The Statesman.
London, England, 1820-06-05 00:00:00

PIRTNERSHIPS DIKSOLVED.

W. Mole, Worcester. and R. Lockett. I I ereford. common-
carriers—R. Alpe and H. Alpe, Swaffliam. Norfolk. mer-
chants—R. Atkinson. and I'. Atkinson, Sunderland near the
Sea, Durham, saddlers—R. Simpson and E. Nestleid. Sear-
borough, millers—R. and J. Newhouse, Huddersfield, York-
shire. plumbers—R. Mays sad T. Sampson. King's Lynn,
Norfolk, coaehmakers—C. Greases and T. Kemp. Hodder*.
tli Id. Yorkshire. printers and publishers of the Yorkshire
Casette—l'. Styring and T. Barlow. Sheffield, scismar-mane-
facturers—T. and G. Cartwright. and G. 0. Pogson, Not-
tingham. Isce manufactstrers,as far as rriste. to G. 0. Pug-
son—J. Trnsidder and K. Downing, Pettry it. oil and mustard
ntannfarturers—W. and J. Broadbent, of Bradford, 'York-
shire, cotton-spinners and manufacturers—T. and U. Lovell.
ted Lion-street, Holborn glass-cutters—J. and .1. Cook-
' wonky, Plymouth, chemists and druggists—W. Sutton and
ca-slake, New Sarum, coopers—J. Keet, nen. and E.
tee!, IF;irteuroutls, linen and woollen-drapers—A. Paton and
T. Uill, Ilishopagnte-street, hard-soap-manufacturers—R.
Sryatisanci R. Tronson, Liverpool. general and commission
merchants-- W. Underwood. J. Room. J. Room. jun. and J.
Webb, IlriNtk I, as far as regards J. Webb—J. James and J.
Tilreffatt. of Liverponi, thip-smiths—J. Lane and G. Ed-
wards. of Bristol, Spanish wool brokers—T. and B. Bedford.
of Mitcham. Nui•res, common brewers—ti. I). Balmer and
I). Lowndes. Liverpool. attorneys and solicitors—W.
Shortriihre, J. Todd, Jan.. C. Todd, I). Fraser, and A.
Pletcher. Glasgow —J. 11. Baverstoek and J. Levy. Alton,
Hunt.. bankers—R. Chi) and E. Roscoe. Liverpool. iron-
U facknisca--E,suld T. A. Drum, of Beratondse) -street.
tallow-chandlers anti !salters.
L.411' INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF-KINGI3 BENCH, Ji:Nt S.

',MICAS comma Pon

Mr. ITV( moved for a writ of habeas corpus, to
he directed to the Keeper of his Majesty's gaol at ll-
cheater, commanding him to bring up the body of
Henry Hunt, Ell4l. (now in his custody in execution of
the sentence of this l'ourt), in order that be might be
personally present to show cause against the rule now-
depending against Mr. Alderman Waldman, Mr. She-
riff Parkins, Mr. Hunt, and others, for an alleged in-
terrnption of the election of Lord Mayor iu November
last.

Mr. Justice BATLEY (the only Judge in Court).—
Von had better make this motion when the Court in
full. Hare you any in4tance in which a similar appli-
cation has been made in the ease of a defendant in
rs:ention of his sentence:

Mr. Cnorti.—There are instances in which a
prisoner in restudy has been brought up by habeas
corpus to give evidence in a cause.
Mr. Justice BAT [Av.—That is a very different thing;
but have yotiany instance of a prisoner being brought
up in a rave in which he may show cause by affidavit?
Mr. CIIIT rv.—Vour Lordship will observe, that the
rule in this ease calls upon Mr. Hunt to show callow
why a criminal information should nut be filed against
hint. and I apprrhend it is matter of right that a de-
fendant in • criminal case mpy be personally present
eve, to show cause if be choose. '
Mr. Justice HATL 0 ferring to his notes
and the officers on dm aide).—Vou will find au
application was ogee ' e, that a defendant in ens-
! tody might attend thi execution of a writ of inquiry,
he being of opinion that he assist to attend, but the
Conti would nut grant the apididadol).
Mr. ('utter.—in that casts the defendant was not
called upon to appear by any rule, but here Mr. Hunt
is called upon to appear in a criminal case; and be-
side. that was a civil proceedine.
Mr.,lll,:ice B tYLCV.-- Ile mode of .Itowinxe, eanse
is by affidavit, amid he is to show cause in that way.
it' von think you emu sustain the motion, you had bet-
ter mention it when the Court is full.

When the full Court came in, their Lordships pro-
creded on the new trial paper, upon which they were
occupied until three o'clock.' At that hone
The Sou c voa-tian BRA L was called upon, and stated
that he was in attendance to pray that the rule might
lw made absolute in the case of the King r. Parkins
and others, but as the day was now far advanced, pro.
bahly their Lordships would nut be disposed to enter
into the business; lie was, however, anxious, for the
convenience of all parties, that some day should be
fixed on which the case should come on peremptorily,
although it stood in the peremph ry paper. In the
ordinary course of business it would probably come on
in the course of Monday or Tuesday ; but he begged
to state, that on those days he shonld be engaged in a
very important case in the Conatem Pleas, which bad
been specially fiat(' for argument by the Chief Justice
of that Court on Slunday. If it suited the pleasure of
the Court, Thursday was likely to he a convenient day
fur all parties.

Mr. Carreh saisLhe should submit on general prin-
ciples that the defendant was entitled, as a matter a
right, in a criminal rase, to be present.
The CHIVI J;•st it e.—ls there any instance of the
kind on record ?

Mr. retyrry said, he was not aware of any case :n
which the Court had granted a habeas corpus and
the like circumstances, He would admit, that in t:.-
case of Mr. Richard tiaythorne Butt, an application
the same kind had been refused by another Court.
The Sotti-mou-tiariturtAL.--Thot person was is t::e
custody of th • MarshaL
Mr. CHisrr.-1 mention that as an instance, against
me, but I hope to distingtakk it from the present ewe.
The Soucrroa-threstam..—That was an applica-
tion movie for a habeas corpus in the Common Plea ,
on behalf of I.r. Butt, and the Court refused it.

.--I cite it against myself.
The Cotes drat tcs.—We will call upon you when
it routes to your turn. At the close of the day
Mr. (~,ivy renewed his motion, which he anted
was founded upon an affidavit of 3lr. Hunt, to the i t-
fect that he had attended the Court from day today i
every term since the rule Ishii for a criminal informa-
tion against himself and other defendant& hart becn
.01144114- IWO ie Apewing nose agninet it :
that he never intended to retain or employ Counsel ran
his behalf, and that he had not, in fact, retained or
employed Counsel for that purpose ; and that he wa
desirous of having an opportunity of showing cause in
person. On this affidavit the Learned Counsel sub-
mitted that he was entitled to the prayer of his appli-
cation. It was to be observed, that the prosecutors in
this case had not thought fit to proceed in the ordi-
nary way of indictment, but had selected a mode of
proceeding which called upon the parties to show cause
why a criminal information should not he filed trg.oiti•t.
them. '1 rue it was, that the defendant might file an%
davits, and probably the contents of such affirlavi.s
would be the t.ne I' •ts of what the party might b.-
permitted to urge in his defence; hot the elect of
those allidmits might materially depend upon the mod-.
nate knowledge of all the facts and bearings of the
case, whirb the defendant alone might possess. '1 he
personal attendance of the party in some cases was 4
sestially necessary, for the purpose of surgesting al -
gnomons and observations in defence which- could mily
come within his tin n knowlt.olge. Justice toward- a
party exposed to all the perils of a criminal prose.
lion, imperiously urged the pr.opriety of allowicr
personal attendance during a discussion of such im-
portance. Fur his (Mr. C.'s) own part, he shoulo!
extremely sorry to be called upon to enter into t
examination of sun h voluminous affidavits as must to.•
tiled in this case, because they would embrace mattes.:
of infinite importance to the interests of the partie.,
and more particularly to those of Mr. Hunt, who w...s
I peculiarly anxious to conduct his own case iu showing
i cause against the role. He was anxious to urge thoo-e
oolsseevations which occurred to him to be necessary t
his own joistifi •ation, and which would no doubt come
with inure effect from him than from any gentleniaa
of the bar, particularly when urged with that sor: of
ability and acuteness possessed by him, so mneh be-
yond the ordinary class of mankind. He (Mr. I.)
would submit, that though he found no precedent;
(and he ha.l sought fur them with industry) in which
a similar application had been granted, yet as nurse
were to be found in which it had tis•en refused, be trust-
ed the Court w odd not in this instance refuse it.

The Otter Jus rtes.—You find no instances in
which such an application his been made.
Mr. CMITT r resumed, and admitting the 01)%fria-
don of the Learned Judge to be true, yet, he t•ulfr-
mitted, that upon every principle of
justice the deft na-
ant was entitled to the writ now prayed. In all ci.• s
of misdenteanottr 'defendant bad a right to he present. .
A defendant might not choose to einploy Counsel : he
might nut have the mans of dohs:: so, and was he, in
his absence, to be subjected to the perils of arr mind
informat.on, without an opportunity o: showin_ cause
against it? If, indeed, the Codrt itself could With
propriety, in the administration of its justice, heroine
the advocate of the defendant, most undoubtedly Mr.
Hunt would be satisfied with thradvantages which he
must experience at the hands of their Liirttobipit
as that was not to be expected, he was anxioo. r..
sent bts own cafe to their consideration, Ly means ct
a personal attendance. The reasonableness of 1v.%
quest was obvious. He did not seek a plessnr.thie et-
cursion to London; he must still remain in the rustedy
of the gaoler ; all be sought was the opportunity vi

r'~'