The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-04-22 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S. BHNCH.—Witivattrtirrsa,
MONDAY.
ram—
•'' !' • V TUC YIN 6 V. T. BIGNOLD, SEN.
• • TM* was an indictment for wilful sod corrupt perjtity,
Alleged to have been committed in an answer to a bill
flerfin Chandery by the defendant, upon which a verdict
of Geilty was found by the Jury;
.• The short statement of the rue, as presented on the
trial, is as follows :—A company of gentlemen formed a
Boril'V, called the " Norwich Union Fire and Life As-
surance Company," among whom was the defendant,
who was allowed a per-tentage upon all the premiums
received by him. A diTute arose between the members
• of the Company, and a bill was filed in Chancery by the '
holders of shares, praying for an inquisition to prevent
the defendant fro.n receiving anymore subscriptions, and
also to give au account of the money received by him.
The defendant put in his answer, upon which the allega-
tion of perjury was assigned. A passage in the bill
stated that the defendant had agreed within the period of
• three years to advance the sum of 10,0001. to answer the
immediate demand of the Association, which sum was to
be invested in the name of the trustees. In his answer
to this, he swore be never made any such agreement, and
if the original document contained any such clause, it
was different from the draught which bad been shown to
him as an exact copy.
The SOLICITORAiENERAL moved for a rule to show
cynic why a new trial should not be' granted, on the
ground that the allegation in the defendant's answer,
.updn which the assignment of perjury was founded, was
rot material to the relief sought by the bill. The de-
fendant's affidavit stated, that the draught was in an at-
turnev'i hands, and that the defendant bad been pre-
vented calling him as a witness on the trial, since be
feared he would not produce the documents, as the de-
fendant was indebted to him a considerable stun of mo-
ney. Prom the affidavit of the defendant's wife, it was
stated, that this attorney told her if be had been called
as a witness on the trial, he could have completely ex-
calpsted him from the accusation preferred agt.inst him.
• The LORD CUM, JIATICIC thought, that the point of
law urns in favour of the rule sought, and that the Soli-
- citor-tietteral might either have a rule nisi, or move in
arrest of judgment.
Kole Nisi granted.
TUC KING V. WARDLI.
Mr. P Vali moved for a rule to show cause why the de-
ferulant, against whom a coroner's inquest had found a
. verdict of manslaughter, should nut be admitted to bail
in the county of Lancaster. He was the driver of a
stage-coach, which had been overset, and one of the pas-
sengers killed ; and this verdict had been found against
him, but his had not been yet arrested. The learned
Counsel urged, that under the circumstances of the case
no blame attached to the coachman.
The Cover, however, expressed their reluctance to
grant a favour in a case of this kind, lest they should
encourage practices by which the lives of his Majesty's
subjects were often placed in evident peril ; and refused
tbe rule.
The Lone Coin, JUSTICZ left the Court before two
o'chn•k, to attend the levee, and the other Judges rose at
hslfpast two.

COURT OF COMMON PLhAS.—MONDAY, Aram 21.
(he Banco.)
SHERWIN r. 8)11711.
This action, which was brought to recover the amount
of an apothecary's hill, was tried at the las assizes of
York, before Mr. Justice BATLEY, and a verdict given for
V'e plaintiff.
Mr. Sergeant PELL now moved for a role to show
cause why the verdict should not be set aside, and a new
trial granted. TLe question fer the decision of th'e
Conrt wae, whether, it being required by the statute of
54 Geo. 111., regulating the certificates to be granted by
the Court of Examiners of the College of Physicians,
tltat the person applying for a certificate shall produce
sufficient testimonials of having received a medical edu-
cation, of being a person of moral character, and of bar-
hag. served an apprenticeship to the profession, the pro-
ductiOn of such certificate of the Court of Examiners
was or. was not sufficient evidence of the necessary.ap.
prenticeship having been served?
The COURT was of opinion that it was ; and refused to
grant the rule.
Their Lordships rose at one o'clock, for the purpose of
Wending his Majesty's levee.

PREROGATIVE COURT, Aram 21.
The Court was occupied during the greater part of the
time it this day sat, with the consideration of certain
mal-practices alleged against Mr. William Gearing Clark-
son, one of its Proctors; and which resolved themselves
into an extortion of higher fees than were warrantable
by custom, and a diversion of business from the bands
of others into his own office. Upon this conduct, as in-
consistent with the rules laid down for the government
of Its officers, the judgment of the Coort was prayed.
Dr. Lusursoyox was heard this morning iu extenua-
tion,and remarked that, in one of the cases urged against
his client, that of extortion in taking out an admitustra-
tion,sno precise sum was appointed or affixed in the table
o! fees ; and as it was impossible to appreciate exactly
the quantity or value of the labour performed in a proc-
tor's office, so it was easy to suppose that a person might
be led into error in di termining his amount of charge
tinder circumstances like these. But there were one or
two additional facts to which he was desirous of drawing
the attention u! the Court. By the affidavitss irappeared
that Mr. Clarkson Lad sought for informatioo upn the
subject; and though lie bad inquired sufficiently, or
son.glit for it in the best quarter, yet be was informed by
at. sndividu rl, that the rate of charge was that which be
had adopted. This individual, whose name he was of
course not at liberty to mention, was, however, one of
respctability. It was not surprising that Mr. Clarkson
should yield to his instructions, though it was mstier'of
re,..tret that be had not carried his inquiries a little fur-
ther. . •
Sir J. NICHOL asked whether it Was the first time that.
Mr. Clarkson had‘ever made out a bill de bonis non?
Dr. LusinNovort resumed, and said lie certainly had
stood in mind of some sneak direction, and it would be
remembered that the established fees were liable to vary
witti the variations in the stamp duties. Now, if the in-
terests of the public, or character of the profession,
should render it necessary for that Clink to mark its dis-
approbation". and to visit'M r. Clarkson with its censure,
lie trusted this Circumstance would be allowed its full
weight in estimating the degree to which it should he
extended. By the 135th canon it was prescribed that,
Rat any offence of this kind, by an officer of the Court,
he should be subject to a suspension of six anontlis. He
made this reference not' to limit or fkter the judgment
which that ('onrt might now feel itself bound to pro-
nounce, but to show what was the view when of such
practices in times gone by. Since the alteration in 1315
there bad been 'no public tables of fees, or authentic
charges, which could have served fur the guidance of
his client.
Sir Jour; Ntcnot observed that in 1615 there had
teilisoinechenge in the stamp duties, and, to accommo-
date them td the feei, a new table had been constructed ;
fad this, though not bust np in public, was accessible
to every pracirlioser die Registrar's Office..
• DT, latlOlClatoToir then alluded to another bead of
templaints.tbat, he said, was (01104110 on a ease in which
Sib Caere was pleased to eontiserw*Client in cost., and
*Ma ought amt %Weston' ti be Mind on the present
Occasion.
Nit Swot. said he 'Wild not suffer that case to
prejudice his mind, bat a reference 10 it was natural anal