Cambridge, Wednesday, Aug...
The Times, 1824-08-06T00:00:00

kIVIL :bIDE.-Lfefore tthe OIDRD U}IIEF LfARON. This was an indictm,ent against the defendant, for obstructing a clergyman in the perfornmanee of his duity. There were also counts for a commnon assault, upon the parish clerk of Papworth.Evered, and two other indivitluals. Before the case commenced, MSr. STOLRKs and Mr. CoosE't, who were for the defendant, proposed a compromise; but the coun- sel for the plaintiff' declared the thing to be impossible-the aggra- vation and insult of which the prosecutor complained having been carried on, in fact, even up to the prerent moment. Mlr. RoBi{sow stated to the jury that the prosecutor, ifr. Cedl, had lately been curate of Papworth-Evered, and now held a living presented to hi by Dagdalen College. MIr. Cheero, the defendant, was a man of considerable influence and fortune ; a member of Par- liament for Cambridge ; a magistrate for the county; and though last, not least important to the question before the Court, church. warden of PaLpwo,th-Eveyed. The circumstances were some. thing singular which had given rise to the present differ- ence between Mr. Clheere and the prosecutor; but through. out the preliminaries to that transaction, as well as thirouglh the transaction itseir, the former would be found to have acted in the spirit of a mats and of a Christian. If lie had now, at the eleventh hour, reffited to accept thatt aenelde from the defendant ivhich would fully have satisfied him if offered at an earlier mo- ment, it was because he felt that a public tribunal was nowv the pro- per power to which he should appeal. Hle felt, and wished to act, in a manner becoming, the character of a clergyman; but he did not think that his function reouired him to wave the comnion feelings of a gentlemnan. The leained counsel then proceeded to detail the circumstances (afterwards given in evidence) which had led to the violence of which his client complained. In Decemnber last, it seem- ed that there had died, in the parish of Papworth-Evered, a poor infirm old man of the name of Dawes, who for a long time liad been in the employ of the defendant. In tile manner of Dawes's death there had been some peculiarities; he lived alone in atn hovel in a state of greatdestitutign, and was found dead on the floor of itis hut, with his clothes on-.circumstances which, in the view of Mr. Cecil, and several other persons in the parish, made a Coroner's in- quest prudent upon hi&, body. It miLht be sufflcient to say at pre- sent, tMat this man had' died on the 1fith of Dcrember, and that he was to have been buried on the 18th; but that a protest (as to the necessity of an inquest) had delayed the funeral to Christmas-daty, the 26th. On tlht day, ho*ever, no inquest having taken place, but a communication having passed bet ween Mr. Cecil, and his supe- rior the Bishop of Ely, Dir. Cecil had been in the act of readinz the burial service over the body of' tlis old man, when he had suffered that interrmption from the defendant for which the litter was now called upon to answer. The jury would hear (and with astonish- ment), that while Mir. Cecil was reatding the burial service, Air. Cheere had atuacked him in a moat profane and indecent parody "~ion he critual words; followed him into hiis churclh, insilited binthae, ndordredhis-cngxgaronto quit the edifice. In tBe end5thedefndat bsl oncude bylocking the church up, with the nbuiedbod init,whee tat ody hatd remained until after the nsaig Snday andindcd utilthe building was in a state cutorrequringhim t surende his u'pice nd e toldehim a particular statute-the statute of th st of Queen Mary. That statute hiad miade it penial to interrp anarchbishop or bishop in re- citing- the mass, or in any othier brachof the church-iservice ; and Mir.-Scrgeant Hawkins, in isis Pea of thec Crozesu, held that the disturbing any minister of thie establised chiurch in the r.adsing of thie Conormon 1'rayer za-me within it. The Rev. William Cecil (the prosecutor) Raii-.Ini December last I was the curate of Patpworth-Evered; M Ar. Cheers acts as a magistrate for the county or Cambridge, and resides at Pap-worth-Evered. Whien I first took the cure, he told me that he was perpetua Ihnrchwardlen." There was a tunan in the; Pa- rish namt on Daw-es. when I camie to it; he lived in a small house, which I understood was the only house built by the parishi for the~soor. Da%res was betwveen 80 and 90 years bi' age when Ifirst sawv him, and( in a state of extremie wretch-edness. When I met Iiim ijn the street, his clothies were its such a state titat I was oblied o trn sid fordecncys ske.I believe titat he had no- thig wichcoud b caleda bd; ut ay,ofnights, buryingbhis lims i th ases o kep iniwar. I cosequence of Dawes's sitatin, gae ntic totheovesee ofthepaIsh,but nothing was don fo hi. fte a im, Ibouht imsom shrt and a1 bed myself. I hal sen insa sortrim beorehe ied ; but I hieard the ciretam- stancesof hisdeathonlyfrom. my parishioners. He tiled on the 161th Of December, and, in consequence of wvhztt I heard, I sent anio-ice to Mlr. Hill, the overseer, sinedl by myself and most of th.: parish, desirngt have a coronier's inqu~est. Oni the 18thl of December (two days after this) I received noticte of his funeral. I had notice to btarv him, on that day at two o'clock. No inquest itad titen been h'eld; but I attended to bury, in consequence of the notice. The corpse was brought up into tI i chiurchyard ; but then a parishionier earns forivard,and protested against burying withiout ani inqnest, say- ing that rtte man hiad beeni as ~ood as muiLrdered, andi ouglit not to be put into the ground without inquiiry'. The namTe of thi-, parishioner was Cragili ; he had formerly beeni constable and overseer. I n con- sequence of whtat lite said, the funeral did niot go on heand I al ter- wards saw MNr. Inigle, the coroner;, and iMr. Ingle seert over hiis deptuty (Mr. i-4umphries;); butstill no inquest was proc-eeded in. In cornEeQnunce of all this, I niade aeomimunication to the Lord Bi.shop of Ehy,a-sdsoinatters remiainied.Ontlie25rt iofD)ecemberfoUiowinig,which was Christmias..dav. I attended attlie churchi to perforiti divinieservice. There was a veryistnall congregation present-not more than ninie or teni persons, inistead of 40 or 50. Just as I hiad gone throughi theI servicee a.n dbefore the sacramient had been administered, I heardI the h t tl, a- foria funeral. I had given no orders for its tolline: butIp~ onmy surplice, atid took bie ook, and went out in the usual way to mee the corpse. WVheni I went ouit, I sawv thle coffin ofliwe coining tip tue chiurchiyardl in processicn. dir. Cftceer n [fill were at the hecad of it. and Efie greater part of' the parish fol- lowed behinid. I then began the burial-service in itle u-.ualh way, rcading, "1 I ami the resurrection atid the life, suith, ties Lord ; he who believethi in mne, thonughi hie be dead, Yet shiall lie live " but MVr. Chieers interrapted me, calling out lourdly, "1 He whio believer, ini you ? I do niot believe in you ; it is too late; it is of no use." I went on rending; but Mr. Cheere interrupted inse aFain,when I cme to, "1 I kiiow not that miy Redeensier liveth." crying, " e donot know you;" andhfe went on, " Titerseisan inhiuman creature-for I cannot call himi a nian-thiat creature would tiot buxry a poor ma,ol because lie was poor; lie wouldi bury me for a gauood snilk scars.' Byv this rimie, thie coffhn was car- riedl into the chiurch : andi Alr. Cheere urged the people to go in along with it. NVhetn they were in, he aske,d if' any thing fiad been gaLthered at the communion-table; andI the clerk said, " NO." He asked for the key of the chiurch, and the clerk gave it to hini : he then told the bea-rers to put down thescorpse. They liesitaLted at first, aind I prodtitteet a letter whicih I had received fromi hiis Lordship the Bis3isoo) of Bly that morning, and offered it them to read, sayit,g ithat I liad'atithority to bury the corpse. Defendant thien said, " Yes, Sir; but that letter was written in consequence of a false and scan- dalous letter which you wrote toi tue Bishop: I also have a letter from the Bishop." The bearers then put dowis the c-orpse in the chturch, anti Mr. Cheere got before the people, telling themi all to go out, with great vociferations, and holdling up his arms to drive them, as thouigh they had been a floclk ot siheep. The people went out ; attil he then called the clerk, aad ordered hlim to take t he cosomunion bread and wvine, and carry it to Wiidow Gattisnn's. Tihe clerk's naine is Creswell. I offitresi to let him- read the letter I had from the Bishiop; but he told nic that Mir.Cheere said he was his servant, and thie servant of thec parish. I answered, thiat in thie church I considered him my servanit, and( ordered himn to go to his desk, and dlo his dutv. dir. Cheere, hosaever, ordered Creswell out of she clittrch, and lie went out withi the rest of the people. I was ithen left in the cliurch wvithi only, my maid-servant, Ann Saving. Mr. Cheere rhesiredi her to go out witk thie rest, but I made signs for lier to stay. She told hiim that she stayed by her tuaster's order. Ilie asked "1 who was her master ?" and'she said I was., Air. Cherer then went out of the church, anld Anti flaying said slite thiought that he hadl locked tie in. I went through the rest of thie burial-service, wyhicti had nott been completed, isite being present. Wie then went to thec church-door,where I saw Mr. Cheere. He asked my nsaid if my hatt anti cane were brought out; she said "1Yes ;" anid lie thien said t'o rise, '' Now, Sir, you never enter this church again ;" and he adlded, Iwill see the body buried miyself', andl by a proper clergirman." H-e theni iocked the churchi-door, and went away, pting Cs.. key into his pocket. This liappetuedI on Christmnas-day. The clerk, Creswell, afterwards caine to me (frost the defenda'ir) for the sur- pice. Tuie body remained about nine days locked usi in the cliurch. rlhis preventeti me from perfo rming service titere urion the Sunday f"lllo.,ing. I founci rtoe church loced avtlthe usual time. This hotly was erentually,lIbelieve, buried by agentlIeman ofethenamneofFennel. Croas-examined.-Mr. Cecil said, "4J have a living, and had one at thie tdine I hield this curacy. I had been curate about three yentas when this transaction took place. The funeral, on the 25th, c-ame upon isise by, surprise; I had nor given anr order, nor receivedl any notice as to it. Cragill, I think, was per- fectly siober when hie protestedI againist the burial oni the lO8th. I think him as sober a inan as most of the parishiioners. I know Mir. 11oldsworthy; lie is a ciergIvinan,andl(I hear that he called onme once with Mr. Cheers. I was in mny study, I thiink, when Air. Cheers came, butrI did not know who was with hiim. I think this was after the 25th ; I diol not know but that Kir. Cheere was alone, and I did not chioose to see liini. I received a letter from dir. Cheere, after the 25th of December, requesting me to bury Dawses's body. Mir. Cheers and I had not been on good terms for slime titne whien this transac- riots happened; I have since quitted thie parish. I never said that the iniquest on Dawes was unnecessary. I finished rending the bu- rial-serviceover his coffiniwhileimy maid atid IA werealonein tfiechurcb. I did say that I niever would rend thie service again, unless Afr.Cfheere signed an atpology (which I wrote) for his conduct. I rememRber telling Creswell., the clerk, that he was responsible for getting the body put into the grave; 'hat he muLst get some somiebody to assist himr, or dlo it as lie' could; but I do nor remember to have said that he mutat pitchi it, or pu:;h itcedgeways ; or drag it in, if he liked, or that, so he didI get it into the grave, it didt not matter to me how." Anne Saving (the servant-maid) corroboratedi dIr. Ce-cil's evi- dence upon all miaterial noints. On her cross-examination, slite saidI that slite had been examinedI by the prosecutor, an(tiher evidence taken down. Al r. Cecil was then caLlled back, and asked whether lie had not himself written die protest which Cragill presented osi the 18thi of December. He saiA that lie istad ; but hie had written it at Cragill'e request, and under his dictationi. Jolin Cresisell, the clerk, corroborated the prosecaitor's testimony as so what had passed on Christmnas-day. He thought that Cra Zil 9,ad been " fresh in liqluor" when he miade the protest on the l8th. '.. he prosecutorhatitold him thathie imuet get the coffin inito the grave some htow-that lie nighit pitchi it in by the endl; that liecould doit htimself in half an hiour. He (witness) hstd hknown Dawes for 30 vears before h lis death. T'le lhouse in which he died was ttiei town poor-house. Dawes had been eniployedi by dir. Cheere up to the timne of his death; hiis allowance was five shiilling a-week, which lie (wfitness) had re- gularly paid him; Fifteeen shillings had been owing to film when he died. Charter Hlaines, a IRbourer, said that he lied gone up with thje pro- cession after Dawes's bodiy on the 25th of Decemnber. He hiad heard Air. Chleers say to 5Mt. Cecil-,' There goes that ignorant fool, to preach toa mt rave~ Al r. SvtOTcOIesmcotntsentveed that Ibis indictment had been brought forward by the prosecutor rather to Igratify his -own vindictive feel- ing thnfo unyprpose of public juistice. If it wast not so, whY ha dlir. Cecil demianided to hiave a wri ten apology signed by dlr. Cheere,as thec only, termns upon which he woului listen to any thitng in the shape of am-ends or conciliation. The facet was, that on the 25th, of December, there liatd never been aniy intention by .Mr.Cheere that shle body of' Dawes should be buried ; he had merely meant so de- posit it in the chiurch for security, until uome other clergvnsan should be found to officiate in the prosecutor's place. For tf is statements about tiies wrtethed condition, &c., fDee, the evidence even f'or the prosecution, proved themn to bwhlyufounded, it was stworn by Creeswell, that this man recevd nalowance of five shil- lings per wveek ; atitil that the defendant (wiho was chsarged witth ne- glecting bini) liad beets his only benefactor. For this offence of Mir. Cheere, such as it wvas, it would be an ofl'erse at the commoni law ; but it was surely too muchi to talk at this time of' day, of a statute passed its the very worst period of Eniglish Ihistorv, so support the totteriing fabric of Catholic superstition. TIhe jurry wouldi look at the ititentions of the defendant, and at tie feelings undler which bohteates isatd acted. dir. (Cheere- was the last m-an, whio, froitii education,ta'bits, or opiiiions, wvould be likely to do any, thling in violation of the religiouts institutions of hIls country; anid he (thie learned couns8el) lsould sit dtwm, siotirithstanding the hasty expres- sions, whichliihi clienit had been betrayed into using, in the fuillest confidence of his ireceiving ass acqutittal. The LostD C11Itgr 3ARsOw said, that the charge in tie presnt Indictmetit was two-fold-firs', for the defendant's having inlterrup- ed tlae church service; and.next, for ana assa.ult made uponl partici- har individuals. The count reliting to tice assault might be dismiss- ed, for there was nio evidence upon it: but that as to the interruption I of the service stood in a very differcnt situation. A great deal of statement on both sides, and some evidence, had been gone inito, which was foreign to rise case. The qucstion teas tnot as to the condirioti of the man Dawes before his death; or as to the protest against his burial on the 18th of December; or as to whether the prosecutor had done right or ivnong in abstsining from burring h,bn on that day: thie guestiot was,short.ly arid stimphnlltl or had not the prosecutor been interrupted in his duty by tie defendaT,t on the 26t of December? Now, unless. the jury discredhied all the witnesses in the case, it what Mr. Cheers had done did not amount to an interruption, he (the Chief Baron) thought it would be diflicust to conceive what did. At present, the only business was to find a verdict of gnsilty or not -guilty: the punishinent of he defendant (if any was to be inflicted) would be apportioned by the Court above. It had been suggested, that dIr. Cheerc had nor meant the body to be buried when he took it up to the church on the 26th of December, but merely to deposit it tliers in safety until he could getsome otiher clergvyiian (not Al r. Cecil) to perform the service; if he haddone this, he had (even nmerely in so doing) done that which he had nio right wehatever to do. In going fortb so pernfrm the service when he heard the beU toll, BMr. Cecil, the prosecutor, had done no more than lie was justified in doing-no naore titan his duty; anid that he bad been disturbed in the execu- tion of that daty (if the witnesses were to be credited) it was almost impossible to doubt. Tihe Jury, without hesitation, found thte defendant (on the count applying to the ilcterruption) Guilty. CAMBBRIDGE. WEDNESDAY, AUG. 4. THE KING V. CHARLES CHEERE, ESQ.