The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-06-19 00:00:00

•

TILL KING V. COLLINS AND OTHSIS.
The ru'e for a new trial, obtained by Thos. Collins,
Eng., and Simnel Mills, R.q., the Magistrates who
were convicted wl,h the late Sir Nathaniel Conant, for
corruptly withholding the License of a publican came
On for
• • The.

I.llfr

INTELLIGENCE.

COURT, TUESDAY, Jurn 18.

DOWN G.WOOD AND OTHttt. -
ID this Me Mr. KIDIDOTTOM, on the part of the
defendants Matthew Wood, Philip Western Wood,
and Benjamin Wood, moved that several snits against
the defendants should he dismissed, stating that the
parties had arranged all mature of dispute amongst
themselves; to which Mr. KNIGHT on the part of the
plaintiffs, consented, and it was orJered according,/

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Jugs 18.

•

JUSTICIL stated the substance of
.alch contained counts charging the
.4 a coaspirary to refuse the license in
A, eler.to favimr the house of Meng and
so a count oohing the
aim omitting the particular
if *sax and Co.. bet Olefin,.
eel to grant the liernse.—He
s_ and observed. that its whole
Aionar-A.
be_partiesiar rawly, omitted in
my the pry, negativing that me-
silty. oat this *swat ahem
111"411111111141 e promentioa. showed /*seri
'AI eppeared. he said, for this poo,
• , . reflected es the situations in
held, on the characters which
,
110.41...a."4.;e• yweseoMor
tett and on their families. who
re-*, '1.4„
e imputations east on them;
- • decline the task if a eenee.l4
•
pa' lie sty did pot urge him to, perform it. If the
whole of their condoet was snrveyed. even with a fa
wearable eye, It must appear to have been unfortunate;
and erten tbry reflected that an individual had, by their
Segligesee or want of attention, been greatly oppress-
• 1, they could not be entirely without some stings of
• rem**. The Court would perceive that from the
- very nature of the eau, from the privileges attached
to the office of Magistrate, none but circumstantial
evidence could be given of the *Rimers of a corrupt
motive In their minds. The prosecutor was in
this extraordinary difficulty, that be was to show
the real character of acts, respecting which no din
closure was made, which were accompanied by no expla•
nation, and (myeloid§ the Magistrates were not bound
to assign reasons. Surely, under those disadvantages,
- .
Werra a prfautfiwie case of suspicion was made Oct
' It imperiously called for an answer—an answer such
as the Solicitor-General professed his ability to give.
•
full. satisfactory, and complete." His learned friend
tad declared that he should call witnesses, who would
satisfy all mankind of the perfect integrity of his
extents. and would leave no part of the conduct even
Ik6:4\\: In doubt ; has bad be at all fulfilled Lis promise ?
bone witnesses. indeed. he did call;. bat Ma *sly
made his omission to call others the more sa.pieleos
' What ! in a case like ibis, where no shade of impels
tion was to be left on the character of the defendants.
was the very witness with whom a suspicions conver-
sation was sworn to be held at the time of refusing
the license, to be withheld ? Why was not Lucas, the
clerk of Men% and Co., called to ezplain what really
passed and to place the defendants on this point above
su•picica! Why were not these two Magistrates. who
were deputed to visit the premises, of Mr. Meek.
and to report to their fellows, called to prove the
condition of those premises, and their own re-
port of them ? But those Magistrates who inspected
the house, voted in favour of the license, which those
who deputed them, ref.tecd to the publican's ruin.
What were the naked e:reumstances of the ease? A
publican, who kept the oldest and one of the most re-
spectable houses in the neighbourhood. has his license
suspended, after transferring MS custom from the
house of Men: and Co. to another. The Magistrates
who inspected his premises voted for its renewal, but
it was withheld. He applied again and again. with a
petition signed by the parish-officers of his parish, and
by every inhabitant of the street in which he resided.
lie received the strongest testimonials of his character
and the conduct of his house: but his petition was %I-
ways rejected. Was this the measure of justice dealt
to others ? Another house, more open to the com-
plaints made against him than his own, was licensed
stain the neat year, its owner continuing to deal with
Meet and Co., to whose beer be had formerly objected.
The jury, no doubt, felt that the case of Mr. Meek was
one of great hardship; aid that be bad sustained Un-
merited injury from the conduct of the Magistrates ;
and, Owego they would not say that the corrupt de-
sign to favour Menz and Co. was satisfactorily proved,
they probably thought that a generally corrupt motive
might be inferred from the circumstances Qs' the ease,
and they bad said so by their verdict.
The LORD Cuter dna rice said. that as the ease was
one of great importance, and Mr. Justice Its-LIT
was obliged to leave the Court to sit at Chambers, it
would be better to adjourn the further arguments on
the rule.
:x-PARTS
Mr. Evans moved for a rule calling on the keeper
of Dorchester Gaol to show cause why Jane Carlile
and Mary Ann Carlile, prisoners in his custody, un-
der sentence of the Court, should not have the same
privileges as ere enjoyed by the felons in the same
prison. He made this• application on an affidavit
which stated that they were closely confined fur 22
boors of the 24, during which short interval only
'they were suffered to take air and esereise—a severity
not contemplated by the sentence of the Cowl. ander
which their health was materially sambas., and for
which no reason whatever bad been given.
The LORD CUM JUSTICE cup d a &tat whe-
ther the Court had power to interfere in the marmot
requested. If the gaoler car guilty of any excess of
dor-ince, he was liable to be indicted.
Mr. Evans observed, that it was sworn that Om"
females were treated in a different manner frees the
other prisoners.
111% JUSTICE HOLROTD replied, that this might
possibir be very proper, if any particular line of con-
duct was adopted on the part of the prisoners. B.
did not think the Court could interfere.
The LORD COM JUSTICR asked Mr. Evans if he
was aware of any authority to show that the Court

, .