The Sun.
London, England, 1802-10-27 00:00:00

On the Prisoners being called on for their defence,
a short discussion arose, in consequence of some ob--
jeetions offered by Mr. FIELDING, it', behalf, as we
could colleet,- in the first instance of the Prisoner Read.
He contended among otherpoints, that there was no
satisfaftory evidence that any at performed by him
was done to prejudice the Underwriters, and with-
out such an intention being established, the charge
of felony could not attach. He had no conception
Of any equivalent proof that could be substituted
in failure of. the above. He also referred to the
case as affeCting Codling, in which, he conceived,
there was pot an -atom of Ltili:ient evidence.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE expressed his opi.
nion that that consideration was matter for the
jury and himself; and seemed to say, in the case of
Codling, that if there was no intent to prejudiCe the
Underwriters, there were no pretensiOns to sustain
the Indidment.
Mr. Ft tLDtNC made some further observations
in support of his allegations, to which Lord ELLEN-
BOROUGH replied. •
In behalf of Read, his Counsel, Serjeant BAI-
LEY and Mr. GURNEY, objeaed at some length.
It was contended, that he had no concern with the
navigation of the vessel, nor had he any controul
over the Captain or the Officers of the ship ; and
that a person, situated as he was, was not in the
Contemplation of the Aft of Parliament—his Letter
of Attorney differed from the generality of those
which went to appoint. Supercargoes ; and the
favourable points in his case were also strongly ad-
verted to.

Lord ELL ENBOROUGH, in the course of his Ob-
servations upon what fell from the Learned Counsel,
.aid, there was some matter for serious considera-
tion, in what had been advanced.
M'Farlane and Easterhy being called upon, the
former, in addition to his leaving it to his Counsel
said,
.he had a number of Gentlemen in Court, rea-
dy- to depwit to his charathr—and observed, that
he had been in His Majesty's service twenty-eight
years.

Fisterby confided his defence to his Counsel.
Mr. ERSKINE then rose and addressed the Court,
in a speech of considerable length, in which he
displayed his usual abilities, force of eloquence,
and legal knowledge. He professed his agree.
meat with much of what had fallen from the
Learned Counsel, who had previously offered ob-
jedions to the observations of the Noble and
Learned Judge thereon, hut he directed his argu-
ments in favour of his Client, chiefly, if not sole;y,
upon an important consideration of Law—he con.
tended by a fair construction of the pia,ttice of the
Law hitherto, and the relevant Alts of Parliament,
the Court of Admiralty had no jurisdiftion over
such a case as Easterby's appeared in the evidence
for the Prosecution. He observed much on the
strianess with which the Law of England re-
quires- local jutisdi4ions to he observed, lie
described the leading provisions of Statute of
Hen. which was framed for the better re.
gulation of these ; those were, hoWever-, in some
points of view so stricl, that a felony partly corn.
miffed in one county and partly in another, could
not be punished. Under that intergretatiOn of the
Law, .the heinous crime of Murder would also go
unpunished; so would a case where an accessary
after the fart, committed the offence in another
County, as the charge could not be venued, as in
such case a Jury of County A. could not take cog-
nizance of what happened in County B. Such were-
tlle.eff...ds of strict locality of Jurisdiction. He
referred to the Statute of William HI. as affeding
that of Henry VIII, in such a case as the present ;
and these objections, he- contended .most emphati-
cally, applied to Easterby's case. The particular
A'l in question, however,. was that of the I Ith of
George I, Chap. 29, which especially provided,
that if any Owner, Captain, or.Offieer,,&c. of a ship,
shall wilfully cast away, burn, or destroy .the same,
&c. he commented Upon the bearing of the evidence
on such a chprgc,but principally contended that as the
part phich the evidence went to attach to Easterly,
such as the •direCting, procuring, &c. must have
been committed- on the land, or without the Juris.
diftion of the Admiralty, his case could not be
cognizable by the Court which he addressed. The
Act of 'Henry Vilith. required such an offence to
be tried by the Court of Admiralty, which could
only be done when the offence was committed at
sea: but there was no evidence of Easterby's hay.
ingbeen on the sea at all, or even that he was on
board the Ship :—pressing this line of argument for
some time, the Learned Counsel contended his
Client could not be touched as an accessary until
this important question of the Jurisdiction wits de-
cided.

Mr. Serjeaut BEST, and a third Counsel, followed
Mr. ERSKINE, and supported his arguments, with
considerable ability.
[The lateness of the hour prevents our attempting any
thing like a detailed Exposition of these gentlemen's
Speeches, or of the subsequent Proceedings of the Court.]

Mr. GSRROW replied with great ability to the
arguments of the Counsel on the other side. He
seemed to refer to the opinion of the Court ; and in
concluding expressed his opinion, that if this
Court had no jurisdiaion of.such an offence, no other
had.

The jett of the Loßb CHIEF JUSTICE'S obser-
vations upon the arguments of Counsel was, that he
thought the cases may be properly rcferred for a
special consideration.
After a few observations between Messrs.
ERsittNE and GAR aow, and the Bench, it seemed
to be his Lordship's determination that the point
should be referred for the opinion of the Twelve
Judges.
Some evidence was then gone into in behalf of
Codling and the other Prisoners, and a number of
tespeetable Witnesses appeared to their charaaers.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH then entered upon
.his
Charge to the Jury, which took up more than two
hours in delivery.
The Jury then, after some time, brnozht in the
following verdkt Coaling, Gz:dt.y—M‘Fitrlane,
q:idty—Eastetby, Guitty—Rcati, Not Gi;;/;y.
Codling immediately received sentence of Death.
Judgment upon M‘Farlane and Eastcrby was respir.
ed, their cases being reserved for the opinhin of the
Judges and at twelve o'cclock_the Court adjourned.