The Sun.
London, England, 1847-12-21 00:00:00

PUBLICOLA,

SALE OF CADETSHIPS.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

THE QUEEN V. CAPTAIN CHARRITIE, SIR W. YOUNG,
ANNA STEW ART, AND RALLETT.
This was an indictment against the defendants, in
which they were charged under the Act 49th Geo. 111.,
e. 126, sec. 3, with the offence of having fraudulently
obtained and disposed of a cadetship in the East India
Company's service for a pecuniary reward or considera-
tion, to a person named Wotherspoon, for his son, the
sum paid being upwards of 3,0001. Sir W. Young was
charged with having disposed of the appointment, and
the other defendants with assisting to procure it. There
was another count in the indictment, charging the de-
fendants with a conspiracy to obtain an appointment for
a pecuniary consideration. The defendants who ap-
peared—Sir W. Young and Captain Charritie—had
pleaded " Not guilty." The other defendants were out
of the jurisdiction, and had not pleaded.
The case was commenced on Saturday, and con
eluded late last night.
During the two days, a vast quantity of evidence was
adduced in support of the charge, after which Lord
Denman summed up, and explained the law to the jury.
He said that the question which the jurors had to de-
termine was, whether they were satisfied on this evi-
dence that Charritie had received this money for the
nomination to the cadetship, and whether Sir W. Young
had wilfully and knowingly assisted him in receiving it.
They had just heard from several most respectable
witnesses a very good character of both these de-
fendants, and their situation in life would have
seemed almost a guarantee against the commission
of the offence for which they were indicted.
Captain Charritie's character was high in the know-
ledge of various respectable persons. Sir W. Young's
character, in addition to that, seemed vouched for
by the Company itself—the station he occupied
in the Company spoke strongly for its respectability.
The jurors would, therefore, say, whether in their opi-
nion, the existence of the offence was clearly proved ?
It was clear that Wotherspoon was his accomplice, and
his evidence required confirmation according to the or-
dinary rules of law. In the first place, it was clear that
Young gave a nomination to a cadetship to Charritie ;
that this was afterwards given to young Wother-
spoon, :and that that person was at ;the time an
entire stranger to Young and to Charritie.
The jurors had been told to look on the secret
examinations by the East India House with indignation.
It was certainly dangerous in any party to prosecute
such examinations. He (Lord Denman) had always
been opposed to those practices which existed in foreign
countries, where the prisoner being compelled to answer
the magistrate set his will to work in a contest against
the prisoner, trying every artifice of knowledge and
skill to obtain from him a confession of guilt. Such
a course was oppressive towards a prisoner, and
might make even . fear and ignorance assume
the semblance of guilt. But the examination here
stood upon an entirely different footing. Whether they
might not have been conducted with some degree of
acuteness it was not necessary to say ; that might be
doubtful; but it was most proper, on the part of the
directors, to appoint a committee of inquiry into cor-
rupt practices among the directors of the company,
if any such practices were even supposed to exist.
No man of reason or honour could doubt that. The
existence of bribery and corruption throughout so-
ciety, in Parliamentary elections, in offices, and in
other matters, was something which required to be
vigorously suppressed, and if not suppressed, if allowed
to continue and to spread, would bring us to such a
state that we should not have one man of principle left
in society. Every person would, even in self defence,
join in the general corruption. If appointments were
never to be obtained but by gifts, those means of ob-
taining them would be universally resorted to, for every
one would feel that if he did not resort to them he lost
substantial advantages, and that his character was only
like that of his neighbour, and would not be affected by
such conduct. He knew nothing of such importance,
if they regarded the honour of themselves or their
families, than that this course of corrupt proceeding
should be discouraged by every means and the
interests of the country especially required that
it should be discouraged within the limits of
the East India Company's territories, and among the
servants of that company, wherever they were found.
Sir W. Young was a director. It was his duty, the
moment that a suspicion was entertained, to require
that an inquiry should take place, and when himself
called on to submit to that inquiry, it should have been
his most anxious wish to go into that inquiry, and to
afford the fullest explanation, and make himself of the
party of the inquirers, and not to be opposed to them ;
instead of considering that they were acting to his pre-
judice, he should have deemed that they were seeking to
confirm and establish his honour, and he should
have given every assistance to the investigation.
It was important to observe that this inquiry, in which
the defendant Young was called on to give information,
took place at a time he was fully aware of the circum-
stances, and of Charritie's application to Wotherspoon,
to get up a case of pretended employment and agency
between himself and that person. It might have been
thought that as between Charritie and Young this would
have been rejected by the latter with the greatest scorn;
that as between a gentleman and gentleman, he would
have treated it as an insult scarcely to be borne. It
might have been thought that he would have said, "If
you have sold yourself, am I therefore to be
bought ? Am I to be implicated in your cor-
rupt transanctions?" But be had not done
so; he had adopted the account given by Charritie. The
examination was necessary, and it seemed to have been
conducted with gravity, calmness, and deliberation.
Plenty of time was given the defendants to know the
charge, and plenty of time to answer it. Suppose Sir
W. Young to be both aged and infirm, that would not
show that his mind was bewildered by this inquiry. He
was in full possession of the charge; he had the option
to answer or not; and if in such circumstances answers
came out that were important to the inquiry, it was the
duty of the Court to use those answers against him. His
and the on Lordship here went through the examinations, and then
referring to the distinction between the proof they fur-
nishedreeort asgaiadintshtatSiitr
wWas. Youngthat these d
efndn tad charge
nwthe
not tried for concealing, but for comm. • itting a particular
act, namely,•the one for putting m • s
()Ley into nis pocket,
and the other for assisting him in doing
so ; but it
was for the jury to say, whether this act of conceal-
ing, which was now admitted, was not extremely
strong evidence of the previous • assistance having been
given. Ilis Lordship then went through the evi-
dence, and finally left it to the jury to say, whether
it was or not proved that this place or appointment
was sold? It might be that Charritie got the greatest
profit from it, but had not Young assisted him to get
that profit? These were the two charges contained in
the first count. Were they both, or was either of there,