The Statesman.
London, England, 1820-11-27 00:00:00

THE NINO C. DAVISON.

It will be recollected that the defendant in this case
was found guilty before Mr. Justice Beer, at Guild-
hall, of the publication of a libel on the Christian
religion, and that he had since obtained a rule to %hew
cause shy a view trial should not be granted, on the
grounds that he had been, prevented making a defence
at this trial, by the Learned Judge having fined him
Perna' times during his address to the Jury, and that
he had thus deterred him from stating those arguments
which eight have had weight with the Jury in the
verdict they were about to deliver.
lie. 6tramay now shrived cause against the rule,
and denied that the course adopted by the Learned
Judge had produced the effect on the defendant which
h.: stated ; and that his Lordship's ditty called on him
t.► act as he bad done, is defence of that dignity and
Fower with which he was invested, not for himself, but
fur time benefit of the public. Mr. Gurney then pro-
ceeded to detail the circumstances of the trial, anti
observed, that so► far from the defendant's nerves
iwing affected, or he being intimidated he proceeded
f:r (j►ree-quarters of an boor after the last fine, to
address the Jury in a strain which, if the Learned
Judge.was to be blamed at all, it was that he did not
again interpose, and prevent the ears of the audience
biting shocked by such tenets as composed that ad-
dress. lie concluded by strongly urging that no
grounds had been laid, on which the Court could grant
a yew trial.

Mr. Corinne, in support of the rule, then addressed
the Court. and repeated his former arguments as to
etkoduct of the Judge during the trial, and the
erect which it had on Davison's defence.
The Citegr JUsTiCa said, if be could entertain the
most distant apprehension that the opinion he was
about to deliver would operate to restrain any indivi-
deal hereafter in making a lee-al defence. he would
long facilitate before he would deliver it ; hut he had
no such apprehension. He was ready to allow this
was a noolt•isiportant jaastion: it was nu Ices than,
whether the law should in future be administered at
all in our Cows. it was the duty of a Judge to
p es •rve the order and regularity of proceedings in
tors where they presided; and the power of lining
.as use of the means be possessed of so doing. It
was a power which indeed, should be exercised with
Vie greatest caution, bet if any at ail would justify
its aexertion, it was one like the present, in which a
WWI charged with irreligion had attempted to de-
feat! ',kneel( by uttering sentiments still more
gious; and be was uncle,: the necessity of saying, that
if a nwn accused of blasphemy attempted to defend
burled( by uttering siker blasphemies, it became the
slaty of a Judge to stop- him, even in his defence.
'no Learned Judge observed, his own conduct had
hem adverted to; he bad reflected much un the sub-
jett,.to which the Learned Counsel alluded. At the
time he had doubts as to leis conduct, and he was now
cessineed be was wrong.. cm that occasion; but he
ves..n.illing at the time rather to err on the side of in-
elisfgence that on that of severity. With respect to
tips inns in the present instance, he must deny that
dirsaperior Court had power to judge of their pre-
iniete, bat as so much had been said on the subject,
Me'must now deelare his opinion that they were must
properly inaposed, As to tbc'rule applied for, he was
eleariy of opiniob there ought to be no neer trial,
ands therefore. that the rule Arnold be discharged.—
be rrst of the Court agreeing in this opinion the
rude fur a new trial was discharged; acd it was or-