
them as Barristers, and to grievances, which required redress.
They resorted to the only mode -which was open to them to
obtain it; for that very course of a memorial had been pointed. ,
out to them by his Lordship, when he refused to hear objec-
tions, made on one or two occasions, to the proceedings of the
Court. But he was not so lost to all sense of duty and pro-
priety—he was not so mad, as to put his name to such a memo-
rial, if he had thought that he was thereby conveying an insult
to the Court, or degrading its character in the eyes of the public.
'What object could any of them (the Bar) possibly have in so
doing? they could gain nothing by it either from the Court or
the public. The public never were appealed to in the moat
indirect shape. Surely it must have been some proof to their
Lordships that they had acted bona fide, and with the purest
intentions, when no circulation whatever had been made by
them of the representation they had made; but, that one single
paper, which had.been presented to the private consideration of
the Members of the Court, was all that had transpired on the
subject. Their (the Bar's) sole object had been redress, in
case their representations were well founded; and they never
could have ixiagined that nay application for it made to a com-
petent tribunal, would be deemed libellous. He confessed,
that they (the Bar) had no very confident expectation of_a
favourable result in all respects, at leasi in his Lordship's
judgment; but still they conceived that they were proceeding
in a direct course to obtain that redress which, if not had here,
might be granted by an ulterior tribunal. He would beg to
say a few words here, upon the institution of the small cause
Court at this Presidency. _ the Acts of the 7th and of the

39th and 40th of his late Majesty—
The RECORDER here recommended to Mr. Irwin not to
pursue that course.'
Mr. IRwns--Then he should not so—and he should not en-
ter into the particulars of the memorial, because he was of opi-
nion that the present occasion did not call for it. But he would
rqer to the whole memorial before the Court to vindicate them

(the Bar) from the imputation of any libellous or disrespectful
intention in presenting it. His Lordship had adverted to some
statements in the memorial, as unfounded in fact ; if they were
so, he was sincerely sorry that they had been inserted in it.
But he declared solemnly there was no statement in the memo-
rial which he did not in his conscience believe to be true; some
as
of
his own particular knowledge ; and others, as from the
hest information he possessed, and the best means he had of
obtaining it.
small Cause Court hod been drawn up by Sir Wm. Syer, His Lordship had stated that the rules of the
had
been sent home, and had obtained the sanction of his Majesty
in Council—Now he solemnly declared that that was the first
time that he had ever heard that fact from any authority. He
had anxiously endeavoured and inquired after information as
to that important fact, -but had never been able to learn that
the rules had been sent home, or that the sanction required,
was obtained.

The -RECORDER remarked, that it was required by the
Charter, that all the rules of that Court should be sanctioned
by his Majesty in Council, and he, therefore, presumed that
they had been so sanctioned,
Mr. lii.-wibr..:—Surely, on a point of such vital importanceai

that, which had been the subject of doubt and enquiry ever
since he came to Bombay, was it not going too far to say, that
because the Charter required such sanction, it had been there-
fore obtained, or that, because it was required to be done, it
must necessarily have been 'done. That sanction, if clearly
established, would have precluded them (the Bar) from at all
questioning the legelity and validity of the small Cause Court
proceedings,and would have deprived them at once of thatground
of complaint in the'.mernorial. His Lordship might be in pos-
session of fuller and more correct information on that point
than they were, but, as the result of their enquiries had left the.
fact undecided, they might be justified in assuming that it was
not proved, and that the rules of the small cause Court never
had obtained the sanctions reqUired by the charter. Ile skould
conclude, what he had to say, by again disclaiming most so-
lemnly any intention of disrespect to the Court, or to any of
its members, and by appealing to the memorial itself, and.to it
fair and dispassionate consideration of its contents, to 'free
them (the Bar) from that' charge which was now made against
them.
The RECORDER addressed Mr. Advocate-General, and
asked whether he Witt-led to say any thing ?
Mr. Anvocoor E-GENERAL.—IIe had but a very few words
to say, Mr. Irwin having fully and sufficiently expressed his
feelings. But hie Lordship had alluded to some of the state-
ments in that memorial, which he had taken down as being
tthey w
e unfounded,ere and,deemed et iibeuu
perhaps,o it might be on that very account that
s. He would therefore, if his Lord-
ship would allow hiln, advert to those statements, to the facts on
which the Bar had, in their minds, conceived they were founded.
First, as to the courts being sometimes held privately. There
was one case of a man, having been committed for a contempt
of Court, in reference to some proceedings of his, as a clerk in
the office of the small-cause Court, and which proceedings
were the subject of many private examinations by the Court.
The Court, too, which committed him was held privately ; nor
did he believe any one yet knew what the nature of this con-
tempt. That, therefore, appeared to them (the Bar) as one
instance of a private Court.
The REconnrit—That, Sir, was an inquiry in private
chambers into the conduct of that person, and nor a Court
which was held.
ADvottTE-GENEitee—But, as he believed, a con-
tempt could be committed only against a Court of Record, and
a Court of Record alone could commit for a contempt, they
(the Bar) had, of course, conceived that those private sittings
were Courts.
The REcortuEtr—Did lie mean to say that only Courts of
Record could commit for contempt ?
Mr. ADVOCATE-GENERAD—He should say so.
The itmconnEtt—Did he mean to say that he (the Re-
corder) could not commit a man who insulted him, for in-
stance, ie his own private chamber? (pointing to it).
Mr. ADVOCATE-GENERAL.—He(the Adv.-Gen.) spoke off
hand, certainly, and from mere recollection, and perhaps he
might be exemplifying prodigious ignorance ; but he would
venture to submit that neither his Lordship, nor a Judge of
the Court of King's Bench, could commit a man as for contempt
committed against him in his private chamber. Another point
was as to Courts held without any rule for that purpose and
without public notice. Now the regular day fixed for Courts
for small causes, by the rules promulgated, was every Saturday.
But the days had been repeatedly changed; although he could
say for himself, and, he believed, for the rest of the Bar, that
they had had no notice of the new appointed days; nor hadi any
rule, lie believed, been as yet made on the subject. lie be-
lieved, indeed, that Saturday was almost the only day on which
those Courts were now never held. Ire knew not what other
authority settled the day from time to time but his Lordship's
discretion.
The Itexontern.—lf he (the Advocate-General) had had
no notice of the Court days it was his own fault, for he
might have known by enquiring of the officer, and if he
had attended in Court he would have heard the officer ad-
journ the Court to the next day, or on which it was to be
held. Ile had altered the regular day from Saturday to Tues-
day, for the facilities of business, although the alteration was
not yet made a rule. The other days were merely adjournment
days.
Mr. Alderman MERITON—IIe had always heard the
officer adjourn the Court when lie was present to the next
Court day. And he had never known of any Court having
been held during his time to sit, to which lie had not been
summoned.
31 r. ADVOCATE-GEterten—Perhaps the statement then
was too broad, in saying eeenerally, that Courts were held with-
out public notice; and he was very sorry that it should not
have been qualified by reference to the kind of notice given,
.namely, that by the officer of adjournment, and by the sum-
mons of the Aldermen. He would wish this qualification
should be inserted in the Memorial. He could safely say that
no 'such notice had ever come to their (the Bar's) knowledge.
But, in truth, whatever might have been stated erroneously, or
whatever expression might in its nature be considered offen-
sive to the Court, the Bar would be glad to expunge, or
amend, or vary, in any way the Court might be pleased
.to
suggest.
The only other topic to which his Lordship had pointed as
unfounded, referred to the examination of the parties Viva
Voce upon oath.
The R eCOILDER.—By the term parties any one would sup-
pose that both plaintiff and defendant were meant, but the
plaintiff only was ever examined.
Mr. ADVOCATE-GENERAL._He (the Advocate-General)
was not aware himself of any distinction which his Lordship
drew, between party plaintiff and party defendant. He had
thought, however, that both parties had been examined, and he
was the more induced to think so, from his Lordship having de-
claret' he had authority to examine the plaintiff. But, in fact,
he believed that he could refer to notes taken upon the only
two occasions that he ever attended a small Cause Court, by
which it would appear that both parties had been occasionally
examined. . •
The RECORDER:—When, pray, had lie ever known, a de-
fendant examined ? He had a right to examine the plaintiff,
when the defendant did not appear, both by the rules and the
Charter ; but lie never, that lie recollected, examined the-de-
fendant.
Mr. ADVOCATE-GENERAL—He could not say that he
could find in tim charter any such authority for examin-
ing the plaintiff. But as to the instances he had spoken
of, he had not seen his notes since they were taken,
which was now two or three, months ago, and he could not
et absolutely sure :—but, speaking from recollection, he could
refer to a case, in which his Lordship entered into a long exa-
mination of a defendant, as to a claim of set-off, and proposed.
an arbitration to bins, to which he finally assented, and it was
then intimated that such reference would be made obligatory by
a rule of Court.
The Ruconmen.—Was that an examination ?—asking a
party to refer his cause.
Mr. ADVOCATE-GENERAL—He could only say that it was
an examination upon oath, and referred to the caefits of his
claims.
He had now offered all that he had to say upon the subject,
except that he disclaimed all intentions of conveying any disre-
spect to the members of the Court. Indeed, it was their (the
Bar's) object to make an appeal to higher authorities on the
subject of these Courts ; but he had conceived and had express-
ed such opinion, that it would be the more respectful to address
their Lordships in the first instance. Referring to the impres-
sion taken up by the Court, lie would wish to express for him-
self and his brethren their regret that they had done thus much
to occasion it; but he confessed, that he was not in the least
aware that such an interpretation could be fairly put upon that
appeal.
Mr. PARRY, on a reference made to hhn by the Recorder,
declared that the sentiments which had keen expressed by Mr.
Irwin and by Mr. Advocate- General, were so perfectly in ac-
cordance with his own, that he had nothing further to add than
that, if that memorial were to be considered either libellous
or disrespectful, the object with which he had signed it would
be entirely defeated.
Mr. LE MEssußfEn and Mr. CLEreewn declined occupy-
ing the time of the Court, as all that they had to offer had been
already so fully expressed.
The RECORDER then conferred with the other Members of
the Court, and after a few seconds said, that the Court had con-
sidered the memorialeand the imputations which they contained,
and which nothing on the part of the Bar had removed. It
would have been culpable
in any man to have presented such
a memorial. It was far more culpable in the Gentlemen
of the Bar: The Gentlemen of the Bar ought to have
known better. They. ought to have known better than to
have stated matters, taking the chance of their being true,
not knowing whether they were facts or not. It appeare
ed that Mr. Advocate-General admitted hiniself to be
wrong in one or two instances. It was unnecessary for him to
go again into the matters of the Memorial. All these gentle-
men had presumed to state that they had seen what they had
tdheeclsaernedte,naciesdoftoti
e hlalledouit: pwtoash, that they should be suspended.im as the President of the Court.
On account of the insult which had been offered to the Court,
or in the words of the Charter, removed from their situation of
Barristers in the Court for the space of six calendar months,
and that in the mean time the Attornies should practice as Ad-
vocates, as well as Attornies,

We beg to point attention to the foregoing proceedings which
have recently taken plac&in the Recorder's Court. Vire men-
tioned in our last that we expected to be able to lay before the
public a copy of the Memorial presented on a former occasion.
The observatien was made from a presumption that the Me-
morial did not contain any matter which might be construed
into a libel.'rhe
Court has however considered part of the
Document to be libellous, we therefore give to the public such
parts only a were read, and formed the subject matter of dis-
cassion in the C0urt.........(1icm&ay GaZelte.)