The Sun.
London, England, 1802-03-20 00:00:00

shere he will. How we 7.'ere respelled when first
lye came to &Amhara, and now how we are de-
spised ; but it is not my fault. He is as fit to be a
Minister of State, a a Manager of a. Parish. He
should try -to make himself respefted by the rich as
well as_rhe poor ; but that is impassible. The pa-
rish went on quietly enough till he came. He has
set every' 'body togethei by the ears. He is noisy
and-ove;bearini; in his manner, and only fit to be a
c mstable or a :ttriier at Baw.street.''

Th.;mzeis D cry said he was an oilman, and .had
knOtv'n the D,!tendant litany years ; he served his
family, and was pet fatly acquainted with his writ-
ing ; the writivg produced did not, upon the whole,
look like his, but there were certain letters extremely
like it ii he could think him capable of disguising
his hand writing, he should believe these letters
were written byhim ; he had no hesitation in sty_
ing there were many parts alike.
Qn-his cross-examination he said, the more mi-
nutely he. looked at the ilecers, the more he was
convinced there were many of them exactly alike :
if he had received an order from him in such a hand-
writing, he should shave executed it ; he should
have supposed he might lh.ve had the gout in his
hand, or that he might have been unwell when he
wrote

John Bonnor, an. in,speffir of Franks 'at the
Post-office, statett, that lte eras by habit capable of
ascertaining whether a hand_writing was a natural
currency, or an itnitation by some other person, or
an attempt by the writer to disguise his hand ;'he
had looked at the letters carefully—they were cer-
tainly written in a disguised hand, he had not the
smallest doubt of it. He was then asked whether,
by comparing these letters with the other writing,
admitted to be the-Defendant's, he could state with

certainty that the perm who wrote the one wrote
the other ?

The ATTORNEY GENER AL_Objeaed to the ques-
tion ; he had approved the admission of such evi-
dence recently in the case of Foster and Mellish ;
.but in consequence of not being fully prepared, he.
had not been able to urge those reasons which he
should now offer. The Letirned Advocate in a
speech of great ability contended agaisist the prin-
ciple of evidence recognised by the modern practice
of comparison of hand-writing by a witness who had
never seen the Parry write—it was a practice peril-
ous and dangerous to the life and liberty of the

Subjea, aid never till lately admitted even in the-
wort times and the worst Judges. Ho then re-
ed the cases •of Algernon Sydney, the 7 Bi-

_ .
shop', and in short every case upon the subjea down
to the lasi decision of :Mr. justice LE BLANc, in
Foster and Mellish. He insisted that the novel
dOatine of evidence was in violation of that prin-
ciple of evidence by which the people of this coun-
try were secured in the cnjoynient of their rights,
proyerty, liberty, and eery thing dear to them.
He was followed on the same side by Mr, ADAM,
Mr. CoNsT, and- PY.

I\ll-..GARRow, Mr. Serjeant BEST, Mr. MAR-
_ _

movr, and Mr. REYNOLDS, were Neard in an_
ewer ; after which the ATTORNEY GEiIERAL re.
plied.
Sir BEAUMONT HOTHAM delivered his opinion
at length, and decided that such evidence was not
admissib!e..

Mr. another of the Inspeaors of Franks,
deposed to the letters being written in a disguised
hand.

Mr. Greenv.,:od, the Clerk of Messrs. Lee and
Co. Bankers, said the Defendant kept his cash at
their house. He well kritv his hand-writing,
laving paid his drafts for the last twenty years.
He had looked over the letters, and had hardly any
doubt as to their having been written by the De_
fendant : there were many parts of them not dis-
guised at all, particularly the words hypocritical
villain," which were exally his charafter. If a
draft had been presented in such a hand-writing,
he-would have paid it without any reference or hesi-
,tation whatever.

Wm. Faller lLtd lived twenty years with Mr.
Cator, knew his hand-writing perfettly ; believed
the letter it, b.! his hand-writing ; he bad not •the
.mAlkst particle of doubt.
• Samuel Heard, a Stationer at Bromley, said, the
lettt•r:i produced were all written upon paper of the
manufeelure : the maker's name was Taylor,
and thc• date in the water mark
.1796 ; it was call-
ed. uncut foolscap. He dealt 'in paper of that sort,
and many other sorts ; he had not sold any of it

to more than two ,persons. Mr: Jackson applied
_ .

. .
to him for some, but he had none left ; he could
not mention any person he had Sold a single sheet
to, except the Defendant and the Bishop of Roches-
ter ; their servants usually came for it. and paid
him ; the Witness said he had seen the Defendant
last week at hi; own house e he went there to
take a little Bill ; the Defendant said to him,
" You never spld me any paper ?" to which he
" No, Sir, not diredly to you, it was not
for me to know who the paper was for." He was
not surprised at the question, because the business
had been the subject of conversation.
This was all the evidence fur the Plaintiff.
Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL then addressed the
Jury in behalf of the 'Defendant. He commenced
his Observations by congratulating the Court and
the Public upon tlle.decision of the Learned judge
upon the point ct law respelling the admisSi.bility
of the evidence--a decision which, in his opinion,
had reiieved the country froth one of the most
• grievous oppressions it ever had suffered : for if
such evidence could have beeni.eceived in the case
'of Mr. Cator, for a misdemeanour, the same ob-
scure, dark proof, would lie applicable in, every
case of felony. Men would be condemned and
punished with death opOn the testimony. of persons
who were not familiar with their writing from
havirnrseen them write, but by strangers who had
no other medium of proof than the hare comparison
of riling. With regard to the Case itself,
it was of the deepest importance, not only as it
affeded the Defendant but the Public ; it was a
question whether 'a'Gentleman of fortone,charilder,-
aod honouelli-a done an ad which, if he was guilty
of, stamped him as one of the most weak as well as
the must wicked of mankind ; an ad which render-
ed irt doubtful whether his folly or malignity most

• predominated ; an at .which 'aimed at the destruc-
tion of the peace of a family. If he thought the
Defendant was. not perfectly innocent -of the fnu:
• charge imputed to him, he should most readily co'e..
• sign him to the criminatory observations •of his
Learned Friend, li-wever severe. they might be.-
-The Jury, .before they could pronounce him guilty
'• of such a crime, would retied upon'the char.o of
the nein who was supposed capable of haying coin-
-mitted it. The Defendant was a Gentleman who
had passed a life in the service of the East India
Company, uncontaminated liy the suspicion of any
vice. 'lt was not the demerits of his brother, John
Calor, the Jury were to try, and therefore he was
persuaded they would discard from their minds any
prejudice they might have entertained in conse-
quence of their opinions with regard to any part
of his- conduct. Could it.
.be imagined -that so
malignant and vulgar A' libel could have proceed-
ed from a man, Wilt's& life•had been charaderized
by qualities of an opposite nature. He was a man
uniformly spoken of in terms of. resped and kind-
ness by those whose good opinion was most.valo-
able. :He '• had, at an early period, gone to
the. East Indies, where, by his industry, he
gained -a respectable .fortune, and had retired to
Beckenham, near the residence of his brother,
to enjoy. it. He did not mean to infer that
the Prosecutor,. -Mr. Jackson, would have imputed
such an offence as this was to the Defendant, if he
had not persuaded himself into a belief that he
was the author of the libels ; but it was perfealy
natural for persons, . when they had -once adopted
a notion, to persevere in it, however mistaken
ii might 'be.- He could not helpeahinkin4 Mr.
Jackson would have acted with inttelt 'mOrti pro.:
priety,, if he had, investigated the ground of his
suspicion before he had attributed to the Defendant
a deed of so infamous a nature. The Learned Advo_ '
cate then proceeded to comment• upon the evidence,
and observed, that the- Defendant had never mixed
in the controversies (tithe parish; that he had never
had any difference with the Prosecutor, except the
trifling dispute in the carriage respediog Ik-dormers,
'never doing any good ; that lie was a mad of-mild,-
good-natured and inoffensive manners, and of liberal.
education ; and, therefore, thai it was absolutely
improbable he should have been the author of such
infamous libels : he inferred, that the very circum-
stance of his having furnished the Prosecutor with
the means of substantiating his charge in the mat,".
ner he had done,. by writing to him those letters
which had been compared with 'the libels, were a
proof that he was 'conscious of his innocence, and
was not aware of any pi;ssible way in which those
letters could he employed to his disadvaetage. He
then stated the nature of the eyidCnce he meant to
lay before the Jury, and concluded by trusting they
would not by their verdiet hold up the Defendant
as an objeet for- the finger to point -at fOr the re-
mainder of his days: He then proceeded to.call his
Witnesses. .
The Biskv
_of Rochester said, -he had known the
Defendant. nearly eight years. The Defendant's
family and his own were in habits of intimacy.. His
opinion of him was, that lie was a plain, hOnest,
good-natured Gentleman, A very valuable neigh-
bour, and, he believed, incapable of composing the
libels-in question. His Lordship said, he was well
acquainted with his hand-writing, and he was of
opinion, the libels had not the least resemblance to
' it.—Upon the cross-examination of the Witness, it
irppeared that his knowledge of the Defendant's
hand-writing was derived from letters written sub-
sequent to the libel,
Mr.. Burwell, formerly of the Supreme Council
of Deogal,, said, lie was 'Well acquainted with the
Defendant's hand-writing : he was surprized that
any one should haVe supposed him 'the writer of the
libels ; he had examined them narrowly, and, the
more- lie looked at them, the more he was convinced
they were not the produdion of his pen ; from his
long knowledge of hint, he did not think him a
man likly. .to -have done a 'thing of the.kind ; he
had been in. situations of considerable trust in India,
and he believed incapable of a dishonourable action.
, Upon his cross-examination, he admitted he had,
as one of the Members of the Council, signed an or_
der for the dismissal of the Defendant, in conse-
quence .of an imputation of perjury, for having
sworn that a debt, which he well knew avas due
from the House in which he was a Partner,- was not
owing front' the firm, and for endeavourin . aft
„..,
the debt upon another House. The Wit - at,
gip
tempted to explan- this, by saying, thane was
averse to the dismissal of the Defendant, •- but that
he was compelled to sign the order because the ma- _
jority of the Council were against him. He said he
was restored after a suspension of several years.
Mr. Smith Bagwell, the brother of the last Wit,
ness, said, he had long been in the habit.olcOrre
, ponding with the Defendant, and was perfedly ace.
quainted with his manner of writing. The libel
had not, in his opinion, the least resemblance to. it.
. Mr. Starke!, the Defendant's Solicitor, deposed-
. to the same area ; hut, upon his cross-examination,
admitted, that the words " hypocritical villain,"
did•very much resemble his. hand-writing..
Air. Farmer, a Gentleman, of Wickham; in
Kent, said, the Defendant was an inoffensive-man,
and totally incapable of writing the libels imputed
to him. - -
Mr. Grote, of Beckenham, said the Defendant was
a man not likely to have written angnymous letters :
he was a quiet peaceable Man, bringing up hiS fa-
mily virtuously', and exercising all the proper duties
of a father.
Mr. Jenner, of DoelOr's Commons, said he was
intimately acquainted with the Defendant—he was
a man of most inoffensive manners, fulfilling-all the
duties of life—as far as his opinion went, he was a
most worthy member of society.- •,.
Mr. Foster, of Beckenham, said he had known
the Defendant sixteen years ; he had a rising family
of his own, and thought the Defendant and his fami. '
, ly the fittest for them to .associate with ; his family
was a patern of domestic harmony ; the Defendant
was a peaceable, friendly, inoffensive, acid valuable
neighbour; he conceived him the most unlikely man
in the world to have committed so infamous an action
as the one imputed to him.

t' STOL KS,