Star.
London, England, 1807-11-28 00:00:00

LAW 7NTELLIGENCL

COURT OF RING'S BENCH, NOII. 15.
CRIMINAL INTORM•TION.
Mr. GARRow moved for a criminal information
again& Robert Holton, Efq. at the inftance of Mr.
Champneys, a Gentleman of family and fortune.—
The profecutor had a park and manor, arid was
anxious to preferve his game. Mr. Holton had in-
truded himfelf on the premifes, with a difpofition
rather to annoy the proprietor, than to deltroy his
amufements as a fportfman. He had very fre-
quently tretpaffed, not only on the manor, but on
the preferves, while he was on a vifit to a Clergy.
`man in the neighbourhood ; when Mr. Champneys
wrote him what the learned Counfel thought a very
civil letter, informing him, that he had four diffe-
rent times fported on the manor, and even on the
preferves, and the writer defired that he would dad
from fuch encroachments in future. This letter ac-
cidentally fell into the hands of Mr. Hclton's father
who himfelf returned an anfwer, reprobating, in pro-
per terms, the condua of his fon. It afterwards was
delivered to the young man, who wrote to Mr.
Champneys, that he had that indent received the let-
ter from his father. He faid he had paled over the
firft impertinence of the writer unnoticed ; and fiat.
ed, that he had been amnfing himfelf on Mr. Cham-
neys' manor, but not without fufficient authority, and
he begged leave to inform that Gentleman, that he
was at any time at his fervice.
Legal advice was taken on the concluding ex,
'talons here employed ; and by a profeffor it was
fuppofed that the concluding words were to be con-
limed into a challenge to fight. In confequence of
this conliruaion, a bill of indiament was prepared,
which, however, was not found by the Grand Jury.
After the death of his father Mr. Holton returned,
and fucceeded to the patrimonial property. Mr.
Champneys had been for fome time abfent from his
znanfion, and on his return was informed, that this
Gentleman had been again trefpaffing on his grounds.
The profecutor was acquainted with his brother, but
had no recollelion of Mr. Robert Holton. He was
lately riding over his dive, attended by three per-
lons, one of whom was Mr. Sainfbur y, a brother Ma-
giftrate (for Mr. Champneys was in the commillion);
and another was Saunders, his gamekeeper. Thus
accompanied, he met a man with a double barrelled
gun, of whom he had no knowledge, and whole con-
duit occafioned the prefent application to the Court.
This perfon was Mr. Robert Holton, who immedi
ately pointed his gun, which was ready cocked, at
the profecutor, and laid, 44 Stand out of the way,
you fcoundrel !" He then again railed and pointed
the muzzle of his gun, and even touched the brealt
of Mr. Champneys with it. In this dangerous fitux.
tion, Mr. Champneys :liked the gamekeeper who the
man was? To which Saunders replied, that it was
Mr. Holton. " Yes, (laid Mr. H.) I am Robert
Holton, and have often wifhed to meet you." The
(errant interpofing, defired Mr. H. to uncock his
gun, with which requeft the latter complied.—
Mr. Holton then returned-44 You are a liar, a brute,
a vagabond, a grovelling toad ; your name Rinks in
the country ;" and this complimentary addrefs was
retorted to without the fmallelt provocation. - Thus
oircurnfianced, Mr. Champneys thought fit to ap.
prife Mr. Holton, that he fhould apply to his Lord-
!kip (naming the Chief Juflice) and to the Court of
King's Bench, for redrets. Mr. Holton replied, that
be did not care for that ; that he had given Mr.
Champneys a pretty good dote ; and then, with con-
fiderable volubility, he repeated the grofs and infult-
log expreffions. Thus coc.umdanced, Mr. Champ-
neys thought his life was in danger, and fought the
.;:oteetion of their Lordfhips. Mr. Holton had let
siefiance, not only all decency and decorum, but
oen the high authority of the Court, and if it thould
ins interfere with its powerful arm, fatal cffeas
might enfue.
Mr. Juflice LAWRENCE afked, why Mr. Sainfbury
did not exercife his authority as a magilirate ?
Mr. GAMOW replied, that a double barrelled gun
Was cocked at the bread of his friend.
The CHIEF JusricE reniarked, that Mr. Champ.
treys might have exhibited articles of the peace
againd Mr. Holton, and that the inter view had more
the appearance of an aftault than a challenge.
Mr. GARROW--.." The firtt letter it is impoffible to
mifunderfland."
Lord ELLENIOROUGH—" That is gone by."
Mr. Gattßow" This much refennales a cafe, in
.Lincrilnfhire, in which your Lordfhip fo lately inter-
poled."
Lord ELLENsototrow faid, that that was for
hot fewhipping a Gentleman beeaufe lie maintained
his right to hi. own properly. Mr. Champneys might
immediately obtain the protedion of the Cow tin the
dual manner, and he might alto prefer an indiament.
Mr. Nike Gauss—" He may likewife bring an
*llion of trefpafs."—Rule refuted.
JAMES HARRIS V. JOHN JAMES.
This was a cafe refer ved after trial, and the tingle
queftion was, whether the certificate of the Defen.
dant, who was a bankrupt, obtained after the anion
' brought by the Plaintiff, and before judgment, ex-
onerated the Defendant from the debt and cods.—
Judgment for the Defendant.
THE ICING V. J. INWOOD.
This man was brought up under a charge of hav-
ing killed William Goodman. It appeared by the
affidavit of Mr. John Walker, a furgeon, that the
deceafed had been fatally wounded by a cutlafs. On
the fith of Oftober this medical gentleman was fent
for, and obferved feveral deep gates in the arm of
Goodman. The deceafed, teeing Mr. Walker's atten-
tion drawn to his arm, laid, that he wifhed him to
examine his thigh. The furgeon did fo, and &co-
'acted that the mufcles were dreadfully cur. In this
Parts a mortification enfued, which was the caufe of
Geedman's death. In the affidavits of Samuel
Gurney and others, it was dated, that the prifoner,
with two others, having learnt that depredations were
committed on the Met y dependent on Moor Para,
Bertfordaire, concealed themtelves to &tea tEe
robbers. Goodman, while on the watch, entered the
Mem, and was proceeding to plunder the property,
when, after being called to, he attempted to elcape
by fwimrning, and the Defendant putfued him tsith
a cutlafs. A fciiffle enfued thf water, and (.:1 the
bank, oa which Goodman received the wounds of
which he died.
, On the application of Mr. GURNRY, the prifoner
was admitted to bail, himfelf in 4001. and four re
fpeetable tunics in an equal

•• •
NOV/mint . 27.•-•-•Tilli kIIO wins raostevrox of

LORD KINGSTON V. CAPTAIN PHILIP NAY.

We mentioned this cafe in our Paper of Saturdky
lalt, when the Criminal Information was applied for
by the ATTnINEY GENERAL.
Mr. Pau, this day, mewed caufe againfl making
the rule abfolute. The charge made againii the
Defendant was tbat of giving a challenge to the
Profecutor. The affidavits upon which the applita-
tion was made, Elated, that, in the year 1798, Dud
Kingflon was Colorel of the North Cork Militia,

1 and was proceeding to Wexford to oppofe the rebels,
1 when he was taken. He there law the Defendant,
who appeared to him to ad as a commander of the
' infurgents, and in this opinion he was confirmed
by the leader, General Keogh, who Paid, that he
had deferted from his Majetty's fervice. When the
commotion had lubfided, Captain Hay demanded of
the Commiffioners compenfation as a fuffering Iny.
alill. In cordequence of this requeft, Lord Kingflon
wrote to the Earl of Hardwicke, reprefenting, that
the Defendant could Support no Inch claim, fine he
___ _ .

had co-operated with itie rebels. The refult was,
the meeting between Lord Kingfton and the Defen-
dant, on the Bth of October laft, in Devonfhire place,
where the challenge complained of was given. In re-
ply to the charge, the learned Counfel had the affidavit
of the Defendant himfelf, who Rated that in the year
1790, when he was only 13 years old, he went abroad
in his Majefty's fervice; and after his return, at the
age of t 8, received a Lieutenancy, and accompanied
General Abercromby to she Weft Indies. From that
time, until the year 3798, he never returned to his
Majefty's dominions, excepting for the (pace of eight
days ; and on the 3oth of Api ft, in the fame year,
he went to Ireland, to take p( freffion of his patrimo-
nial elate in the county of Wexford. Finding that
the generality of the people were nearly ripe for in-
furteaion, he engaged himfelf in an employment
gratifying to himfelf, and ufeful to his country, in
recovering the affections of his tenantry to their
King; and 250 perfons actually took the oath of al-
legiance, adminifiered to them by a Magittrate
of the name of Richards, at his inftigation.—ln
the month of May the rebellion broke out, and
although the defendant at that time was an officer
of rank in his Majefty's army, he, notwithdanding,
engaged himfelf in a fubordinate capacity, in a Vo-
lunteer Corps, and exerted himfelf with the utmoft
activity againd the infurgents. When the Loyalifts
were under the necellity of abandoning the town of
Wexford to the tebels, Captain Hay was endeavour-
ing to make his efcape with Gone companions, by
means of a veffel in the harbour, but he was inter-
cepted by the infurgents, and brought back a prifo-
ner. When he was fecured, the rebels held a spit to
his throat, and girding a (word to his fide, compelled
him to place the fhamrock in his hat. During this
period Lord Kingfton was alto taken, •and to him
Captain Hay communicated the fituation in which
he was placed; and the defendant intimated to his
LordAtip his intention to make his efcape as loon as
poffible. The profecutor then requefted, that he
would reprefent his (:he profecutor's) confinement
to his Majefty's army, that, if pollible, he might be
releafed. Captain Hay, after much danger, did
efcape, and was the firfl perfon who trantmitted to
Government the intelligence refpeeing the rebels.—
After the rebellion had ceafed, fufpicions were en-
tertained by many perfons in Dublin, that Captain
Hay had been inttrumental in favour of the infur-
gents; and, at his own requeft, he was brought to a
Court Martial. The decifion was, that the defen-
dant had borne arms again!! his Majelty; but it evi.
dently appearing that his conduit proceeded from
compulfion, the Court molt honourably acquitted
him. After this public tettimony as to the rectitude
of his motives, Lord Cornwallis appointed the defen-
dent to the command of a troop in the 23d Regi-
ment cf Light Dragoons, from which he was after-
wards removed to the 18th, tinder the command of
Colonel Stewart, brother of Lord Cafttereagh. Not•
withftanding this refult of the claim of Captain Hay
for compensation, the High Sheriff and at Magi-
ittates of the County of Wexford, demanded that
the defendant fhould appear before their Quarter
Seffions, to anfwcr the charge of receiving money
improperly, as a fuffering loyalil. Upon the rec'om•
mendation of his Counfel, Captain Hay tefiaed this
application, but contented that the matter &mild be
examined in the Court of Exchequer in Ireland,
where the Judges qnafhed the proceedings.--
Theta profecutions having failed, Lord Kingfton fern
in a fiatement of the fa/as contained in his affidavit
to-day, to his Royal Highnefs the Duke of York, in
confequence of which, an enquiry was inflituted, the
faith of which was, that the Commander in Chief
expreffed the tune} conviction that the infinuations
againft the Defendant were completely unfounded,
and directed that this opinion (Mould be communica-
ted to Captain Hay. Since that period to the pre-
fent time, Lord Kinglion had traduced the character
of the Defendant in every company he entered, and
had declared to Colonel Stewart, and other &tin-
guifited perfons, upon feveral occafions, that a hang-
man was the only man fit to deal with Capt. Hay.
So much the Defendant had thought it right to fay
with relpeit to his previous condutt, and the charge
made againd him by the profecutor of being a traitor
to hi. country. The fad of giving a challenge, the
LearnedCounfel did not mean to deny; but the Court ,
would fee that the circurnftances by which it was at-
tended, were not fuen as would warrant them in';
granting the extraordinary interference requelted
The interview on the Bth of 06teber had been mif-
reprefented by the profecutor. What occurred was
as follows : After recognizing each other, Captain
Play laid, that he had been informed, that his Lord-
lhip had traduced his charatter, and he and his bro.
ther officers with him, Mr. Carew and Mr. Hughes,
witted to be informed if that were the truth. Lord
Kingfton replied,.that upon hearing that Capt. Hay
had been allowed his claim as a (offering loyalift, he
had done every thing in his power to bring the De-
I fenclant to trial for that fwinoling tranfattion. Capt.
Hay anfweied, that he did not wifli to know what his
Lordfhip had done ; but he requited an explanation
of the language he had fo frequently tiled, and likewile
an apoiogy for the expreffinn he had jolt employed.
' re: Kii glti n obtervcd, that he fhould make no
apol ley ; that he had been to his Royal Highnefs
the Duke of York, to date the Defendant's conduct,
and that the only verlun fit to deal with him was the
hangman. Captain flay was much irritated, and
told Lord Ningflon, that he demanded that fatisfac-
Lion from him which one gentleman expected from

another. His Lordfhip inquired if the 'Defendant
intended it as a challenge ? And being anfwered in
the affirmative, he replied. that he would not meet
Captain Hay ; that he did not confider him as a
gentleman, when he refufed to appear before a Jury
of his country, to anfwer for the fwindling tranfac-
non he had been guilty of in receiving compenfation
its a. (dieting Captain Hay then told Lord
Kingtion that he had done with him ; that he found
him in infamy, and in infamy he left him. In this
fiatement Captain Hay was confirmed by the affida-
vits of the Hon. Colonel Stewart, aad Lieutenants
Carew and Cray; to the latter of whom Lord King-
Ron had declared, that he would not meet Captain
Hay, but would fight any perfon whom he might
fend; and that if the Defendant fhould openly infult
him, his Lordfhip thought that he was as ftrong, or a
fironger man than the Defendant, and would be able
to throw him over bridge, or otherwife difpofe of
him. Under there circumtlances the Defendant ap-
pealed to their Lordfhips not merely as Judges, but
as men, uniting that they would refpeL the feelings
of an injured individual, and would not interfere in
a cafe upon grounds like thole Hated on the pan of
the profecution.
The ATTORNfir GENIRAL replied, and contended
that it was quite impoffible for the Court to confider
the conduit of Captain Hay otherwife than as that of
a man endeavouring to force the Noble Lord into a
duel. The quefiion was, whether it was altogether
fuch as called for the interference of their Lordihips?
this, he believed would not be denied, and he there-
fore united that the rule would be made abfolute.

Mr. GAIRROW, on the fame fide, merely Paid, that
the language ufed by Captain Hay, could admit of
no other interpretation, but that of provoking a chal
lenge.
Lord ELLEN sonovc H obferved, that the language
ufed certainly could bear no other conflruelion, but
that of provoking a challenge, at the fame time that
the Court could not overlook thole provocations that
gave rife to it. Here the Noble and Learned Lord
recapitulated many of the remarks made upon the
cafe by the Connie' for Captain Hay ; he particu-
larly dwelt upon the forenefs that Captain Hay mull
feel at being branded as a rebel, becaufe inevitable
and irrefillible neceffity had happened to drive him
as much in the power of the rebel forces as Lord
Kingflon himfelf was.
His Lordibip added, that in all cafes of applica-
tions of this defcriptinn, the Court had a difcretion
which he nulled would at all times be wifely applied.
In the cafe of the King v. Hankey, where, like the
prefent, there was all that could be called a dire&
challenge, and, like the prefent, all that could be alto
called wanton provocation, the Court exercifed that
difcretion. They refuted the rule—fo they would here.
The Complainant ought to have come into Court with
clean hands himfelf; he did not ; his conduft has been
that of uniform and reiterated calumny againft Capt.
Hay, and he has no title here to the Rule in queftion.
His Lordfhip Paid, that it malt not be doubted for
a moment, that.the giving a challenge was an offence
which the law would puttifh, but; under certain cir-
sumftances, the parties might not be entitled to the
fpeedy and efpectal interference of the Court. Here
there did not appear to be any intention on either
fide of breaking the peace at this time. As for Lord
K. his only objeftion was (as it appeared) to fighting
a rebel. He refuted to meet Captain Hay, becaufe
he deemed him a rebel, but he was ready to embrue
his hands in the blood of any others of his Majefly's
loyal fubjefts.—Role difcharged ; but, Paid his Lord-
{hip, cot with coils.