Page images
PDF

%l»e 22d article of war, "in case of the commission of any crime deserving punishment;" and the Court was therefore of opinion, that the alleged trespasses were covered up to the 24th of December, by the limitation in the Local Militia Act, and that all the subsequently iilleged trespasses under the orders of LieutenantColonel YVhitbread, were justifiable in respect of that officer, and consequently in respect of the defendant Baillie, as acting under the orders of his superior officer. The judgement was consequently in favour of the plainin error.

Circuit Court, Invernets, Sept. "22.—John Lamont, Roman Catholic Priest, residing at Abercholder, was brought to the bar. The indictment against him was founded on the common law, and on the Act of the Parliament of Scotland, 34th of first Session of Charles II. (1661, chap. 34.) intituled, "An Act against clandestine and unlawful Marriages," whereby it is provided, that "whatsoever person or persons shall hereafter marry, or procure themselves to be married in a clandestine and inorderly way, or by Jesuits, Priests, or any other not authorized by this Kirk," shall suffer the penalties therein mentioned; "and that the celcb rat or of such marriages be banished the kingdom, never to return therein under pain of death.'' The indictment charged the prisoner,, with having "celebrated , a clandestine and irregular marriaga, between John M'Railt, a

fotcstant, and Isabella Macnaldj a Rotnan Catholic, or

Papist, without any certificate produced or required by him, that the bans of marriage between the said parties had been proclaimed, as required by law, on three different Sundays," in the church of the parish wherein they resided, "and without any due proclamation of the bans of marriage having taken place."

Mr. Lamont having pleaded not guilty, the Lord Justice Clerk inquired if there was any objection to the relevancy? Whereupon Mr. Grant, of Rothiemurchus, as counsel for the prisoner, stated, that there was no objection to the relevancy, and that the panne 1 rested his defence on the general plea of not guilty.

The Lord Justice Clerk, however, deemed it his duty to make a few remarks on the statutory crime charged. His Lordship mentioned, that his attention was for the first time particularly called to a consideration of the statute, when on circuit at Jedburgh, in April 1812. He then bestowed his most careful attention on the subject, and thought it his duty to pronounce sentence, in terms of the act, on two persons then tried. They appeared, however, to have assumed the character of Clergymen, which did not belong to them. Another case occurred before his Lordship and Lord Hermand, at Aberdeen, in September 1S12, against one of the Baillies oflnverary. Special circumstances occurred in that case, which rendered it unnecessary to give uny general judgment on the point of law. These cases were not exactly similar to the present; they were in various respects different f

ferent; but on duly weighing all authorities, he thought himself bound to give effect to the statute, and had no doubt of the relevancy of the indictment against Mr. Lamont. In the course of his observations, his Lordship said nothing on the expediency or policv of the law, nor of the present prosecution.

The usual interlocutor of relevancy was then pronounced, and a jury sworn.

The Advocate Depute then stated, that the present indictment contained two specific and distinct charges; 1st The celebrating of marriage by a person not entitled to do so, the pannel being a Popish Priest: and 2d. The celebration of marriage without the due proclamation of"bans. Both these charges he thought he could have been able to establish, but on account of the necessary absence of a material witness, whom he expected to be able to adduce, he was not prepared to prove that the bans were not proclaimed, and he, therefore, abandoned that part of the charge. He expected, however, to be able to establish the other charges contained in the indictment.

Mr. Giant then mentioned, that he had not stated, and did not mean to state, any objection to the relevancy. But from the new light which had broke forth from the statement of the prosecutor, h; felt himself called on to state the reasons why he thought this prosecution could not proceed. For this extraordinary prosecution itself, he could not refrain from saying, as a lawyer and a gentleman, that he considered it the most illiberal, the

most unwise, and the most repugnant to all the feelings which dignify human nature that had ever fallen under his observation. The learned gentleman then contended, that from what had now been stated by the Advocate Depute, the trial could not proceed. He called the attention of the court to the crimes stated in the major proposition, and then adverted to the particular offences with wich the prisoner was charged in the minor; and as in each case it was stated, not merely that a marriage by a person not authorised, but a clandestine marriage without proclamation of bans, was celebrated by this person, blending in both cases the incapacity of the celebrator with the omission of the proclamation, the learned gentleman contended, that unless the prosecutor would undertake to prove that the bans were not proclaimed, he must relinquish the trial. If, however, their lordships should be of a different opinion, it must of course be in the view of the court and jury, that the prisoner was entitled to assume, that the bans had been proclaimed. He trusted, however, that the trial would be stopped.

The Lord Justice Clerk observed, that the trial could not stop, but the arguments of the prisoner's council were worthy of the consideration of the jury.

A number of witnesses were then examined by the Advocate Depute, and several as to the character of the prisoner, whe all bore testimony to its being most respectable.

The jury were then addressed by the Advocate Depute, and

after

afterwards by Mr. Grant, on behalf of the prisoner.

Lord Succoth then proceeded to sum up the evidence. His lordship adverted fully to the several points of law connected with the statute founded on, and the case at issue. We understood him upon the whole to be of opinion—1st, that the statute libelled on was in full force; 2dly, that a marriage celebrated by a Popish priest, with or without the proclamation of bans, between what parties soever, even when both are Catholics, was irregular and inosderly, and that the celebrator was liable to the penalties of the statute; and thirdly, that the Pannel had celebrated an irregular and inorderly marriage.

The jury having for some time retired, returned a verdict, finding bv a plurality of voices the libel not proved, whereupon the Pannel was assoilzied simplicity, and dismissed from the bar. The result of this trial appeared to -afford much satisfaction to the crowded audience that attended. —(Caledonian Itiercury.J

Court of King's Bench, Dublin, Nov. 13.—Doctor Troy and the Dublin Grand Jury.—This day, after twelve o'clock, the crier was directed by the Court to call the Rev. John Duffy, who had been served with an order to attend the Court.

Mr. Duffy appeared, and was directed to come as near as possible to the bench.

Chief Justice.—How long, Sir, since you were appointed Catholic Chaplain to Newgate?

Rev. Mr. Duffy.—I really do not k»ew, my Lord; but the

Grand Jury have appointed me for life, after a week's deliberation on my arguments, and—

Chief Justice.—Have you discharged the duties of a Chaplain since your appointment by the Grand Jury?

Mr. Duffy.—My Lord, I would have done it, if my Prelate had not prevented me.

Chief Justice.—Was any violence offered to you by any person in the gaol, which could prevent your attendance?

Mr. Duffy.—Certainly not.

Chief Justice.—Then, Sir, you have not discharged the duty?

Mr. Duffy.—My Lord, spiritual obedience is a first principle of the Catholic church, and I might as well attempt to destroy the entire Christian church, as to subvert any one of the principles.

Chief Justice.—1 merely wished to ascertain the fact, whether or not you discharged the duties of Roman Catholic Chaplain to the gaol of Newgate, and I find you have not. Our conduct is directed by an Act of Parliament, which we are bound to follow without either abating or exceeding its directions. It was our province to recommend, if we thought proper, to the Grand Jury to appoint a Roman Catholic Chaplain to Newgate; we had no power to particularise any individual, and God forbid we ever should exceed our powers. The Grand Jury accordingly appointed this gentleman; but owing to some interference he has not discharged the duties of the statjgn, and therefore must be removed by this Court, to which the Legislature has entrusted the right of inquiry into the transaction.

Bev. Mr. Duffy.—My Lord, I have not been allowed to attend.

Chief Justice.—All that is necessary for us to know b, that the gentleman did not attend. He says he was prevented * * *

Mr. Duffy—(interrupting.)— By my superior, my Lord.

Chief Justice.—You may call him your superior, Sir, if you wish; and 1 am sure you think him so, but 1 know nothing about him. Had the gentleman been prevented by illness, or any legitimate cause of absence, we should certainly extend to him the indulgence, which in such a case he would have a right to expect. We must direct his dismissal, and desire the Grand Jury to proceed to the appointment of another.

Mr. Duffy.—My Lord, I am appointed for life, and am to receive the salary whether in England, Ireland, France, or America. The Grand Jury have so determined.

Mr. French.—My Lord, I would beg leave to offer a few words on hehalf of Mr. Duffy.

Justice Osborne.—Doyou mean to deny the fact of non-attendance?

Mr. French.—Certainly not, rny Lord.

Justice Osborne.—Then you can say nothing for the gentleman.

Mr. French.—I declare, my Lord, 'tis very hard if a respectable officer of the Court, who is threatened with dismissal, will not be allowed the benefit of counsel.

Justice Daly.—Mr. French, if you mean to contend for the legal admissibility of the cause which prevented his attendance, I, for

one, most certainly, will not bear you.

Mr. French.—No, my Lord; what I mean to shew is, that the duty has been performed by some persons, and therefore, that it is not a case requiring the interference of the Court, as the object of the Legislature has been satisfied.

Justice Osborne.—The Statute does not permit that the duty should be done by proxy.

Mr. French.—My Lord, Dr. Troy threatened to excommunicate him.

Mr. Duffy.—Yes, my Lord, if I would even distribute the bread.

Mr. French.—he would not even allow him to distribute the bread, my Lords. 1 have the letter of the Prelate in my hands, in which he threatens him.

Chief Justice.—We must discharge our duty, and therefore dismiss the gentleman. I certainly lament his situation very much, but we have no discretion left to us. All I shall say in addition to what I have already stated is, that if the power of the Legislature of this Court, and of the Grand Jury, to appoint a Roman Catholic Chaplain to Newgate is denied, I certainly will not admit the authority of any other superior.

Trial of Mr, Joseph Blackburn, of Leeds, for Forgery. York Castle, March 18. It being generally known that the trial of this unfortunate gentleman was to come on this morning, the Court was filled to excess at a very early hour.

Sir Simon Le Blanc entered

the

the Court a few minutes past nine «»*clock, when Mr. Blackburn and Mr. Wainewright were placed at the bar.

After the swearing of the jurors, Air. Wainewright was removed from the bar, and the Court proceeded to the trial of Mr. Blackburn.

Mr. Richardson opened the indictment, and stated the facts which he intended to establish by the testimony of the different witnesses in support of the prosecution.

Mr. John Atkinson, attorney at hvw, Leeds, produced a deed, which he stated to have been received from Mr. John Scott, one of the stewards of a benefit society, on the 11th of February, and which had been in his possession ever since.

Mr. J. Scott stated, that he was a steward to a Society, called the Clothiers' Benevolent Society. There is a chest, in which are deposited the deeds and securities belonging to the society; the witness took the deed, produced by Mr. Atkinson, out of this box on the first Monday in February, and delivered it to the landlady of the house where the box was kept, and received it back on the Saturday following.

Mrs. Mary Fluker, the landlady, stated, that she received a deed from the last witness on the day he had stated; that she delivered it to him again on the Saturday following, and that in this interval it was never out of her possession.

Mr. J. Scott then proceeded to state, that he delivered the deed so received from Mrs. Fluker, to Mr. Atkinson, at his office, on Sa

turday the 11th of February last, in the same state in which he received it.

Mr.Thomas Taylor stated, that he knew Mr. Blackburn very well; employed him to make a mortgage for him about last November, for the society known by the name of the Clothiers' Friend Society, and took his deeds for that purpose to Mr. Blackburn; the sum to be secured was ISOl. Witness aFterwards saw the mortgage-deed, which is that now produced, and which was prepared for him by Mr. Blackburn. Witness does not recollect whether any person but Mr. Blackburn was in the office when he called.

Charles Smith was employed in the office of Mr. Blackburn, to engross deeds. On the deed in question being shewn to the witness, he said it was engrossed by him in November last, and was either delivered: by him to Mr. Blackburn, or left in his office.— Witness looked at the name of one of the attesting witnesses, signed "Jo. Blackburn," which he said was the hand-writing of Mr. Blackburn.

Mr. Musgrave stated, that he was one of the attesting witnesses to the deed in question, and that Mr. Blackburn was the other. Witness did not go to Wakefield to register the deed, nor did he take any oath on that occasion. The word "sworn," he stated, was written opposite to Mr. Blackburn's name.

Mr. Abraham Smith said that he is one of the stampers at the Stamp-office, in London, and has been in that situation 16 or 17 years. When the stamping for the day is coDeluded, the dies arc

put

« PreviousContinue »