Star.
London, England, 1819-06-23 00:00:00

..... lares,i".- to
thi
wciuld notco
accede. It was easy to- sighse-Why
these propositions were rejecab Th. Commissiemp
refereed to their Solicitor to report on each camel'
it occurred, and by his report they were guided. It
uas not in the nature of man that the. Solicitoe'
should report with impassiality, whether be, should
quash in the bud these, 761 prosecutions, on which
perhaps only ./,',3 or £4 costs had been incurred.
while they might swell in, the end to £l6O-44ersi
The cause was brought before the Exchequer, whie.hi
with all respect to those who adosinistexed the law.
he.must say, had assumed too much of the odious
character of the Star Chamber (Hear), and is whit
the Solicitor of the Excise assumed much of the
power formerly exercised -by the Master of the Crown
Office, till the abuse of it was correcteJ by the Sts-
tute of William and Mary. When the cause was
brought before that Court. the.,hadge who presided
said, that the Commissioners of Cirstoriti had nq
power to rectify the error, and he directed tlii.fary.
to find a verdict for the Crown. The petitioner sta!
t(d, that he was advise:l by his Cpuns4l that *Bill of
Exception.% might be tendered, and he shotdil have
Prosecuted it. but that he had test funds... Hl suit
better advised to apply to the Lords df tlieTratse
14e sent to that Board the sime'stateMetit, oerber,
which he had sent to the Commissioners cirtacisr4—
precisely the same affidavits, with not one riewiaa.
The Lords of the Treasury having ad Solicitor' be-
hind them, came to that honourable conclusion which
was to be expected from them. Their decision was
in fact a decided rebuke on the Commiltioners ofl
Excise. They remitted the penalty, but they made
a stipulation that the individual should pay the costs
of the action, the Statute not giving costs:to the,
Crown, but it being in the power of the Treasury to
make what terms they pleased. They might now
see how this matter stood. He had the receipt in his
hand of the Solicitor of Excise from the defendant,
for the Crown costs in this prosecution, which, in the
hudgment of the Lords of the Treasury, should never
ave been instituted. They amounted to 1:160 .ss.
In addition -to this, the defendant, who had not
money to follow up his bill of exceptions. had his
own Solicitor's bill to pay, amounting to £B9 ss. 9d.'
Thus it was that two years after the matter had bed
at rest, was it trumped up to wring from the petititi7.
ner the enormous sum of £l6O ss. From an exami-'
nation of this individual case, and a knowledge of
the fact that 761 prosecutions were instituted in the
course of the year, he was not going beyond th*
bounds of probability in inferring, • that the proce4l
inga of this kind were instituted not so much foe thk
protection of the Revenue, as for the sake of Ii
costs, for the advantage of those at whose advi&
th
were instituted—(Hear, hear,!) Neither was it t
supposed that the higher Crown Lawyers could v
these prosecutions with altogether unprejudiced erit
(Hear, hear!) When he had mentioned this subject
before in the House, the Attorney-General had tateo
up his allusion with a warmth which shewed ho '
nearly it touched him. In every prosecution nearly
fifty guineas were paid in fees to Counsel fdr the
Crown, though comparatively few were brought to
axial, for after the last 6s. Bd. was stuck to the bill,
jse Solicitors, who, before were so averse to compro-
mise, were anxious to agree to it—that was, to have 4
no more trouble in the business: The House should
hear some of the items of the Bill in the present case.
After a charge for five fair copies of the brief were
these items:—The Attorney-General, ten guineas ;
the Solicitor-General, ten guineas; Mr. thiuncey,
eight guineas ; Mr. Clarke, eight guineas; Mr. Wal-
ton, four guineas; and, finally, to-keep up the splen-
.donr of a Crown prosecution, £7 13s. to the Marshal
aed Crier of the Court. It was thus that the expenses
of the Crown were swelled out; for the respectable
Solicitor for the defendant had carried the cause on
for half the sum. But a defendant was placed by
this proceeding on the part of the Crown in a most
difficult situation. How was he to meet this array
of talent against him? There was the Attorney.
General equal to two, and the Solicitor-General equal
to two more (a laugh); so that if the unhappy de-
fendapt could find and fee five lawyers, he would be
equal only in number, not in talent, to the forces of
his prosecutors.' This was on all defendants a severe,
but on innocent defendants a cruel and wicked has,
post—(llear, hear.). He invited the atteir,iou of the
House to this subject, which so well deserved it—
iHear, hear.) Whether the prosecutions were neces-'
vary or no, the mode of carrying them on was un-
dicessarily expensive; and in the next Session, he
should move for a Committee to inquire into the
mode of instituting and conducting these prose-
cutions—(Hear. hear.) In this he not only antici-
• pated no opposition, but support and thanks, from
the Ministers, who in their Financial Resolutions had
appended a declaration, the sincerity of which some
had doubted, from the late period of the Session at
which ' - favour

bad-oiffear).
Honourable Gentleman rot bringing the subject be-,
fore them. When applicatioos were made to the Trot"-
sury on, revenue subjects, the decisions were generally
satisfactory. The result was very different when ap-
plication was made to the Revenue Boards, who re-
ferred all matters to their Solicitors.
The SOLICITOR:GENERAL complained of the
attuck made on the Court of Exchequer, which had
been compared to the Court of Star Chamber, and
bf that made on the Judge who presided on the trial
of Captain Bryant—(Hear, hear, hear.) If that cheer
had any reference to Whet had been said of dhe Judge,
he would accept it, and say, if there was any thing to
complain of in his conduct, the more manly course
would be to proceed by impeachment rather than by
bringing it forward incidentally, as done this night.
lie then described the law of the 96th of the King,
which law, he contended, was merely made.to pre.
vent frauds, -which were formerly common- Now
Eohat was the resent case? la the manifest it ap-
peared that a certain number of bigs of coffee were
On board- the said ship, end when the Captain tad-
&rived it was found that. there was a diminution in.,
, entity. This was exactly the case the law had been
amed to meet. It had been mid the contents of 145
bags had been pet in 140 i. but this change, it it had"
taken place, ought to be noticed in the log-hook of
the ship. The Captain had been told to produce it,
but he had never Acme so. The conduct of the Judge,
he maintained, had been strictly in conformity with
the law; he had no authority to act but as he did.
The Treasury, ia remitting the penalty -on the peti-
tion of Captain Bryant, had not decided as the
Honourable Member had assumed, that the prosecu-
tion ought never to have been commenced. They
were satisfied of the contrary, but taking into their
consideration the poverty of the defendant, and all
the circumstances of the case, they had remitted the
penalty, and thought it would be sufficient to cover
the public from the costs of the prosecution by direct-
ing him to pay the expenses, which amounted to 1601.
The Honourable Gentleman had this night renewed
the attack which had on former occasions been mark
against that most respectable person, the Solicitor of
the Board of Excise, stigmatizing with the imputa-
tion of commencing suits for the purpose of his pri-
vate emolument. A more unfounded imputation
never was made—( Hear, hear, hear). Every prose-
cution that was undertaken was under the express di-
rections of a Committee of the Board—(Hear, hear.)
As to the costs, the Honourable Gentleman threw
out an imputation which he must know to be un-
founded. The Honourable Member must know that
no costs were taken on behalf Of.the Crown—(Hear,
hear, hear). It was the established rule that the Crown
neither gave nor received costs. The only instances
in which costs became a question, were those where
the defendant, knowing his guilt, entered into a com-
promise, of which one of the conditions might be
giving a suen-to cover the costs. Then the timelier
able Gentleman talked of the avidity manifested lek
the Solicitor of the Board with respect to cons,
though he knew that no compromise ever proceeds l
from the Crown, but must be proposed by the de-1
fendant, from the consciousness. that a verdict must
go against him, and were entered into out of mercy
on the part of the Crown. Why then was such an
imputation thrown out with respect to costs, when all
' this must be known ?—(Hear, hear, hoar.) As to the
number of Counsel employed, it was rendered neces-
sary by the great pressure of business and the length
Of time that the Court sat—circumstances which tea-
dared it necessary that there should be a sufficient
number of Counsel to relieve each other. He west
therefore sure that the House would see that the case
of this Petition was not made out, and no foundatim
for the imputations which had been thrown ant
against honourable men—(Hear, hear, hear.)
Mr. N. CALVERT was an advocate for inquiry
upon this subset, thinking that the statements and
cbservations of the Honourable Mover were by no
means answered by the Honourable and Learned
Gentleman. On the contrary, indeed, he thoughts
the Learned Gentleman very ineffective upon some
points, and especially with regard to the number of
Counsel usually retained on &chequer prosecutions,
for he could not see the propriety of Peeing Counsel
who did not actually attend or take any part in such
' prosecutions.
Mr. DENMAN was of opinion, that had the bill
of exceptions been pursued, the ruling of the Judge
might have been rectified by a higher tribunal. The
Solicitor of the Excise had a difficulty duty to per-
form, and was surrounded by temptations of a most
clangorous nature. Prom him the prosecution, in
fact, originated, as he examined the witnesses. In
-cases where he had been employed, of the same kind
as the one before the House, he had always advited
his clients, whether guilty or pot, to come to a corn-

'rise
conside-

system which had keen ,complained of. The lion.
Member then proceeded to enter into a review of the
practice of the Court, and the hardships entailed on
defendants, even when innocent of any offence, and
roved to be so by that system. He thought the
whole case-ought to be investigated by Parliament.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY, in his reply, observed that
, the whole aspect of the Court-of Exchequer presented
a strong resemblance to the Star Chamber. But he
hoped, that on the same principle as the Acts of the
'4th and 6th of Williatn and Mary restrained the
power of the Master of the Crown Office to file in.
formations, some restrictions would be imposed upon
Exchequer prosecutions. With respect to the num-
ber of those prosecutions within the last year, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer professed to think them
comparatively inconsiderable, in consequence of the,
extent of revenue, but the 760 before the House'
formed only a small part of the Exchequer processes,
as be.was convinced that if all the proceedings before
Magistrates, and by summary jurisdictions, were id-
cfuced, they would be found to amount to several
thousands. He looked, however, for some ameliors%
don of the Revenue Code, as the Chancellor of distil
Exchequer, from expressing no dissent, appeared to
concur in the proposition which he had announced ,
his intention to bring forward at an early period of'
the next Session, for the appointment of a Committee
to inquire into the whole system.
. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
begged that he might not be understood to concur
in the Honourable Gentleman's intended motion.

On the motion of Mr. HARVEY, a Return of the
several Petitions. Memorials, and Proceedings, with
regard to the prosecution of Samuel Bryant by the
Excise, were ordered to be laid before the House, to-
gether with a statement pf the costs, and of the re-
reault of the said prosecution.
CAAIELFORD ELECTION.
Mr. HUME, in the absence of the Chairman of the
Camelford Election Committee, begged to state the
grounds on which their Report respecting Mr. Flatlet
had been founded. That Gentleman having taken a
1 prominent part in the late Election for Camelford,
the Committee issued their warrant for his attendance
as a witness before them, but though every effort was
made to serve a notice upon him, he could not be
found. The Committee, having had reason to believe
that he had absconded, to avoid giving evidence, issued
their warrant for taking Mr. Hallet into the custody
of the Serjeant at Arms, where he now wan He did
not mean to point out the course which the Houe
ought to follow, but he wished to impress the neces-
sity of enforcing the power vested iq the Committee
ofcommanding the attendwe of witnesses. The
Hon. Member then moved that William Hallet be
committed to his Majesty% Jail of Newgate.
Mr. S. BOURNE thought it would be acting con-
trary to the general practice to have the prisoner
meamitted to Newgate, without giving him an op-1
portunity of accounting for his absence. It was likely
that be might deserve the punishment about to be C-
flicted on him, but this ought to be pzoved..
Mr. HUME had no other motive for making his
motion than having been informed that it was the
regular course of proceeding.
The SPEAKER observed, that the usual course
was to depend on the Report of the Committee, and
allow the prisoner to remain in custody until lie stat-
ed his ewe by petition. In a recent case this was the
course adopted by the House.
Mr. CROKER moved that that part of the Repckt
of the Committee which concerned Mr. Halle be read.
The Clerk read the Report. It stated that
Hallet hid absconded to avoid giving evidence before'
the Committee, in consequence of which he had been
ordered into the custody of the Serjeant at Arms.
After some observations from Mr. ScAaLsrr;
MACDONALD, Mr. S. BotiamE, Mr. W. CROIERItt lind
Mr. HARVEY,
The SPEAKER suggested the propriety of allow-
ing the prisoner to remain in the custody of the
jeant at Arms to a future day.
Mr. HUME then withdrew his motion.
BANICRUrTS. REGULATION BILL..
-On the motion of Mr. J. SMITH the Bankrupt's'
Regtilation Bill was wcgmutitted, Borne amendments
were proposed and agreed to, ' and the Report was
brought up, ordered to betaken into consideration on
Thursday aext, and to be printed.

WORKING CLASSES.
Mr. HUME ppsented a Petition from a number
of journeymen tradesmen and mechanics in London
and Westminster, complaining of the operation of
laws relative to combinations among workmen for the
purpose of obtaining higher wages, and praying for
an amendment of them. The Honourable Member,
after some observations on the hardships to which
these laws subjected workmen, and the unjust advan-

.
i •
N.

' -, : .4- ••:'z,vl*!*.• N. A % • * • .
. 4 4.:11 . .•.. .
..• . ,
. . . •,'''' , „
,•, ~ .p., . . • -
. ..t
f: ' I • - •
&tug their.achatily. His intis Atari paid cm.,* Friend (the Solicitor-General), that he did not thin
shirt the Customs had • previously been ,atis6ed, eindaed, asld framed irlthe lsest legal it at all necessary to dwttll upon them ; but he
, ap-
aid praying for an interview. He received for an- • the, GendeimlkAldstoW SW the dice, pealed to the House whether the *umber of Lich&
'nee, r only a verbal communication, in atich his re- "thiiikspete of all who knew Illm. gun- prosecutions, so often adverted to in the course
vest was refused on the ad that the Commis- E. Lt( said. that whatever might be the of the discussion, could be regarded as so conside-
surners•were never my ei .thoee.of the 761 character i 4 the Solicitor, the system on. which the sable, when it was recollected that we had suck an
prosecutions which they Instituted He then offered Customs and Excise acted, of referring all causes to immense revenue to collect.
modified terms. of ColprOglaiSe; to which also they the Solicitors who were interested in prosecutions, Mr. GORDON denied that any attack had been
mould not accede. It was eair to tmfrithiewhy all was bad--(flesh. 'Fite Hoes* was, obliged_ to the made on the Learned Persons alluded to, it was the
_,. • ...., ...f Thr. rinn_

.j :::whicii it was' proposed, in favour of economy. He promise. In the present case the Commissioners of tage which they allowed to masters, gave notice, that
i.. ',.d make one observation on the universality of Cibtorns had, in 1814, admitted the excuse of the on Tuesday next be should move for leave to bring in
. irosecutions. There was hardly one kindness of life deftrtdant ; and, in 1816, he had been prosecuted by a Bill to.amend the Combination Laws.
which was not followed up by the severity of these the Board of Excise. In the Court of Exchequer Mr. ELLICE stated that he had great pleasuie in''
prosecutions. He had a letter from zan inhabitant (though he meant to impute no blame) there was an offering his Entire concurrence in, and cordial assis-
of Colchester, who stated, that he had lent a neigh- overwhelming weight oa the side of the Crown. By tance to :he measure of which the Hon. Member had
'.1.. f bout his brearingscopper; having allowed his neigh- . the Bill that had passed the House last. night, the given notice fur the repeal of the. Combination Acts,
.1 '
boar to brew a quarter of malt in his brew.hoose, he powers of the Board of Excise had been extended ins a subject to which it had been his intention, if no,
. 1
_ ' was prosecuted. The 61st intimation he had was an a-manner unheard of before. other Honourable Member had taken it up, to call
',',.information of forty or-fifty folios. He se* a peti- Sir C. BURRELL stated several instances of op- the attention of the House. He had been obliged,
i ' . [ion to the Excise, wile were pleased to, remit the pression and exaction both in the Excise and Customs. in consequence of the distresses of his constituents, to
prosecution, on conditton that he shbuld pay •He dwelt upon one case in particular, M which an appeal to the feelings of the House, in favour of a
£9O, with whatever othde costs had been incurred. individual, prosecuted by the Excise, was advised by meerire they had suggested for their own relief, and
i He received, three months after, a letter from Mr. his Counsel rather to pay the penalty reqnired than which bad been opposed on the general principle,
' 1111 Cart (the Solicitor), stating that the costs were £46 to go into Court to make any defence., and with this that it would interfere with free labour ; and his only
odd—(Hear. hear.) 'fit Solicitor, in these cases, advice the defendant felt it expedient to cumin., al- answer to that opposition was, that although he ad-
i I
never condescended 10, give in his bill, so that Ow though fully conscions of his innocence:. mitred any regulations of the price of labour was con-
' ' 'defendant might have the advantage of having them The Petition was ordered.to lie_UO the table, crave to principles which all acknowledged, it had
: taxed—he only gave ni)ris compliments,"- as in this.. The CHANCELLO of lire FAGUIQUER ex- barn rendered necessary by the repeated violation of
I nstance, and said that his costs were so and so— pressed his astonish 4.ftirereflettiodathroutiouts these principles, which had produced the distressing
f i ' they were generally sbatewhat under the penalty re. this evening upon.the • rifExcise, whoweseaduc effocta frigOts Which the manufacturing classes in every
Mitted. He should mOfi that the Petidon be brought wad character,, had on,atillikomicaphon been au highly' of the the country were now unfortunately suffering.
i - - up, Intending afterwards to propose that the. Papers :cadet. 44t,0e4 - ite7: dr ' id. Eathe7.
,__
_tlitlierjeatest pleasure, therefore, in offering
relating tO it shook' be laid on the table.' - • Are! dt. . ; iti hs paietable as ..s.3oedia; support to A measure iiihich would be the
'••tab' Mr. R. COLBORNE stated, that the Solicitor of their- !Wei' '' " . . ' -been,. that, first tAnta.re-es lishitiLtheyriisciple of free
was l .....
' ' the Excise was merely a Ministerial Officer; th 0: he 'Court was
had no cognizance of any case but when it was laid animadversions kl,linivev— es', been. -so &Brand for: thellooouraPerrentlerinui in 'call
endiaintiii.to re-
before him by the Board, and could not proceed cibly answered by his Honourable and Learned move a grievance; of which the operative manufac-