The Sun.
London, England, 1819-11-11 00:00:00

RHOr)ES V. LEECH.

-'Phis was an action against the defendant for an
assault, the declaration alleging !hat the defendant
caused the plaintiff to be floggedwith cat-o'• nine-
tails. The defendant pleaded; first, Not Guilty ;
and second, as matter of justification, that he
being Captain and- Commander of a China ship,
called the Orwell, on board of which the plaintiff
was acting as quarter-master, the latter had been
guilty of a breach or duty, and had acted in a dis•
orderly, insolent, and improper manner and that
in order to punish him for such conduct, l'e (the
defendant) had caused him to he chastiseti in the
manner alleged, for the preservation of the dis-
cipline of the ship. The plaintiff, in his replica-
tion, simply negatived the special plea, and on
this issue was joined. At the trial before the
Lord Chief Justice, at the London Sittings after
last Term, the Jury intim' their verdict for the
plaintiff—Damages 5001.
Mr. ‘IARRYAT now moved for a rule to sbew
cause why this verdict should not be set aside, and
a new trial granted, on the ground that the Jury
had given excessive damages, the defendant hav-
ing only given the plaintiff a dozen and a half
stripes, be being a young man, well educated and
%tell connected, basing actually jumped over-
board to avoid the indignity-afterwards put upon
him, for a trifling expression of
,discontent, in
consequence of his being unable to execute the
defendant's Orders upon an 'empty stomach, occa-
,ioned by shortness of provisions on board the
ship, •

The particulars of this case have already been
fully before the public.
The Coua'r, after bearing the case fully and
fairly stated by the Learned Counsel, were clearly
of opinion, that the damages given were not only
not excessive, but were extremely moderate under
the circumstances proved before the Jury, and
therefore refused the Rule.

MILLAR AND OTHERS V. MARK.

This was an action of assumpsit upon a pro-
missory note, for securing the payment of 201.,
which the defendant had given to the plaintiffs as
surety for one -- North. At the trial before
the Lord Chief Baron, at-the last Assizes for the
County of Nottingham, a verdict was found for
the plaintiffs.
Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN now moved for a new
trial, on the ground that the note was given for
usurious consideration between the plaintiffs and
North. The case was this :—The plaintiffs were
leading members of a Money•lending Society at
Nottingham, of which North was a subordinate
member. The plaintiffs, at one of their Meetings,
put up to sale the loan of a sum of 201. Several
members were bidders, and at last it was knocked
down to North at the price of 271., which he
agreed to pay by instalments, the whole aggregate
sum to bear interest at five per cent, until ail the
instalments were paid. It, order to bind the
bargain, the defendant agreed to become North's
security, and gave the plaintiffs the promissory
note in question, upon which be was sued. The
Learned Serjeant submitted, that under these cir-
cumstances the action would not lie.

The COURT thought enough had been stated to
warrant them in granting a rule to skew cause,
which was granted accordingly.

MR. HUNT AND THE MANCHESTER MAGISTRATES.
At.tour,o'clock the Chief Justice and Mr. Jus-
tice Holroyd retired from the Court, leaving Mr.
Justice Bayley and Mr. Justice Best to bear mo-
tions of course. Mr: Hunt at this moment enter-
ed, amid availing himself of the first opportunity,
presented himself to the notice of Mr. Justice
Bayley.
Mr. Hunt—My Lord, will you allow me to
make a short motion.

Mr. Justice BAYLEY—I cannot attend to you
now. You should have made your motion when
the Court was full.
Mr. Hunt—l understood that I would not he
allowed to do so until the ifar was gone through;
and I have been waiting in the Halt all day anti
all vesteiday for that purpose.
Mr. Justice BAY LEY conferred with Mr. Jus-
tice BIAiT, and it was agreed that Mr. Hunt should
ptoceed to state what was the object of his 'no-
tion.

Air. Hunt then stated, that his motion arose

ont of the application which he had made the
other day. He had adopted their Lordships' ad-
vice and recommendation, an►i Lad applied to the
Attorney General for the purpose of proceeding
against the Manchester Magistrates, and it was
in consequence of the Attorney-General's answer
to his application that he now proposed to make
a motion.

Mr. Justice BAYLEY—On whose behalf do you
move ? Is it in a criminal or civil suit ?
,Mr. Hunt—l am told 1 cannot move in a cri-
minAl suit. 1 applied the other day for that
purpose.
..Mr. Justice BAY LEY—Is the motion in a civil
suit, and on whose behalf is it made ?
Mr. Hunt—lt is on my own behalf.
Mr. Justice BavLav—ln what suit ?
Mr. Hunt—l rather think it will be against the
Artorney-Geimeral.
Mr._ Justice BAYLEY—A civil suit against the
Attorney-General!
Mr. Hunt—l suppose the Attorney-General is
'liable to an action.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY—Have you instituted an
action against him 1
Mr, Hunt—There is no action instituted against
him, nor is there any prosecution. I was only
telling your Lordships, with submission, what is
the nature of my application. I submit, that in
applying to your Lordships, I am in the same si-
tuation as it 1 were apptying to a Grand Jury,
though I admit yout Lordships are a Grand Jury
of the highest dignity amid importance in the coun-
try. In this point OF view, I trust you will allow
me to read a very short affidavit, which states the
grounds of my application to tilt Court, which is
to direct the AttornLy-Getieral—
Mr. Justice BAYLEY—Is your motion for a
Mandamus to the Attorney-General ?
Mr. Hunt—No my Lord; but Gat your Lord-
snips should direct the Attorney-General to pro-
ceed on this public cause.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY—We have no power to
give H y such directions. I stated .to you the
other thy, and I stated as distinctly as I could,
what were the reasons that induced the 111
the exercise of its duty to declare, that they could •
not grant an a;,plication of this kind, unless it
was made by a Gentleman at time Bar, whose pro-
fessional education enables Nita to judge what is
fit and proper to lay before the Court for its in-
formatiyu.
Mr. Hunt—You know that there cannot be a
civil suit instituted against the Manchester Magis-
trates, except it 'be by an individual.
Mr. Justice BAYLvv—But your present motion
is for a criminal suit ?
Mr. Hunt—lt is a motion for time commence-
multi of such a suit.
Mr. Justice BAY LEY—Which any Gentleman at
the Bar is at liberty to make ; and it you were to
make out a case fit for the consideration of the
Court, I venture to say you would find many Gen-
tlemen at the Bar who would gratuitously under-
take the case. If the foundation of your applica•
:ion was, that you had applied to every Gentle-
man at the Bar, and that all of them had refused
to undertake the cause, or that you are not in a
condition to. employ Counsel, then the Court
might, in the exercise of its discretion, assign
Counsel to conduct the cause.
Mr. Hunt—This is an application completely
its point- I will shortly state the facts upon
which I move, and which arise in consequence of •
my appearing before the Attorney-General last
night. I was aware that I could not come here
without an affidavit, and therefore I have an Hai-

davit of the facts lAm stating. I applied to the
Attorney-General, and after laying the whole case
before him, I called upon him to bring the case
before the public. He refused, and 1 have his re-
fusal hi writing. I merely submit this fact as the
foundation of my motion. 1 was told by your
Lordships the other day, that the Law Officers of
the Crown were the proper persons to undertake
such a cause, and therefore I applied to the At-
-torney-General for that purpose. I am aware
that for an individual wrong, my course would be
strictly, to bring an action, as your Lordships ad-
vised me to do.

Mr. Justice BEST—We did not give you any
advice on the subject ; we merely told you, that
if you had any individual particular wrong to com-
plain of, you might bring an action. You did not
state to us the other day that you came to redress
any private wrongs you' had suffered, but you
stated that you came for vindictive justice (if I
may use that expression), and to proceed on the
part of the King for the supposed crimes ofThese
persons.

Mr. Hunt then proceeded to repeat, in a desul

tory conversation with the Court, that he had ap-
plied to the Attorney-General, in consequence of
what had passed the other day, and had called
upon him to prosecute the Manchester Magis-

trates, but that he had refused, assigning for red-
son that he did not usually practise in the Court
of King's Bench, and never went there but on
official business.

The COURT said, it was true that the Attorney-
General did not attend this Court, except upon
official business for the Crown and Public Boards;
and that it was competent for bins or any other
Advocate to refuse to undertake a cause in a Court
in which he did not usually practise.
_ _

Mr. Hunt was again urgent in pressing the
Court to interfere in the manner requested.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY--4 will ask you one quei-
don. I wish to know whether your affidavit states
that you have applied to any Gentleman of the Bar
for advice ? and to know whether, in his judg-
ment, it is a proper case for inquiry
Mr. Hunt replied, that his affidavit stated that
he had applied to the Attorney-General, and that

he had laid the whole of bis case before that
Officer.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY said that this was no answer
to his question.
Mr. Hunt then urged the Court to hear the
contents of his affidavit, and their Lordships at
length suffered him to state what the prayer of
his affidavit was, namely, " That your Lordships
will permit this deponent to read these affidavits
_ _

himself; and that you will direct the Law Officers

of the Crown to perforrM that duty for which they
are so amply paid by the public."
Mr. Justice BAYLEY—Now,, win you tell me
what power we have to give directions to .tlie Law

-Officers of the Crown to institute any proseetz'
tion ?
Mr. Hunt--I think you are all powerful•
found it so.
The discussion proceeded at much greater
length, bat the above being a specimen of its ge".
neral character, we forbear entering into any large/.
detail. Mr. Hunt having exhausted his subject,
Mr. Justice BAYLEY and Mr. Justice BEST de.
livered their opinions seriatim at considerable'
length. In substance they stated, that this was
an application which could not be entertained bY
the Court—first, because the applicant had not
:thew!) that he had applied to any GelltlelnEtn at
the Bar for advice upon the subject of the moil"'
which their Lordships were sure would be nil.
cheerfully giveu by any Gentleman of the
properly sought, without any pecuniary consi:
deration ; and, secondly, because the Court boa
no power to order the Attorney-General, or any
other Officer of the Court, to institute a protrecte
tion, that being a power never exercised by it, •
and was wholly without precedent. If such is
power could be exercised, it would be attended
with the most mischievous consequences to tb
public, because it would totally subvert time Pro.
vince of a Judge, whose duty it, was to adminis'
ter justice in cases impartially brought before lilt
and not to assume to himself the office of 8
prosecutor. Before the Judges could make Bucw
an order as that alluded to, they mast first hear
the accusation, and then with their minds pre"
judiced by the case laid before them, decide titer'
wards upon the case in which they had direct"
the prosecution. Such a proceeding would be
strange anomaly in a Court of Justice. 00 the
whole, their Lordships, atter repeating the ref'
Sons wi!icti thty had before given, why a private
h: !son could no: put in motion the criminal VI
of the country, declared !heir distinct opinion'
!hat th,-y had no power to direct the prosecution'
as prayed by Mr. Hunt's motion.

Mr. EH►tnt, in a parting reply upon ail Corrt'
tilloded to the evidence he i►ad in his posst!ssiott
against the Manchester Magis►rates, but 'is l►C
Iva, immediately checked by the Court, we f"r'
bear stating circumstances which appeared ;o be
couched by mere assertion only. He (Alen IJC
tl►e Court in apparent disappointment.

ANOTHER FATAL INSTANCE OF HYDROPHOBIA'

beards, of No. 3, Globe Terrace, Mile
End, was in the habit during last summer of feed'
ing out of his hands a favourite dog, and on Ofie
of these occasions the animal quietly licked hts
hand ; soon after a small sear was observed °
one of his fingers, which was sometimes pee'''.
liarly painful, and which could not he removed hi
the application of any plaster or lotion. WhCri
the scar was first observed it was cotemporaneol
with an inflammation in the face, 'and althotig`l
the dog diA.in raging madness, it was never s°l-)'
posed that the crag or tdie iz;fllmmation WAS a"
tributable to he animal. These synytoms were.,
painfully felt from time to time, and on TflursdoT
last the sufferer complained of sevefe indisposi'
lion ; on Friday he was seized with a violent
miting, and on Saturday lie was obliged to !WI)
Messrs. Charrington's Ale Brewery, where I%e
worked as a cooper; on Sunday be seemed not °;"
_all improved in his health, -and it was remarked
for tbe first time., that on giving him water t_la
wash his bands he turned away his head, 3/1'
could not bear the sight of it. Same liquid 113‘,:
dicine was offered to him which he took wiEri
great difficulty; he felt, he said, as if it viio°Lii
strangle him. He then took a pill, 'after wbici.
be appeared a little better, but about nine o'et
at night blood was seen to ooze from his tro°t"c'
and it continued so to do until a few minutes pas
7 o'clock, the next morning (Monday), whef) be
expired...--The poor man has left a wife tvidt se"
small children, to lament his Premature dcatb
the eldest of the children not more than 12 Year
of age.

• oil
MURDER.—We lately announced that the -
faction called Ribbon-men, were extending (l'eul;
selves in the direction of the western counties 0;
Ireland. We regret to find that their progress 11;
been milted by the blood of a very respectabf,
Gentleman, and has excited considerable alarlo '—
that quarter :
" WATERFORD, Nov. 6.—On Sunday epee
ing HENRY SAINT GEORGE, &q. brother of °I-
RICHARD ST. GEORGE, was most ilahniu my Wit;
tiered and cut to pieces by a banditti, near
own hou3e, within a few miles of Athlone. P
had been lately active in putting down ribb°ll:
men. His cousin, MANSRRGH ST. GEORGE, sva"
murdered in 1; 93."—(!Waterford Mirror.),
" The Sheriffs of the counties of Limerick;
Clare, and Roscommon, have convened diet
respective counties, for purposes of police."'"'
(Ibid.)

ATTEMPTED SUICIDE.-011 Tuesday, a Gentle:
man of respectability, in the
.neighbourhood of
Fulham, who has for some time shown sympwriiiis
of mental derangAment,. endeavoured to pikt °r—
end to his existence by throwing himself otf
ney Bridge, and would inevitably have succeeded
in his attempt had it not been for a stranger, "d! c;
was passing over the bridge at the saute done, an
,happily caught him just as he was nearly 011.1115
'balance on the top rail. The unfortunate-min
conveyed home to his friends, who lye imPe •
future will prevent his attempting so rash an

BIRTH.
-°'`
On Tuesday last, Mrs. Wm. Haigh, Claphani•Ccon,oun
a daughter.

MARRIED.
On the 10th inst. at Marylebone New Church, Feli.X.Wll4;
more, Esq. of Belvedere-house, Lambeth, to ftosaownd, 5-
cued daughter of Major Tu!loch, of Porthfid-place•

DI D.
Asne'
At Brixton, on Tuesday, the 9th inst. aged -/,,,,z0i500•
On Friday last, at her house, Balliani•hill, Miss D. "
wife of Mr. Louis Dubuisson.

. •
LONDON: Printed by J. B. CARSTAIRS., of No.
Ormond-street, Queen-square; and published by ryr
SCRIPPS, of No. 7, South Melton-street, at Til,tsde^`)
Office, No. 112, Strand ; where Adirertisenicnts,
Lettc;s) iks, (post-paid) „gist b.:a/liras:As

C

ttz,
Lizprj

I'4ll ;
Netting

`tread
141111ral
a •
Cepin
Nrer,
111.1.11 e .
tae.
11),:
each;!
'446-311
46
ih
hot

toit/iire.

Totiowi,

fikd „
2;the

C141(?)1.

Also

Littl
sat,,.
the Au

tyod

R.
..01 1„ „

/411ers'

trice 3