Star.
London, England, 1801-02-02 00:00:00

THE KING RVSEY.

Mr. LAW, land tet in, had moved an Arreft of
Judgment in the above cafe, which was an indift-
mcnt againfl the Dt.fendant for rcgrating a cer-
tain quantity of oats in the Corn Market on the
Bth of November. He had been tried before
Lord KENYON and a Special jury at Guildhall,
and found guilty.
This day this Rule was called on, and the mat-
ter was moll learnedly argued on both tides.
Mr Laseisz !hewed cattle again(' the Rule...-
Ilc gave up the §r(i.part of the todia:nent, which,
cared the Defend.rat with having unlawfully'l
got into his potrellion tae Corn Ilated in the In-
didment. He contended, that kcgrating was a
crime at the. Common Law of this Land, and•
That thc Statutes of the ath and sth of Edw. VI.!
Were only declaratorY of the Common Law in that•
particular;. and.that.theStatute of the r ztli of the
prefent King; which repealed that of Edward VI.
repealed- oar What it enumerated, and left the
Common I.:enc where it flood antecedent to the
paffinkof that Statute. That therefore we were
to finif the, Law froor,the di is to be found in our
handed down to us froth age to age by
$
7c4)t as
ti Reporters. ,kle.quoted Coke's Inllitute,
kg which it appeared to be the opinion of. that
.10-aide of the profelllon, that a Regrater came from
rfgratement ; and that a Regrater and Ingroffer
were,.originally, comprehended under the head of
Foreflalkr.' —ln a word, the avec -of a mil:
demeanour, at the Common Law, was .not that
which was to be found merely-in a 'private wrong,
bet aVo that which-was at "'sae injyry, what was
more emphatiselly the cbaraaer of thatwhich was
aatc4 upop this Indictment. The Statute of Ed-
ward VI, we's Undo two Centuries and a half ago,
*ad, for that period, there was no Indieiment to
be found at Common Law for Regrating, for
%hey were all founded upon the Statute, until the
repeal of it in our Own time; but that the Statute
of Edward VI. was declaratory of the Common
Law, upon the intik& of Regrating, and that the
Statute of the lath of the prefent King did not
repeal any part of the Common Law upon that
fubje&, was molt rnanifeilly the opinion of the
Learned Commentator upon the Law of England,
PM late Mr. Jallice BLACKSTONE, as appeared by
as edition of his book, which came out very loon
after the palling of the aa of the i ath Geo. 111.
in which he tool notice of that very Stauste.
Mr. Law, Mr. Serjeant BEST, and Mr. MA.
aver., contended Molt Rrenoufly and ably for the
Rule, upon the grounds opened by Mr.
The two latter gentlemen contended alto, that this
Indiament was defeaive, inafmuch as it did not
llate.that the Corn was bought with intent to en-
hance the price, and illuftratcd this by various ar-
guments ; after which the Judges delivered their
opinions.
Lord Kr NYON raid, tbatthis was an Indiament
charging that the Defendant, at a hated day, at the
Corn Exchange, did unlawfully get into his poi.
feffion ninety quarters of Oats, of thc growth of
this kingdom, at the price of 40 !billings per quar-
ter, and that on the fame day, afterwards, viz.
the Bth of June, in the fame Market, did un-
lawfully fell it at the price of 43 !billings per quar-
ter, and Which to compute the intcreft,giving him
ered4 for turning . his capital into ule every
twenty-four hours, in this thrifty manner, was
a little more than 30001. per cent. " What
ought to be the Law of the Land," Paid his
I.ordfhip, " I will not pretend to inquire, or
even to think. The Legiflature is called together
for great and arduous purpofes, and among loch
porpofes is the fubjea which is now before us, un-
der the head of. Scarcity, or High Price of Provi-
:ions. I have the utmoft confidence that the Le.
gillature will do that which is bell to be done upon
this as well as other fubjeas ; but we have in
the mean time thrown upon as, the painful, for it
is a painful duty when a cafe bears hard upon a
party, or where any body may think fo, to pro-
nounce the Law; but it mull be remembered that
edges are not to inquire or 'Peculate what the
w ought to be, but what the Law is. My
Lord Coke, a great Judge, and, I think, ftandard
of the Common Law of this realm, Rates it as
his opinion, and to have been the opinion of
learned men before his time, that Regrating was
an offence at Common Law. I think we ought
to fee what intelligence we can obtain from this
fource. The Common Law of the Land is talk-
ed of in a way that, if it be right, I know not
how to take it. I Ihould have thought that a
majority of the Gentlemen of the Bar had held
this to be an offence at the Common Law : this
appears to have always been the prevailiNc opi-
nion, as we collet it from the bell Text 14 riters,
nor do I think that what we find Rated as the
Common Law in Coke or in Blaekftone upon
this fubjca, is to be laid afide, becaufe we cannot
find it in Braden, who, by the-bye, was a Ci-
vilian, I think ; or in Glanville, or come others
of the olden writers. I value highly the la-
bours of Mac men, for they were very learned,
and they conferred great favours on their polle-
rity ; but whoever reads and examines them with
the greiteß care, will return from his (Indies
without poifeffing great information on the pcint
now before us, nancely, ho‘c, tlu Law ought to be
adminillered upon this Indi :Intent. Why, they,
what is the !late of the cafe, and by what tett
are we to judge of the queftion ? I have 'bid al:
ready that the text is to be collated 'froth the
heft writers, and I have fail what that text is;
to this we mull add the declaration of Parlisment
itfelf ; and that declaration is to lie fodnd in the
Aft of Etlivard.the Sixth ; fin although that Aft
repealed, yet we arc at 'liberty thU to look in-
to that aa, to fee whether it was declaratory of
what was then underftood tobe the Common Law,
and that is manifest by its Wing the word "
dare," and the Legillature in thole days threw
no words away. Mr Brother This v hits argued
this cafe muff ingeninully and ably. I Mould
not he doing julttce to my feelings if I were not
to fa:- Co; but I think he has gone beyond the'

point where his own real judgment would have
directed him to flop. He tied, that a Statute
cannot be confidered as a Declaratory Statute,
unlefs it be fo named, and that the anal courfe
was, in Declaratory Statutes, firft to Hate what
the Law was, and then to declare it, and that
there is no other Declaratory Statute among the
ancient Rolls of Parliament. Now, I verily be-
lieve there arc many. Lord Coke tells us, and
every Lawyer whore name appears in our books
to &terve the name of a Lawyer, tells us, that
the Legiflature *tiling the word " declare," is to
be underflood as making that Statute a Decla-
ratory Law; for at the time of Edward VI. and
before it, there was not that verbiage which has
fiiund its way into modern Statutes—L..l:ly word
had a meaning—Every word was weighed alms It
like gold doff before the Legiflature adopt, d it,
and allowed it A place in its ails. Mr. Law, with
great earacitnets, challenged the vvhole 8.0 to
Thew. a tingle Record, except the repealed Sta-
tute of Edward the Vltl,, in which Regrating
i limed as a Crime. This has been well anfwer-
ed by his Learned Coadjutor, my Brother Bell
hini4ll." Here his Lordfliip quoted the Roll
which had been alluded to by Mr: Scrjcaut Belt
" Having thus gone through the written Law;
let us conic to the opinions of learned mete, and
here we 'arc in a miterabre Date indeed.—l do
ntit blame Mr.' Law for charging what I flared
to the Jury to be imperti:&, for I dare fity, I did
not with pet lea accuracy slate it • but I cannot
ry help obfeing, that the Learned Gehtlemcn mho ,
have argued for the arrcit of this judgment, have
not quite agreed in all points. I do not know
whether or not they held a confultaiion, I rather
think they did not upon this occalion ; for Mr.
Law is clear there is no Common Law by which
Regrating is deemed an offence, and he defies
any body to prove there is. My Brother BEST,
with, I think, a better aim at the cafe, admits
that Regrating *nay be an offence at Common
Law, provided it be with intent to mile the Price
of the Article, or to produce any public mifchief;
but he contends there fhould be nn judgment in
this cafe, becaule there,is no fuch averment upon
this record. Now I fay, we have the opinions of
learned men from. the earliefl times, Gating that
Rcgrating is an offence by the Common Law of
this land ; and here I beg to be underflood as
grounding nsyfelf mainly upon my Lord COK I.
It is invidious to remember what has been hid, I
think unadvifcd flippantly, and rashly, of that
great Lawyer ' • and I do not know what would
become of my Lord Co R E'S charaiter, if what was
faid of him of late years had all the weight it was
intended to,have ; for Tome body or other (an at
Von to Mr. Burke) who has not given us his name,
who dates his obfervations from Beaconsfield,(but
it is not every one who chutes to date his Works
from Beaconsfield, that is entitled to the fame
veneration as the great Staterman who once re-
fided there) (has told us, that the labours of the
Legiflature, and thole who afterwards fupported
them, were very improperly refcued from the
moth that ought to have dedroyed them. I do
not think that this is a fentence which would be-
come the Profeffor's Chair, nor does it exhibit
much knowledge of either the Common or Civil
Law of this land. What I go upon, and I mainly
rely on it, is, the text to be found in our Law
rooks, as containing a Syllem of Law, but alto
the Parliamentary Declaration on which that Law
was eflablifhed, and the Statute declares, as a de-
finition of a Regrater, " one who buys Corn, &c.
in a market, and fells the fame again within four
miles thereof." If this be not fo, then there is an
end of the cafe ; no punifhment can be infliaed on
the Defendant, becaufe in that cafe, there is no
Law on which it can be founded. I cannot tell
whether, according to technical learning, this prac-
tice is to be called an offence, but certainly, to a
Layman, this teems to lead to dangerous conic-
quenccs. It fhould teem as if it had been the in-
tention of the La.'.-, that goods Mould come to an
even market, there to find fairly their level price, fo
that every body fhould have an opportunity of bur-
jog what he wanted. The Defendant buys Corn in
large quantities, and others, who want it, are to
reiron his humanity, whether they are to be fed
or not. If they are to he fed at all, it is to be at
the profit to him of two or three fhillings per
(biarter ; and this, taking his capital out of his
hand only for 14 hours, and allowing him to do
this every day in the year, that is 36; days, he
will have 30001. per annum hitt:reit upon his
capital ; it may be right that this praflice fhould
continue, but this is the effcit of it. I have
considered this &Wed over and os er amain—it
has hardly been out of mind fence the trim of the
caufe, for it then made a very deep impreffion
on me. The matter, and die Law of it, were
both ably treated by my learned Brother upon
my.right hand (Mr. Juflice Grote) the other
day, (the Cafe of Mr. Waddington) to all which
I beg leave to fubferibe. Therefore, without
confidering whether the Law is right or wrong,
we arc bound, and therefore we !hall, unlef the
Parliament should interrupt us, give Judgment :
—that Judgment, in my opinion, is againd the
Defendant in this Cafe."

Mr. Jultice Gross. I am not quite fo
'clear ; I think this Cafe differs from the other,
to which my Lord Chief Justice has Oft referred.
I never heard any thing more ably or more fa.
tisfafforily argued, than the Cafe before 421 this
I•day. 1 with to confider whether the defcription,
a llat,Al in the IndiElment in this Cafe. is a ii;f6.
dein defcription of the Offence complainsesl of?
Or, whether words ought not to have bees added,
to fignitv that the Buying and Selling again in the
fame Market, in this Cafe, was. with intent to
mile the price of Provifions ? Here I have fo
much doubt, that before I deliver an opinion,
by which I would be bound, I with to look into
Authorities, and confider the confcqucuces of
Inch a dccilion. _ _ .

" With reipea to the word Regrater, I hap
pen to know that that term, in Come of the Conn-,
tics of this Kingdom admits of a perfealy inno-
cent intent, and to have no reference whatever to
any view of btqing with an intent to enhance un-
taiirly the price, but to mean merely a buckfier-
ing ; and that livcrAl palms arc 'ailed Regrai

era to whom nothing
.Unfair in a way of trade
can with propriety be imputed. Looking at this
Indidment, I do not obferve it is (fated to be
the intent of the Defendant to enhance the price
of the commodity ; and that is the gravanr in
cafes of this fiat. There are a number of hi-
(lances which I could put, in which it could not
be difficult to fee, that buying and felling again
in the fame day, and perhaps in the lam: mar-
ket, and perhaps, tut, at a lower price, for the
mole laudable of all puipoles, would bean offence
at the Common Law, if the conttradion contend-
eel fur on the par t of the prosecution be eltablirli-
ed to its full extent. I lay this rather with a
view to throw out a doubt and difficulty which I
fed at ; but, in my mind, if the dc.
f:ription be f4.lLient, there can b, no doubt
but that Regratiq: is an offence at the Corn-
: mon Law, and that then the Indielment is
right, for it Hates purchating and felling again in
the tame market, and !fates more, that of raing
to a very large advantage ; but I doubt whether
it ought not to have b:en Hated that the offence
was committed with intent to enhance the price ;
therefore I would rather, for the prefent, panic a
little before I give'a decided opinion : if, in the
comic of a day or two, I (hall bc perfedly fatisfi-
ed, that the argument, on the part of lie Crown
are corred in this pat ticular, I Ilan have no dif-
ficulty to fay fo ' • nor any, if my opinion (hould
b: in favour of Defendant. At prefent I had
rather he exbufed than give an opinion by which
I (hall be bound down."-

Mr. Juitite LAWREWCI Ind Mr. Jutlice LE
BL ANC agce6d, that Regrating was an offence at
Common Law, but had the fame doubt as Mr.
Jultice GaosE, as to, whether the Indidment
(hould hot have Hated, that the Corn was bought
with intent to enhance the Price! The Cafe,
therefore, flood over.

THE KING V. IVADIIINGTON.
The Leading Counfel for Mr. Waddington re-
quelled to know of thcir Lord'hips on what day
it would be convenient for the Defendant to come
uppn the Kent information. He meant only to
make a few obfervations, but neither for a new
trial, nor an arrefl of judgment. The Court ap-
poiuted Thurfday neat.