The Sun.
London, England, 1802-06-22 00:00:00

THE KING ^J. JOHN CHAMBERS THE YOUNGER.

This was a Case, in which the Defendant was re-
ported to be in contempt upon his answering inter-
rogatories before the Master of the Crown Office,
upon a subjea which has been already before the Pub-
lic, that of taking several warrants of Attorney for
one sum of money, lent by his Father, at the Hole-
in-the-Wall Public House, in Fleet-streer, to a poor
man, and who had been the objet of the most
griping extortion, &c. Tile Defendant stood com-
mitted last Term for this misdemeanour, and was
struck off the Roll of Attornies.—it appeared,
that he had presented to my Lord Chief Justice,
and we believe to the other Judges out of Court,-
an humble Petition praying to be restored, which
Petition Mr. ERSKINE adverted to in the course of
a short speech in behalf of the Defendant, intreat.
in; the mercy of the Court, &c. and to which
Mr. GARaow, Counsel for the Prosecution, as-
sented, alledging he had no difficulty in saying, he
believed the Defendant had always concluded him-
self well in all cases except the present, in which it
appeared, that he was a very young man, and under
the imperative commands, and almost absolute.
control, of his Father, who had lent this mo-

ney, Sic.
The Court said, that whatever circumstances
might appear in this young man's Case that might
ultimately procure for him the lenity of the Court,
he must be made to feel for a while its justice, all i
therefore must continue for the present off the Roll
of Attornies.

THE KING v. TUr.NrR.

This was a Rule calling on the Defendant to
shew Cause why a Criminal information should
not be filed against the Defendant, for alledged
miscoßduet at the time when a parish meeting was
held for the purpose of chusing a fit Guardian of
the Poor, &c. when a Gentleman of the name of
Fielding was chosen to that office, with which elec-
tion the Defendant being di,ssatisfied, used violence
to Mr. Fielding, and then offered him a chal-
lenge, &c.
It appeared now frdm Affidavits that this was a
dispute between two Clergymen, the Defendant
being the Reaor of the parish in which this hap-
pened, and the Prosecutor being a Minister of the
adjoining parish ; that in the course of the proceed-
ing at this Elestion, the Prosecutor had also mis-
condu&ed himself by saying some unwarrantable
and very provoking things to the Defendant, and
therefore my Lord Chief Justice observed, that as
the Defendant had, by his Affidavit, stated that he
was ashamed of his misconduft, as well he might
be, and as the Prosecutor had also misconduetc..d
himself, this was not a matter in which the Court
would lend its extraordinary interference to settle
their disputes, but leave the Party to his India-
tnent, it he chose to adopt that course.—Rule dis.
charged.

THE KING V. -GARD.

This was also a Rule calling on the Defendant to
shew cause why a criminal information should not
be filed against him, for offering a bribe of about
pool. to five, being a • majority of nine Elec-
tors for a Borough in the West of England, the
name of which we could not distinttiv hear, for
the purpose of obtaining their suffrages for a Candi.
date, whom he did not name.
It appeared from the affidavits made in answer
to this charge, that he was a man very low in life,
and that he denied his being employed by any other
person to aft as Agent in this business, and there.
fore my Lord Chief Justice observed, that as he
had made this denial of agency, and as he was in
no condition to advance this sum himself, and as
the Party had another remedy against him if he
was guilty, the Court would not interfere in this
manlier, and therefore the Rule was discharged.

THE KING V. PINKERTON.

The Defendant was convided of a libel on a
Gentleman of the name of Houghton, Agent for
the Birmingham Canal Company, refleding on the
testimony that Gentleman gave before, the Arbi-
trators to whom were referred certain disputes
that subsisted between the Canal Company and the
Defendant. His case had been, fully heard last
Term;, when he was committed to the King's Bench
Prison, and now he came up to receive the judg.
ment of the Court, which was pronounced on him
after a suitable address. The sentence of the Court
was, That the Defendant do pay to the King a
fine of 2001., and that he be committed to the
custody of the Marshal of the Marshalsea of that
Court, until such fine be paid.

THE KING V. M'LEOD.

The Defendant came into Court for • the purpose
of receiving its Judgment upon two Convictions,

up;tl Criminal Informations filed against him by '
His Majesty's late Attorney General, for two
libels,-• one- reflecting on the charader of Lord
Clare, late Lord Chancellor of,lreland ; another
reaeding on the proceedings of the. Legislature. by
the adoption of Martial Law in Ireland, in conse-
quence o► the late unhappy rebellion there.
Mr. Justice GaOSE being about to pronounce the
Judgment of the„Court,
The Defendant solicited permiSsion to address the
Bench, alledging that he was about to move in
Arrest of Judgment, upon which the Court signified
its disposition to hear him. The. Lord Chief jus-
tice retired, and the-other three Judges remained to
-bear the Defendant's. argument in Arrest of judg-
ment. The Defendant then proceeded. He laid it
down as an established proposition, that there could
be no crime where there was not a moral turpitude.
He endeavoured to apply this proposition to the first ,
InfOrmation of which he stood convicted by the Jury.
The second Information .he contended contained
nothing but that which any man might write in
the true spirit of an Historian, who was- to be
allowed certain scope to fancy and imagination, in
order to give to the Reader an interest in What he
saw :—That History was a figure, of which a col-
le lion of fans coristittited the skeleton, but that
blood and flesh were added by genius to give it
life, &c.—Such, he said, was the case here ;—of
the latter Composition' he avowed himself to be the
Author, and be had composed it cooly and de-
liberately in his closet.—He avowed all the senti-
ments contained in it, and. maintained they were
consonant to ,the pure maxims of our admirable,
Constitution, &c. and, that therefore, there could
be no came in them.—He wandered very often
from the' subject, and was frequently admonished by
the Judges, and desired to return to it, and was,
more than once told that he was not, to abuse the
privilege he had of moving in arrest of Judgment,
by repeating calumnies already much too often
uttered, and that if he persisted in this mode of
addressing the Court, he must be remanded, to the
place from whence he came, .and continue there.
Until he was in a proper temper to address the
Court in arrest of judgment, or else to hear that
Judgment, and continue silent and be ,decorous
while it was delivered.—He then urged his suffer,
ing, as already endured, and trusted, that as Peace
was come, and all heat. on account of political dis.
sentions should be at an end, the Court would at
most only order him to be imprisoned-one month,
and that then he should be permitted to retire to
that obscurity which, was now the ambition of his
life, where he intended to, cultivate in peace, the
acquaintance of the Muses, &c.