Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

The Lord Chief Justice. We are sorry to take this course, but we have no option. The law must not be borne down and trodden upon by defendants in this manWe can hear no more, unless you will address us in a way which we can properly hear.

ner.

The Judges then began to consult, but, during the whole of their consultation, Mrs. Wright proceeded to read on, quite regardless, and apparently unregarded. At length she was stopped by

Mr. Justice Bayley, who rose, and without any preliminary observation, said, "Susannah Wright, the judgment of the Court on you is, that, for the offence of which you have been found guilty, you be imprisoned in the House of Correction, in Cold Bath Fields, for eighteen calendar months, and that you pay to the king a fine of 100%, and that, at the expiration of your imprisonment, you find two sureties for your good behaviour for five years, in 50l. each, and that you be further imprisoned, until such sureties be found and such fine be paid."

Mrs. Wright was taken from the court, protesting against the sentence, and with a contemptuous smile on her countenance.

11. The Solicitor General moved the King's-bench for a rule to show cause, why a criminal information should not be filed against Dr. O'Meara for several libels published against sir Hudson Lowe in "A Voice from St. Helena."The Court expressed some difficulty in granting the rule, on account of the lateness of the application. Mr. C. Phillips, for the defendant, observed, that no less than three grand juries had sat, since opportunity was afforded for the application. After consulting with the other Judges, the lord chief justice granted the rule, saying, You may take your rule; and in showing cause, perhaps you will produce authorities for our interfering at so late a period."

12. In the court of King's-bench, five persons recently convicted of keeping gaming-houses in PallMall and St. James's-street, were brought up for judgment :-Rogiers was sentenced to pay a fine of 5,000l. and to be imprisoned in Cold Bath Fields 12 months; Humphrey, to pay a fine of 2001. and to be imprisoned two years; Oldfield, to pay a fine of 1,000l. and to be imprisoned in the King'sbench prison; Bennett to pay a fine of 1000l. and to be imprisoned in the same place; and Carlos to pay a fine of 500l. and to be imprisoned in Cold Bath Fields, each for 18 calendar months.

13. Upwards of 250 solicitors met at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, in the Strand, to adopt such measures with respect to the king's counsel in highest practice in the court of Chancery, as might lead to a more effectual per

formance of their duty to their clients, than has taken place since the establishment of the Vicechancellor's court. Mr. Le Blanc was in the chair. The measure suggested as most advisable, was the appointment of a committee to consider the propriety of securing justice to their clients by employing those gentlemen of the bar only, who would attend strictly to the business placed in their hands, and who were determined not to divide their attention between the courts, in such a manner as to give cause of complaint. Resolutions to this effect were immediately agreed to.

[ocr errors]

These resolutions, however, proved ineffectual. None of the gentlemen of the bar made any alteration in their usual line of conduct. The truth was, that this clamour, raised by the solicitors, was wholly without foundation. No instance is to be found of any king's counsel neglecting his duty to his client.

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

in the boxes and the pit, that there was little or no danger to be apprehended, the people in the gallery were not to be tranquillized. Considerable efforts were made from the stage, too, to persuade them, that, if they would but patiently wait a very short time, they would see every thing restored to order. All in vain: a deaf ear was turned to the advice given to them-and with a tremendous rush, they struggled for egress. Eight individuals were literally trodden to death! Many more sustained severe injury.

20. OLD BAILEY. -Benjamin Moore, a well-dressed young man, was indicted for assaulting, on the king's highway, general Wm. Kerr, with intent to rob him.

By the evidence of the prosecu

tor appeared, that on the 7th of February witness had been dining at the United Service Club, in Waterloo-place. He left that house shortly before eight o'clock, not in the least affected by wine, and passed through St. James's-square, by the house of the late marquis of Londonderry. He wore at the time a military cloak, which, being open in front, left his chain and seals exposed to view. When he arrived near the bottom of Dukestreet, he suddenly received a violent blow on the back of his head, which almost stunned him. Finding himself unable to resist, witness called out for help; and turning round to see who was near him, he fell against some railings, and held fast by them. He saw a man standing close behind, with (as witness then conceived) a large stick in his hand. The man held the stick up with both his hands, in the attitude of striking. Witness thought, that, if it had been a stick, the blow he received must have fractured his

skull. The man did not strike a second blow, but ran off, when witness again cried out for assistance. The night was dark, but there were three gas lamps near the spot where he was attacked. Witness saw two men on the opposite side of the way, one of whom ran after the prisoner, and the other came over to support witness. In a few minutes, and while witness still continued on the spot, the prisoner was brought to him by a soldier and the man who had pursued him. The prisoner then appeared to be much heated and agitated, and said to witness, "Are you the man I shoved against just now?" Witness replied, to the best of his recollection, "I don't know what you call shoving, but some cowardly villain, a few minutes ago, most cruelly assaulted me behind my back.” The prisoner said, he had taken witness for another man. The prisoner held a cotton umbrella in his hand, which appeared to be saturated with rain. The blow witness received was a most severe one, his head was much swollen, and he even now felt the effects of it.

Michael Donovan proved, that he was passing through Dukestreet on the night in question, in company with a man of the name of Osmin. He heard a cry of "Help, for God's sake," and heard at the same time a blow, or blows. On the opposite side of the way, he saw two persons; one of them was staggering, and the other was running away. Witness pursued the man who was running away, and overtook him at the bottom of St. James's-square. During the chase, witness cried out, "Stop him," and in Pall-mall a soldier did stop him. When the soldier

stopped him, the prisoner struck him with an umbrella.

Osmin and the soldier, by their evidence, confirmed this account most fully. The prisoner was taken to St. James's watchhouse.

In his defence, the prisoner stated, that he had attacked the general by mistake, conceiving him to be another man. He denied that he had any intention to rob the prosecutor; and represented the improbability, that, if he had intended to rob the general, he would have incumbered himself with an umbrella.

Several witnesses gave the prisoner a good character. One of them was his own brother, a respectable tailor in Bond-street.

The jury (after the judge had summed up the evidence) asked, whether they could find the prisoner guilty of the assault, excluding the intent to steal?

Mr. Baron Graham explained, that the prisoner had been indicted upon a particular act of parliament, and that the jury must be satisfied, that it was the prisoner's intention to commit a robbery. The prisoner must therefore be pronounced either guilty, or wholly innocent of the charge. Not Guilty was the verdict.

-

21. MURDER. Ely Assize Court.-John Rolfe was convicted of the murder of John Landen, with a hedge-stake, in a plantation on the farm of Jonathan Page, esq., in Burnt Fen, parish of Littleport.

On his first examination, Rolfe charged two labouring Fen men, his neighbours, as accomplices with him in this deed, who were immediately apprehended. As he persisted in charging them with being the first who struck Landen, another examination took place,

in the course of which their innocence was so clearly manifested, that at length Rolfe acknowledged the falsehood of his tale, and confessed himself to have been the sole perpetrator of the deed! After his condemnation, he became sullen, and regardless of his approaching fate, until a few hours before his execution took place, when he made the following voluntary confession of his crime, viz :—

"That he went with Landen, from the house of the latter, on the night he committed the murder, to the plantation, where they had agreed to take the game; soon after they had arrived there, while Landen was stooping to set a snare, he struck him with the back part of a casting-tool-a kind of fen-spade, which he had brought with him from Landen's house; that he repeated the blows two or three times, though he believed the first had killed him, as the only words he spoke after were— Oh dear!-that he did not struggle at all. The bludgeon, he said, produced in Court, he had never seen before: that Landen took no stick with him, but cut one on entering the plantation for himself. He said, that he had determined to kill Landen two or three days before he did it, and that his object was, the booty of his money, watch, and his high shoes, which he unlaced and took from his feet; but that he was also afraid Landen would inform against him for some fowls they had stolen together. That he intended the fen-spade, which he brought from Landen's house, for another purpose beside the murder of Landen; that was, to dig his grave, and bury him; which he thought he had sufficiently done."

25. THE KING v. JOHN FER

RIER. This was an information, filed ex-officio by the attorney-general, against the captain of a merchant vessel, for carrying two seamen named Clarke and Morris, to Genoa, and wilfully leaving them at that port.

The Solicitor-General stated, that this prosecution was instituted under the statute of William, which was passed to protect British seamen from a species of oppression to which they were peculiarly liable. There was a double temptation to captains to leave their men in foreign ports, because the mariners were not entitled to wages unless they performed the whole voyage, and because foreign sailors might be hired at a cheap rate to navigate the vessel on her voyage home. To shield seamen from this evil, the statute prohibited, in the most positive terms, the leaving of any sailor at a foreign port by the captain of a merchant vessel. The defendant had taken Clarke and Morris on board at Bristol, but at Genoa had refused to allow them provisions, in order to compel them to leave the ship. They were willing to go, if the captain would pay them their wages, he refused to do so; and while they were gone ashore to obtain provisions, he set sail without them. The British consul provided for them while they remained there, secured them a passage home, and passed them to the Navy Board, by whom this prosecution was directed. A similar indictment had been tried three years ago, and the Admiralty, thinking it of great importance, had caused the proceedings to be printed, and had ordered a copy to be placed in the office of every British consul.

but

The case was proved by the two seamen, Morris and Clarke. The defendant made an address to the jury, in which he complained that the sailors had not done their duty as he expected, but did not apply his observations to the material part of the charge. The jury found the defendant Guilty.

ANSWER OF THE RIGHT HON. T. WALLACE, M. P. (late president of the Board of Trade), to the Address from the merchants, bankers, ship-owners, and others

connected with the trade of the Port of London, presented on the 26th of February, 1823:It is for the first time, I believe, that it has been the good fortune of any individual, under similar circumstances, to receive from the great mercantile body of the city of London the honour that has been conferred upon me, by this most gratifying address; gratifying, not less from the sentiments it conveys than from the manner in which the communication has been made to me.

If you do justice to the emotions which the sense of such an honour, and from such a body, cannot fail to excite in a mind not dead to every feeling of honest pride, you must be satisfied, how hopeless it would be on my part, if I attempted to find language capable of giving expression to what I feel at the present moment. I will, therefore, simply assure you, that I thank you from my heart for this inestimable testimony of your esteem, and that I receive from you, with the profoundest sentiments of respect and gratitude, this highest distinction to which a public man in a free country can aspire, the spontaneous

acknowledgment of his services by a body of his countrymen, not only most important in its intimate relation to the national wealth and prosperity, but at the same time, best qualified to appreciate the services it has condescended to approve.

Thankful as I am, I retain, however, too just an estimate of the limited extent of my own sible exertion of them could enpowers to presume, that any postitle me to a distinction so unexampled. Much I must be conscious is due to the partiality with which efforts have been viewed; my much more to the purposes to which they were directed and the principles which governed them; and most of all to the results they were intended to obtain. If any differences of opinion have existed in respect to the measures of which I have been the advocate, I have the happiness to see before me a convincing proof, that the candour of those who differed from me has never denied to my motives the most favourable interpretation. To relieve the shipping of the country from every vexatious and unnecessary burthen; to simplify, consolidate, and improve the laws by which our navigation has been regulated; to give additional freedom to our intercourse with foreign states; to recommend a system of trade more adapted to the age in which we live, and the enlightened and liberal principles that characterize it, freed from the antiquated prejudices that made us view with jealous apprehension the industry and progress of other nations, and unincumbered by the shackles and restrictions those prejudices had imposed; to open wide our ports for the admission and transit of

« ZurückWeiter »