Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

cafe) be was bound, both as a liveryman and a freeman, to pay a fubmiffion; that the defendant acknowledged the charge, but plead ed in his juftification, that the company of Goldsmiths were poffeffed of a prerogative, which in fome inftances (particularly the prefent) exempted them from fub. million to the mandates of the Lord-Mayor; that he defendant alfo attempted to justify himself on the plea, that the Lord-Mayor had no authority to call a common-hail, fave for the purpofe of elections of members of parliament, LordMayor, Sheriffs, &c. that, in order to invalidate this defence, extracts from the city records fhould be read to them, from whence it would clearly appear, that the Lord-Mayors of London had, from the earliest periods, been invested with that power which the defendant pretended, on the prefent occafion, to deny the exiftence of.

The city records were then produced, and many extracts from them were read, tending to prove the authority of the Lord-Mayor to convene a common-hall for other purposes than fimply thofe of elections. Thefe extracts being gone through, Mr. Serjeant Burland rofe, and in a very masterly fpeech (which lafted for above an hour) in anfwer to Mr. Dunning, entered upon his client's defence. The defendant's counfel having finished their pleadings, Mr. Dunning next rose, and made a final reply to their arguments.

Either, faid Mr. Dunning, the precept was a lawful one, or it was not. If it was a lawful one, disobedience on the part of the defendant was to the last degree cri

minal, and flatly contradictory to the oath he must have taken when admitted to the freedom of the city, the form of which oath runs thus,

[ocr errors]

obedient and obeifant ye fhall be to the Mayor,' was flying in the face of legal authority, by disobeying the precept of the Mayor. Was this a way of conforming to the purport of the oath? Was this to be obedient' and obeifant' to the chief magiftrate? But even 'difobedience to the commands of a fuperior might in fome cafes be excufed, fuch as where the dif obedience happened by accident, was an overfight, and not in any degree the effect of predilection; yet Mr. Plumbe's difobedience was wilful, it was contumacious, and fuch as, if permitted to pass with impunity, would overturn all order, and destroy that fubordination effential to the existence of every corporate body. Thus the matter ftood as if the precept was a lawful one, and Mr. Plumbe's difobedience wilful; if, on the contrary, the defendant, by his counsel, fhould fhew either that the precept was not a lawful one, or that Mr. Plumbe's disobedience not wilful, then the profecution must neceffarily fall to the ground.'

was

Mr. Dunning, however, obferv ed, that he would fave his learned brethren on the oppofite fide the trouble of attempting to prove a negative, by himfelf proving, as the proof lay upon him, the affirmative, viz. That the precept was a lawful one,'

This talk Mr. Dunning executed by quoting a multiplicity of cafes from the Refertory book, all de. monftratively fhewing that fimilar precepts had, in former times, been

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

:

As to bye laws, undoubtedly every company has a right to frame fuch as fhall more immediately conduce to the good government of the company; amongst every fociety of men bye laws are framed, are admitted; but then, the bye laws must be such as do not clash with that relation in which a fingle company fland to the city at large; a relation which is as a part to the whole the bye laws therefore of every company are framed for internal government; but will any man pretend to fay that exigencies may not arife wherein it would be highly proper to take the fenfe, not of this or that company, but of the city bodies at large? And how fhall this fenfe be taken, unlefs a power of convening is fuppofed to prefide fomewhere? But if the neceffity of the existence of fuch a power be admitted, where ought it to refide, in whofe hands ought it to be entrusted? From every confideration of policy and of witdom, the power of convening thould refide in the chief magistrate, who fhould be allowed to judge when

and how far the exercife of fuch power may conduce to the welfare of the whole.

To fuppofe the Goldsmiths or any other company to be felf-exiftent, independent, fubject to no laws but thofe of its own will, to allow this is to fuppofe a part to bear no relation to, but to be altogether independent of, the whole; a propofition which carries abfurdity upon the very face of it! A propofition, which, if admitted, would ftrike at the very existence of the city as a corporation! For the different companies, like fo many component parts, make but one whole; they form, in an aggre. gate fenfe, the corporation. It is not when apart that the corporation is difcernible, but when the members are affembled in convention: So that a power of convening is not only effential to the existence, but is alfo involved in the very idea of a corporation.'

[ocr errors]

Mr. Serjeant Burland, in the courfe of his pleadings, having remarked, that the inftances produced by Mr. Dunning from the city records were but few in number, Mr. Dunning replied, That as to the paucity of inftances, the gentleman had no right to complain; Quevedo (fays he) when, in the romance, he is made to visit hell, he faw feveral Kings there, and exprelling his furprife that he faw no more, his guide told him, there were all that had ever reigned; and I have brought all the inftances which are to be produced.'

The whole was then recommended to the most ferious attention of the jury by the Recorder; who fummed up the evidence; and the jury, after a deliberation of

about

about three quarters of an hour, brought in a verdict for the plaintiff.

Some Account of the remarkable Trial of Major-General Ganfel, on Tuefday, September 14th, on the Black Aa, for firing a Cafe of Pistols at three Bailiffs.

T half paft eight in the morn

places; that as foon as they came within three feet of him, the deponent directly pulled out is writ and read it to him; the General went immediately into his room and tried to fhut the door, but that he, the deponent, got his knee between the door and the door-poft, and touched the General on his right fhoulder; that the General took a piftol (he fuppofed out of a chair in his room) and fired it at him;

Aing, Judge Nares, the Lord- that he struggled hard to get in

Mayor, Alderman Stephenfon, the town ferjeant, and other city officers, being upon the bench, MajorGeneral Ganfel was arraigned at the bar of the Old-Bailey feffionshoufe, for wilfully and maliciously, fhooting off a piftol at James Hyde, with an intention to kill or maim the faid Hyde. On his pleading not guilty to the indictment, the evidence for the profecution were fworn; the first of them was James Hyde, who depofed, that having a warrant against the prifoner, at the fuit of Mr. Lee, furgeon, for 1401. he went, in company with the plaintiff and feveral other fheriff's officers, to Mrs. Mayo's, in Craven-street, in the Strand, the 26th of Auguft laft, between two and three in the afternoon, and enquired of Mrs. Mayo if General Ganfel was at home; upon hearing that he was, he went up ftairs, and on the stairs he met two boys, Henry and James Afield, the General's fervants, one of whom held a knife in his hand, and fwore that if he or any perfon offered to come up, he would rip their belly open: that they knocked the knife out of the boy's hand, and pushed him and his companion down ftairs: that they went up higher, and faw the General on one of the landing

that the General declared he would not be taken; that he had five or fix more piftols, and ftanding with his back to the door, railed his left hand over his right shoulder, and fired through the door at his head, but that the ball miffed him, and took off part of the hat of Thomas Felthoufe, who flood behind him; that after a farther ftruggle the General fell down, and he and his companions dragged him to the ftair-cafe, where he held by the bannifters, which breaking with his weight, he tumbled down the ftairs, and was got into the coach, which conveyed him to the lock-up-houfe of James Armstrong, a fheriff's officer, in Carey-ftreet.

Thomas Felthoufe, and Thomas Hyde (brother of James Hyde} were next fworn, each of whom differed very effentially in their evidence, but both declared that they never faw the General till they faw him in his room; one fwore that the door was quite open, and the other, that it was fo much open that James Hyde was in the General's room, and he, the witnefs, was following him in when the General fired. Felthoufe faid, the General's face was turned towards the door. They all three declared that they were unarmed;

that

that, though they were fo many of them it was merely accidental, but that nevertheless they were aware General Ganfel was a man not eafily to be taken. This was the fubftance of the evidence brought in fupport of the indictment.

After it was gone through, and the neceffary crofs examinations made by the counsel for the defendant, the General was called upon from the bench for his defence, when he pulled out a paper, and read it to the court; the contents of it were exceedingly probable, very judiciously arranged, and delivered with a decent and manly tone of voice.,

The General totally denied his being out of his room when the bailiffs came, or that his door ever was open after they came up, till they forced the lock, and by violence obtained admiffion into his apartment. He lamented that his circumstances had of late been fo embarraffed, and his fituation fo difagreeable, that he always kept his door locked, and used the utmost caution about going out or in ; that he had for a number of years had apartments at Mrs. Mayo's; that he paid for them by the year, and he conceived he was legally warranted to fuppofe an apartment yearly paid for, to be in every refpect like a houfe; that by law every man's houfe was his caftle, and he had kept his door locked, conceiving it a legal fecurity against every attack; that the bailiffs knocked at his door, and afked if Mr. Mayo was there, when he answered them he was below fairs, and that was not Mr. Mayo's apartment; that they went down ftairs, and returned again after he had learnt from his fervant who the perfons were who had put the faid

question to him; that as soon as they returned, they threatened to blow his brains out if he did not open the door; that therefore his firft piftol was fired through the door with a hope to terrify the bailiffs from their attempt to take him, and the second went off in his fall, having his back against the door, when they forced it open. He concluded by obferving, that the laws of his country had fecured feveral privileges to the fubject; that he thought his privileges violently infringed by the officers, and he had acted merely in his own defence, without any defign to commit mur der, or maim a fellow fubject. corroboration of this defence, feve In ral witneffes were fworn.

Henry Afhfield, the lad who met the profecutors on the ftairs, depofed, that he was fervant to the General; that his master had been out in the forenoon as far as Kenfington-gardens; that he came home much fatigued with his walk; that he immediately put on his night-gown, and laid him down on the bed: that he (Henry Afhfield) was employed in cutting bread and butter, and preparing a fallad, (the only food his master took when he thought himself ill) at the time the bailiffs entered the house; that his mafter fent him down to know who it was that had enquired at the door of his apartments for Mr. Mayo; that on his return he found the door of his master's room locked; that he told him Mr. Lee and fome ruffians were there; that he was met as he went down the ftair-cafe by James Hyde, who prefented a piltol to him and his brother, knocked him down, and swore he would blow their brains out if they did not let him and his companions pafs.

5

James

James Afhfield's teftimony agreed principally with his brother's, and he declared, that when he went down ftairs, the General bid him take notice he locked the door, which he heard his mafter do.

Mrs. Mayo depofed that when Hyde, and thofe who were with him, came into her parlour to afk for the General, a double-barrelled piftol lay on a dumb waiter, which Hyde, contrary to her earnest entreaty, took, and did not return till the next day.

Mr. Vickars gave a very good reafon to the court for believing the door was fhut when the firft pillol was fired, as the mark on the wall, made by the ball, was in a frait (or horizontal) line with the orifice in the pannel.

Mrs. Sanders faw the hole in the door-poft made by the fecond ball, and conjectured the door must be fout at that time, as the edge of it was burnt by the powder, and when fhut, formed a fort of circle.

Mrs. Mayo corroborated the evidence of the lock being broke; and fome other witneffes ftrength ened the credibility of Vickars and Sanders's depofitions, that the hole in the door was not oblique, but horizontal; and mentioned feveral other circumitances, tending to evince that the door was faftened.

The examination of witneffes being gone through, and the arguments of the counfel finifhed, Mr. Juftice Nares fummed up the evidence on both fides, with a very great number of judicious and pertinent remarks, fome of which were in fubftance as follows:

He obferved, that no fubje&t was above the laws; that in their eye all men are equal; that the piifoner was not to be looked on as VOL. XVI.

a general officer, nor was his fituation in life to influence their verdict; the pooreft individual found the laws provided to remedy his grievances, as readily as thofe of his fuperiors; a prifoner, therefore, was no farther guilty, than the penal guilt the law had clothed the crime with, the commiffion of which was brought in charge against him, and he was clear from that guilt, till full legal proof was adduced to fix the actual commiffion of the crime on his perfon; that the General's plea refpecting the fecurity. of his own houfe, was indifputably found doctrine; the fact alledged. againft him was nevertheless of a very enormous nature-a refistance with a deadly weapon, to those employed in the execution of a civil procefs:-but, in his apprehenfion, the extent, aggravating circumftances, and enormity of any offence, ought ever to influence a jury to be exceedingly cautious in their credit of the fort of evidence brought in fupport of the profecution, and increase the probability of the matters urged on the fide of the defence; that therefore he thought it his duty to obferve to them, that confidering the evidence of the two Hydes and Felthoufe by itfelf, without once looking to what the witneffes for the prifoner had fworn, it was altoge ther fo improbable and contradictory, that it deferved but little credit, when the life of a man depended on the degree of belief given to it. They had all fworn they had no arms, and James Hyde had fworn, that he faw the General on the fairs, and deliberately read his writ to him, and yet that he could get no farther into the room, than his knee between the door and the [0] door.

« ZurückWeiter »