The Statesman.
London, England, 1812-01-30 00:00:00

. . .
LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OFKlikirrs BENCH, JAN. 29.
THE LINO (ON THE PROSECUTION OF. TUB BISHOP Of
DERRY) vt. MANSELL PHILLIPS, ESQ. M. T.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved for the judgment
of the Court on Mansell r:dllips, Esq.
• The Defendant having appeared in Court, the
Criminal Information which he was r: ed with hav-
ing published, in a newspaper called the Ca.Orian,
A libel against the Bishop of Dmy, with the nature
of which our. Readers are already acquainted, and
on which information the Defendant had allowed
judgment to go against him by default, was read.
Mr. &viz( then addressed the Court on'the part
of the Defendant. He had it in charge from his
client to declare, that he felt the most sincere con-
viction in his own mind, that there was not the
shadow of truth for that calumny against the Right
Rev. Prelate, of which he had so indiscreetly sutler-
.ed himself to be the prop'sgator. From the first mo-
ment that he became sensible of the injustice he had
been made the means of rendering to the character of
this distinguished prelate, be had felt the most sin-
cere contrition for his offence, and had deeply de-
plored his own indiscretion on the part he had acted.
—ln communicating the intelligence, as it had come
to his hands, to the Proprietor of the Gccnbrian, he
Lad not intended that is should meet the public eye.
'When he observed, therefore, that it had been pub-
lished, he immediately wrote to him finding fault
with him on this account. Having himself no know-
ledge of the Right Rost. Prelate, lie rhade it his busi-
ness to obtain a letter of Jntroduction to him from
Lis • Solicitor, and inspired with a wish to make a
penonalacknowledgment to the Bishop, of his deep
sorrow for the oflence which he had so indiscreetly
committed, he went over ft Ireland. for the sake of
imploring forgiveness. He was so fortunate, how-
ever, as to ascertain on his arrival in the neighbour-
hood at the Right Rev. Prelate's residence, in Ire-
land, that he had set out for this country • so that
the Defendane.• journey to Ireland was rendered nu-
rititg. Asa gee•leman, the Defendant felt himself
on in duty, to -site cl-ery atonement in his
.power for the offence into which he had inji. Viciously .
fallen. This, he now wished, in tl,e most une-
quivocal terms, to do through Min (Mr. Bevan)
his Ceensel.- He vas also lesirous of an oppor-
tunity of waiting on the Right Rev. Prelate hi ::self.
that he might, to bim ..tetsciaalle, make an ac-
acknowledgement of his e, . or. The Defendant had of-
fered to the Bishop to pay the emits of the proceed-
ings, but these' he had refused to receive. The De-
fendant had in co, :cqueece, under "ie inipression
that the Right Revereud Prelate, though he might be
unwilling himself to • receive .any thing in the shape,
of a pecuniary consideration, blight not be disin-
clined to see it bensferred to some deserting chari-
tehltinstitution, had placid a considerable sum at
the disposal of the bishopoo be appropriated to
such charitable uses at he should chase. Under these
circumstances, the Learned Counsel hoped that the
Defendant should experience the lenient considera-
tion of the Court, in the judgment which they were
now called on to pass upon him.
The A.TroastzT-GENtest. said, he could net be
Ignorant that no inconsiderable effect had ber;n pro-
duced on the Court, by the address of his Learned
Friend, and also by the judicious line of conduct
which the Defeodaut had been advised to pursue
throughout. Little remained for him (the Attorney-
(".nieral) now to say, because every object which the
Right Rev. Prelate could be supposed, in the present
prosecution, to have in view, was already answered.
One word in explanation, however, he must be per-
mitted to say. The Bishop of Derry, with that li-
berality which belonged to him, seeing two young
men who were exerting themselves to carry on, in
the neighbourhood of his diocese, a manufacture
which promised, if succosful, to he higly butieficial to
the surrounding country. assisted them with the money
for this purpose. The undertaking failed; the Bishop,
in consequence, lost his money ; aud, on this cir-
cumstance, had some malevolent person raised the
report that the Bishop himself was engaged in mer-
cantile speculations. After what had bean done by
the Defendant, the Bishop felt he could ask no
more. lie had only to declare as to the sum, so'
properly placed by the Defendant at the Right Re-
verend
-Prelate's disposal, his Lordship had resolved
that no part of it shOuld be disposed of in that coun-
try to which he more particularly belonged, so as to
seem to dispense with act' of his accustomed chari-
ties in that country. 'l he Right Reverend. Prelate
wished that the sum in question should go to a cha-
rity in this couutry—that it should go to the Society
of the Sons of the Clergy.
Lord Etr.Ettneurwan srtid,in these circumstances,
the proper tours' would be, to take be Defendant's
own recognizance to appear to *salve the clidgiserit
of the Court when called on, and for his good behi-
viour.
The Defendant was accordingly discitairged, on
giving his own recognizance to the above effect, to
the exteut of 5001. •

TOE KING) ON TOE PROSECUTION OF FLLINGTON, V.

THE JUSTICES OF SUFFOLK.

A Mandamus had been applied for in this ease,
calling on the Justices of Suffolk to admit the Pro-
anutor, who claimed to be the Preacher or Teacher
of a Dissenting Meeting of upwards of 100 persons,
to take the oaths required by law to be taken by
bim, in order to qualify him as such Preacher or
Teacher.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL and Mr. DA MPI ER
Sheaved cause against the rule. All the Justices re.
quired at the Sessions was, that the Prosecutor
should produce a gertificate that he was the Preacher
or Teacher to the particular congregation in respect
•f which he claimed to be allowed,to qualify. The
Justices had laid it down as a rule, and one which,
they submitted, was far from being' unreasonable,
that such certificate should be produced by every
person without distinction, who came before them
pith such a claim. Nothing could be.easier than for
a person who stood io this relation to any congre-
gation, to produce a certificate by some member of
his congregation that this was the fact. This was a
general rule, which, having adopted, the Justices
could not depart from, satisfied, as they were, that
it was for the advantage of the Dissenters them-
selves, and that the most exceptious person could
sot object to this as a reasonable general rule.—,