The Sun.
London, England, 1818-02-23 00:00:00

THE KING V MILNE AND OTHERS.

. .
This was an itadictm-ent !Bele:red against Mr;
Huskisst)h P one Of the Commissioners.
Mr. Milne,: the surveyor,' Mr, Na rile builder,
Mr. George ThottipSon; Mr., James 7Ellollips
and Mr., Cornell, .persons emplOyed under the. Act:
called.the-,New. Street Act, by Mr.. Charles Pitt,
fora conspiracy. to injure him in 14employ as
agent and referee for persons seeking conrpenso;
lion tinder the Act tor the loss sustained by then
in beingjemoved from.their habitations, situated
in the IMe of the proposed, new street.
he prosectitor,pleaded his 0 wneause, and ad-
dressed the Court in a speech of ,considerable
length, in -which lie adverted to, and commented
on, various topics, in no way. connected with the
question at. issue. He concluded his address, of
three hours length, by Stating, that. he should cait
tifty-two witnesses, and. read :various doentnent
to prove his 'case.. ,Amongst the witnesses called
bY him were the following:—
George„grookes., a solicitor, Mrs,
.Sarah Gouch,'
James „Watkins, Richard. Jervis, John Presland,
Sarah Strong,. and James Hardgrave, being e?t-
at:tined . by Ale plaintiff, proved that Mr. Pitt had
acted as their surreynr in. the year 1815 ; that the
defendant's Mr. Nash, Mr. Thompson, sen. and
jun. and Mr,.,Cnrnell, had, at .different
Made use of language ;ending to prevent them front
employing the 'plaintiff. " •

W. Tooke, Esq. Deputy 'High Weit—
toinster„ recollects the questions of coinpcnsatiott
which cattle before hint relative to F. B Fouche,
on the 13'th of September, 1816. Witness hgd no
recollection of insintiAtimis being thrown our
against Mr. Pitta-, of his having conspired witlk
others to erect a Bazaar, for the purpose of de—
frauding the ContmiNsionets. •Witness recollected
the case of Mr. Wilding. Mr. Pitt was not a
witness on that oecasion. He was alluded to ;
but the Ciunsel.employed withdTew his allusion.

Cross- eionziaed. —The trial of Fouche Was for
compensation for a house in Oxford-street, valued
at 10 0001. in consequence of its having been let
for seven years as 4 bazaar, at 9991. 10s. a•year.
It was fitted up as a bazaar in 1816, long after
the Act was passed. 1 he' previous rent of the
house was 751. and the taxes about S5l. Mr.
Pitt valued the house at 5,3901. It %vas a com-
mon shop in Oxford-street. The claim before the
Jury was 100401. The person to wi•oun the lease
at 9991. 10s.was.graated, was a person named
Saroeder, who was ,reviously click to FOncite,
The Jury gaVe 1;4001 Mr. Mayhew, another
surveyor, valued it at 5,6901., but he valued it as
baz,t,tr, at the rent of 9991. JOS. Tht• Curtin-Ik-
:4nrc-ti 1,0501.; the jail/ gave I,4001•.
Mr. harmer, 3nothcr,sorveyor, said that, coosi-
tiered as a bazaar, tie s;ionl.4 value the premises at
4,5001 The i»siottation.ot Counsvl, that Mr.
Pitt was.concerned in the bazaar; was withdrawn,
as utifoundc'd.

IValker proved the having employed Pitt
as his. agent. Cornell c4edon %.itne•s,
Mr. Pitt vvonld lead hii>t io the yvrong, and Me.
Pitt hail better take t are of Unwell', as they
have nothing to do

• The Right Hen. G. ,Canning.—Witness re-
ceive 4 a letter trove the prosecutor, da,ed May
9th, 1817. Witness acknowledged the receipt Of
',hat letter on.the ggd of nty, and ,stald in his
reply, that he had transiniited an i•xtraet or, the
prosecutor's letter to Mr. Huskiss.on. - Witness
had no recollection of having spoken to the pro-
secutor iu tile lobby of.. the House of Cominods,
and recommended hiin to petition.the Lordi of the
Treasury; but it was the answtrhe ham-
rally have wade, and probably did make, if the
prosecutor applied to hint.
Sir Burdett.—Witness was Chairman of
the Committee of the House of Commons, to
which the petitions of the inbabitauts of Maiket-
street, and.Norrit-street, in the Haymarket, were
referred.

Lord ELLENBor.OUGH observed, -be could not
hear what passed in the Ii of C0(1)(1)0114. •

_Prosecutor resumed his examination. Witness
received several letters from the• prosecutor.
(Here one was handed up to the witness, and lie
was asked who was the individintl itiladed to in
that letter as having mentioned his, the ptoseen.
tot's name.) The witness said he•could not re-
collect who.that individual was.

Mr.'Villette employed Mr. Pitt as his referree,
bur not being ►hie to get iris businewsettled, he
went to Mr. Milne himself, and Mr. Milne them
told him the Commissioners would not treat with
Mr. Pitt. This was in July lat.

The prosecutor then proceeded to call several
other witnesses, who stated that•' they emplOyed
him. as their agent, but in
,consequence of the de—
Jay which took phce in having their business
done,L they ultimately tou} their papers out of
.his
hands.

Sir James Grabam was next called. Sir James
stated, that Mr. Mathews, an intabitant of Mar-
ket-terrace, bad applied to hiM to interest himself
tor:him. .Sir James did so, and on inquiring into
the compensation offered to Mr. Mathews, he cbn-
sidered 'it as most liberal, a'nd strongly advised Mr.
Mathews to accept it. Mr. M. said he was ready to
accept it, but his papei s were in r. Pitt..s hands,
and he feared he should not he able to get them
front him. Sir James, and several or bet 'Members of
P:tyliamenf, interested C:emselves for the persons
seeking :compensation, and, in most instances,
their compensations was most liberal. He re-
collected having seen ttte proecutiar in the lobby
et the House of Commons ; and, in answer to
some ques'ions put by Mr. Pitt to him, he recol-
lected haying said that some eety .exothitant de-
tuauds bad been Made by intik ;dUals, and (bat it
was reported,that Mr..rit advised qiese exot bi-
taut demands. .Mr. Pitt ecnipkitied of iojary lie
had receved, and aski:d lICSS to Sr kit tta Alf,
HuskisstAt in his behaif. k‘ irtaess declined..'
Pitt then observed,•.that be knew several of itla.
Haskissoit's constitueins. , James
'• you had better apply ,to Mr.,Pirt af-
ter ward„threatened to initire Sir Jan.es With his
',on4ti:iients. •

My.Loiti, 1 am sorry S.ir.Jumes

cannot recollect something Mote but I cannot
force hint Ia recollect what he has forgotten "
Lord ELLENIIOROUGH.--" Sir hints recollects
More than is for yosir advantage."
The Hon. Mr. Beanet...--Witness is Member
fur Shrewsbury ; knows the family of the Wild-
'tugs very well ; they are tenants of the witness's
father; recollects speaking to Mr. Huskisson on
behalf of John Wilding-, and his claiws of com-
pensation ; Mr. IL expressed a wish speedily to
decide tl ilding's claim, either by reference or hy,
tsial; Mr. Huskisson said, though he was m''st
ready to consent to as reference, there was a person
it, whosti lie should object as a referee ; a,nl, he,
as ti.c sanse time, assigned a reason which carried
e.,nvietion to Isis mind as to_the propriety of that
Ojection. Witness 3fterWards met Mr. Pitt in
the street, and its a conversation with him, said, he
k,ti ;omit! Mr. Huskisson most willing to settle
the (-I.•im of John Wilding ; witness hat no' re-
collection of Navin; received a letter front Mr.
Vitt, requesting be would become a referee be-
tween hint and the Commissioners. 1:,..te the
letter of Mr. Bennet, in answer to Cie letter in
question, was handed' up to him. The Hon.
Member read his letter, and said the application
had certainly been made, but be declined becom-
ing referee fo-r Mr. Pitt.
Lord Lauderdale had been on the bench in at-
tendance 01- dAy, subpcenett by the prosecutor,
Who, at this petiod of the day, six o'clock, said
he should not examine his Lordship,'nor would
lie detain hins any longer.
Mr. Phillips, a clerk in the New Street Office,
was. next. called. He knew Mr. Pitt, and had
seen Lim backwards and forwards at the office fur
ta o years. The office was open.to the agents of
claimants indiscsiminately, with only one solhary
instance—the instance was Mr. Pitt. The excep-
tion- of Mr. Pitt arose from a transaction which
took place in July, 1816. It was as tolloWs :
A claim was sent into the office at that period on
behalf of Mr. White, of the Haymarket, by Mr.
Pitt, of 2000 guineas., as the price of Isis busi-'
tugs, &c. It afterwards turned out that. Nlt. Pitt
was in contract for the hnsiness of Mr. White at
that time, for a sum under 900 guineas, and at
that sum the purchase was afterwards male of
3,Jr. White. Cposs thiS transaction it was that
the Commissioners decided that they would at no
future period treat with him as a referee.
Mr. T. Farquharson, in Jane, 1816, had an in-
terview with Mr. Milne and Mr. Cornell relative
to the purchase of Mr. White's house. Mr. Milne
then said that. Mr. Pitt was culled on to make the
best explanation he .could relative to this'trans
action. He deClared he had no ill will towards
lirt Pitt, who was much deceived if be thought
lse,• Mr. Vines, was his enemy. Witness also
saw Mr. HuskissOn on the same subject, who de-
clared„he was no personal enemy to Mr. Pitt
z : on
the contrary, if Mr. Pitt could justify his conduct,
be would do all in his power to forward his inte-
rest with the Board.-7--Here the defendant closed

• Lis case. •
Lord ELLENBOROUGII Mr. Attorney-
General, do you think it is necessary to address
the Jury ?"
Mr. ATTORNEY-GENETtAL—" My Lord, indeed
uo.not, after tt.e lasr part of the evidence. I
will only wake this obserVatiou to the Jury. Gen-
tlemen, Mr Pitt is not the person on his trial;
if he were, that which has been proved by several
of his owe tvitnesses„. would, with a tew other
circumstantes, be st tong evidence to convict him ;
instead of whien he has ventured to charge Gen-
tlemen. investesl with a duty which they owe to
the public,. of preventing the public being wronged
by these transactions, with having entered into
a conspiracy' against him ; and, because they
have (for I must admit they have)-been guilty of
tivt ritteh lenity in having permitted that man,
'after his earnest and repeated intercessions, to
complete those references in which his name
had been previously inserted, warning hint at the
same time that his conduct should be narrowly
watched, he has the audacity to come here and
state the Which they had doneont of charity to
him, as evidence against them of au original con-
spiracy against his character and conduct. Gen-
tlemen, I have only one further observation to
make. This is 'the first time (I hope It will be
the last in my lire), that in the long course of
four or five and thirty years. I have ever seetilhis
happen—that the man who was best able to give
evidence and to explain the whole, should go be-
fore a Grand Jut y, and put himself the first wit-
ness before that Jury, in a room where he could
not be cross-examined, to induce them to find a
big ; and then, when he comes into a Court
of 'Justice, before a Jury of his country, to
try the defendants upon the indictment., to titre
himself into an. Advocate, to break through every
rule and law.of evidence, beeause he dare not
place. bintsi/If in that box to•be cross-eXamined'as
to the different transactions of his past life, and
to he met and co:.fiicted by others whom lie has
allOed to,. who are attending: the Court,and who
were bronght, here to have stated that which they
might in that case have stated about Mr. Pitt; re-
peoing who,m,' if the COlnneissioner'S had knoWn
'as much as those witnesses, they ought never to
have suffered him to pitt his toot into their office.
is .the first. time I have ever witnessed such
an exikibition, and I hope, for the 'sake' of law and
of justice, is will he the last."

Lord Eii.KNI3OitOZ;6I4.." Gentlemen, I shall de-
tain you with hardly a sentence. This has been
:an exhibition of tile most shameful etiroutery that
in the co'irse o! long'professitmal life I have ever
witnessed. This persbn is charging Gentlemen,
Against whom, upon the fullest investigation of
their conduct, there is nothing to he brought as
matter of blame, but the lenity with which they
bate, treated a person convicted 'before 'them. of the
grossest fraud ; a man claiming to be employed and
trusted to fill the pact of referee bee the Claim-
ants end 'Government; who iid. come forward
with a demand. of 2000 guineas, when he had.
himself taken the bargain tor, that property at
8501. I think, if there be any thing blameable, and
there is something blameable, I will say, on the
7,i;•• of the respectable Commissioners, it was their
Pavti.g for one moment after. that, discovery 'per-
mitted any instrument or'any transactltsn to stand
cpon the records of their commission, or haVing
let evert the transactions that were begun, be con-
sum and brought to a dose under his agency.
7. he Commissioners, certainly, very properly re- .

•
proved him,•and-told him that they would have no
further transactions with him ; but in mercy to
hini, and also to the poor unfortunate beings who
had hetore put their affairs in his hands, they let
tl►.'m be brought to a close under his manage-
nu nt. Their • duty ought to have prevented
his giving evidence of any transaction later
than Jone, 1816, (and as has' put me in mind,
even in the year 1817) ; for the credit of pub-
lic justice, and for- credit and security .of
innocence and 'honesty in transactions of busi-
ness, they ought 'never to have suffered his
name to appear upon the records again. It is unr
necessary to refer to that other business where he
put an e,tin►ate of 5,0001. and upwards, en pro-
perty in Oxford-street, which- was converted for
the occasion into a -Bazaar, and which was of such
inferior value to that which he had' vouched, that
the Jury gave a verdict for 14001. only. Really,
at this time,, and fatigued as you must be by
.your attention in this case, it is unnecessary,
and it is most unbecoming, to pollute oneself and
contaminate oneself by a communication with
tlstpe things which have been given in evidence
agaitAt him, all of. which are full of infamy fron►
the ,beginning to the end. Gentlemen,
,1 do not
fecal it to ask what verdict you will find ;
4 see the itnpression the case has made upon you ;
I know- you are my' 'countrymen ; I know you
have a sense of justice ; and I am sure you will
find a verdict of Not Guilty:"
The Jury immediately pronounced a verdict for
the Defendants accordingly.