Star.
London, England, 1818-05-19 00:00:00

COURT OF XING'S 'INCH, MAT is.

THZ KING V. :MOH IaRCIMON, I.IIQ.
Mr. WILD stated to the Jury (which was special),
that this was an inslictment against the defendant,
who was a Magistrate ; and who, not regarding his
duty in Mich character, and in violation of all his sa-
cred functions, did licence one Thomas Wright to
keep a common ale-house, well knowing that he was
a most improper person to keep such house. There
were seven other counts in the indictment, which
charged the defendant with having similarly con-
ducted himself in seven several instances. At half-
past nine o'clock Mr. Justice Asaorr took his seat
upon the bench, and shortly afterwards the Jury were
impannelled and sworn..

Mr. Scaaterr, in 'opening the case to the Jury.,
begged that if any of them that were then on the
Jury should have served on Saturday, that they',
would forget what had passed on that day. The
charge, he observed, was one of a most serious na-
ture, and he did not know of any one, under the
shape of "a misdemeanour, more serious.
Mr. TOPPING here observed, that he understood
that five of the Jury, who served on Saturday, were
in the box—not that he mentioned the circumstance
as a matter of objection.
Mr. Justice ABBOTT—The present charge is as
different as possible from that of Saturday.
Mr. SCARLETT said, he was passive on the subject.
Mr. &alarmism; observed, that they did not mean
to object to any of the Gentlemen.
Mr. Justice ABBOTT stated, that if any objection to
them was to be received, it ought to have been made
before the Jury were sworn ; bet they having been
called and sworn, the trial must go on : the question
was perfectly distinct from the one tried on Saturday:
this relates to his conduct as a Magistrate.
Mr. Meiceron, who had taken his seat on the floor,
said that he had not the slightest objection to any of
the Gentlemen who composed the Jury.
The trial was then proceeded on.
Mr. SCARLETT, after some very impressive and
eloquent remarks on the superior advantages which
the people of this country, as compared with every
other part of the world, possessed in the administra-
tion of justice, from the highest Officers down to
those of the most humble character ; and, after hav-
ing particularly described the important duties, as
well as the high trust and confidence which were re-
posed in the Magistrates, proceeded to state, that the
c..arge against the present defendant, who had held
the office of a Magistrate; was that of having cor-
ruptly abused the functions of his sacred situation.
He then went on to observe, that among other duties
devolving upon the defendant, was that of granting
licences to public-houses. The Learned Gentleman
observed, that amongst the machinery of a well-con-
ducted Government, was that of a Magistrate, who
received no pay from Government, but who was en-
trusted to act upon his own feelings of integrity and
honour, but who was called upon by the Govern-1
ment and the people to discharge his duty conscien-
tiously, and thereby he would obtain the applause of
those around him. It was the peculiar province of a
Magistrate so situated, to take care that the public
were not led into snares by the appointment of im-
proper persons to keep public-houses, and thereby
render them, instead of receptacles for refreshment
and accommodatiog, schools of indecency, immora-
lity, and every viLlious propensity. The Learned
Gentleman warned the Jury not to find the defen-
dant guilty, unless the case should be made out by
the most conclusive evidence. The defendant had,
for many years, been a Magistrate for the County of
Middlesex, and it was not in one solitary instance
that he had violated his duty as a Magistrate, but in
several instances in the years 1815 and 1816, even
after he had received the fullest information that the
houses were kept by highly improper persons ;
amongst these were the following : The Seven Stars,
kept by T. Wright ; the King's Arms ; the Queen's
Head; the Turk and Slave ; the Adam and Eve; the
Ram and Magpie ; every one of which, it would ap-
pear, had been kept by persons who allowed gam-
bling, and almost every other sort of. excess. In the
year 1815, the conduct of the persons who kept these
houses, became so notorious, that the constable
thought fit to make a list of them, and lay it before
the Magistrates at the Quarter Sessions ; notwith-
standing which,' however, they were all re-licensed.
Soote of them were the property of Mr. Merceron,
and of others he received the tents. The Learned
Counsel concluded by observing, that corrupt mo-
tives were attributable to the defendant, for no man
would act corruptly unless he had a motive for so doing.

Mr. J. Underton, a clerk in the office of the Clerk
of the Peace, proved that Mr. Merecron was in the
Commission, and had been so for '2O years.
Mr. J. W. Perry was head constable for the parish
of Bethnal-green for the year 1515. He, accompa-
nied by the Headboroughs of the parish, went round
very frequently to inspect the conduct of the different
public houses. Among others, he inspected most par-
ticularly the Sevcn Stars, in Fleet-street, Bethnal-
green. This house was conducted in a very bad man-
ner, by keeping open till one or two in the morning.
All manner of persons of the lower orders young peo-
ple of both sexes, assembled there ; they were gene-
rally playing at cards, 20, 30, or 40 at a time. He
frequently remonstrated with the landlord. He found
this to be the case whenever he went round. The
house was open during Divine Service on Sunday.
His remonstrances were not attended to. He also
visited the King's Arms, in George-street. One Sun-
day forenoon, about a quarter before 12, he found
about 30 persons in the room, smoking and drinking,
and playing at shuffie-board. He found the house
open,several times during Divine Service, and people
drilling. The house was open very late at night, to
twelve and one in the morning. Frequently remon-
strated with the landlord without effect. He likewise
visited the Queen's Head, in Fleet-street ; it was con-
ducted as badly as the two preceding cases ; gam-
ing, bad hours, and open during Divine Service. He
visited the Turk and Slave, in Brick-lane ; it was as
bad as the others. He sometimes found it shut up at
night, as if there was no one there. They got in with
difficulty, and found no company below stairs ; but
afterwards, on going up stairs, they found 30 or 40
people, drinking and smoking. He got admission
with difficulty, but perceived no gambling ; they
often turned people out at late hours, and while they

wee going out at the front door, the landlord was
letting the people in again at the back ; knew Mr.
Merceron, acting as alKagistrate for their parislt.4—
Shortly before the licensing day, in September, 181.5,
he was sent for by Mr. Merceron, to his Office in
Brick-lane. Mr. Merceron asked him, whether he
had any complaint against victuallers on the next li-
censing day ? Witness said, he certainly had, for he
had found many o; the publicans very disorderly.—
He mentioned particularly the four he had now
spoken of ; and stated to Mr. Merceron what he stated
to-day. He said, he thought their conduct was ex-
tremely reprehensible, and that they ought to be se-
verely punished for it. He added, that he must re-
port them before the Licensing Board. Mr. Merce
ron upon this told him to be careful what he did, and
not to be litigious, as his report might be the cause of
these people losing their licenses, and themselves and
family be reduced to beggary. Witness told him he
understood he should have to take his oath when he

came before the Magistrates, and that be would take
his oath correctly. Mr. Merceron replied, he must
send to the persons in question, and admonish them,
and that no doubt he should find their conduct bet-
ter. He said he should be on the bench on the li-
censing day. Witness attended on the licensing day.
Mr. Merceron and Sir D. Williams were alone pre-
sent. A question was put to witness by Sir D. Wil-
liams, how he found the morals of the licensed ? He
told him he had found them very bad, but he had
had an interview with Mr. Merceron, and that he had
promised to give them an admonition. Mr. Merce-
ron replied, I have taken care of that, Sir Daniel: I
have seen them. V.ltness was sworn ; he was not
asked to name the houses, and no more questions were
put. The victuallers were then called in. If it bad
not been for what Mr. Merceron said to him he
should have presented these houses ou that day.—
The licences were renewed to the same persons. Wit •
ness visited the same houses again, and did not find
their behaviour ai all improved. He was treated af-
terwards with insult, and he was less attended to than
before by the !audio: ds.
Cross-e.ramined.—Was appointed to the office of
constable in 1815, about Easter. On every visit he
paid the houses, he found them equally ill conducted.
He did not recollect all the Ileadborouglis that at-
tended him ; Mr. Field, Mr. Cadoux, and Mr. Smith,
attended him. During the whole of his office he
never laid any information before any M *strate,
except Mr. ilerceron. He knew these pe were
offending against the law, and liable to pen ties, and
yet he, as constable, never laid any information be-
fore any other Magistrate than Mr. Merceron, who
said he need not r any further. At the commence-
ment of the licensing business there were but two Ma-
gistrates present. There were great heats and ani-
mosities in the parish. Witness was a partizan for
neither side, and never had the slightest difference
with Mr. Merceron.

Cadonx, J. Smith, and J. Field, Headboroughs of
the parish, in 1816, gave evidence to the same effect.
1. Reynold...on, a Constable in 1816, said, on the
licensing-day in that year Mr. Merceron asked him
if he had any complaints to make against public-
houses. He said he had, and named the Seven Stars,
the Adam and Eve, the Ram and Magpie, the Turk
and Slave, and the Golden Key. I►lr. Merceron
slid, he should be careful what he said, as he misht
deprive the occupiers of their living; and that it he
would leave it to him, he would see and talk to them.
Witness asked him, whether, when he came before
the Magistrates, he should not be obliged to take an
oath as to the publicans ? Mr. Merceron answered,
that he would ; but that was merely a matter of
form. Witness told him, he could not take the oath
that the publicans were orderly, when he knew to
the contrary. When witness 'vent before the Magis-
trate., Mr. Merceron, Sir Daniel Williams, and two
Or three others were present, and witness was asked
if he had any complaint to make ? He told him the
Golden Key was a disorderly house. That was all
he was asked. He did not mention the rest, because
Mr. Merceron said he would see the parties and ad-
monish them ; he did not know that Mr. Merceron
was the proprietor of any public•houses.
J. Lefevre, J. Gardiner, J. Scrase, J. Essex, and W.
Fishwick, corroborated the testimony of lteynoldson.
Mr. Guitsav proved that he took the minutes be-
fore the Committee of the House of Commons in the
year 1816. Mr. Merceron had access to those mi-
nutes. On the 17th June, 1816, the minutes appeared
to be corrected by Mr. Merceron: he sometimes cor-
rected them with pencil, and sometimes with ink.
Mr. TOPPING submitted, that if any of these mi-
nutes were read, the whole of them ought to be ;
and that they could not be received in evidence, it
not being .a voluntary deposition of Mr. Merceron,
but compulsory.
The COMIION SIIRJEANT followed on the same side.
Mr. Justice Aasorr was of opinion, that the evi-
dence was receivable.

The evidence was then received, from which it
appeared that the defendant was the owner of several
public-houses, among which were the Seven Stars,
the White Swan, and the King's Arms. He also
produced lists of other public-houses, of which he
received the rents, including the Turk and Slave.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. TOPPING then addressed the Jury for the de-
fendant, and said, the evidence he proposed to call
was, for the purpose of shewing that he could not
have any corrupt motive, inasmuch as he had no
other interest in or controul over the houses than
what arose from the right of a landlord to distrain
for rent. He then called Mr. C. Lush, a Solicitor,
who proved that Mr. Merceron had sub-let the
houses in question to Hanbury and Co. the brewers,
and others.

Mr. Justice Aaaorr, in summing up, observed,
that there was no part of the functions of a Magis-
trate more important than the licensing of public-
houses ; the trust was indeed sacred, for upon its
due discharge depended the health and even the lives
of the lower orders of society : dissipation led to
crime, and crime to death. With regard to this
offence, charged to have been wilfully and corruptly
committed, it was fit to remark that, in order to
maintain it, it was not necessary to chew direct pecu-
niary motive in the defendant to grant licenses in
opposition to his owa conviction of the unfitness of
so doing ; it was enough to establish, that the defen-
dant had even a remote and general interest in the
renewal of the licenses.

The Jury scarcely fuzzed roukl, and fouud the