Star.
London, England, 1828-07-18 00:00:00

nr
uppn the Prftion. The question was imomraft...
merely to the particular case, but to the whole corn
munity ; if such a mode of prbeeeding was proper, hit
it be publicly declared, and then the question would
arise whether it was not fit that the Coast and its prac-
tice should be reformed ? If the mode of proceeding
were wrong, theo what answer could be given to the
allegations of the Petitioner? If any explanation could
he given by his Hon. Friend below him (Dr. Lushing-
ton), he should be happy to hear it ; but as it stood, the
treatment Counsel sandiparties had received, in reference
to the table of lees, was most extraordinary, and ap-
parently unjustifiable. It was not possible, at this late
period of the Session, for the House to enter into a
minute inquiry upon the subject, but it was a question
whether Government ought not themselves to order au
investigation by other means than a Commiwee of the
House of Commons. The Petitioner, by coming for-
ward, did a substantial service. not only ti himself, bot
to the community; and he (Mr. Hume) was satisfied
that the discussion would be useful, whatever might be
the result.

The question was then put that the Petition be brought up.
Dr. LUSHINGTON said, that he lamented the ne-
cessity which existed for troubling the Houle upon the
subject ; but be felt assured that the House would fa-
vour him with their attention when they considered that
.into his hands was confided the vindication of the chi-
racier of a Right Hon. Gentleman—a Jddge—at* indi-'
vidual who had been foethir ty years a Member of that
Muse—who had graced his profuion between forty
and fifty years—who had been for upwards of twenty,
years King's Advocate—and who had for many years
held the high office which he at the present moment
filled. If he (Dr. Lushington) thought that the allega-
tions contained in the petit,on which the House was,
now considering, required any thing more than common
capacity to contradict and expose, he might, perhaps,
have shrunk from the task ; but it was indeed easy for
1 any person possessed of even the most limited informa-
tion, to disprove those allegations—foolish, frivolous,
and malignant as they were. In entering upon this
question he would be as brief as possible—as brief as
he could be in replying to the long speech with which
the Honourable Member had just indulged the House.
But it was first necessary for him to account for the
absence of the Learned Judge against whom the
allegations contained in the petition were principally
advanced. To the astonishment of the Learned Judge,'
he a few days since observed a public notice that on the,
Tuesday following certain charges were to be brought
forward in the House, in which notice heo by nanie,
was denounced to the public as a delinquent; as a Judge
who bad betrayed his trust. By name was he described
to the country as a person guilty of a violation of duty.
He (Dr. Lusbington) was at a loss to conceive why the
Hon. Member (Mr. Home) had not considered it more
consistent with justice and delicacy riot to have intro-
duced this notice with the name 4 f the Learned Judge,
or why he bad not deferred doing even this, until be
had read the documents, in order to see if the charges
contained in the petition were well founded. If the
Judge had been so hardened by such attacks as to care
little for the consequences, be would not have come,
down to the House on Tuesday to bear what those at-
tacks were. He did, however, comedown to the House,',
and then the Hon. Member (Mr. Hume) stated his in-
tention of postponing, until Thursday, the presentation
of the petition, and consequently the preferring of the
charges. The House then manifested its sense of the
treatment the Learned Judge had received, and cer-
tainly
placed him on such a footing as not to render
again necessary his being in his place to meet the
charges. Sure he (Dr. Lushington) was, that if the
House did not expect the Learned Judge to attend,'
the Learned Judge owed nothing of courtesy to the
Honourable Member who had so uncoulteously and so
unceremoniously postponed the presentation ef the Pe-
tition when the 'earned Judge was in the House. He
was therefore justified in being now absent. Bet Imetbe
House consider the course pursued by the Honourable
Member for Aberdeen. It any misch'ei had been done
by the Court, a remedy was to be found in appeal to a
higher tribunal—and here he must protest against being
called upon to discuss in that House the proceedings of
a Court of Justice, when, as he had ju t now said, the
aggrieved party had a. remed y before an utter ior j nri -dic-
tion. What would be said it complaints were to be
made in that House against the Court of King's Bench
for having exceeded its jurisdiction.' He was the East
man in that House who would say that a Juige was not
amenable for his judic al conduct. but he a ould say that
those who brought forward charges like the present
ought to take care not to be made the instruments of
disapointed suitors—(Hear, hear).—CHere 'the Hon.
Gentleman proceeded to state the facts of the case, as
already detailed.] Much stress had been laid upon the
large amount of cats in the cause (Peddle v. Evans).
while the sum contested was coasparatrve.y trill rig ; the
costs basing been 2.500/.—:he sum in dispute only
IRON. But that was a circumstance to t p- culiar to
proceedings in that, or indeed in Any Count. Li Courts
of Common Law, ton example, es ry man knew • that
the costs r fan ejectment sere the same, whether the
value of the property was only five pounds, or many
thousands—(Hear). Of the petition beanie the Hnu e, he
would say that it taus more the petition of the per-
!son whose petition it purported to be, than it was the
"pet tion of any floiioarable Member of t at House.
The petitioner was an eicisenisin, in-an est.eniele hums
ble situation in life, I. tterly incapable of knowing or '
understanding the coot?! teof it—(Tne Honourable and
Learned Member defended Sir John N choll again t tbe
charge of delay, denting the alleged airier of business:
in the Court over which th.t Honcuritit)vandisefined
per son presided, and bore testimony to the assictoity,
industry, patience, forbearance. and tales t of that
Learned Judge, as proved even by his Attrition t
the very cause referred Vs), which he had wisest-
cation in saying involved, or very nearly balanced,';
die ' que.tion, whether or not the to tacos was of
sound mind ? In speaking of the Solicitor (Mr.,
' Walker), he had, he acknowledged, wed very strong
expressions, not one word of which would he now re-'
tract; for he should be ashamed to avail himself of his
Parliamentary privilege to state any matter which he
could not af erwasdefully substantiate—(Cheers). [The
Hon. and Learned Member then read a letterlrom Mr.
Walker, dated Bristol, Sth May, 1828, in which he as-
' seated that the whole burden of the costs would fall
upon him, and then proceeded to contrast that asser-
tion with his subsequent evidence.] A discrepancy
which he.contended fully justified him in using the ex-
pressions he•had applied to than individial—and, he
should ask, had he not made out his case ?—wben that
person on the one band swore he was responsible-fur the
tostsiand on the other that be was not.
sh..D.-W. HARVEY—Not legally responsible.
Dr. LUSHINGTON'-.-The Hon. Gentleman-says not
legally respbasible, but I Will maintain that he was le.
gaily and actually responsible, for At was he who em.
played the Proctor. *He (Dr. Lushington) hoped to
Goo no man would be permitted to take advantage,
of such a subterfuge as that just now suggested by
Me-Honourable Member for Colchester k and if au at