Star.
London, England, 1801-01-29 00:00:00

COURT OF RING'S BENCH, JANUARY 2L

' tilt ICING V. WADDINGTON.
Lord KENTON fai4, that although this cafe was
not the fira among the peremptones for this day,
yet being among them, at would, perhaps, be bet-
ter to difpofe of that cafe now.
Mr. Waddington Paid he humbly conceived that
he was entitled-to (peak to the Court before judg-
ment was pronounced, for that the Court had not
yet received all the information upon the fubjea
which they ought to poffefs.
Lord Kau row Paid, the Court, as he under-
food, had heard all that was intended to be urged
on this fubjea, ant that nothing was remaining
but for the Court to pronounca its judgment; but
if Mr. Waddington wanted to add any thing more,
perhaps the better way would be for him to be
remanded, and for the Court to put off the cafe
until the next Term,

Mr. Waddington raid he confidered this as a
queftion of national importance, and deeply af-
felting the charader of the nation and the law of
tl.e land.
Lord Ksisvon faid, that Judges, like other men,
were fubjed to the infirmities of men, but as far
as they had been hitherto able to judge of the cafe
which was now befbre them, the Defendant was',
brought to receive judgment for a breach of the
law of this 12.nd.
Mr. Waddington then proceeded to addrefs the
Court, and to lay before it the hiftory of his bay-
ing entered Into, and continued in the trade in
hops; the fluduations in the price of that article;
the deficiency in fome years, and confequently the
high price ; for it was not owing to the fpecida-
tions of Mr. Waddington, but the will of Gob,
that there had been a fcarcity of them.--Here he
entered into certain calculations as to the produce
and the duty on hops for the revere' years in
which, he was in the trad;', diftinguithing each
year ; and then proceeded to infift.that they were
higher in price Before he became a dealer in them,
than they had been fine*, and that his going into
the trade had the effed of encouraging the growth
and cultivation of hops, and that of breaking a
combination which had long before that time been
carried on among the dealers in that article ; from
which be maintained that what he did was ufeful to
the public, and meritorious inftead of criminal,
and that hops had been rather lower in price now,
than they would have been if it bad not been for
his (peculation. He infifted that what he did was
not contrary to law, for that all the old names
upon the fubjed of foreftalling. regrating, &c.
were done away, and repealed by the Astute of the
sash of the prefent King, and that the cafe now
before the Court, was rather the trial of the Alt
of Parliament, than of Mr. Waddington. He
begged of, and intreated the Judges to be cau-
tious of what they were doing, fur that he was
convinced they were under a delufion, in con-
fidering that his conduit in this cafe was ille-
gal, and that the time was not far off when it
would be proved, and authoritatively declared to
be fo ; and therefore the Court would do well to
paufe, for it would not only be injurious to the
charader of the nation at large, in the adminiftra-
tion of its jullice, but alto (NI-graceful to the Judges
themfelves, to psis a judgment fur which there
was no legal foundation. He maintained thaf the
old flatutes and maxims upon which his conduit
had been held to be criminal, were current only ,
in the early periods of our hißory, when the very
word Commerce, which had brought us into our
prefcnt fplendour, was hardly f much as to be
ken in a Didlionary. That we were now in a fitu-
ation to which none of there maxims were appli-
cable.—At the moil, fuppofmg his conduit to be
contrary to law, which he confidendy denied, it
was ptualaing a man for his ignorance to puni(h
him at all. for he had afted coarcientioufly
through the whole of this bufinefs, as he had in
the rell of bis life, which he vindicated in generaN,

terms, contluding with the words: " To err is
human, to forgive Divine."
Mr. lattice GROSS then proceeded to addrefs
the Defendant, previous to delivering the Judg-
ment of the Court; in which the Learned Judge
went over the Mort hiftory of the cafe as it appear-
ed upon the trial at Worcefter, but which has
been to frequently, and fo amply before the pub-
lic, that to detail it again would be quite sunne-
ceffary. The Learned Judge then proceeded to
obferve, " That in the prefent Rate of what was
called paper credit, human ingenuity could not
invent a mode, the tendency of which was mere
to enhance the price of an article of neceffity in
life, by' preventing much of it from coming to the
market, or that Which was there from being fold
at a fair market price, than the condua of the
Defendant in this cafe, and this was done at a
place in which the dealing in the article of Hops
was very extenfive, the city of Woreetter ; from
whence the Northern part of this country princi-
pally derived its fupply." Under fuch circum-
fiances no man could help teeing the confequcnces
which mutt have followed, for they were inevit-
able ; that of railing the price of Hops from t 11.
to tsl. per cwt. upon which circumflances the
Jury had found the Defendant guilty. Upon this
it had been argued either that no judgment at all
thould be pronounced upon the Defendant, becaufe
he was guilty of no offence, or that if that was not
fo, that the punithment ought to be a lenient one.
As to the arguments in favour of an arra of
Judgment, if the Court thought that the Defen-
dant's condua was not contrary to law, what-
e'er they might think of it in any other light,
yet Judgment ought to be arrelted, and the Court
would fay fo. When the Court recolleiaed the anxi-
ety of our Anceftors, and hop they had frequent-
ly expreffed themfelves againß this crime of en-
hancing the price of the articles of life, as appeared
by the maxims of our common law, as handed
down to us by our ableft Reporters, the Court
could not deem it otherwife than a very dangerous
precedent, to pats by there maxims in the article
of hops, which now made part of the common be-
verage of the people of this country. Molt un-
queltionably it was a crime to enhance, by undue
means, the price of the article of hops. It would,
indeed, be molt unfortunate, if the 12th of George
the Thild, which had been fo frequently alluded
to, had either repealed the llatutes it did not men-
tipn, or any part of the common law upon this
fubjea; for if it did, then it would be legal for
any man, by any means, to enhance the price of
any article, without which the community could
not exift ; but the Statute of the t 2th of George
the Third, had ro fuch operation, and fortunate
it was for fociety it had no fuch operation, and,
therefore, to enhance, by undue means, the price
of the articles of life, was againft the prefent fub-
Ring law of this land.
In mitigation of the punifhmcnt of the Defen-
dant, the Court had been firongly addreffed, and
principally under the head of neceffity to give as
much fcope as poßible to the " freedom of trade."
This freedom of trade had been urged, and urged
very properly, as a topic for the grave and ma-
ture conSideration of the Court. The Court had
gravely and deliberately confidered it, and upon
which the Court was molt clearly-of opinion, that
for any individual, or number of individuals, for
his, or their own private gain or emolument, to
enhance the price of the neceffaries of life, thereby
to prevent others from purchafing them at the fair
market rate, which they might otherwifc be fold
for, conflituted no part of the freedom of trade,'
and was a praaice contrary to law. The freedom
of trade was like the liberty of the prefs, a great
and a valuable privilege, and a great pillar of a
free State; but the eihife of the freedom If tlld,, war
like the licentieufwli of she Puji, to be checked when-
ever the good of the community required it.—Goo
forbid that the Court Should do any thing that had
the kaft tendency to violate the freedom of trade.
On the contrary, the Court were molt anxious to
protea that freedom. The law itfelf moil mei-
oufly provided for the proteftion of that freedom I
for it had declared, that to (top, or interrupt, fo
as to prevent, any perfon from bringing his goods
to market, and taking them from him, or obligigg
the owner to take leis for that, than he nught
have gained for them at a fair open market, was
a capital offence, and thole who were guilty of it
forfeited their lives to the law; and wifely was
this made the law, for the great objea 'of the law
Was to encourage men to bring their goods to open
market, which could not be expected if men were
not proteaed in to doing; the law had, there-
fore provided fufficiently for the punithment of
thole who interrupt pafons in bringing their goods
to open market. Thc fame law took an intereft
in the condition of that great earls of fubjeas,
who are buyers at public market, and this part
of the law might be called the proteaion of the
poor againß the rich ; nor was this, in any re-
(pea, new law. From all time, it had been a
crime by the Law of England, unduly to enhance
the price of the necelfaries of life, or to prevent
their coming to market, to be fairly fold there,
either for the purpofe of enriching an individual,
or for any other purpofe—The Freedom of Trade
had its legal limitsom-No man was permitted, by
the laws of this reihn, to purchafe what he pleated,
of whom, or when, br where he pleated, for ceri
tain goods were contraband, in which no man was,
permitted to trade. • In fdme cafes, none could
trade but thole who were khthorjzed by the law;
and in others,the trade could not be carried onwith
none but thole whom the law nominated for that
purpofe. It mull be evident, that by this, he alluded
to the Exit India Company. In the cafe of naval
(hires, which have the King's mark upon them,
the Law had laid, that none but certain pertins,
duly commiffioned for that purpofe, mould deal in
them. Nor was any man permitted to buy any ar-
ticles of, nor fell th.m• to the Enemies of the King.
—This the learned Judge Rated, to thew that the
freedom of trade was like every other freedom,
Cultic& to certain and neceffary legal limits. For
the fake of the public at large, and more efpecially
for the fake of the poor man, the Law paid an
anxious refpea to the mode of the Sale of the ne-
' ceffary articles of life, and had provided, that the
price of them &puld not, on any account, be en-

'hanced unfairly, either for the private profit of an
irtdividual, or for any other purpofe. In this, and
other zefpeds, the freedom of trade bad its limits;
it was, indeed, like every other liberty, and mutt
be regulated by Law : The Court were as much
bound to acqniefce in this part of the law, with
regard to trade, as they were to acquiefce in the
law, which proteCted thole who were coming to
market to expofe their goods for Pale. The Judges
found it laid down in all the good books, by which
a knowledge of the Law was inculcated, that the
charge made upon the Defendant, and proved in
this cafe matt fatisfattorily, was a crime, and one
that called for the fetious attention of the Court,
and they were bound to treat it at filch. But it
had been faid, that the 4th and sth of Edward VI.
was repealed by the Statute of the tzth of Geo.
111. as far as related to Foreßalling and Regrdting,
and from which it was inferred, that to enhance,

however unneceffarily, the price of any article
whatever, ceafed to be a crime in the eye of the
Law, and this idea the Defendant was fuppofed to
have stied under. This mode of treating the Cafe
fuppofed the Defendant to have read that fame
Statute, and fuppofed alto, that others had confi-
dered it, as well as the whole law upon this fubjea,
and that the Defeadant bad advifed with others,

who had bad more opportunity of Rudying it than.
himfelf : Thofe perfons m►ght have told h►m, that
the Statute of the 12th of the prefent reign, did
not apply to the Cafe now before the Court. That
Statute did not fay, that fuch ads as the Defen-
dant had committed, ccafed to be criminal, nor-
was it neceffary for any A& of Parliament to pro-
nounce fuch conduft criminal, becaufe it had, from
the earlieft times, and conllantly, been conlidered
criminal by the Common Law.
The offence of which the Defendant was con-
vifted was a dire& violation of the courfe and rule

of jolt and honourable Trade, as well as of the
Law of this land, which encouraged every one to
bring his goods to market, and to difpofe of fuck
goods to the belt bidder. It was recorded that the
Defendant had been guilty of canting the article
of Hops to advance to a much higher price than
any other market would have produced, but for
his interference.—Th's was a crime reprobated by
the Law of this Realm, and for which the Defen-
dant muilbe punithed.
The Learned Judge then Paid, he could not, for
the Defendant's honour, fuppofe, that what was
laid by Counfel in one particular, was true.
namely, that the Defendant had aged confcien-
tioufly, under what he thought the provifions of
the 12th of Geo. 111. and according to his own.
feelings of what the Legiflature intended by par.
ling that Aft. The Defendant, by appealing to
his own feelings, mull have been allured that the
Legiflature of a great and populous kingdom,
anxious to provide for the welfare of the•peoplei
at large, and efpefially for the more neceffitons
objeEts among them, eould not have intended to
have taken from the lower clefs of men that key-
rity which the common law of the land had pro-
vided for them ages ago, and had continued to
afford to them under.alithe viciffitudes through
which the nation had pall. It was an indifferent
compliment to pay to any Legiflature, to fay, or
even to fufpeet, that at any time, fuck could have
been its intention—or that it ever did, or intended
to do any thing that would throw open a door
for the rich man to clime to any place where
there may be an opportunity for him to fpeculatn
on the neceffaries of life at the expence of the poor.
Thefe arguments, therefore, if well confidered,
could operate but tittle in mitigation of the fen-
tence to be pronounced on the Defendant, efpeci-
ally when the Court recolleeted, that the Defen-
dant's attention and caution had been awakened
on this matter by the brit application againft him,
in which his condua had (hewn negleet at leaft,
not to fay defiance of the confequences. The
Court having confidered all the circumftances of
this cafe, the nature and extent of the offence, the
time in which it was committed, and being con-
vinced it called for a precedent, which was to ope.
rate as an example to ethers to beware of com-
mitting the like in future, did order and adjudge,
4, That in addition to the imprifoninent.lle had
already fuffered, he be imprifoned in the prifon of.
the King's Bench for one month, that he strtyr
to the King a fine of Soot. and that he be fri
irnprifoned until fuels fine be paid."

Mr. Waddington, apparently in a rage, tore a
copy of the A& of Parliament of the 12th of Geo.
111. which he had flourished in his hand while he
(poke, exclaiming, as he went out of Court, mcji
difrarful moitifahtercerl
This judgment is for the Worceiter burin& only
—that in Kent remains to be difpofed of.

_

THI ZING V. SHILTOI4.
The Defendant, Benjamin Shelton, was a fur-
veyor to the Commiffioners for affeffing under the
Income Duty, in a diitrin in 'Warwidcaire, and
he had ball indined for making falfe Returns, and
tampering with lime of the e@lenors under him
to do the fame thing, to return to the Commif-
fionsrs left than was proper, and to put the re-
mainder into his own pockets for which he was in.
dined, and be Coffered judgment to pals by default.
The Sentence of the Court upon him was—That
he be imprifoned in the common jail at Warwick
for one year, and that in that time, he be set in and
upon the pillory for one hour, between the hours
of twelve at noon and two in the afternoon, on *
market day, in the open Rreet in Warwick.

Till KING V. 14.1.110 D.
The ATTOILVIVGINER Al. prayed the Judgment
of the Court on Allan M'Leod, F.fq. a young
Gentleman of literary charafter, for a Libel on
his Royal Highnefs the Prince of Wales, publilbed
on the sth of Auguß tyuy. He laid he was not
defired to prefs the Court to pats on the Defendant
any other fentence than to the jufliee of the Court
(hould teem abfolif.ely /weary, on hearing the
libel read. The Defendant had faffered judgment
to go by default, and the reefon why he was not
brought before the Court loony was, that the
officers had not apprehendsd him until the talk
Term. There was an affidavit of the Defendant,
Rating his farrow and contrition for this libel, to.
gether with a promile not to offend in future.
The Libel being read, the Judgment of the