The Statesman.
London, England, 1818-01-13 00:00:00

•-• liTiiiiiiinit ' oreCCE,lieso—sa
stll7,.ie—m. ay- fairly hair .
against Mr.ll4gllsfej; and givellim a discharge. We?
write this ofe.puiprliirthat. your. err wrr also should
be is ithoot iireitidicei but for certain intim:tent iei.
semi .it is neceissry that
.we StiOUld hate on immediate
' answer." ThialetitarlwasOni coignionicated by Mr.
Caste to the i'liiiitif ward long ifteiiards. The
final rovetiog oat 011 tho 7th
.o.lDeceitiber; lasi wn
that day a Mr. M‘Duff, an attorney, was present it
- Guildhall vilien Mi.Collina prodUceda list of perA
seise to whom the bankrupt admitted,itimself indebt-
• id : among them Mr. M• Duff did not see the name.
ef the Plaintiff, slid expressed his sorPrise, as he
• . knew that the claim of Mr. Beveridge exceeded 5,0001.
aa' When he risked Mr. Collins if he mesutart say thel
, ' the Plaintiff was no creditor. the answer was,
P' " Oh, yes ! put him down 5001.7 But for this *M.'
le deist the name of the Plaintiff would have been entirely '
410 r i•• omitted. Mr. *Duff .was then infoimed, to his
1,14 , 'astonishment, that an indictment for perjury against
M.•! 3.)1r. ' Beveridge was in canitimplaticin ; and •be was
tej% 'iirequested to ;ail. upon Collie-F..on the evening, when
- ed l'il'e shnu4l he shown the letter written to Coote, and
v,is 'the deposition on which the criminal proceeding was
. .' ' to fle grounded. -Ile went aceo, gly to the office
It
r•• of• Mr. Collins, when he was... d, thit to save
*.i l'enxiety and esperice to the Pleinfilf, the indictment
.11TM Would be dropped if lie would eccept a fixed sum of
*II' J.eattney, in lieu of his claim. Ikes..the forms of jut-
'''' tqNice were employed to exaort from Mr. Beveridge a
consent to betray his interests and his credit. Mr.
; • bl/Duff agreed to mention the matter to the Plaintiff,
~'a" who rejected the offer with proud disdain, not con-
" 'descending to make any reply to. an Offer so dero-
gatory. This bill was presented to the Grand Jury
in consequence in January, about 13 months after
• the date on which the perjury was alleged to have
u•'• been committed ; and only a few days afterwards
Mes. Beveridge, at that time confine& in childberi,
received the following arronyindus letter, which
would be proved in tl.e hanclwriting of the Defend-
ant, Charles Pughsley :
" ..
Thur.dny Evening, ?54 January, 1817.
" I do'nt know whether you are aware that your
Imbued is indicted at the Old Bailey for perjury,
and the Grand Jury havinglound a true till against
him last Saturdav, and I fear that the circumstances
are so clear, aura the esidenee so strong, there is but
--.:. little chance of his escaping a conviction, and that is
transportation. I think It a pity that Mr. B. did not
attend to the first intimation he had of such a proce-
dure.: he must be well aware thst the parties will
. carry every thing they may have egainst him to the'
greatest extremity. I was • told' the other day the
, parties did not intend to stop there.; should he
escape punishment in this Instance, I, hear they have
stinting- pull against him that will materially affect
his pocket, &c. You can make what-use of thii in-
formation you think fit.—Frin a welt.wisher of
. _yours, whci'subscrihes hiMself StL:."
This intimation obviously referred to the letterlo
r 'Mr. Coote, and it displayed a system of iniquity and
.malice seldom exceeded in a Court of Justice. With
. ; eespect to the connection of Hardy, the Learned
. 'ter r Counsel was in a condition to prove repeated (led'.
. • retions which showed that he partook of the spirit of
the rest, anal was an active and zealous abettor of
their crime. This was not all ;the Defendants
.1)2(11
• ...,oefitted upon their malice. Afters in vain using this I
' prosecution as a threat, they wort obliged at length
▪ to bring it into Court, and here they displayed great
ingenuity ; for, bele* IV al ' assured that they could
soot convict the Plaintiff of wilful and 'corrupt per.
jury, or even of mistake, they took care to keep
4-their witnesses out of the way; and as soou as the
, Counsel for the Crown had concluded an ezaggerated
• statement (warranted by his instruction.), they pre,
tended to have been taken by surprise, and consented
to a verdict of not guilty for want of evidence; thus
4. laving the stigma' of accusation upon the Plaintiff
-'.without affording him an opportunity of cotiviricing a
coJiiry of his wen innocence and their guilt. For this
Itijury he.now sought damages at the hands of twelve
honourable men, who knew the value of a good
• name, and were consequently able to estimate not
merely the loss, but the deep sofferings of the Plain-
- tiff. Weaver had not been included in this action,
keorder that the other side might not be in a conch-
.; lion to say that the Plaintiff had deprived_ them of
every witness who could establish their exculpation.
• Let the other side call Weaver, and it would only
further establish the malignity and iniquity of their
proceedings.
The Learned Counsel then proceeded 'to adduce
' his evidence : it is inipossible to enter into the de.
tail;. it will be perhaps sufficient to say, that the *R-
enate-generally supported his statement. There
- were; however, some deficiencies, end h 'seemed clear
.that-hli. Collins had esprestied his Wish to hi• Duff,
Mit, the Pleifitiff*nuld endeavour to eaplein the mail.
.wer in Which he had meae"the•gath to which *seep-
•eilen was taken. Could he shit* that he had sworn
tender mistske, he proniiiikt Vt. presecutiou
-.should be dropped.. A doubt t Jaw a upon the
. .
point whether he•hidor:liiid got n elided to otrPF to
the Pleb/tiff it ineCifie sum and 4) dri.p the Indict.
ment on `Condition titiehe'sto4a,bee4on the claim
~
upon the estate of C. Pugli;ley..'' - ,u.i. - •
• The rlain t ill's case; ben' Cleiilnir.,.. bili.: Tont sr ci,
for the Defetidents, ccrolga' Jed tlrkuo :evidence had
been brought forwardigaialfTtit filtfihaley. . ,
7.. Lord Et.i.teaottotilieltii o ti4ijeteinit, a ver-
dict of acquittal wicente/ *Oh isfipalKin him.
Mr. Toertivo,lo his ea. re.',o tediii,lttry for the
other Defendants, speVit the"iireneitigh.eheracter
the Defendant, Mr. Ce,lliiittliiiit siiefeitieclifp,e thirty
years in the profesair ; ,Ite. id,iested„tliat Au, was
se evidence to warrani,e sutpicoiethrille hid urged.
tint proseeution,fromitapirqier. menves,; and; hear.
glee! that the terme'ot his.letteraci Mr. Conte did nett.
• warrant the:orced construction put upeothem. gr..
Collins had, in troth, go concern in thejgdictrueitt ;
her refused to proceed in it, sod Cherie! ,Pvielaeley ,
outplayed; another Attorney for the perpese... With
etiapect to Charles gegliley, he. stihmitted,.that • RowL
thief- ball been -established i but. the le'ttert to Mrs.
ilwirwOdiA AMA" showed a4t thing like a' matiguagt
. spirit r, '
of hostllitk.,:; lie Witay .
he ahle,to pert4ocs,tilie
4101 that It was noilias band-writing, sod. that' he
Was . nor connected
.itlith it,;„ . A.verdict iigeiriet.the
DefenthigAs.Coild nGt 'tie ,warraiiitrilloefeas.,il were
etivioes, not only that tniliCe.had luffenCe4 the par-
ties prosecntigg, bit that:thelitectieent was prefer
*td „witheot any reasousble or prehable eause...ribroli

,:_' ~~ _