them, they found on each a sovereign, an half crown, and a shilling. The money was produced and identified by the prosecutor and Mr. Holmes. This was the case for the prosecution.

The prisoners being called upon for their defence, they both repeated the charge, and persisted in stating that the contents of the letter were true. They called no witnesses. The counsel for the prosecution said, they were possessed of evidence to show that, in point of fact, the prisoner Gardener was in bed at his lodgings, seven miles from the spot, at the very time when he represented himself to have witnessed the supposed transaction in question; but the learned judge said, that such evidence was quite unnecessary, the utter falsehood of the charge having been demonstrated by the witnesses already examined.

The jury immediately found the prisoners guilty.-Mr. Baron Graham sentenced the prisoners to be transported for the term of their natural lives.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH
APRIL 15.

Byrne v. Parkins.

Mr. C. Phillips stated the case on the part of the plaintiff. The plaintiff became the object of commiseration in consequence of the vices of another individual; and Mr. Parkins undertook to collect and receive the sums which might be subscribed for his benefit. The charge against Mr. Parkins was, that he withheld a portion of those sums. It would be shown, that early in September, 1822, he confessed that he had received. 150l. on account of Byrne, and this not boastingly-not jocosely-but as a

matter of business and calculation, to Mr. Cobbett, who interested himself in the plaintiff's favour. Mr. Parkins proposed to remit 1007. to Byrne in Ireland, from which Mr. Cobbett dissuaded him, and cautioned him to take care, on his own account, how he advanced so much money, which might never be repaid. "Oh," replied Mr. Parkins, "I can be no sufferer, for I have already received 150l." Now he would produce the defendant's own account delivered to Mrs. Byrne, acknowledging the receipt of 150l. after the arrival of Byrne in England, and making, together with the 150l. mentioned to Mr. Cobbett, the sum of 300l.

Mr. William Cobbett was then called, and appeared in the box.

Mr. Parkins: Now, Mr. Cobbett, let me ask, do you believe in the Bible?-Mr. Cobbett: Let me ask you, if you believe that you are the father of Hannah White's bastard child.

The Lord Chief Justice: Pray, Sir, answer the question.

Mr. Cobbett: It is not the Bible, it is the Testament.

Mr. Parkins: Do believe in you it?-Mr. Cobbett: I do believe in

it.

Mr. Cobbett was then examined by Mr. Patteson, and gave evidence as follows:-I know Mr. Parkins and Byrne, I recollect a subscription being collected for the plaintiff. I had a conversation with Mr. Parkins in September, 1822, about a fortnight before Byrne's arrival in England. Mr. Parkins told me he had written a day or two before to Dublin, signifying his readiness to send 100l. to a Mr. Stanton, the editor of a newspaper, on account of Byrne. I advised him not to send the 100l., as it would be better to keep it till

Byrne arrived, and give it him here; and I asked him how he could venture to send 100l. already, expressing my surprise that he had the means of doing so in his hands. He replied, "Why, man, I have got 150l. in my hands." It might be a little more, or a little less; but 150l. was the sum I understood him to mean, and which he certainly mentioned. I think the conversation ended in his agreement not to send the 100l. He did not speak boastingly; we were talking seriously of the matter. I was urging him not to lay out the money improvidently; and to be careful how he sent it to Ireland. When Byrne came, he obviously was destitute of means, except from the subscription, though something had been given to bring him over. On the 1st or 2nd of November, I had a conversation with Mr. Parkins as to how Byrne should live most economically till the subscription should be completed. I proposed that he should go to live with Mr. Blair, a farmer, at Worth, in Sussex, where he would live at very little expense, and that expense I was willing to bear myself, that his money might not be wasted. Mr. Parkins objected to that plan, and said he had a place for him to reside in, at no expense at all that the little victuals he would want, he would give him; and that he (Mr. Parkins) wanted Byrne to go round with him to meetings and societies, that he might show the people the sufferer, and induce them to contribute for him. I yielded, on this, though with great reluctance; he overpowered me with professions of sincerity I thought him sincere; I could not think otherwise. -Mr. Parkins then began to crossexamine Mr. Cobbett. As you have told a long story about me which I

:

know nothing about, I will ask you a few questions. Pray what trade are you? Mr. Cobbett : What trade? I am neither a dogseller nor a coach-maker.-The lord chief justice, with much urbanity, said, "That is not the way to answer the question.”— Mr. Cobbett: must I answer it my lord? The Lord Chief Justice: Why not? cannot you say you are a bookseller, if you are so? It is not for me to instruct you; but 1 have heard you are so.-Mr. Cobbett: Well, I am a bookseller. I never saw you but once before you spoke about Byrne, when you told me you were the son of the duke of Norfolk, and he owed you 28,000l. I do not believe a word of it. You also told me, lord Sidmouth had paraded his daughters before you, to get you to marry one of them. The witness was cross-examined as to his having written certain articles in The Statesman and the Register, none of which, however, were read; and being asked whether he had not recommended Parkins to invest 100l. in American stock for Byrne. Replied: No, never. I never recommended stock to any human being-no paper money. "Get your money and lock it up," I have said to everybody. If I recommended that you should take the chair at Byrne's dinner, it was because you had the money.-I said, "What are we to do? If we go without Parkins, he has the money, and he will sack it."-Mr. Parkins: -Did I not offer to leave the chair, in consequence of your introducing something about the bishop?-No; I thought you went to it a great deal too eagerly, and stuck to it a great deal too long.-Mr. Robert Bell stated, that, in the spring of 1823, the defendant told him he

had not paid Byrne all the money he had received for him; and in the winter of the same year, he told witness he had employed him to take care of his stables.-Catherine Byrne, daughter of the plaintiff, proved an account delivered by the defendant to her mother. The account was read, and stated the subscriptions received, to the 7th April 1823, to be 151l. 8s. 3 d. -This was the plaintiff's case.

Mr. Parkins called Mr. Henry Hunt, who stated, that, in November, 1822, the defendant introduced the plaintiff to him as the injured Byrne, and mentioned the sum that had been subscribed for him to that time, which was certainly under 50l. Two or three days after, Byrne called on him, and said Parkins was going to set him up in a livery-stable, and requested witness to send him his horses.Several witnesses proved payments of small sums by Parkins on Byrne's account.-Mr. Phillips admitted that the plaintiff had received 50l. from the defendant.-Mr. Tozer was called and sworn, but it appeared he came only to speak to the character of Scott, who was not examined.-Mr. C. Phillips: Pray, Sir, were you not principal operator to the late Johanna Southcote? The Lord Chief Justice: You need not answer that question; it has nothing to do with this cause.- -Witness: My lord, I have no objection to answer it. I was -and I think it an honour of which I may boast before the whole world.

The Jury found for the plaintiff, damages 1531. 5s. and costs.

Report of the PRIVY COUNCIL. At the court of Carlton-House, the 14th of June, 1825.. Pre

sent, The King's Most Excellent Majesty in Council. Whereas, there was this day read at the Board, a report from a committee of the lords of his majesty's most hon. privy council, dated the 7th of last month, in the words following, viz. :—

"Your majesty having been pleased, by your order in council of the 15th of November, 1822, to refer unto this committee, the humble petition of William Rough, sergeant at law, late president of the honourable the court of criminal and civil justice of the united colony of Demerara and Essequibo: setting forth, that the petitioner, in the beginning of the year 1816, went out from England in the abovementioned capacity, and resided abroad as president until December 10, 1821. That, however, in the month of October of that year, by a violent act of authority, the petitioner was suspended from the exercise of his functions in such office, by his excellency majorgeneral Murray, lieutenant-governor of the said colony. That the petitioner during the weighty and important disputes that have agitated that colony, over the court of criminal and civil justice, of which it was his lot to preside, has ever been fixed and constant in his determination, fearlessly to confide in the law and in your majesty, a sentiment which at various stages of the contentious transactions in which his duty to your majesty has engaged him, he has undeviatingly and perpetually expressed, that your majesty's principal secretary of state for the colonial department, the right hon. earl Bathurst, although he has not deemed it expedient to refer the petitioner's case, upon his request, for the opinion of your majesty's

legal officers, has yet nevertheless been pleased to avoid himself making any final decision thereon, and has further been indulgent enough to engage to the petitioner, that he shall be aided and assisted with all documents and evidence from time to time lodged by the petitioner in his (the colonial) department, so that the petitioner's case may, as a whole, be fully heard and investigated. That the petitioner, therefore, conceiving himself to have been deeply injured and aggrieved by the above act of his excellency major-general John Murray, lieut.governor aforesaid, as well also as oppressed by the general conduct as connected with and leading to the said act of suspension of the said John Murray, from August 1, 1819, down to June and July of the year 1822, respectfully and humbly prays to be permitted, through your majesty's grace and favour, to state publicly his complaint and wrongs before your majesty in council. That the petitioner desirous of avoiding, if possible, the necessity of resorting on his part to his legal remedies of indictment and action (measures painful and distressing), respectfully entreats and begs, that after a perusal of his case, and documents by the right hon. the earl lord president, it be the gracious order and command of your majesty that the petitioner be referred for hearing, and for the production of further evidence to your majesty's right hon. privy council, and therein it may be agreed upon and determined what due reparation should be accorded to the petitioner, for the injuries to his honour and character which in the service of your majesty he has personally and officially sustained; and as the petitioner, if he had recourse to

harsher proceedings, would be empowered under the fatherly and protecting statute passed in the 42nd year of your majesty's most pious parent, his late majesty of blessed memory, to pray the punishment of deprivation of professional military rank against a lieutenantgovernor committing wrong, as the petitioner alleges the before-mentioned major-general Murray to have done; so, now the petitioner earnestly prays, that it may be referred by your majesty's gracious sense of justice, to your said right hon. privy council, to say whether such censure be not the only adequate reproof which your right hon. council can recommend to your majesty under the circumstances, to be made good by evidence. Lastly, the petitioner respectfully prays, that your majesty may be graciously pleased to relieve as early as possible the petitioner's mind from the painful consideration that he, as a judicial servant of your majesty, has been interrupted in and removed from (however undeservedly) the exercise of his functions, and with a view to extend to him such relief, that your majesty may be pleased to direct his case to be forthwith referred to your right honourable privy council, as referred. The lords of the committee, in obedience to your majesty's said order of reference, took the said petition into their early consideration, with the documents accompanying the same; and after several meetings on the subject matter thereof, directed that the petitioner should be informed that their lordships having repeatedly taken his said petition into consideration, together with the various and voluminous papers which had been successively presented by him, found it impossible