The Statesman.
London, England, 1824-01-27 00:00:00

771 P. r

ABUSE. OF M :AUTHORITY.

kChairman of the. li
Town or Ziolji.erfnelti" 6r
'tit.
TmOnazi:tßrag:SlTND, ESIi: , 4c; ,i ,
I
Sne-LThere are some most disgraceful rnments In
'-.•t• ,
culation, relative to a recent transaction in this *county:l ir;
which yourself,and the magistracy its pmeriteare isill to be
nf!D'oisi:twkratbaer.dttl:ni:figreart'epioceediftiejaanx::lltetiiitinkibeveirfe4nirifire I.7whivltnanhst.
should
ao preventingimplicated.
authority h
toAe libealnbacutnhs
protecte onsf9
the t.3i
from the tyranny of tneaner minions of the lea. &Oaf-
though it has pleased his Majesty's Ministeie ihigaieral,
and es good Lord Eldon in particular to eretsiab name
from a cominiesio aof the peace, I still, hold a• tank' end
situat in the county, which not only authorises' me •to
interfe4 in cases that seem to bear the 'stalest; Of oppret-
sioa, hat which Imperiously can upon me to do so in bebtlf
ista. • .
*Shy less f testate fellow-countrymen.
' 1 refett • the liberty of asking you a few wa-
ddles, serail theAmisell Mr: hates Flint :—and L
ellen expect that you will answer • them lie: beihnieara Ilia•
-gistrate,*l legigator, awd-a man. `-4/41,*titto -rousewhat
late in putting these qeestietti, you will-attribute to my ix-
Pectation'that you would hive telt it necessary to put forth
a declaration of your coninet, as it had been represcteed by
the public press' ; for I could not suppose a man, with the
obligations of senatorial and neteist-riol responsibility tee.
on his shoulders, would have suffered such representations
to remain an hour UIICAMiI dieted, if they were not trua—
nts was my opinion. And if there was ao explanation
due to the public, sere!), your own constituents, these
who n you affect to represent, lia•I a right to an expla-
nation at your bands. Bat since I have area nothing
in the shape of defence, I am indeeed to come forward,
and enquire into the facts, that you may not shelter your-
self under the pretence that it is nut your duty to reply to
iodelinite reports.
It is sail, that you, as Chairm in of the Sessions, with
the concurrence of the rest of the tutgistr Icy present, hate
sentenced a respectahle professional gentleman to three
months hard labour at the tread-mill; who had committed
no other offence, than that of demanding from a constable
a sight of the authority upon which he had arrested a 'lien,.
I could not have believed this possible. When I read it,
I thought the Journalist was giving an imaginary ease ;
and when I was compelled to believe there was some truth
in it, I felt as indignantly as I have often done in pursuing
gross instances of perversion of the law to an instrument
of private vengeance in foreign countries. I looked most
carefully over the reported evidence against Mr. Flint ;
and I found none to warrant the conviction. I knew,
however, of what materials a sessions' jury was competed.
and I did not wonder that they shotila look rather to tho
summing up of the chairman than to the evidence of the
witnesses. But I did hope that, on the bench, there would.
have been discrimination and honour enough. to have
made an accurate distinction in the case of Mr. Flint, who
was present in hie professional character, and who had an
unJoubted right to act as lie (Ed act, whatever custom may
have determined the legal courtesy to he.
1 shall not enter into any detail of the evidence; but
had I been a Magistrate. I should have felt it my duty'to
have told the Jury, that there was no proof of riot against
• any of the piisoners ; and that there was 'violence to
prove. that Mr. Charts Flint, instead of being riotous.
had actually endeavoured to repress the noise, which was
tortured into riot. + Itshoolsiohave told the Jury, that it
was not a licentious use of the tongue, tzar a trilling inde-
corum of manners, that t•onstituted a riot in England.
We have grown nonderous delicate of kee.W hen arespect-
able man, whether knave or /'owl, would swear that be is
alarmed at the conduct of the multitude,the authorities ex-
claimed, "A RIOT, A RIOT" an I away with them to ptison!'
Mr. Grattage gave yore Sir, a very proper answer to your
question, as to whether he was " disturbed in his own
house by the noise." Ile told you he was disturbed, but
not alarmed; and it does notaopear that ane forth r .viszitief
Was done, or complained of, than keeping Cliarlea Clarke,
Esq. out of his bed an hour lamer than usual.
Yet you, Sir, in your saturnine up of the evidence, are
made to say, Coat " it was scarcely possible to conceive a
" more outrageous breach of the peace ;" and, in snpport
of this, you refer to Mr. Cuarles Clarke's evidence, calling
him " a gentleman of fortune t:o ways connected with the
parties." Now, whit was his evidence? He would not
go to bed at ten o'clock, his usual hour, bemuse there
was a noise! Why did he not point out also to the Jury.
the decloretion of Mr. Grattage, who said, that altho ugh
there was a noise, it did not alarm him? Did you
hind the restlessness of Mr. Clarke a better prop to a laine
cause?
I would also ask, why viii concurred in the opinion
laid down by the Cutinsel. that " the dispute between
Cook an I Jo ruing!tant should he put out of the anes•ion?"
You must have known that this could not have been cor-
rect, if you afterwards made use of the lase:nye* set down
for you, viz. :—that you, (the Magistrates) " hi I consi-
dered the case, first, " with reference to the d ify which.
"you owed to the defendants;—secondly,to the wily which
" you owed to the public ; thirdly. with reference to tee
" duty which you owed to Sir O. ;lerningliam, the prose-
" cams.; and lastly, with reference to the duty whicia
" you owed to yourselves." A pliiertion might lcive thought
the duty you owed to the public, included all the fluty
which was required to be performed; and it is difficult to
assign the particulars of your other dunes to any credits
able beating on the case.
Your duty to the prosecutor, to the defendants, awl
yourselves, was to administer strict justice between the
parties. Was it, then, justice to order the moat degrading
punishment that the law awards tothe vilest felon, to be
inflicted upon a professional gentleman; one who may
hereafter rank even alarm the present, all powerful Alegi-
striae, whe bas dared to indict this insult upon his feel-
ings, for an alleged offence, which it fu Ily proved, out
ten times as aggravated, has been hitherto considered by
the law es sufficiently atoned for by imprisonment and
fine, without the addition of mental and, bodily torture?
Your duty .to Sir George Jerniugeam, evidently eon-
- eisted'in putting his opponents into custody; but what
ire., duty was it that the Magistracy,owed to itself? Are
you. Sir, or atm of your colleagues, kolders of any portion
of the ancient barony of Stafford. now claimed by " the
Cooks?" Did. yOtt begin to feat for the " consequences"
of such proceedings towards "yourselves" and .1 others
having landef"—poiots you am reptile' as Isivioye pressed
very earnestly *win .tbe Jury. after, 44viot. oar& Mat the
tame of the alleged riot was to ble,kept, eittirely oat of
wiew•? ,
.l would farther ask you for. tbe. teeters •which yowrself
and , your .00lleagueta had for, passitag.thkgkeeseximtence
upon Mr..Flint,,as• spat the others..stbss,rtevaiss. are
wade to state. this you *Slotted igurerat ciriferetter
eat of
sailigallionie . his easet"oooebre .yen ethlit rent . Ras
there " on, liminess." and 4., Slit 110k#0,ne egkrtneli 0 aid
in the riots?" :Nest had seed they/ea/able 01,4bc troapuss
ant to the Jany I :sittl.youlled therathailed..dbot .11)Cebelle

-• • _ •
.11011 Utilit rnie...44... mak —• . and the roilo la b..
f abed Jam, a amiable. situp tbat Mr. rnal.
quiet, and not to and a aoLos4