Star.
London, England, 1807-02-19 00:00:00

I. 1W ATELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH. FEB. sy.
TRH Etna W. EDWARD BARMITT.
This was a profecution for perjury, at the fiat of Georgians Au
gotta. Dowager Counters of Granard. The t :efeneiant had made
anfwcr to two interrogatories in the Crown Office, and the prefent
,Irnt was :minded on the answers In
NI. GAR Row Paid, that tbeDefendant had long pradlifed in this
Cou— as an attorney, and was in very extenfive bound's. Motives
of di • would not permit him to enter into any particulars
uneonneded with the prefent inquiry, and the Jury had wily to
do with himas he a:is implicated on the pref-ot epecafion. The
Counties of Grained havil g been moletted by her creditors, was
in tufted', when this Defendant was recommended to her, that
the might avail berfelf of his profeffirtnal affiflanee When he
came he advired her, as the only mode to retrieve her affairs, to
raife money upon annuities; and to facilitate fuch purpofe, he in-
troduced to her two Toreigners, who were difpofrd to advance
her money on the fecurity the had to offer. Their names were
-Charles Frederic Baron de Gillie,and Jaques Marie de la Rue.
Thefe money lenders brought to the r Ike of Mr Barnett nine
hundred pounde. when the Counters attended for the purpofe of
receiving it. The Defendant. however. put it into his defic, bat
paid over to her, 01. of it on her earner interceffion. In centre-
quence of this tranfadtion. proceedings were had. The Courtidi•
reaed that the Defendant should be attached, in order that the
matters might he inquired into relating to this affair.
[The Learned Counfel here R ted the particulars rerpeerng the
Sr ft interrogatory on the record, in the anfwer to which perjury
was charged ; but the counts on which were abandoned, to pre-
vent any nnneceffary embarraffenent.]
The fecond interrogatory " Have you, or have you not,
ever, and when, or at what time or times, received from her High-
role the Margravine of Anfpach (fitter of the profecutrix) any,
and what rum or fume of money, bills, note'', or fecurities,thr mo-
ney, on account of, or for or towards carrying on the concerns, or
'eying the debts of Georgians Augußa, Counters of Granard
It then required that the parties' names. with the dates,rume, and
other particulars relating to there tranfadions, Ihould be fet down
in the anfwcr.
On the reply to this queftion, fo clearly and fo fully Rated, the
charge of perjury was founded. The Learned Counfel Paid be
fhould prove, that in the Spring of t Soo, a rum of 3001. was paid
to the Defendant, which he had never acknowledged to have re-
ceived. This tettimony would be fupplied by perfons of undoubt-
ed veracity; he meant by the two Noble Perrone and Colonel
Stuart, who were now on the bench, with his Lordfhip. The
Counters of Granard then refided in the Pavilion, adjacent to
Brandenburg Houle : this lady was fent for into the contiguous
;annum) of her Highnefs, and there, before the parties rpecified.
ale turn was paid into the hands of Mr. Barnett. He thould call
the witnefres. and not the fmalleft doubt could remain on the
minds of the Jury with regard to the commiffion of this crime;
and if this guilt were ettahlithr d, the opulence and the connexions
of the Defendant would nut proted him from the juftice of his
country.
After the rule rerpeding the interrogatories had been read by
the Clerk of the Court, Sir VIC ARY GIBBS, on the fame fide with
Idr. GA It 'ow. pr: poled that the fecond interrogatory charged in
the Indiament should be perufed, on which Mr. MARRYAT
clf-
jedted. defiring that both the interrogatories might be given in evi-
&nee. This havirg been done, the Learned Counfel for the De-
fendant contended, that the record had omitted fer much of the
proceedings, as materially to vary the real fads of the cafe ; and,
in addition to this, he argued that the anfwer being taken in the
Crown Office, which was in the city of London, and the oath be-
ing given in that Court, which was in Middlefex, the name in
Middlefex was improperly laid ; a jury in this county having no
prifdidtion over an offence committed in London.
'I his °Medical was over ruled, but allote was taken of i' on the
minutes of the Chief Juttice.
The Margrae ine of Anfpach, being examined by Sir Vie ART
GIBBS, raid. that after the death of her Lord, her filter, Lady Gra-
nerd, became embarrafred in her circumftances—that about
March, or April Mao. Mr Barnett called upon her, and Rated to
her the difficulties of Lady Granard's fituation; tut which the gave
him tome antedated drafts on Child and Co. to become due when
her jointure was payable ; and farther, a rum, which the baieved
to be 3ocl that the took from her bureau, in hank notes. On her
crofs examination by Mr. MARRYAT, the added, that the Wen
dant had fent her a fort of an account, which refembled an apothe•
cary's bill in shape and &mentions; and among the fingalar charges
againft her in this paper, was one for a bode, of which her Mt. r
had made her a prdent. Afterwards, being dirgulted with the
condo& of Mr. Barnett, the put her concern in the affairs of her
fitter, by the advice of her brothers (Lord Berkeley and Admiral
Berkeley) into the hands of Mr Carr (Secretary to Lunatics in
the Court of Chancery.) In the whole, the had advanced about
lied. or soon!. for the relief of her finer : the bad kept no ac-
count whatever, or even made a tingle minute in writing, of any
of there tranfaaions ; and had kept the whole of them a profound
fecret from the Margrave•
Lady Granard confirmed molt of the above particular', and
swore pofitivcly to the payment of 3col. in Bank notes, to the de-
thndant, diftinguilbing tome of them,particularly one of 601. which
excited fame obfervation trout the Learned ffiouufel by whom the
defence was conduCted.
Colonel Stuart depofed to the fame erred.
Mr. MARRYAT, before he addreffed the Jury on behalf of his
client, took a technical ohjeaion, which he submitted to the deci-
Eon of his Lordthip, and it was this : Mr. Barnett was (worn to
anfwer interrogatories, but there was not the fmallett evidence,
that the interrogatories fo anfwered applied to the contempt, fo
that there was an allegation upon the record, averring, that inter-
rogatories touching the contempt were exhibited to him, which
fad was not proved.
His Lorelthip having commented on the nature of the interro-
ratories, and on their connedion with the anfwers and the con-
tempt alledged, alto over-ruled this objedtion.
Mr. MARRY AT then addreffed the Jury On the evidence, but
preparatory to his application of it, Rated Come additional fads.
In 1799, the Counters of Granard became embarratred, and, at
that tinie, the only means the had of rcfcuing herfelf from her dif
ficulties,through the medium of her own property, was by a Me-
diate The had in Ireland,th that the role expedient which the had
ter railing money was in the form of annuities, and the defendant
gays her the heft advice applicable to her peculiar fituation. It
Was not to the honour et thole concerned in this profecutinn,
Whatever might be the elevation of their rack, that they had lett
Mr. Barnett in a oral uncertainty as to the precife objedt to which
his defence ihould he diredted; and the fad was, that in con-
sequence of a caufe In late as yefterday in the Court of Com-
mon Pless,the courfe of the defence had been varied, for then an
adlien againtt Colonel Stuart was tried upon one of thofe very
annuities.
lord Et LEN BOROOGH (intermpting him) —" If no evidence
be intended to be produced as to this particular, it should not be
Rated."
MARRYAT....." I do not know, if the tem may not be
here."
Lord ELLENBOROUGII.-..." What can that have to do with a fait
between the King and Barnett r
Mr MAR RYAI Cad, that after what his Lordfhip bad ohrervcd.
be would confine himfellftrialy to the charge founded on the an.
(wee to the fecond interrogatory in this Record, the allignment on
the former having been abandoned by the Condit for the prole-
cution, as wholly untenable. What, then, was the tellimony as to '
the pot atledged to have been paid to Mr. Barnett T 'I he Mar-
gravine was uncertain as to the turn fo paid, although it piled
through her own bands, and from her own pocket. Cal Stuart
affedted to be pofitire with refped to the rum; but yet, when
crofrexamined, he acknowledged that he never law it counted out
before him 'ripe Counters, indeed, laid, that the was pt tm as to
the turn ; yeti:wing diced with regard to the amounts of the revs
ral notes in which it was paid, the pfitively dittinguithed one hank
note for nt l. although a note for this amount was never 'lined from
the Bank, front the beginning of time.
Mr. GA aßnet laid, he b..iicved fuch notes were current in the
money m aka.
Mr. MARRYAT appealed to the great experience of the Gentle-
men of the Jury oe fuch a fulljed. He complaineti, not only of
the mode In which the ptoteeution was condudtcd, hut alto of the
generality with relied to the dates and eirtutnftances, which
made it extremely difficult for Mr. Barnett to arrange his defence.
Neither the indictment, or any one withers, related the time when
the to 1. gnt into the hands of the Defendant. It was Rated, in•
deed, to be In the fpring of tProw, and yet from this period to the
year 1804, no intimation was given to Mr. Barnett of any remit'.
ntfs regarding it. Suppofing, for argument's fake, that it had been
adtually paid to Mr. Barnett. yet, Rarely, it might as tardy elude
his memory, as efcape the reeolledion of the witnetres, during
that long interval Another circumftanee deferred the attention
of the Jury, and it was this: That to the interrogatories put to
the Defendant in the Crown Office, belied no opportunity of re-
plying with the fame pre-tonfttieration as to interrogatories pro-