The Sun.
London, England, 1851-11-17 00:00:00

S U No

LO,NDON, 'MONDAY TEITENING, NOVEMBER 174 1851.

LIVERPOOL COUNTY COURT' CASE.
CONCLUSION OF THE DEFENCE.
PRESTON, SATURDAY, Nov. 15.—At the
_opening of
the court the first witness called was
Mr. Ge.)rge Stone, who said he was high bailiff of the
Liverpool County Court, and had been appointed by the
late Mr. Lowndes. He considered the demeanour of
Mr. Ramshay as calm, collected, and dignified. He
had improved the mode of conducting business. It bad
improved in quality and increased in quantity. The
behaviour of Mr. Ramsbay was dignified, and like that
of a judge determined to keep order in his court, and
make it respectable. Ho had a peculiar mode of shut-
ting his teets, and people who did not know him thought
it was: from bad temper. He did not hear the word
" ass" used by Mr. Ramshay.
Cross-examined—Had never signed a memorial in
favour of another judge, nor suggested a memorial in
favour of Ramshay, as a counter memorial to that pre-
sented against him. Did not know whether Mr. Lowndes
ever fined any one. Considered Mr. Ramshay to have
the. average temper of men. He recollected an occasion
when Mr. Ramshay recommended a poor woman to
bring in action fur money misappropriated, and said, it
she had not the money Ise would give it to her.
Mr. Ramshay he re rose and said—That although he
did not wish to volunteer as a witness in his own cause,
ho was ready to answer any question put to him.
This closed the case for the defence.
Mr. Monk then replied on the part of the memorialists.
He commenced by deprecating the violent attacks which
had laecen made by Sergeant Wilkins on everybody, high
and low, and attributed them to a distempered imagina-
tion. He did not think there was another man in the
profession who would have taken a similar course. Al-
though the inquiry had lasted a very considerable time,
the question simply was, whether Mr. Ramshay was fit
to be a county court judge? It was his duty to con-
tend that the evidence he had brought forward proved
that he was not. He was certainly surprised that the
Learned Sergeant had so virulently attacked the re-
porters, who were performing a peaceful and useful
duty, and who could not make any answer. He had,
however, made use of' their testimony when it suited
his purpose. He should only refer to portions of the
evidence; for instance, he must call attention to the
speech of Mr. Ramshay on the 25th Of August. He
could only consider that speech as a declaration of war
against the people of Liverpool, and as proving the
allegation of the memorial—that he was unfit to be a
judge of the County Court there. He denied that the
press of Liverpool had prevented Mr. Ramshay from
performing his duties. The Learned Counsel then de-
precated the selection of the County Court for the din-
ner, and' said he did not think Mr. Sergeant Wilkins had
justified Abe introduction by Mr. Ramshay of the biogra-
phical account of his family. He feared that a man so
sensitive about his family as Mr. Ramsbay was not fit to
be a judge. After seeing the placards, Mr. Ramshay
had fined a great many people. Ho believed this fact
proved the allegation of the memorialists, that Mr. Ram-
shay.had an undue notion of his own dignity. The
judges of the land never fined people in this wholesale
way for a supposed contempt of their persons and con-
duct. The Learned Counsel, after describing at some
length the scene in court when Mr. Whitty was there,
contended that there ought to have been some warrant,
writing, or authority for his arrest. The case was dif-
ferent where the contempt was committed before the
judge. The case of " the King v. Clement" did not bear
upon this case, and the other cases cited were not analogous
The Learned Counsel then cited various cases in support of
his views. He then argued that the Bending a verbal
message was not a good proceeding under this Act. The
Act directecLthat all orders and other proceedings of the
Court should be entered upon the records, and within
the Act of Parliament there was no " order" in this
case,.as the Act directed. The attempt to arrest Mr.
Whitty, under the circumstances, was utterly unautho-
rised ; and-the bailiffs might have been treated as tres-
passers, or even as' Sir George Stephen had advised.
The whole question was, whether the bailiffs were au-
thorised or not ? •
The Court here adjourned for a short time, after which
Mr. Maule proceeded to defend the witnesses on the
part of the memorial from the observations and attacks
of Mr. Sergeant Wilkins. He concluded by comment-
ing at great length upon the evidence, which he said
fully supported the memorial..
Mr. Fowler expressed his thanks, and that of Mr.
Sergeant Wilkins to his Lordship.
The Earl of .Carlisle said he should give his deci-
sion with as little delay as the importance of the subject
warranted.
The inquiry then terminated a little before four
o'clock.