Star.
London, England, 1827-05-11 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, M•I to

The Court took the peremptory paper.—Lord Tarr•
minis said, the Court would hear arguments upon
special cases to-morrow ( his day), and would on Sa-
turday take, instead of the Crown paper, the London
and ►Middlesex new trials.

MRS. MANORS WARR/MD.
The ATTORNLI•GRNSRAL said, that from what he
understood Mr. Brougham had stated to the Court yes-
terday respecting this Lady, it would be unnecessary for
him to make the motion he had obtained leave for.—
Mr. BROUGHAM assented.—The' ATTORNL[•GittttRAL
then moved for the discharge of Mrs. Frances Wake-
field's recognizances.—Ordered accordingly.

TUX XING AGAINST THE NEV. HENRY IROINIIITON AND

BARLOW.

This was a rule Nisi for a criminal information ob-
tained last term by Mr. Campbell against Mr. Brough-
ton, who is a magistrate of Staffordshire, and also
Against Barlow, win is a constable, for illegal and op.
pressive conduct. The application for the rule is re-
ported in our paper of the 29th January. Two cis&
&en, John Caddie, aged ten, and Julia Caddie, aged
only seven, the children of a poor cottager, wete, in
the middle of the day of the 12th of October, seen by
Barlow, with part of their clothes off, wading in a
pond on a common, catching or playing with some
ducks. It appeared that the girl had hold of one duck,
which belonged to Barlow, and the boy had hold of
two, which we understood belonged to his own parents.
Barlow directed a man named Ward to tun after the
children, who had both run away, which he did, and
brought back the boy, whom Barlow took before the ma-
gistrate, Mr. Broughton. No charge on oath was made
against the boy, who had not hold of Barlow's duck.
However, Mr. Broughton ordered the boy to be detained
till the nett day, when he directed that the little
girl should be brought before him. In the middle
of the night, Barlow, who is charged by.the-affida-
vita for the information with personal hostility towards
the parents of' the children, went with a rope in his
hand the child, awoke him, and threatened to hang
him with the rope if he did not confess that his father
set him on to steal the duck. The next day, when
they attended before Mr. Broughton, he took the depo-
sition of Barlow apart from the children and their
mother, without affording them an opportunity of
asking Barlow any questions. The children, on being
asked what they had to say for themselves, both said
they were fighting the ducks ; and the boy, in his
affidavit before the Court, swore that he had never
stolen any thing in his life, and did not mean to steal the
duck. The Magistrate committed both the children to
gaol for a felony, to take their trial at the Sessions.
.‘ here they were both tried and acquitted. The affi-
davits stated that Mr. Broughton, on the mother's in-
tercession for her children, said he wished he could also
send the father and mother to gaol.
The ATTOZNIMGENERAL and Mr. RUSULL, for the
Rev. Mr. Broughton, shewed against the rule, and Mr.
Tattooer) shewed cause for Barlow ; after which Mr.
CAMPERLL and Mr. W#ATZLItIf were heard in support
of the rule.

Lord TENTERDEN-With respect to making the rule
absolute against Mr. Broughton, we are to consider
whether he was acting from a corrupt and malicious
motive? or in a mistaken discharge of his duty. if we
think it was from the first cause, we ought to grant the
information ; but if we think otherwise, or if we doubt,
we ought not to grant it, for the Grand Jury is still
Open tot the parties to resort to. Although I see much
in Mr. Broughton's conduct that I do not approve of,
there is not enough to is malice upon him; and he has
denied in his affidavit that he was actuated by any such
motive. The age of the children might have made a
very discreet than, or a very humane man, pause before
he committed them ; but. Mr. B. tdikht have thought
he was doing good to them. One thing which he did that.
meets our disapprobation is, • I believe, a very common
thing, but it cannot be too much reprobated—he
the depositions in the absence of the accused party.
may be convenient, instead of repeating the depositkiai
where it has been taken before, to read it over to the de-
posing parties,and to pi isoners, taking care to ask them if
they will to put any questions; but in this case there was
not the slightest reason for doing that, because no affi-
davit was made at first, and therefore the deposition
should have been taken when the parties were all toge-
ther. The manner in which Mr. Broughton took the
deposition was not correct, neither was it correct, as he
took no information upon oath the day before, that the
boy should remain in the custody of the amicable.—
Looking at the whole case against Mr. Broughton, vi e
think the rule should be discharged ; but, nevertheless,
it should be discharged upon his paying costs. He acted
improperly in taking the information in the manner be
did, and also improperly in the mode be stated it to
have been taken. With respect to Barlow, we will
either grant the information, or discharge the rule upon
his paying costs, as the parties may please.
Mr. CAMPBELL said, it was the wish of the parties
that the rule should be made absolute.
Lord TENTIRMIN —The role, then, most be made ab-

solute against Barlow. There are two material facts in
his case which do not apply to Mr. Broughton s one,
what previously took place; and the other, his going
to the boy in the dead of the night.

THE KING V. JOHN KEMP.

Mr. HOLROTD stated to the Court that the defendant
had been tried and convicted before Mr. Justice Gage-
lee, at Bury, upon a criminal information for a libel
upon the Magistrates of Suffolk, and that be appeared
in Court to make an apology and express his contrition
for his offence. The Magistrates had consented to ac-
cept the apology.

The defendant put in the apology, which was read by
the officer of the Court, by which it appeared that the
libel was published in the Thiry Gazette of the 10th of
November, 1825, and was relauve to an assault case.
• LOrd TINTIMDEN—Let the defendant be fined Is.
and be discbargeJ.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. Si*T 10.
The Judges sat is banco this m..lning At Westminster,
but hothing of any it occurred. At one o'clock