The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1812-05-05

S7e-=..ef-.-----.
eng to adjournment, TIE Jury nnt. the CHI
Justice attending, 10 give aud to receive, the
verdict But the king ot Spain beng three
times called, and no one answering in his be-
half, after the suoioined protest had been
reed. the plaintiff was nonsui,ed.
1t Is not in ourpower tn exhibit even an
Outline in this singular case, as it appeared
ON either side, nor Of the speeches ot counsel.
Though Ferdinand the Vii was not named
In the record, the action was prosecuted for
his use. The defence asserted the fact
OF the duties having been regularly accounted
Tor with the persons to whom the defendant
pleaded he was alone accountable s,id de-
led moreover that the plaintiff, Ferdinand
the VII had any right to sue.
a great deal CT evidence was given on
both sides, as to the actual situation of Spain,
alternately asserting and denying the royal
pretensions OF, Ferdinand the VII and of j.
seph Napoleon. The principles of the Spa
u!sh constitutions; the rights of roy al success
sion, abdication and conquest /; the famous
conferences at Bay0nne, between Napoleon,
Ferdinand the VII, and Charles the Nv !;
with the most Interesting scenes latterly per-
formed in Spain were brought into discus
sion.
His .excellency the Chevalier D'Onis,
Eavoy Extraordinary and Minister Plcni-
potshtiary from Spain to the United States
csAmerica, though not recognized in that
capacity by the American government, af-
ter protesting in form against the jurisdicti-
OIL of the court to compel his attendance I'M
der subpoena, was examined as a witness.
His eXcellency Count Pahlen, late Minister
Plenipotentiary from Russia to the United
States, now from Russia to the Brazils, NJ /.
Pederson. Charge d'-f6ai and Consut-Ce-
neral from Sweden to the u. States, and Nj.
de Douzy Vice-Council of France, resident
al Philadelphia, were likewise examined as
witnesses, each under protest. SIS
We have obtained and annex, copv of
the protest of thee plaintiffs counsel from
which it will appear that the termination of
this extraordinary cause-w no. less eX-
extraordinary than the principles il involves &
the manner Of their trial.
1t was addressed and read to the Chief
Justice and is as follows:
The King Of Siiam Us. Parish.
SIR,-The novelty OF the proceedings Of
this morning will be an apology for the APP
pearance of our not being ready at the mo-
inent to express a sentiment either as it
respects the situation of the counsel, or the
interest of our client. Without meaning
how ever to derogate from the rights of the
Bench, we now deem it g duty to declare:
list. That we consider the manner in
which written question from the jury was
co mmunicated & answered as irregular &
injurious to the rights of the parties.
I'd. That we consider the written answer
OF judge NeateS to the first written, questi-
OH or the jury as unfoundcd in fact so far
as 1t atiirlns that it was not pretended by
the Plaintiffs counsel that Ferdinand the
VII. or any persons under him were in the
tuH exercise of all therishts of royalty.
Sd. That we consider the written answer
OF Judge Yeates to the second written cues
tion,as calculated to influence the jury i'll de
termining whether they would find spe-
cial or general. verdict.
9Th. That we consider the refusal of
Judge feates to give distinct and public
answer to the distinct and public question
OF the jury, whether the testimony of Mr..
Labouchere was legal evidence, as a depar-
ture from the terms of the agreement ON
which the testimony, with the assent of the
Judge was allowed to be read in evidence. 81
as an injury to the cause of the plaintiff
For these reasons We have determined as
counsel for the plaintiff to decline receiving
the verdict OF the jury.
We have the Honor, &c. Sir your most
obedient servants
JARED INGERSOLL,
w. RAWLE,
A. ]. DALLAS,
c. ]. INGERSOLL,
= J. R.INGERSOLE,
Philadelphia, April oath, 1912.