The Sun.
London, England, 1819-07-08 00:00:00

wisHART V. SIR F. BURDETT, BART. AND I'LICR.

This action teas brought under circumstances
similar to those detailed in the former case. Mr.
Wishart, who is well known as having taken an
ac:ive part in the Elections for Westrnioster, for
several years past, had, it appeared, become ob-
noxious to the people, in consegnence of the part
be took at the last Election, and the populace
proceeded to his house in Coventry-street, on the
night of the 3d of March, and broke his windows.
Proof having been given of the damage sus-
tained—

Mr. BLACKBURNE (with whom was Mr. J.
EvANs) with considerable ability addressed the
Jury on behalf of the defendants. He observed,
that they were evidently singled out, both of
them being very well known, as defendants in
this action, for the purpose of itupr:fssing the
public with a belief that they encouraged the riots
which took place in Westminster in March last.
The Learned Counsel stated, that he would ►rove,
by incontestible evidence, that the mob, who did
all the mischief complained of, was hired by Mr.
Lamb's CoMmittee, to which the plaintiff be-
longed—and, if he brought this fact Lorne to the
plaintiff, the Jury must find a verdict for the de-
fendants, since he who employed a mob could not
recover any compensation from the Hundred, if
the persons be had caused to assemble together
committed depredations on Lis own properly. He
Olen called

VV. Waller, %vim deposed- that he had been
employer in the late electiOn, by a person of the
name of Bond, ho belonged to the Bow-street
establishment, to stand at the south end of the
hustings, for the purpose of cheering ?Ir. Lamb
when he addressed the people. He was also di-
rected, when Mr. Hobhouse spoke, to make the
most, discordant noise possible. Witness went
with Bond to a public-house called the Ship, in
James-street, Covent-garden, where he saw a great
number of persons, who were employed by
Bond to attend at the hustings for the pur-
pose of supporting Mr. Lamb. IVitness, however,
did not like the company, amongst whom were
Dolly Smith, Cropley, Randall, Tom Jones, West
Country Dick, and several other fighting men.
In consequence, Bond told him, as he wrote a
good hand, be would be useful in making out lists
of the men employed. Witness did so, and could
speak to about 122 men who were employed-by
Bond. He was present when money was paid to
the different leaders. Some had 12 men under
their command, other's double that number. On
Tuesday, the 2d of March, witness went with
Bond to Mr. Lamb's Committee-room, in Hen-
rietta-street. Bond went there for the purpose
of getting money to pay the men. They saw Cap-
tain Prescott, one of the Committee, to whom
Bond said, that as he had engaged the men for three
days, Ile could not discharge them at a moment's
notice. ::apt. Prescott said lie would not give him
any more money, that be bad already received
241., and his men were worth nothing, for half a
dozen stout fellows would beat them all. Witness
made out an account of the money paid by Bond
to the men, which be saw delivered to Mr.
Holmes.

On his cross-examination, witness said be
was employed at present to make out tradesmen's
account 9.

William Bond, a Bow-street patrole, deposed
that he was unacquainted with Mr. Wishart, and
did not believe he would know him if be saw
tutu. Was not present when the candidates were
proposed at the last election. During the elec-
tion,he was frequently at Mr. Lamb's Committee-
room, Henrietta-street. The principal person he
saw there, as a managing person, was Mr.
Holmes. He was at the Conimittee:ruom on the
Saturday of the second week of the election. He
saw Mr.- Holmes and Captain Prescc“t there, but
did not know any other person. He received in-
structions up stairs as to what was to be done
on the Monday by a person who, he was inform-
ed, was Mr. Macdonald.

Mr. SCARLET: objected to this evidence. The
defendant's Counsel ought to connect Mr.Wishart
with these transactions. At present two indivi-
duals were introduced, who, it did not appear,
had any connexion with the present plaintiff.
The CHIEF JUSTICE said, it was, very difficult to
prescrible the course a Counsel was to pursue.—
Much must be left to his discretion. This was
but the second witness—and he was of opinion
that the examination should be proceeded in.
Mr. SCARLET? was convinced that his Learned
Friend could not, by this witness, connect Mr.
Wishart with the transaction of hiring the mob.
Mr. BLACKBURNE then called Mr. Holmes, who
deposed, that be was Secretary to Mr. Lamb's
Central Committee. He knew Mr. %Vtshart. He
very seldom appeared at the Committee-room,
and took no part in any discussion. Plaintiff was
not at the Committee on the Saturday of the se-
cond week ut tae election. He was then out of
town. Plaintiff returned on the Monday, and
called on him for the •tote of the poll. He never.

came there for any purpose, but to ask the state
of the poll.—Witness could not say whether he
was a Member of the Committee or not.
Mr. Macdonald, M. P, stated, that there was
no Committee appointed to conduct Mr. Lamb's.
election, but that a number of his friends came
forward to promote his election ; that Mr. Wish-
art, with himself, was one of those friends, but
took no part in the business, merely calling now
and then to see the state of the poll that in con-
sequence of the interruptions which electors de-
sirous of voting for Mr. Lamb experienced • in
their way to the bustings,, from a tumultuous
mob, it was thought expedient to employ a nom-
' her of persons under the'directions of a constable
named Bond, to keep a passage clear from the
Committee-room' to the Hustings ; - that those
persons were positively enjoined to conduct them-
selves peaceably, and not strike any body, unless
struck by others ; and that Mr. Wishart was
wholly ignorant at the fact of such persons hav-
ing beet) employed.
Mr. BeAckevaNn said he had no other evidence
to connect the plaintiff with the transactions' in
question.
SCARI.ETT, in reply, disclaimed, on the
part of the plaintiff, any intention of putting Sir
Francis Burdett a!,(1 Mr. Place on the rec,rrd as
defendants, horn any improper motive, or with a
view to excite prejudice. They happened to be
selected as respectable inhabitants of the Hundred.
In the course of his observations, 'the Learned
Counsel, in alluding to the known anxiety of Sir
Francis Hurdett, as an advocate for Pat hamentary
Reform, said, 1t would say this of the Honour-
able Baronet, that, in his opinion, from the mode
he had adopted to attain that object, he was the
greatest enemy of Parliamentary Reform. With
respect to the other defendant, he was a tailor by
trade, but he believed him to be also a most re-
spectable man, and also, he was informed; had
abilities and character which would adorn any
station of life. As to the merits of the case, there
was not the tiightest evidence to connect the
plaintiff with the' nature of the defence set up.
The Cut ill, JUSTICE chtirged the Jury, that the
defence set on, it it had been proved, would have
Ibeen a satisfactory answer. to this action, but
inasmuch as it had totally tailed, the plaintiff was
I entitled to a verdict. _ _ _

The Jury seemed to be in doubt, and desired to
withdraw.

The CIIIEv JUSTICE then entered into more de-
taiied'observations upon the case.
Mr. SCARLETT was heard in continuation of his
previous reply, and at length the Jury interposed,
and said they were satistied.—Verdict for the
plaintiff. Damages 151..135.