The Sun.
London, England, 1802-02-08 00:00:00

YARMOUTH, FEB.

THE Ann, CLOSE, from Blyth to London, is put
with loss of anchors.

At day-light this morning a large Brig, supposed
to be a Collier, was discovered to be on the Cockle
Sand, off this Town : she disappeared about ten
o'clock, and it is feared all hands perished.
On the 4th the Providence, of Lynn, BLY TH mas-
ter, from Chatham to Blackney, in ballast, was run
down about four miles to the Southward of Cromer,
in eleven fathom water, by the Elizabeth, of North
Shields. The crew with difficulty got on board the
Elizabeth, and were saved.

On Friday a letter was sent to the Commissioners
of the Navy, announcing a donation of 'O,OOOl. to
Greenwich Hospital, and the same sum to the Chest
at Chatham. The author of this princely donation
signs himself A Friend to the Nacy. He is un-
known. The money is to be paid, we hear, through
the Banking-house of COUTTS and Co.
The Lisbon Mail of Saturday .brings some par-
tial confirmation to the report which has been in cir-
culation for some days, of the dispersion and loss of
several ships of the Fleet, which sailed from Brest
for St. Domingo.
La Duquesne, of 74 guns, Citizen QUERANGAL,
and La Cornelia, of 40, Citizen VILLEMANDRIN,
part of this fleet, and full of troops, were separated
from the Admiral on the 26th December, to the
northward of Cape Finisterre, and put into Cadiz
on the 6th January.
On the 16th ult. a brig arrived at Oporto from
Baltimore, and reports that, or. the 3d. in lat. 23. 5.
long. 30. 8. she saw a ship of the line under French
colours, with her masts by the board, and in great
apparent distress ; which was further expressed by
signal guns. The brig endeavoured to approach her,
but the sea ran so high, and the wind blew so fresh,
that after devoting several hours to the attempt, she
was obliged to relinquish it.
The Mi/brooke schooneri which arrived at Lisbon
21st ult., from Gibraltarvmentions a report to have
prevailed at'Cadiz, that,Aeveral
,s 4 the Fleet had
been lost.

. ,
Letters from the Cacar, of 84 guns, Rear-Ad-
miral Sir JAMES SAUMAREZ, dated Gibraltar, the
zzd ult, confirm the account of GANTHEAUME hay-
passed the Gut on the zoth ult, with four Sail of
the Line and two Frigates, and that the Rear-Ad-
miral had immediately, dispatched the Warrior,
Zealous, Bellona, and Defence, of 74 guns, to ob-
berve their motions, though it is supposed they were
gone to Cadiz, to be joined by some other ships.

L4J P EPORT,

COURT 8F KING's BENCH, Fit. 6.

VIE KING •z). IeLEOD.

THE Case of the above Defendant is not so im-
portant in itself, as the matter is, whiCh is involved
in it, from the turn which the discussion took ; but
which; in that paint of view, is extremely interesi.:.
ing; for which reason we shall enter more at length
into the Report of it, than the Case would of itself
have otherwise required. -
The ATTORNEY GENERAL stated minutely. the
Affidavit of the Defendant, on Which this Motion
was grounded, and upon whkh Motion, a Rule was
granted calling on the ATTORNEY GENERAL, to
shew Cause- why the ri L
elerklantld not be at li-
berty to carry down theskecordi of these Informa-
tions, which had been fried against him, by Pro-
viso, in order that they might be tried, &c. on
the ground of its being delayed by the Crown, to
the oppression of the Defendant, who had already
had three Notices of Trial, and all of them counter-
ni:o and the necessary expences of his prepara-
tion for his Defence having exhaued his resources,
and reduced him to the extreme of poverty, he be-
ing now obliged to subsist on the Prison Allowance,
&c.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL observed, as he went
along, that the Affidavit of the Defendant was
drawn in a way that was calculated to misrepresent
the cause of his detention, for that he hadstatcd one
of the Libels charged against him, as being a com-
plaint against MartiA Law in Ireland—whereas it
was a publication against that system of prudence
adopted by the wisdom of the Legislature for the
safety of the State, and without which there would
have been no Law. The other parts of the Affidavit
were drawn with a view, obviously, to introduce
topics of declamation upon sufferings, which are the
unavoidable attendants of (ladled guilt—but which,
sometimes, succeed in making an impression on
some thoughtless People. •
Having gone through the whole of the Defend-
ant's Affidavit, the ATTORNEY GEN'ERAL proceeded
nearly as follows : .
My Lords, although I am non'obliged, in the
exercise of that which is undoubtedly part of the
legitimate function of my office, the charging of
men with Misdemeanours tending to excite Discon-
tents, to account to; thisGentleinan, why I have
aced as I have done, or to assign to him, or to any
one, reasons for postponing .these Trials, in as
much as I can account to myself, for reasons that
are satisfaCtory to my own. conscience, for every-
thing I did in this case, which reasons, hope)
would nor be satisfaaory to me, nniess they were
such :if; would satisfy every moral mind—and, pro_.
testnig, as. I do, against the right of demanding of
me any account whatever of my. conduct in such
ce:,es, and insisting, as I do, upon my right to de-
mur to any compulsion to account for my conduct as
a Prosecutor in these cases, I will, nevertheless,
state to your Lordships the. reasons, which the De-
fendant in these Causes) and those who are connect-
ed with him, know to be the reasons, why these
Trials have not come on at an earlier period.—
They were to have taken place at the Sit-
tings after the last Trinity Term, in the usual
course of Trials before Special Juries, at Guildhall.
There was a Witness whose evidence might have
been material, although perhaps not absolutely ne-
cessary, who by an accident well known to have
happened, was for a time disabled from attend-'
ing upon these trials at the Sittings after Trinity
Term, consequently the Trials were postponed
until the Sittings after Michaelmas Term, the
notice of which, together with the reason for it,
were duly given to t his 'Defendant by Mr. Wit trE,
the Solicitor for the Treasury. The Noble Earl
to whom I allude (Lord CLARE) to the great loss
of that Country in which he so meritoriously aeted,
is no more. Here I should state to your Lord-
ships, the situation of the Defendant, in or;?er to
show that he has not actually sustained any •incon-
venience in consequence of thiS postponement of his
trial. He could not have any anxiety to be relieved
from the apprehension of,an ignominious punishment,
for he has already stood upon the pillory. All his
Witnesses live within the boundaries of the capital,
as he has stated in his Affidavit, and from their
station, it is not probable that they would -take the
tlligle shilling which usually accompanies the Copy
of the Subpcena, but I really ought not to consider
these things; if they be hardships, they unavoidably
attend conduct such as the Defendant has pursued.
The Learned Gentleman (Mr. SCOTT) who sits
behind me, having occasionally asked me questions
upon these trials as to my intention of proceeding,
knows the disposition of my mind upon the subjea-
, as well as :I do myself. • At the Sittings after
Michaelmas Term, there was, we all know, such a
load of business as made it quite impossible to go
through it ; Many of the Special Jury Causes stood
over, aild there is now a large reserve of Remanet
to be tried of them. Why then, I was to consider
what was best for me to do ? The was
already a Prisoner, he would not- be detained an
hour in custody longer on account of the postpone-
ment of these trials, for the time of his present
sentence will not have expired bcfere his trial shall
take place, after all the delay he causes to complain.
of.—He suffers no anxiety on the score of apprehen-
sion of an infamous punishment, for .that he has
already suffered by standing in the pillory.—He
has no expense to defray on keeping Witnesses in
town, for they live in the capital. As to all ex-
pences of Counsel, we all know how gratui-
tously that is had in Cases of this description ; nor
indeed can there be any Witnesses on either side
whose evidence will be very material to the issue,
except those who, on our part, will prove the
publication. ~On the other side, I will 'venture
to say, before-hand,, they will probably be called
for the purpoSC of introducing topics of declama-
tion, and to •give an opportunity for the further
circulation of the mischief of the publication--
Nor do I believe that one of the Witnesses the
Defendant has subpoenaed will cost him a single
-penny. So stands the case upon the score of in-
convenience to the Defendant. I was observing to
the Court, that at the Sittings after last Michael-
mas Term, a great reserve was made of very im-
portant causes, Many of which were pressing in
point of time; Masters of ships, and other.persons

- :

gOing abroad;` the eYpenee of ttetemion het:
enormous, a vaiiety of transaCtions
on the affairs of mankind, and •,-,'hich, 7 t),)tight
entitled them to a precedence to the trial of
causes, and they had, it. -So that Chese causes stood
to the adjourned. Sittings at Guiniall• beford'
present term. The Dcf:ndant's .:affidavit su4-gests

somzthing as if these trials were fL.:ed and post_
polled without a communication with -the Learned
ju!ge. The fa& is, and it is 1).-A-fe.61.1y familiar to

us all who attend trials at Nis; Prius —we know

that' arranjement. of causes is suggested by a very
iatelligenti, °dicer who accompanies his Lordship
(Mr. LAW -r Eli, Clerk of Nisi Pritss); which at%.

rangernt!r‘t is communicated to his Lordship,' who
afterwards sanctions it, nor can it have any ,effea
without that sanction. According to that arrange.

ment, these causes were to have been tried before
this Term, and at my instance, they were placed

tbremost in the paper.for that putpose.

His Lord-

ship allotted two days for these trials before this
Term. It so happened that I was engaged in the
trial of Governor Wall at the Old. Bailey.; That
trial was once intended on the Friday preceding the
day for which it was afterwards api.-loimed; it could
not then take place, far reasons which I cannot be
expeaed to explain; it was appointed for the fol-
lowing Wednesday. There were three indiaments
found against that person, for• three distina

ders, which your I,nrdships know could not be
included in one indiftinent. ILia that. person been
acquitted on the first indictment, it might have
been necessary to go into • the circumstances of the
second, and inmille third, in "the event of an ac..
quittal of the se&-mtl. There was therefore a pos
sibility of more days than one being taken up in the
trial of that person for the charges exhibited against
him ; and there was the greatest probability that
his case would not be over until 'three or four on
the following morning. On Thu'rsday, which was
the day preceding the 'Fenn, there was a considerablO
number of causes which stood for trial. One which
had been depending far upwards of twenty years, and
the Plaintiff tiad been in gaol for four years, and
I thought his claim to precedence to the trial of
this Gentleman well founded. Another cause be-
tween Mr. IN/le7stitr and the East India Company,
stood for trial also; the cause was important, and
must necessarily have occupied a great deal of
time, had the parties not agreed in Court to make
a case of it for argument before your Lordships
upon a point of law. This Gentleman being in
custody, there appeared to me, for the reasons I
have already stated; less inconvenience to be sus_
tained by him if his causes remained, than would
have been sustained by others whose causes stood
for trial, and therefore they had the preferenee,
and, these causes remain untried. I have acted upon'
circumstances, and have been governed by re.asons,
that are satisfanory to tnytteif, and, I trust, satin_
factory. to every other reasonable person. I should
not have said so much, had I not known there has
gone abroad a number of aspersions ag:linst per..
sons in office, as if we had t-;catedthis Defendant
harshly, and as if he had met o:yression from
Government. I know it is • essential that the
Public shotild not he imposed upon in these matters,.
and that they should not be led to believe that any
of 17-lis Majesty's Ministers have affect in a manner
contrary to the oath of His :Majesty luniseif, which
is, to administer justice in mercy, impartially, and
without delay. No such injustice is intended—no
such injustice shall take place. This is an attack
on the King's Attorney-General, an attempt to
render him odious in• the public eye ; the return he
intends to make is, to bring the Party to trial
according to the rules\ of law, precisely as if no
such unworthy artifice had been attempted. And
now my Lords, having disposed of the question of
delay, I shall proceed to examine • the question of
law on which this Gentleman has moved for this
Rule. I contend, my Lords, it is impossible for
the Court to make this Rule absolute." •

Mr. justice Goose.—" Mr. Att-orney, this is
not the first time that this subject. has been before
the Court, when we put it to .Mc.-SCOTT to con-
sider, whether or not the case of the King and
Dyde, in 7 Term Rep. was in the way of this
motion. That case was perfedly well considered.
It was given up by a Gentleman who understoOd
very well what he was about, and who is not in
the habit of surrendering any_ point that is main-
tainable in favour of his Client. The matter was,
therefore, stated to Mr. SCOTT, to consider whether
'he would think it worth his while to- move it, for -
the single question now is, Whether the case of
the King and, Dyde is law or not ?''
Mr. ATTORNEY GFNERAL.—" The Case of the
Oueen and Banks, which is relied upon by Mr.
SCOTT, is reported by Lord RAYMOND, and in that
Report there is no such stuff as has been stated, as
calling on the Attorney General to assign reasons
for not bringing the Defendant to trial—but with_
out the Warrant of the Attorney General, the
Case could not be tried at all: God forbid the time
should ever come when the power of the A ttorney
General shall be used for the oppression of the
Subjea, as is more than insinuated by this Defend-
ant and his Supporters. I hope every person con_
earned in the Administration of Justice, will always
he able to account satisfadorily for his conduct;--
but I cannot . Surrender the prerogative of the
Crown, nor any part of the power of the King's
Attorney General, which may be essential for the
support of that prerogative. There may be periods
in which it would be unsafe to bring Criminals to
Justice, and when their escape may be attended
with the most injurious consequences to the Public.
Suppose the times so feverish as that there should
be such prejudice, and such other causes to operate,
that there could be no rational hope for the due
Administration of Justice, that it might be dan-
o-erous to disclose fads, and the like, until proper
preparation was made for their disclosure, is the
Attorney General, in such times, to be called on to
assign his reasons for not proceeding to trial ? Or,
is he -to be subject to captious insinuations if he
does not ? Are all the Officers of Government to be
aspersed for the time being, if they do not, because
discontented men chose to call for it, give every
information of the •cause of postponing trial.,
This, I take leave to say, would he very injurious
to the Public, My Lords, I beg leave to make on.
observation upon this Case—this application to the
. Court is an arrow out
.of the :,ame quiver from

which same arrows were shot before. We can
know hand-writings, sometimes, without having
seen the Party write. This comes from the same
band that wrote some other- injurious caluinni-!s
upon the economy of places
.of confinement. I
know the drift of all these insinuations about Jaifs
and Jail allowances ; they are written with a spi-
rit of malignity—the objed is, first to excite pity
where none is due, then to raise a clamour against
imaginary cruelty ; all this by means of scandalous
falsehoods,, ushered forth by means of pretended
Motions in Courts of Justice, for the• support of
the Liberty of the Subjdt, with which they have
nor the least real connection, nor is that, in the re-
motest degree, the object. The object is to bring
into --hatred the Constituted Authorities of the
Country, and to bring into disesteem its National
Justice. That the objet fails is not owing to the
'want of perseverance in its authors. Why all this-
complaint of Jails in Motions:in Courts of Law
If there be foundation for such complaints let appli-
cations he made where such applications may, regu-
larly and duly, in the course of things, be made, and.
would be attended mi.; if they had any foundation in
truth, which assuredly they have not. No, my Lords,
these Motions are made for the purpose of having
an opportunity of introducing popular topics in ge-,
neral, to pretend to apply them •to a particular case,
on which they have no real bearing, and by
which means popular mischief is wished to be ex-
cited. I know the drift of these measures--I know
the hand-writing of the person who is warmly in-
strumental in this wicked purpose, although I have
never seen him write.. This il)not the first Libel he
;:as written on .the Justice of his Conntry. •It is
not necessary, at pkesent, to stare who that Author

is. My Lords, I thought is' necessary to make
these observations for the purpose of refuting those
dark insinuations which I know have been, and are;
inddstriously circulated against those whose officeit
is to bring some men to justice. I said it was im-'
possible for the Court to make this-Rule absolute,
for taking down this Record by Proviso. .No trial
can be taken down by Proviso against the Attor-
ney General, because the Attorney general
is the Officer of the Crown in these Trials, and
Trials brought on by Proviso, are founded on the
.4aebes of the Prosecutor. No Lerchcs can be im-
puted to the Crown. There: is, therefore, no
foundation for this Motion.' This doetrine is dis-
tinCtly laid down in Coke, 2.4 Inst. and the doctrine.
was also confirmed lately by this Court,. in the case
- of, the King and Dyde) and it would be supposing
the Court capable of coming to a conclusion against
Law, if I were to argue the case as if there was-any
doubt upon it. This Defendant, like every other
Defendant, has a right to his trial, and hiS trial he
shall have. I have, although not bound to do it,
assigned reasons why it has not yet taken place.
God forbid he should be delayed a moment, .so as
to be oppressive to him. Hitherto it has. not been
so, and I will take care there shall be no foundation
for any complaint of any man; of the delay of justice
on account of the conduct of thee ATTORNEY GE.
NERAL.''

Mr. GARROW followed- the ATTORNEY GENE-
RAL. in shewing Cause against this Rule.
Mr. SCOTT entered at great length into the case,
and justified his own conduCt in the course of it, and
challenged his adversaries to bring forward any
thing to his prejudice upon this subje6t; He com-
plained of being harshly treated, in some.respeCts,
to-day. by the Attorney General, with whom
he had had 'communications tipon this subjel. With
Mr. GAitßow, who followed the Attorney Ge-
neral, he never had; nor was he desirous of
ever having any communication whatever. He
then argued, at great length, against the power
now assumed by the Attorney General, which
he said, was assumed for the first time, and which
might, he said, in feverish times, to use the Learned
Gentleman's own words, go .to the destrutiion of
all Freedom in this country, even to the destruaion
o ,the power of the judges themselves. He main-
that this assuine'd power was contrary.to
the express words of Magna _ Charta, which he
(ftr,Pred, 4- the etre& of Which power was eloquent-
-1k-described by the Roirtan Orator ; to illustrare
which, he made a quotation from Cicero. Hecom-
plained much of the hardship of his Client's case, his
poverty, &c. Maintained there was no reproach
in assisting such a man gratis, but alledged that
such did not happen to be the case in the present
instance. He maintained, that the case of the
King and Dyde was not applicable to the present,
because, in that case, 'there was 'no hardship al_
ledged, &c.--[ln the course of his speech, he was,
more than once, desired by the. Court to adhere to
the real point, which was, Whether, according to .
law, this Rule could be made absolute ?--AVhether
a Defendant could carry down the, record by pro 7
viso, when the Attorney General was the Pro.
secutor ? or, in other words,. 'Whether the case .of
the King and Dyde, which decided, expressly, than
this could not be done, was or was not law ?.1
Mr. SCOTT maintained, that if the Court had
thought this case of the King and Dyde conclusive'
against him, they would not have granted him a
rule to shew cause.

Mr. Justice GROSE said, he could not allow this
assertion to be made use of, as an argument. The
Court granted the Rule by way of indulgence and
favour, by way of affording satisla4ion to a person
who complained—but the Court, at the same time,
hoped that Mr. Scores good sense and candour
would have led him, after looking into the case of
the King arid Dyck, in the 7 Term Rep. to give up
the point—it was a case certainly enough to satisfy
any reasonable man.

Mr. SCOTT contended that this was the only
course he could take to obtain justice to his client :
that he had tried every other that he knew, and
would try any that was pointed out to him, fit for
his object. But although he had the highest re-
:pt.& for Sir EDVAKD LAW, he could not take the
words of the ATTORNEY GturRAL in this case.—
Having dwelt a long while on various topics of a
general nature, as cormeaed, in his opiuion, with
the case before the court, he concluded with
submitting, that this Rule ought to be made ab-
solute.

Mr. Justice Gitosr.--This is a rule calling on
the Court to permit the Defendant, in this case, to
carry
,dgwn the Records of two informations by
proviso—Now, whoever hears the words " Trial
by. Proviso" used, knows,, if he be a Lawyer, it is
a trial direfted by the Statute of .the 2d of West-
minster ; and be perfectly well knows the ground
on which that Statute proceeds, whiCh is that of
preventing Defendants being: sufferers, or of their
being oppressed by the laches of Plainciffs—l shall
not consider this matter at the great length entered
into by the learned Gentlethan, .in support of the
moon, that is, on general rules of policy; but
as -a short question of dry right; if the Defendant
has that, right, we:must, in an instant, give it to

When we are told that the -petsons of Juhes and
all His *Majesty's Subjects are. interested, that this
motion should be granted—my answer is, thai the
Judges, and all the rest of His Majesty's Subjects,
are interested that every thing should be done which
the Law requires to be done, and that if the Law
does not authorize me' to grant this motion, however
my. person or the -ptltsons of others may want pro-
• tedion, n-t grant it, because I will not usurp
-a power which the Law.has not given to me—Then
it comes to the question, Whether the Statute of 2d
Westminster, authorises us to compel the Crown to
try .these Causes, or permit the Defendant to carry
down the Records of them by proviso ?" Now;who_
ever will look at this Statute, and upon my Lord
Coke's Commentary upon it, will 'find it expressly
said that it does not bind the Crowd. This' reason,
my Lord COKE states, and he says that this Ad of
Parliament was to prevent !aches in the Prosecutor or
Plaintiff, and he, says there can he no larches in the
Crown—:-That is really an answer to the whole of
this Case. 1

In the'case of the Queen and Banks,. Mr. Justice
Pow E Lt. adopts -the opinion of my Lord Coke :
and in the Case of the King and Dyde, which 'is re-
ported in the 711-1 Term Rep. that doarine is fully
established. It is contended, that that Cast is no
authority, because, it is said, it was not contested.
Now I will not suppose that a Gentleman
(Mr. ERSKINE), who is never apt to give up
his Client's • Case, provided it can be slip-
' ported, would have given it up in this case,
unless, by law, it was not. tenable ; but we
were willing in a Case in which the King was
Prosecutor, and which 'was stated' to. be felt as a
case of hardship, to hear iiigument. .-Do not let me
be misunderstood-r--Thercis a:great' difference be.
tween the prosecution of private Persons, and the
prosecutions which are instituted Majesty's
Attorney... General. I was looking for the case
where the King was prosecuting by his Attorney_
General, in. which the Defendant was permitted to
carry down the Record by proviso. NO such case
has been statedNo such case could be stated, be-
cause no such case ever existed ; nor can it, because
the Stattite of 'Westminster, which gives to the
Defendant the power, does not apply to the Crown.
But, it has been said, here is matter of great op..
pression—l Will not, because legally, I cannot, in
this case, enter into the matter. Whoever has read
what the Law has said, and will attend also to
the circumstances of this Case, will, very easi-
ly, make up his mind upon-- this subjea.
If the man is aggrieved, he ought to have his re-
medy ; for wherever there is a grievance there
ought to be a remedy. It is said, that there is no
other remedy, and therefore' this Motion is made.
That is, begging the question.—Whoever 'looks in_
to the old law, will see, that there is a remedy. I
know the law points out, the remedy.L--The 'books
point out the remedY.=-It is not for me to state
what that remedy is—l am to give my opinion upon
this Motion.—Finding that the party, if aggrieved,
is not without his remedy—Tfinding that no such rule
as this has ever been made'. absolute—finding That
the Statute Of Westminster, the only law that ever
gave the right of trial by proviso, does not apply,
to the Crown—finding that the comment of my
Lord Coke upon that statute does not' warrant this
motion, but is 'against it-finding that there is not
One case to support this thotiOn, andl finding that
the case of the Queen -ariti Banks iiran authority
against it, I cannot assent to such' a Motion. I
conside,r this as'a dry question of right. I cannot
consider any personal inconvenience to A. 8..0r C.
for I consider myself to administe'r thc stria law
upon the subjel, and therefore I. am of opinion,
that this rule ought to be discharged.

Mr. Justice LAWRENCE concurred with his bro.
ther GROSE. He said (among other things) that
.the case of the. Queen and Banks was to be found well
reported in Salk : where it appeated that my Laid.
Holt had said, " that the reason,for carrying,
down a cause by proviso was lathes, and there can'
be 'no proviso as against the Crown, because in the
Crown there cannot be default, or laches." There
was therefore an entire end of this case. The case
did not call for any heat or animation. It was a
dry. question of Law. By the Law of this Country
the Crown cannot be guilty of any lathes, and
therefore, by. the same Law, there. could be no
proviso for carrying down a Record as for the de.
fault of the Crown.

Mr, Justice LE BLANC was of the same opinion,
and (among other things)
‘said, that this was not an
application to the discretion of the Court,. because
application for trial by proviso; was not. to the dis-
cretion of the Court to grant or to refuse ; it was
the ad of the party, to be had or refused, according
as the party .might have a right or no right to it.
In this case the party had no right.
Mr. Justice GRosE—" I . should say one word
more—l am obliged to my brother LAWRENCE,.for
drawing my attention ,to the Statute of Westmin:•
ster ; I.had confounded the Statute' itself with what
my Lord Coke says upon it.—What I have said,
therefore, should be considered ail applying to the
Statute itself, and the 'commeniary of my Lord
Coke upon the Statute, making up together the
whole of the Law."—Rule discharged.

THE KING V. OWEN AND MARDLE.

The Defendants, were called upon for judgment,
but not appearing, their Bail was also called .upon
their recognizance,