The Sun.
London, England, 1844-09-04 00:00:00

anything illegal involved in the expression of opinion
against courts of law for the purpose of having other
counts submitted that would be more satisfactory; but
however it was quite enough for his argument espe-
cially as all the learned judges had given an unani-
mous opinion that they were bad counts—that two
counts in the indictment were bad. The question was,
whether the judgment that had been pronounced, and
the sentence which had been passed, could be good
under the circumstances ? The question was A
and B are good counts, C was a bad
count, and the court pronounced sentence
upon the defendants in respect to A, B, and C. Here
were three counts, on all of which evidence had been
taken, and a verdict was taken upon each of these
three counts. A conviction was obtained, and the
court proceeded to pass sentence, and the punishment
was awarded according to the discretion of the judge.
Now it was possible that the court had taken into
account the bad counts as well as the good ones.
They had been told that they must assume that judg-
ment had been pronounced on the good counts only.
Now in the first place, he had a serious objection to
that. The presumption was in direct contradiction to
a notorious fact. if they were to assume this, future
students at law in Dublin would, on a reference to the
reports of the Queen's Bench in Ireland, find that the
fact was contrary to that which their Lordships had
assumed. The law judges had stated that two of the
counts were bad, while the Court of Queen's Bench
had declared that they were perfectly good and un-
exceptionable. This put the question entirely out of
court. He had felt with his learned brethren great
surprise when he heard the ingenious argument which
had been addressed to the court on this subject, and
he confessed that he never felt any doubt on the sub-
ject until that argument was submitted to his mind.
Now, the question was, whether in point of fact
there was legal ground for doubt to be entertained.
It was not the first time that a court of justice had
taken that view. He remembered at the time that
his Noble and Learned Friend, now on the 'Woolsack,
presided over the Court of Exchequer, a case was
brought before that court, in which it was proposed
to overrule not the mere dicta of judges, not merely
an opinion which had been received with favour in
Westminster-hall, but a series of decided cases run-
ning through a period of fifty years. His Noble
and Learned Friend, now on the Woolsack, had
examined those cases, and in giving judgment
had stated that inasmuch as the decisions in those
cases were clearly founded in error, they were not
binding. That was the case of Hutton r. Vann,
which had afterwards come before there Lordships'
House, and their Lordships were of opinion that they
were bound by the authorities, but that had not pre-
vented his Noble and Learned Friend who presided
over the Exchequer from entering into the con-
sideration of those cases, and of deciding that
they were not good in law, as they all originated
in a mistake which had crept in in the time of Lord
Mansfield. He had heard his Noble and Learned
Friend, with that admiration with which he had al-
ways heard him, lay down the rule on this subject.
Lord Cottenham and Lord Campbell (whose judg-
ments will be given in full in our next edition) con-
curred in opinion with Lord Denman, and, after a
few words from Lord Brougham, the judgment of the
Court of Queen's Bench in Ireland was reversed,
Lords Denman, Cottenham, and Campbell voting
for reversing the judgment, and the Lord Chancellor
and Lord Brougham for affirming it. The effect of
this decision is, that Mr. O'CONNELL AND HIS
FELLO W PRISONERS WILL BE SET AT
LIBERTY.

ADMIRALTY COURT-(THIS DAY)
The first Surrogates' Court during the vacation was
held this day at Doctors' Commons, for the purpose of
hearing applications, several of which were upon the list,
but none of them possessed much general interest.