Star.
London, England, 1820-06-05 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JUNE 5.
HABEAS CORPUS POE 141 t. HUNT.

Mr. CHTTTS moved for a writ of Habeas Corpus,
to be directed to the Keeper of his Majesty's Jail at
llchester, commanding him to bring up the body of
Henry Hunt, Esq. (now in his custody, in execution
of the sentence of this Court), in order that he might
be personally present to shew cause against the Rule
now depending against Mr. Alderman Waithman,
Mr. Sheriff Parkins, Mr. Hunt, and others, for an
alleged interruption of the election of Lord Mayor in
November last.

Mr. Justice BAYLE`t (the only Judge in Cdurt).—
You had better make this motion when the Court is
full. Have you Ray instances in which a similar ap-
plication has been made in the case of a defendant in
execution of his sentence?
Mr. CIIITTY.—There are instances in which a pri-
soner in custody has been brought-up by Habeas
Corpus to give evidence in a cause.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY.—That is a very different
thing ; but have you any instance of a prisoner being
brought up in a case in which he may shew cause
by affidavit?
Mr. Currrv.—Your Lordship _will observe that
the rule in this case calls upon Mr. Hunt to skew•
cause why a criminal information shouldsbot be filed
against him, and I apprehend it is matter of right
that a defendant in a criminal case may be personally
present to shew tause if. he chooses.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY (after referring to his notes
and the Officers on the Crown side).—You will find
an application was once made, that a defendant in
custody might attend the execution of a writ of in-
quiry, be being of opinion that he ought to attend,
but the Court would not grant the application.
Mr. CtliTTY.—ln that case the defendant was not
called upon to appear by any Rule, but bete Mr. Hunt
is called upon to appear in a criminal case ; and be-
side, that was a civil proceeding.
Mr. Justice BavLEY.—The mode of spewing cause'
is by affi-lavit, and he is to chew cause in that way.
If you think you can sustain the motion, you haJ
better mention it when the Coiirt is full.

When the full Court came in, their Lordships pro-
ceeded on the new trial paper, upon which they were
occupied until three o'clock. At that hour
The SOLICITOR-GgNERAL was called upon, and
stated that he was in attendance to pray that the Rule
might be made absolute in the case of the King v.
Parkins and others, hut as the day was now far ad-
vanced, probably their Lordships would not be dis-
posed to enter into the business; he was, however,
anliuus, for the convenience of all parties, that some
day should be fixed on which the case should come
on peremot although it stood in the peremptory
paper. In the ordinary ccturse Of business it wfai:d
probably come on in the course of Monday or Tues-
day; but he begged to st.ate, th.tt on those days.he
should be engaged in a very in:portant:case *in the
Common Pleas, which had been specially fixed for
argument by the Chief Justice of that Corot on Mon-
day. If it suited the pleasure if the Court, Thursday.
was likely to be a convenient day for all parties.
The QuEEN's Somerron-Gr.sEnAt said, that he
was fully prepared on behalf of the defendants, for
whom he was retained, to skew cause against the
Rule; but as he understood that Mr. Hunt, another
defendant, proposed to file affidavits on his own be-
half, it was of importance to the interests of his cli-
ents that they should have an opportunity of seeing
the contents of those affidavits before the case came
on. He unkl.,rstood that some application was in-
tended on the part of Mr. Hunt to bring him up by
Habeas Corpus, and this circumstance would proba-
bly occasion some delay.

Mr. CHITTY immediately rose, and said that he
was instructed to move for a Habeas Corpus on be-
half of Mr. Hunt, and if it was the pleasure of the
Court he would state the grounds on which he sub-
mitted that personal attendance was necessary.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY,—iIk ressonal attendance is
not necessary in order to the production of affidavits.
i. Cutrry s*id, it was his duty at all events to
submit the motion ; and he had no other anxiety
upon the subject than that of discharging his duty
towards his client. At present he was supplies with'
no other affidavits than those necessary to support
this motion. The affidavits alluded to by his Learned
Friend (Mr. Denman) were not yet in town, and it
was not known tothe Gentleman whir had instructed
him, whet they would arrive.
The CHlRlPJusricE.—Has there been any instance
in which the Court has gr:inted a Habeas Cor;us
under similar circumstances

Mr. CHITTY said, he should submit on general
principles that the defendant was entitled, as matter
cf right in a criminal case, to be present.
The CHIEF JUSTICE.— Is there any instance of the
kind on record?

Mr. CHErTy said, he was not aware of any case in
'‘,.hich the Court had granted a Habeas Corpns un-
dtr the like circumstances. He would admit, that in
Oc case of Mr. Richard Gaythorne Butt, an applica-
tion of the same kind had been refused by another

Court.
The Souctrott-GaNzRAx..--That person was in
the custody of the Marshal.
Mr. CUITTY.—I mention that as an instance against
me, but I hope to distinguish it from the present case.
The Sottorrott-GENEam..—That was an applica-
tion made for a Habeas Corpus in the Common Pleas
on behalf of Mr. Butt, and the Court refused it.

Mr. Cu ITTY.—I cite it against myself.
.The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—We will call upon you
when it comes to your turn.

At the close of the day, Mr. CHITTY renewed his
motion, which, he stated, was founded upon, an affi-
davit of Mr. Hunt, to the effect that he had attended
the. Court from day to day, in every Term since the
Rule Nisi for a criminal information against himself
and other defendants had been granted, for the pur-
pose of shewing cause against it; that he never in-
tended to retain or employ Counsel on his behalf,
and that he had not, in fact, retained or employed
Counsel for that purpose; and that he was desirous
of having an opportunity of shewing cause in person.
On this affidavit, the Learned Counsel submitted,
that he was entitled to the prayer of his application.
It was to be observed, that the prosecutors in this
case had not thought fit to proceed in the ordinary
way of indictment, but had selected a anode of pro-

needing which called upon the paixies.themseitee to
shew cause why a criminal infbrtnatiOrt should. not
be filed against them: Ttne it "fast that the defen-
dant might file affidavits, and probably the contents
of such affidavits would be the true limits of what
the party might be permitted to urge in bitclefenee ;
but the effect of those affidavit% might materially de-
pend upon the minute knowledge of all the facts and
bearings of the case, which the defendant alone might
possess. The personal attendance of the party, in
some cases, was essentially necessary, for the purpose
of suggesting arguments and observations in defence,
which could only come within 'his own knowledge.
Justice towards a piriyexposed to all the perils of
criminal prosecution, imperiously urged the propriety
of allowing his personal attendance, during a discus-
sion of such importance. For his (Mr. Chitty's) own
part,' he should be extremely sorry to be called upon
to enter into the examination of such voluMinous
affidavits as must be filed in this case, because they
would embrace matters of infinite importanceuo the
interests of the parties, and more particularly to those
of Mr. Hunt, who was peculiarly anxious to conduct
his own case, in shewing cause against the Rule. He
was anxious to urge those observations which occur-
red to him to be necessary to his own justification,
and which would, no doubt, come with more effect
from him than from any Gentleman of the Bar, par-
ticularly when urged with that sort of ability and
acuteness possessed by him, so much beyond the or-
dinary class of mankind. He (Mr. Chitty) would
submit, that though he bad found no precedents, and
be bad sought for them with industry, in which a
similar application had been granted, yet as none
were to b. found in which it has been reused, he
trusted the Court would not in this instance refuse it.
The CHIEF JUSTICE—Yon find no instances, in
which such an application has been made.
Mr. CHITTY resumed, and, admitting the
of the Learned Judge to be true, yet he sub-
mitted, that upon every principle of justice the de-
fendant was entitled to the writ now prayed. In all
cases of misdemeanour a defendant had a right to
be present. A defendant might not choose to em-
ploy Counsel; he might not have the...means of doing
so ; and was he, in Ins absence, to be subjected to the
perils of a criminal information, without an oppor-
tunity of skewing cause against it? If, indeed, the
Court itself could with propriety, in the administra-
tion of its justice, becnnie the advocate of the defen-
dant, moiA. undoubtedly Mr. Hunt would be satisfied
with the advantages which he must experience at the
hands of their Lordships; but, as that was not to be
expected, he was anxious to present his own case to
tti:ir consideration, by meats if a personal attend-
ance. The reasonablentss of his request was obvious.
Ile did not-seek a pleasurable excursion to London ;
he must still remain in the custody cf the jailor. All
he sought was the opportunity of advocating his own
case, with such ability and means as his own re-
sources could furnish. The Learned Counsel, after
many ingenious observations, and after urging the
distinction to be taken between this and the case of
a civil action, concluded' by expressing a hope that
the application would be received with favour and
indulgent consideration. •
The Cuts JUSTICE—The Court cannot snppose
there is no Gentleman at the Bar to be found capa-
ble of shewing cause for thii individual as well as for
others; and certainly, with. a view to expense, it
would Ise less expensive to shew cause by Counsel,
than to bring the defendant up for the purpose of
skewing cause in person ; and as there is no instance
in which a person in execution of a sentence has been
hroughubeare the Court, in order to do that in his
person which he might do by a Gentleman at the Bar,
I don't teel that we ought to establish a precedent by
granting the writ which is prayed for. The affidavits
may be filed ; but whether, after seeing those affida-
vits, we shall make the Rule absolute against the
party, in his absence, is another matter. That is a
very different consideration. The affidavits may be
filed, and taken into consideration in another way.—
I am unwilling to establish a precedent.
Mr. Justice Rattly% had left the Court.
Mr. Justice Hoiaostp—The writ, in such a case as
thi has in no instance been granted.—Writ refused.

MIDDLESEX ELECTION DINNER.—An extremely
numerous and reseectable company of Gentlemen,
FriehJs to the Independence of Middlesei, dined to-
gether on Saturday, at the Fieemasons Tavern, to
celebrate the return of Mr. BIRO and Mr. WHlT-
vim), as Representativei of the 'County. The Hon.
H. Gm BaNsurr was in the Chair; on his right sat
Mr. BYNG, Sir FRANCIS BURDETT, Mr. ELLICE, Mr.
.HOBHOUSE, Load JOHN RUSSELL, Sir ROBERT
SON, and Sir RONALD FERdtISSON ; on his left, Mr.
WHITBREAD, the Marquis cf TAVISTOCK, Mr. LAMB-
-TON, Mr. F. PALMER, Mr. Serjeant lAN:4MT. WTVILL,
and Mr. W. SMITH. After dinner the CHAIRMAN
gave—" The KING, and may he !liver forget the.
principles on which his family was elected to the
Drone." It was drank with three times three. GOD
save Me king was then sung. The next toast—" The
QUEEN, andthe rest of the Royal Family." was re-
ceived with great enthusiasm, and diank with three
times three. Glee—Hail, Star of Brunswick.

The CHAIRMAN then rose, and in a neat speech,
proposed The healths of their worthy Representa-
tives, George Byng, Esq. and Samuel C. Whitbread,
Esq." which was drank with expressions of the
greatest enthusiasm.
Mr. BYNG expressed the high sense which he en-
tertained of the distinguished manner in which they
had been pleased to drink his health. It had ever
been his utmost ambition, as a public man, to merit'
the approbation of his fellow-citizens ; and he had
110 doubt, that so long as he should continue to de-
serve it, he should still receive their support and ap-
probation ; and he wished no longer to be returned
by them to Parliament than- while there was an iden-
tity of interest between himself and his constituents.
Mr. S. WHITBREAD, in returning thanks, said, he
trusted that, so far as he had yet had an opportunity
of displaying it, they had found no difference between
his professions as a Candidate and his conduct as a
Representative.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT and Mr. 11011 HOUSE re-
turned theanks on their healths being drank.
The Marquis of TAVIsTOCK, on his health being
drank, declared his conviction of the necessity of a
Parliamentary Reform..
Several songs and patriotic toasts were afterwards
i given; and the company broke up at a late hdur.