Star.
London, England, 1819-11-15 00:00:00

QUEENSBERRY CAUSE.

It has been stated by one of our contemporaries,
that the QUEENSBERRY Cause is not likely to termi-
nate for half a century ! The probability is qui:e
otherwise. We understand that the Executors of the
Duke of QUEENSBERRY have delivered in a Memorial
to the Court of Session in Scotland, in which they pe-
tition for what, in the Scotch Law, is termed " liberty
to purge the irritancy." Should this be allowed, it
will have the effect of establishing the Leases granted
by the Duke of QUEENSBERRY, under certain condi-
tions, and tend to bring the proceedings to a very
speedy issue.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, NOVEMBER 13.

TIIE KING V. MIL LOPEZ AND EIGHTEEN OTHERS.

It will be recollected that Sir M. Lopez, and the
other defendants, were convicted at the evon As-
sizes, last Spring, of bribing certain Electors of the
Borough of Grampound, for the purpose of pro-
curing, by corrupt means, the return of a Member
to serve in Parliament for that Borough. There
was also a second conviction against the Baronet, for
an offence of the same description committed in
Cornwall. The particulars of the case have already
been fully detailed to the Public. The defendants
now put in affidavits, in which they severally stated,
that Sir Manasseh had not requested any of them, at
the time of election, to vote for him; nor had he
pointed out to them any person for whom he desired
they should vote.

Mr. SCARLETT addressed the Court in mitigation,
and ccntended that Sir Manasseh Lopez had not com-
pleted his offence, inasmuch as he had reaped no
benefit from it. He had not been elected, nor has, .;;;,.
friend cf his been chosen to repreent the Borough.
The ATTORNEY•GENERAL, on the part of the pro-
secution, replied to Mr. Scarlett. His Learned
Friend had recommended his client, Sir Maa.ts-,e:i
Lopez, to their Lordships' mercy, on the ground that
the offence with which he was charged was not com-
plete, inasmuch as he had not been ultimately suc-
cessful in obtaining a seat in the House of Cerninons;
but, though that Gentleman had not succeeded, he
had used his utmost efforts by bribing a number c.'
voters. Of the act of bribing there conl.l be 1,0
doubt; and of that he was convicted. His Learned
Friend had also contended that Sir Mana:s,..h was not
the principal mover in the business, but that Mr.
Hunt had taken the prominent and active pa.-t. It
might be so, but Mr. Hunt was only the agent cf Sir
Manasseh, for whom it was his intention to se. ,:re a
seat in Parliament. With respect to t: c other de-
fendants, he had not a sufficient knowl..l:- f :be
facts, as related to them, to be able to a whether'
there were any shades of difference in the agnitude
of their offences; it did appear, however, to
that some of them held situations in the Borough,
which was an aggravation to their crime.. This was
originally a private prosecution, and the tie:el:2:lms
were convicted at the Spring Assizes ; na s eps, how•.
ever, had been taken for bringing the defe7:d.. nts up fir
judgment ; and the House of Commons ia con-
sequence, instructed him (the Attorney -Ge.le,-.11)
apply for their Lordships' judgment on the subiett
The House of Commons had consid-red .E ^

,

. ~..•,,

defence of the rights of the people, L'
whilst they prayed judgment, they di, .
dictive spirit : they rested the case •
their Lordships, who would, in their s ie, in,
such a punishment as would seem to t:.7.:n "n:*•L •
the offence.

Mr. Justice BAYLEY, in delivering the judgr;.e,..
of the Court, commented in strong terms on tl,l
enormity of the offence of which the defendants, pe7-
titularly Sir Manasseh, had been c avicted. H.
Lordship dwelt particularly on the lecessity there
was at all times, but more especially at present, to
preserve the House of Commons pure, that the people
bight place confidence in it. -Amongst the defen-
dants, Sir Manasseh stood conspicuous; heir, ' abused
the property with which PRoViDENCK blnsed
him, by applying it to the worst of , aod
might have induced those who came PwlliTtir his in-
fluence to commit the horrid crime of perjury.
'deed, it did appear that one of the defendants, De-
vonshire, had commenced taking the bribery oath,
and would have gone through it, but for the mercy
of the person who had required it should be admini-
stered, who, on seeing his intention, humanely
prevented his proceeding. The Court had taken all
the circumstances of the case into consideration, and
for the first offence of which Sir Manasseh had been
'convicted, they sentenced him to pay a fine of £Booo'
to the King, and to be imprisoned 21 months in
Exeter Jail ; for the second offence, a further fine of
L'2ooo, and three months' imprisonment in the same
prison. Devonshire they sentenced to six months
imprisonment in Bodmin Jail, .and the rest of the
de.fendants to three months' imprisonment in the
same prison.