The Sun.
London, England, 1848-07-14 00:00:00

THE LIBERTY of the SUBJECT.
INQUISITORIAL PROCEEDINGS OF GRAND

JURIES.

TO THE EDITOR OP THE SUN.

SlR,—The liberty of the subject, and a fair and open
trial by jury, is the boast of every nati re of this realm;
and few men, unacquainted with our forms of proceed.
ing in criminal law, will believe it possible that in this
" land of liberty," as we call it, a person may, behind his
back, and without any notice to him, be accused of a
criminal offence, however heinous, tried by the grand
jury, found guilty, held to bail, or apprehended, and
committed to prison, without his having even heard of the
offence with which he is charged. And yet, Sir, monstrous
as it may appear, such cases occur almost every day in
this country, and will continue to occur as long as the
present iniquitous system is allowed t) continue of grand
juries finding indictments behind the back of the party
accused, and without any investigation of the case in his
presence. _ _ .

Some time last year the Cimmon Council of the city
of London unanimously agreed to petition Parliament
to amend the law in this respect. One of the speakers
upon that occasion described the present system as being
" worse titan the Inquisition." And Mr. flumfrey and
Mr. Wire (both professional gentlerann of great ex-
perience in criminal matters) stated that, to their know-
ledge, the present system was almost daily made the
medium of private malignity and revenge, or of vexation,
and that there were hundreds of persons in this country
who made a livelihood by preferring indictments upon
false charges, getting the bills •` found" by the grand
jury, and afterwards extorting money from the persons
falsely accused, upon the terms of abandoning the pro-
seeution. But, although such petition was agreed to
nearly a year ago, and another session of Parliament
has almost passed away, nothing has yet been done to
correct this infamous state of the law.

That this inquisitorial mode of proceeding of the grand
juries, capable of being, and constantly put in motion
against innocent parties, for the mere purposes of revenge
or extortion, should be allowed to continue to the present
day, is really surprising, and I can only attribute it to
the general ignorance which prevails upon the subject
amongst unprofessional persons. I have constantly, in
the society of inteiligeut unprofessional men, pointed
out this anomalous state of our criminal law, and have
always found the greatest difficulty in making any per-
son believe that such a state of things could really exist
in this country in the 19th century.
It is said that one fact is better than a thousand ar-
guments, and therefore I shall take the liberty of men-
tioning two cases which occurred, within my own know-
ledge, during the last few months, both of which strongly
illustrate the necessity of an alteration in the law on the
above subject.

In one Case, a French gentleman came to this country
to recover a debt due to him by a person residing here,
and commenced an action for its recovery. His debtor
sought to evade payment of the debt, and as a mode of
coercing him into giving it up, or compromising it, pre-
ferred an indictment against him for some absurd charge,
went before the grand jury, and behind the back of,
and unknown to, the accused, got the bill of indictment
found, and a warrant issued for his apprehension, under
which he was arrested and confined in Newgate. And
when the case came on for trial, the jury immediately
pronounced a verdict of acquittal, and the judge said,
that the grand jury should never have found the bill of
indictment.
In another case, the defendants in an equity suit
sought to compel their opponent to abandon his claims
against them, by intimidation, by availing themselves of
the existing odious system which I have endeavoured
to denounce. Accordingly, they trumped up two in-
dictments against the plaintiff in the suit, went before
the grand jury, and as a matter of course, upon their
de ixc t Pma er nt et
afonudnudn, cwoatirtrraandtiesteit evidence,sisuedfcvthgeoutptphe apprehensofion
of
the accused, and his committal to Newgate, without any
notice to him, or any investigation of the alleged charges
in his presence. But he having procured bail, taken
defence to the indictments, and resisted all their attempts
at intimidation and coercion, when the cases came on
the prosecutor abandoned both the indictments.
It is, Sir, in the hope of calling public attention to
this important matter, so intimately connected with the
liberty of the subject, that I take the liberty of address-
ing this letter to you, and I trust that you will have the
kindness to give it insertion in your widely circulating
journal.—l am, Sir, your obedient servant,
A BARRISTER.

THE QUEEN v. BARNES.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

SIR,—In referencetotheshort report of this case in
your journal, we, as solicitors employed for the prosecu-
tion, deem it but justice towards our client, the Reverend
Thomas Harvey, to state, that the Learned Counsel,
when withdrawing the prosecution, misconceived the mo-
tives which influenced the adopting of that course on the
part of our client.

The sole object of Mr. Harvey in commencing pro-
ceedings at all, was the preservation of his child from
continuing an unhappy connexion. That object having
been accomplished, and reposing, as he does, the fullest
confidence in his daughter's decision, Mr. Harvey after-
wards felt himself permitted, without inconsistency, to
abandon the prosecution, and, moreover, considered it his
duty so to act, in order that, as a Christian, and more
especially as a clergyman, no vindictive feelings should
be attributed to him, notwithstanding the bitter injury
inflicted.

If, in the exercise of his judgment the Learned Coun-
sel did not fully adopt our client's wishes, it is incumbent
on us to give this additional explanation; and we rely on
your courtesy and impartiality to favour us with a
prompt insertion, as under the present impression which
the report is calculated to convey to the public, the
Reverend Gentlemen's motives may be misconstrued.
We have the honour to be, Sir,
Your most obedient servants,
LEWIS and COOKE.
No. 4, Barnard's Inn, Holborn, July 11, 1848.

LIGHT-HOUSE APPARATUS.—The vessel Pharos,
arrived in the Commercial Docks, from Havre, has
brought 65 boxes 9 cases and one other package of
light-house apparatus of French manufacture, intended
to be shipped immediately from hence to Leith. This
large parcel of light-house apparatus, consisting of
lenses of large size and power, are understood to be im-
ported on account of the Commissioners of the Northern
Lights, and are intended to be toed for the light-houses
under their direction.