Star.
London, England, 1816-11-22 00:00:00

a. 4. •• .7", ,1,.!,...... 4. i ; re. r „,,., re, - ~,, i . o ie. ee ‘..
...ea: v,. e. •• e ~.• ...1,,,., i ..,,: ...r7.;••;.,r r„,„
• fact was qtly proye4,.or rath.f stOistittolibgt the open Mr. Justice A4tott's ekes I' .A nnmber of per.
triasinat-intetition was disproveds .auct.yrt.bit,Jus., sous here appeared.coinciding .selith the same.palpable
tit* Burrough paid, the tingle fact for the -considera: untruth., But it was its evidence, that Day.dson,ots
Lion of the Jury was,• whether. his Lordship rats at well as De Beranger's servants, not only so". tin) go
large.oreeipos. op tha,ezpirationotthe term -lose which out at eleven o'clock, but saw him return... For what
Lhe had
,bien k9uopittecit, Be 41d not 5ity,..410.11r. purpose was this Asserted? . Why did heoendeevoitr
Justice Abbott, Alia' the proof of the fact was hat to make ii appear !lilt he went cut and returned ?--,-
.one step tostrardiCOniiCtion—and 'diet it Was eseen•l The reason wee obvieris That seas the feencletiett
'dal also to pinv: that the act originated in a wicked lof thiowireie ahli case. Front .the iroperfecc eta .neer
and corrupt mind. Not. a word did the Learned is wli!elt Lie cese was stated on the trisl og a:vies:in,
Judge say about the
.intention—he confined himself anteitena the oppertunity afferded of misrepresentieg
merely to the act.. Both these trials were the effect the whole of tee circumstaeces, he telt it necessary,
of a former trial, in which he had been fount! guilty, on the pres. at .occasion, and be conceived it to be
and severely 'punished by the Chief Justice of the, perfectly relevant, :o enter into farther explanation ;
King's Bench. and first he tvould take a part of the ipeech of the
Mr. Justice BAYLEY...." Here I must correct your Learned Judge.
Lordship. You were punished by the Court, rot by Mr. Justice BAYLEY—" I think it ripbt and neces•
tl-.e (.17:ief trust Le. The sentence is the act of all the sary fur the digoey 4 f the Court. that I shoidd.exe
Members of the Court ; and, if the Jieiges differed pleb) to your Lordship as distinctly as I can, the im- •
I
from the Chief Jtot.ce, be could not h eve enterced . propriety of that which your Lordship ie new offering
that which be ought hive wished. Wien a sentence to the consideration of the Court. It is very muck
is pissed, each Judge is. eqiial to the other. Esc', against our inclinatien to stop any thing that may be
defers greatly to the opinion expressed by his brethren, said by any perm who tunes on the floor, to' recetve
as pe facts may st4e.them.". the jitdpenent of the Court. It is particularly against
Lord CtiCHRANE-16 I am perfectly aware, with Om inclination of the Court sl to d,,, when the con-
An respect
'.to your Lordships, that it is not the act duct of any of its Members is ce: eJ in criestiOno—
„of it single Judge; but, as you had pa means of judge Bin, when that condect is called in questi or impro-
inge but from the notes of the Learned Chief Justice,' perly, and when it can have no effect oti that "Oct%
I hold, if those notes were not correct, that he de. is brought under the consideration of the Coate; the
ceiveff pour Lordshipi.9o . Court owes it to its own dienhy to interlete ; and it
Lord'O;cneame then went on.— In one of those will interfere. eithout any cousideration
.W theindie .
trials he was the Prosecutor, and, ie the other, the vidnal who might happen to be subject to its ten.
Defendant. In the first lie obtained no redress— tence. It will ittierfere equally In the cast of a Man
and, in the lass, in consequence of the law being in- of the highest renk or .of the lowest. The Court acts
terpreted differently from what was laid down in the under the solemn obligation of an Oath on each far-
case of D ividson, he was (mend guilty. In tke sat- titular case which comes before it--and it is bountito
ter case Mr. Justice Abbott: instructed the Jury to see. that no attack is ma le on any of the Judges
consider whether the false evidence given might nor improperly, and that oo irrelevant matter is intro-
eroceed from some other cause, and not from a cor- duce,;. Now, the sehject (or the consideration of the
.
i rupt mind : whether s ere: contusion or error might Court is not whether your Lordship Was properly
I 'rot have occurred, so :is to lead him to mistake one convicted or not? if that were the case your Lord-
Sunday for airedrer. New whet Mr. Justice Abbott ship ought to have made an applicetion fur a new
called an asset i ion, was a series of assertions, too nn- trial. gat the consideration for the Court is, what is
merous to be recenciled with the idea of a mete leis. to he the pawn", ot punishment for that ilffence of
i take. Davidson stated, that, on Sunday, February lk !rich you !retie been convicted—being bound to
I 14, the shy before the Stock Exchenge fraud, he take it for granted
,that you have been eddy egos
so.v De Berenger go out of his house, dressed in a rived. Wel are bound to take it for granted because
ereat coat similar to that produced on the trial.— it is the rule of the Corot—not settled by us who are
-
t •rhlt he was, at the time, standing before his win. sitting here, but established by the practice of ages.
i dose, watching the Asylum clock to strike eleven, This being the fact, how can it beer on your .case,
that he might go to prayers ; and seeing De Beren- whether the direction of a Learned Judge, in a dile
! e•er leave the house, he said—r" There goes a lodger, ferent case, (certainly arising cut of the same trait-
with a new greetocet on." This was the assertion section, but undoubtedly having nothing to do
for which he (L rd Cotenant) caused Davidson to with diet _which is before the Court), was correct or
be prosecuted ; for it app, ared. that, on Sunday the incorrect ? It cannot be a proper subject of conside-
-11:h of February, De 11:reoger was at Dover, at ten ration. I therefore think the Court owes it to itself
o'clock in the rroorieg, whilst Devideen positively to tell your Lordship that they wish the course of
swore that he was in London at eleven. But, said proceeding to be pursued no farther. I would have
I Mr. Justice AOhott, he fright beve mistaken that interfered sooner, but there was an intimation from
Sunday for son:: other Sureuay. This was, indeed. my brother Abbott, whose conduct was brought into
a most extraordinary supposition. Mr. Justice Abe consideration, that he was willing to let the matter
bott Lad a copy ef his Lordship's trial—and there it go on. But I think we owe it to ourselves, not to
was proved, teat the great coat so particularly sworn suffer the feeling of one person in the Court to ope•
to, by Davidson. was bought on Saturday, the 13th rate against an established rule. If we suffered
lot February. Mrs. Davidson was also 4 witness, and your Lordship to proceed with &relevant matter, how
supported the false evidence of her husband, as tar could we prevent tellers from doing the same? I
as it referred to the business of di at dey. Could they therefore state it as my opinion, as one of the Mem-
beth have mistaken that Suedey tor sonic other ? tiers of the Court. that that part al your Lori_
Mr. Justice Abbott made # most singular use of the ship's midges, about I)avidscn's case, is irrelevant,
two pens of this evidence. lie said, that, as two . and ought not to be proceeeed in."
out of three parts of the evidence was true, it wayless Lord COC:I3ANE-0 Livish to expl:ak my view of
likely that he should have made assertione which he this matter, l'elrea I eave Attended in this Court,
knew were false. Whereas, his haiieg stated the I which has not 'been very often, ' l have heard Gen-
teuth relative to many circumstance: which took I dollen (poes largely, from (carbide cases, before your
place on the 14th, sheaved that he had not nbi%taken •Lordships. I wish to pursue the same course. I
I the time. want to strew, that what was decided in my case pre-
,' Mr. Justice BAYLEY-66You are not doing that ceeded on very datieelit grounds from the law leid,
1 which is right or respectiul to the Court, when you down by Justice Abbott in the rase of DaVideon."
f endeavour to impeach the propriety of the summing ` Mr. Justice Hoettovo—.6 Your Lordship was so
up, in a case that has nothing to du with the present. proceeding when my brother Bayley stopped you,—
I put thi; to your consideration, at least; and, it Your Lordship was then stating the particular cito
, I necessary, I will interfere, should the ether Members cumstences of 'Davidton's case, and ettunining wise-
,of the Court con-cur uith me, in order to see that I the:, under those circumstances, he was tightly ac-
, that which ought trt to he done, shad not be dine." quitted or nut ? You have been making comments on
Here his Lordship consulted with Mr. Justice A eltere the conduct riot only ot the Learned Judge, but of the
and Mr. Juiteice Hoenoyo, and then s ii:, " Your different Counsel. Now, how can that: be relevant
Linefship nel exercise your own discretion on the on the present occasion, when your Lordship stands
, i subject acrdproceed." for judgment, for having escaped from the custody
A Lord CovatitaNr —64 I assure your Lordships, I 'of the King's Bench, where you were committed.
would not trespass on you with what is irrelevant— under jedgment of the Court,not connected with'', nr
but you wilt find, befote I conclude, that the matter escape, but in the trial leading to which, De iidsen
• Is relevato."
being
Some slight interruption i nere experienced by some relevancy to your case, it ought not to be pro-
-1 his Lerslship, he observed that he was sorry to find creded in:" . . .
1 that the Lean:L..l Gentlemen were so much troutsled Lord COCHEANE—" I hope. before 1 come to the
e ... ...

with coughs to-day.
His Lordship then proceeded with his defence.
One of hisleasons for piosecuting Davidson for per-
jury was, 'to shew the connection between his evi-
dence and the alibi set up for De Berenger, which
paved that the parties derived their instructions from
the same Source. Whree of De Berenger's alibi wit-,
nesses swam, Oat he- went out at eleven o'clock,
though he was then at Dover. Those three persons
all concur red exactly in two distinct falsehoods ; and,l
to shew that the servants did'ucit copy front the evi-i
dente of Davidson, it was only ne.cssary to refer to
the cross-examination of Mrs. Davidson by Mr: Palk,
'now Nit, Jusnce ?ark. S!ie stated that she did nut

end of my address, your Lordship will see that it is
all relevant to the case: As,l speak of the iojth ins
and injustice4Aive sustained, I hope I shall be suf-
fered to proceed."
Mr. Justice I have no apprehensions
of the result of any investigation into my judicial
conduct, on any occasion, since I hid the honour of
a seat on the Bench. Bat I am !word, sitting in
this place, to s,iy, that no investigation of a ease,
wholly unconnected %yip, and bearing. acirt.levancy
to, the charge belle the Court, or the ',tool on
which that charge was sustained, ought to be en-
tered into." •
Mr. Justice BAYLEY—" This being the opinion .nt

see 'De 13 crenger un the Suniay—yrt she was addres-
sed by Mr. Park with such cuesti.nis as shoved, that
he knew what evidence Mr. Davidson would give.—
De Berenger, in a recent publication, in which he
attempted to prove that his Lordship was a partici.
pator in the Stock Exchange fraud, stated that the
alibi witnesses, seven, in number, had mistaken the
day—and that all the facts :Worn to by them really
took place tin the Thursday, instead of the Sunday.
They were all, he declared, in a mistake as to the
preceding Sunday. Mr. Justice Abbott, with the
trial in his hand, could not be ignorant of the evi-
cience of Dr Berenner's servant. His ( Lord Coch-
rane's) Counsel, (KG Maricat) 4or reasons only
known to himself, made no remarks, when Davidson
was prosecuted for perjury, on the connection between
the evidence of the alibi witnesses and that of the
defendant, although 9-10ths of his brief was filled
with arguments drawn troth that coincidence ; but
Mr. Gurney, in his cross-examination, clearly dewed
the connection between the evidence of De 13erenger's
servants and that of Davidson.—" If (said Mr. (,ur-
ney) it eras a mistake in. Mr. Davidson, to suppose
that he saw De Berettger at skied o'clock ,na the
Smithy morning, it was a naiitake into *W4;1,4 cst,
De Ilaenger's sfrvants fell. for they esvotO Oey kir
him it ttee same hoar." ' Was not tbisi e*ough

the Court. your Lordship must forte-sr from ilato.;
ducigg the case of Dd vftison."
Lord CeCilfAllit.-•.." I should regret exceedingly to
take up your Lordships' time with irrelevant, matter,
but the trial lately on foot, and the verdict on which
you are to pronounce my sentence, arise from a VA.
tiety of acts; tied I must wish to call the attention -
trot the pubic to those facts which were concealed in
any way, or by any person whatever."
Mr. Justice A880TT..." No person can feel more
strongly than I do the right of your Lordship to be
heard, on topics that are relevant to your e; lent
this is not the place where matter is to be inir (Li ed,
not immediately connected with the business be re
the Court, for the purpose of exciting the. pu' 1 c
Lord CocHaatta—gi I am afraid, my Lords, it is
not. It is, my Lords, wholly impossible that this
statement—which I telt it incumbent on mit to
lay before your Lordships, previous to your pro.
nounalg tnat verdict (on which, in a great de-
gree, your Lordships appear to have made up your
minds)—can be of use to Me, unless I am pee. •
Witted to narrate the facts relative to amnion's case,
which, not Intowieg the conclusion I mean to draw,
you tell me is inadmissible.”. - •
Mr. Justice BAYLEY" It is quite clear, my Lord,