Star.
London, England, 1801-02-10 00:00:00

THI KING V. SIIIIDII.

This was a Cafe on the return to an Habeas
Corpus, which was, " That at the time of his
trial, the perfon above named, John Suddis,
was a Gunner of an Artillery Corps Rationed at
Gibraltar, and fubjea to the Military Laws of that
Garrifon—That he was tried by a Court Martial,
duly authorized, and held there under an i' of
Parliament ; and that he was there fentenced by
that Court as follows :That the Charge having
been heard and the evidence for the profecution.
together with what the Prifoner brought forward
for his defence, and the guilt of the faid Suddes
'being fully proved, that he did receive feveral
pieces of broadcloth, he knowing them to have
been Rolen, and therefore the faid Court Martial
did order that he be tranfported beyond the feas
for fourteen years, to fuch place as his Mojay by
the advice of his Privy Council Mould be pleated
to declare and appoint ; that this Sentence of the
Court Martial was approved of by the Governor
of Gibraltar before whom it was laid; and that
the Prifoner was fent over to this country and de-
livered into the cultody of Sir Wm. Pitt, the Go.
vernor of the Garrifon of Portfmouth, and that
was the caufe of the detention of the faid Suddes."
Mr EasttlNs had obtained this Rule to bring up
this man, under the idea that the detention of him
was contrary to Law, and on the ground that the
Court Martial had not power to fentence this man
further than a court of Civil Juftice had in Eng.
land ; and that, as it did not Appear, on the face
of the proceedings, that the principal Felon,
namely he who was faid to have ftolen the goods,
was conviaed ; and if that was not proved, the
other Felon, that is the Acceffary after the fad,
which the Receiver is, could not be found guilty
of this felony, and therefore his offence, at moll,
could amount only to a mifdemeanour, and for
which no Civil Court of Jullice in this country had
power, by the Law of the Land, to order him to
be tranfported ; and if a Court of Juftice had no
fuch power, a Court Martial could cot poffela it—
for the Court Martial had only power to lenience
perfons for offences " accot ding to the nature and
degree of their retpeCtive offences," which degree
and nature were defcribed by the Law of the Land,
and beyond which neither Court Martial nor any
other Court could proceed in any of the dominions
of the King of thefe Realms.
Mr. Assor contended, that the fintence of the
Court Martial was concluflve in this Cafe, for
that they were not bound to pats exaCtly the fame
fentence on this Prifoner as a Court of Law would
do in this conntry.—Secondly, If they were fobound,
their Lordfhips were now bound to prefume, that
the trial of this man was proper, and the fentence
alfo, unleG. fomrthingappeared to the contrary.—
Thirdly, admitting this fentence to be correa,
which they were bound to do unlefs fomething to
the contrary appeared, their Lordfhips would not
repeal or reverie that fentence, becaufe the Court
of King's Bench was not a Cow t of Error to cor-
rea the proceedings of a Court Martial. This
Prifoner was now in cuftody under this
fentence of 4 Court of Competent Jurifdi&ion, and
therefore muft fo remain until the King's pleafure
fhould otherwire difpofe of that peribn.
Lord Kaarow delivered a very able judgment,
in the courfe of which he oliferved, that the rules
of Law as well as fubftantial Juftice bad been oh-
(erred in this cafe, for the punilhment was eraftly
that which the Law would have directed a Civil
Magiftrate to pronounce on this perfon, if tried
and convidied in this country. His Lord (hip quoted
the opinion of Lord Hats upon the fubjea, the
prattice of giving way to points of technical dif%
tinaion which went by the merits of a cafe, and
by which tome of the molt atrocious offenders et..
taped the punifhrnent which was due to their crimes.
—As far ;s Courts Martial proceeded in the ab.
fence-of fuch minute and fenfelefs diftlations, they
were right ; for he owned, that Rating an ,offence„
for inftance, by way of weave, as it was called, to
be in the parifb of St. Mary-le-Bow, in the Ward
of Cheap. when the offence was committed in the
EaR Indies, hc owned, he faid, this fort of prac-
tice was a difgrace to the Law of this country.—
However, it was, perhaps, a practice too inveterate
to be altered. Not that he willed to fay any thing
againft the general Laws of this country, they
were, in general. certainly the belt in the world.
His Lordfhip, was, however. quite clear, that this
conviCtion and fentence were right, and filch as an
Engli(h Court of Jultice would have paffed-...:hat
the whole Cafe was perfealy regular, and that,
therefore, the Prifoner ought to be remanded—he
Paid this very much at his cafe, becaulk hc refleaed.
that every other Court in Weßminfter Hall was
open to another application for this Writ, in the
event of the party being diffatisfied with the deter.
mination of this Court.
The other Judges concurred, and therefore the
Prifoner was ordered to be remanded. It was afs
terwards (aid, that the principal who (We disk
goods, was coevieed and hanged for it.