The Sun.
London, England, 1804-11-28 00:00:00

Tfir KING V. =OUTHERDEX.

We lardy 'suited ghtf4 Cabe, when the Defendant
being I. 'tight uo r 0 receive sente;.ce,
rifr. BUR ROUGH moved in arie.t of, judgment
on two gri.unils: first, that an offence must be
provea, which Was the fit olje& of a prosecution ;
that the mdictment for 4,ne'.l an offence must
make the 'cliarge.witl, such a degree, of legal pre-
cisom that the nature of the crime must, in alt its
3r(4, hP cortetly distinguished.

"ne• iVrTortNPy.GENttitAL resisted this Rule.
He said, the vtrflice of the Defendant war perfealy
&sof tr m ,he crime of the person in this case
setting the medicines without the legal stamp. The
of ice here ~ah not against the Statute,. which had
for its ohjedi the protraion of the Revenue, but it
w; the eftin of extortion. If a Countryman were
in -1,01-tclon i;r) a b,isternits day using a parapluie,
and he were toltl by this Defendant that it was
, l . .
Opf (Meno an existing Statute to empli2y this de.
fesce ;tgaino the inclemency Of the season, lest he
shoulo blind -half His Majesty's Subjetts in his pro.
out the Defendant were to add to this re.
in,rk, that a prosecution Would..be Commenced
nainsr this peasant, from which he could he re.
lieveti by d dOriaoOn of 101* ; under thin circum,
stances, the A1T.04 EY•G E ILA!. contended, that
although' no Statute was violated, the extortion
alone would tender the Defendant responsible to the
laWs.ot his country.

Mr.
.It slice LAwastic c•-•-" The 30th Gen.
n.' tivule a letter dirctit,l to another, threaten.
ing a prnseculion, off•nre against law, to be
punishes! by One, .itnittiv)!lwnt, or teansporta.
thin. I wish to know, if, iletote that Statute,
threatenings, accompanied by nu conspiracy, were
a etimc ?

AvraßNty ZENO 41,-u Yee, my Lord,
CAsN ;1p,,„! nn the,..,b;,,k, of this' kind under the
circutn‘ Irces or charging an unnatural
1.• rd ELLEtssoaoucis.--" Yes, because, in
th',e -cases, there is a felonious raking. The
offence of welling, medicines wilhour" a stamp, is
punishable only by penalty. Is this then more
than threatrois.g to bring an anion of debt
This- is nut Inc obtaining money upon false pre.
tences, uoutt the Statute' diteled to that specific

pesq they were instructed to give ment that the
nist(cr ahuuld thus subsitie ; and although Lord
Darnley was governed by no vindiaive motives,
ordinary prudence required that he should not relin.
quish the expedient to which he had resorted fur his
owt, per,,mal honour soil safety. •

Lord EL LitNioROVGIII.•..-.4 We have endeavour.
eel to give the ni.,st lenient construction to this af
hit., and yet it dues appear, that the Defendant
still brooded over the old grievance of the year
'Roo. In such a case as this, Lord Darnley has a
right to the protection of the Court in this summary
nay. I should have been glad if the proposal had
been met by the parties in the form I recommended,
but we have no right to carve out for them terms
of reconciliation. No doubt his Lordship will be
advised, in the future stages of this business, to do
whatever is. most honourable to himself, and to
every branch of his family, bit under the present
circumstances he is ent►tled to have the Rule made
absolute."