Lord Farnham.
The Times, 1824-02-11T00:00:00

lxne 30LICITOR-GRN2ERAL rose for the defendant, to show cause why a criminal information should not be granted. He read the affi davit on thepart oftheptainti(the prominent features ofwhich must be frcRh in therecoUection of our readers.) Hesaidthatthe charge was a rmost heavy and serious one, if true, and felt it rather extraordinary that the prosecutor, having stated that sev-eral persons were present at the infliction committed upon him, did not endeavour to bring some of them forward to substantiate his allegations. The fact was, his Lordship had whoUllr abstained from interfering in the matter, but had desired his wood-ranger (Wilson) to take the boy before Mlr. Graham, a near magistrate. It was a most serious imputation upon Lord Farnham to say tbat,in his magisterial capacity,he had from the Bench,without anytrialor evidence,directedpunishment to be inflicted upon toe prosecutor. But his lordship. in eonjunetion with the Rev. tr. Robinson, one of the presiding magistrates at the petty sessions, and Wilson, the wood-ranger, had come forward by aflidavit to rebut the false statements of the prosecutor. He (the Solicitor-Ge- neral) would not read these lengthened affidavits, but would state in substance their contents. Lord Farnham had had, from time to time, many acts of depredation committed upon his demesne'; the prosecutor, however, was caught in the fact by the wood-ranger (WVilson), and was by him brought before his Lordship, who imme. liately directed that he should be taken to some other magistrate. Lord Farnham, however,as was usual with him on all such occasions, attended the petty sessions on the 3d of Septenmber last * the Rev. Mt. Robinson, aid another magistrate,were also in attendance. When the case of the prosecutor was called for, his Lordship said, " I am concerned, and will retire," and accordingly did so. Here the learnied solicitor grounded a long argument on the observation used by Lord Farnham, as exculpatory of his being a party to any subse- quent acts. The learned counsel deprecated the rancorous spirit which had dictated the prosecution, and lamented that their Lord- ships could not overtake the slander, which hadspread far and near; and concluded by saying, that the order could not, in truth orjus- tice, be g ted. Ar. W.aLLLCE, for the prosecution, rose, and made a proposition to the defendant's counsel-that if they would consent to have the facts of the case go before a jury, be (CIr. Wrallace) would alto. gether abstain from making any further observations to show that the conditional order ought to be .ade absolute. The Solicitor-Ge- neral, after a few observations, dissented. Mr. WALLACE re8umed.-.He felt that, however indiscreet liis Loresaip mnight have acted in his magisterial capacity, at the petty3 sessions, he had, in his allegations, in which he unfuirled the flag of party-feeling, as being the exeitation of the present prosecution, been mnuch more iiidiscrqet in stating such, he immediately an- nounced his being at the head of a party. Such a topic was-an in- judicious and daagerous; one. In the King's Bench, sorely, no paitty.feeling could there find its way. Did thenoblelord think, by' introlsiihng such a topic, he could disparage or lay aside-the merits. of the comiplaint ? Did he think he could thereby Jesgen tbe imputation? He (Mr. Wallace) would say that tip Vety im- putation of paity-fee&g baY ng tintO -e;JnrA lue procetdc. mogs, rigid Justice should strip party-influence of its mischiev- ous force, by dealing rigorously witit. He would ask, was the present a paruy.quesuton ? Party-feelin partook of an in- sidious, slanderous, artful character; buthe ouglthit needlecs to y, that in the King's Bench party.feeling DeVer could nestles- pty.fccllng could not find asprotCCtor an tfe laws; sushi a h cbrg great energy and phapbe, that there vs noperiod in which there was tiot to be fou'nid, azuongpt the profession, those who wvould come forward featlessly. in a court of justice, to advocate the cause of the humble and the oppressed. aganst the proud and the great; and that, for his part, he would rather submit to have the gown sttipped fromoffhis back. than drag it through the mire'of party. He then forcibly arid eloqundtly went over the various points of the prosecutors case. Illr. HOLMES oni-the same side, contended that Lord Farnham had, in this instance, outraged his magisterial duties and violated the law. le supported his proposition by quoting the Timber Act; and contended, that if the facts stated by tfe prosect tor were esta- blished, Lord Farnharn had rendlered himself wholly unworthy any longer to hold the comminssion of the peace. Alr. JoSNsoN, for the defendant, argued at great length, and contknded that the conditional order could 'not, in the preeerLt case, be made absolute. - The JIJDGES deliberated a considerable time, when the LORD COTEr JUSTtCE annouinced, that the ouinion of the Court was, that the proceedings in this case ought to be inquired into.; It would therefore abstainf front making any observations, and the rule was made absolute. The Court was crowded to excess in every part. LORD F4RNVHAM. KING'S BENlCH. rnrTRT.IN_A(TW! THE XIHG, AT THE PROSECUTION O hllICUAEL LYNCH, V. LORD FARNUAM.7