Current:

Leader (1850-1860), 19th June 1852, Edition Town of 2, Page 579, Untitled Article

Page 579
Page 7
7 of 24

On this page

  • Text (4)
  • Transcript

    • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

      Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

      Untitled Article

      • flionB of the statute of George IV .-, and expressing a hope rtfrtt he had so acted without any intention of violating the i w- otherwise it would be the duty of the Government to t the law in force . Since then he had not heard of any petition of the . offence in Ireland , and therefore it was 1 the intention of the Government to give a special Armas by publishing the proclamation in the Dublin Cazetbe unless a similar occurrence should take place . fThe-law ' he added , had not , as Kr . Keogh assumed , lain dormant J but it had come to the knowledge of the Government that Roiuan Catholicstin this country were going to renew those processions along the highways , whichhad wn done away for three hundred years , by marching from

      village to village with banners and emblems of their faith in hono of the Virgin Mary ; and one procession had taken place , which moved for four miles along the high road consisting of one hundred and fifty persons , with banners emblems , crucifixes , and images . He had no hesitation in saying that such a procession must givemuch annoyance to others of her Majesty's subjects ; and the Government thought it right to prevent such ^ viola tion of the law , in w hich instance danger actually existed of a breach of the peace , If the law in this respect were not observed , its violation must necessarily draw down punishment on those who , after this warning , wilfully infringed

      Mixitabt Intimidation . —The Secretary-at-War read a letter of explanation on Monday , in reference to the charge brought against General Thomas . by Mr . Crawford , of employing his influence to coerce the vote of Sergeant M'Bmiey , a pensioner , at the late Ennisldllen election . Canvassing on behalf of Mr . Whiteside was admitted , but the allegea intimidation was denied . Mr . Secretary Walpole considered General Thomas had acted with imprudence , but had not been guilty of intimidation . Sir Edward B lakeney has cautioned General Thomas to be more careful in future .

      Untitled Article

      LORD MALMESBTJRY A 3 STD MR . MATHER . The following additional letter from Mr . Scarlett was published on Wednesday : — " The Hon . P , G . Scabi-ett to the Eabl of Maimesbuet . —( Received June II . ) ' , ' Florence , June 1 , 1852 . "My Lord , —Having recovered sufficiently to dictate a letter , I will now give your Lordship an account of my reasons for accepting 1000 francesconi as an indemnity to Mr . Mather . " In the first place , it was extremely difficult to prevent the Tuscan Government from coupling the offer of payment with _ a protest against the principle of responsibility . The only way by which I could avoid this dilemma was to propose ' that alLdiscussio n about responsibility should be waived , and that the G overnment should simply compensate Mr . Mather for the injury done to him .

      " To this suggestion the Ministers at last agreed , and this point gained , I considered the amount of compensation of secondary importance , provided it were sufficient to mark distinctly the disposition of the Tuscan Government to show sympathy with the British subjects who may suffer similar outrages , by complying with the demands of her Majesty ' s Government . "In the second place , I bore in mind that Mr . Mather had himself rejected the idea of any pecuniary indemnity while at Florence , and declared emphatically that his object was to vindicate the national honour . "I am happy , also , to have reason to believo that tho extent of the injury was less than has been supposed , and there is no probability that if Mr . Mather ' s case had been submitted regularly to a Tus can tribunal , as it might havo been had the Austrian officer beon amenable to Tuscan law , so large a sum as 1000 francesconi would have been awarded .

      "Thirdly—However unjustifiable , in the eyes of civilized nations , are tho severe regulations of the Austrian military service , it must not be forgotten that by Mr . Mather's oton admission , his tone and manner towards the officer mi duty at t ho head of his troops , previous to tho assault , were , to say tho least , highly imprudent , and that to his own indiscretion must bo partly attributed the misfortune which bofel him . " Lastly—I thought it rig ht to tako tho advantago of tho opportunity which presented itself of obtaining tho liberation of tho two Strut < ordn , th . ua concluding all mattors of difference between the British and Tuscan Govornmonts .

      " Trusting that your Lordship and her Majesty s Go vornmont will approve of my proceedings I havo , Ac , ( Signed ) " P . Ca . mimjki . 1 . Scarlett . "

      Untitled Article

      ALDERMAN SALOMONS VICTORIOUS . An attorney named Chubb renewed the legal persecution of Mr . Alderman Salomons , by bringing an action in tho Court of Exchequer on Monday for tho rocovory of IBOCtf ., consisting of penalties for having illegally voted throe timcM in tho House of Commons as momber for Greenwich . Tho plaintiff ' s counsel , Mr . Edwin Tamos , Q . C ., narrated tho facts of the former action , Winch had beon brought for a similar object , in which Mo Court had docidod that tho defendant was liable , l > "t in which tho plaintiff hud ultimately taken tho verdict for one penalty only . This action , ho endeavoured to show , had boon friendly and collusive ; but Mo Chief Baron stopped him , snying that it would bo "" indent , to go into these matters when tlio defendant sot up tliis former action as a defence .

      Mr . John Abel Smith , M . I * ., was called to provo *» o proceedings in tho House of Commons ; hut on t- ' -tv objection of Mr . Willos , tho defendant ' s counsel , « nd on tho Chief Baron informing Mr . Smith that ho could not bo compelled to givo evidence of

      the proceedings of the House of Commons without the leave of the House , Mr . Smith consequently declined to answer any further questions on the subject . A clerk in the House of Commons produced a printed book , containing the journal and votes of the House ; but as he bad not examined that particular copy with the original ,. it was rejected as inadmissible . . .. . .. ¦ „"' Sir Denis Le Marchant , Clerk of the House of Commons , proved that Mr . Salomons , in taking the oaths , had omitted the magic words , " on the true faith of a Christian . "

      Mr . Gray remembered the voting of Alderman Salomons . " The vote is given first , and then it is recorded . He voted in the ordinary way in which a member votes . He came up in the lobby and caused his name to be inscribed in the Division List . He voted as a member three times on three divisions . " Lord Marcus Hill , M . P ., who acted as teller on the night in question was next called ; but a similar objection being taken to his evidence as to that of Mr . John Abel Smith * he decliHed ,,. to _ answer any questions as to the proceedings of the House . - -Mr . James urged that Lord Marcus Hill , as a teller , was included in the leave given by the House to its officers , and therefore might give evidence ; but the Chief Baron held that he was not an officer of the

      House . -Mr . James Jenkins , an attorney , was next called . He knew Alderman Salomons . He heard him state at a meeting at the City of London Tavern , called on the subject of the Jewish disabilities , that he had voted in the House , and that if the view taken by his opponents Was correct , he had incurred severe penalties . Mr . Gray was then recalled , and produced the original book kept by the clerk , containing the record of the proceedings of the House , and the entries of the three votes in question .

      Mr . Willes , in addressing the jury on behalf of the defendant , complained bitterly of the manner in which Mr , James , the counsel for the plaintiff , had opened his case , in endeavouring to excite a prejudice against the defendant . It was ; not Mr . Willes ' s intention to set up the other action as a defence ; but he maintained that the latter was a bond fide action , brought for the purpose of trying the question of law . The present action 7 however , was that of a mere informer , brought for the purpose of extortion . At all events , it was clear that the plaintiff could only recover for one penalty . _ _; .. ,

      The Chief Baron said he should so direct the jury . However many times a member might vote in one clay without having taken the proper oaths , he would only subject himself to one penalty of 5001 . Mr . James said he took a different view of the case , and should tender a bill of exceptions to such a direction . Mr . Willes said he had thought at one time that these proceedings had been instigated by some one who was anxious , on public grounds , to raise the question a second time ; hut he was now convinced that the action was that of a mere common informer , and that being the case , he was sure that the jury would look narrowly at the evidence , and reject tho plaintiff ' s case

      unless it was established by the clearest proof . He then submitted , that but for tho evidence of Mr . Jenkin , who was introduced as a joint conspirator with the defendant in the first place , and then assumed tho part of a spy and informer , there was no evidence on which the jury could fely for proof of the fact that Mr . Alderman Sidomons had committed any act , which would subject him to this penalty . Much evidence had been offered nnd rejected , and that which had been received and would bo left to their unprejudiced consideration by the learned judge was , ho asserted , wholly insufficient to satisfy tho jury that tho defendant had voted ; and unless that was made out by direct testimony , they wore bound to return a verdict for tho defendant , and so defeat tho informer .

      Tho Chief Baron in summing up , again gavo it as his opinion that only one penalty could bo recovered , arriving ut that conclusion from tho analogy of this case , both with other penal statutes which had been similarly interpreted , and with tho law affecting tho right of voting in tho Houso of Lords . Ho observed , ¦ that tho topic which the plaintiff ' s counsel had introducod was totally irrelevant , and had been brought in moHfc unnecessarily and improperly . Tho previous action" not having been pleaded , could not now be not up in uoioncu by tho defendant . " At tho same timo ho muat obsoryo that ho know no social obligation on a man in tho position of tho dolondunt , who had dono an act subjecting him to a penalty , to submit frt fhn mormr « f t . lin Urat . itlfnrmor . eBDOOlOlly When tllO

      penalty was incurred in tho open vindication ot what the dofendanfc bond fide believed to bo tho law of tho land and his rights . Tho Chief Baron afterwards proceodod to curoct

      the attention of the jury to the question , whether Mr . Alderman Salomons had been proved by te gal and sufficient evidence to have voted an the 21 st ot July " } the House of Commons . As this was an action under ahigbJy penal statute to recover a large penalty , and not an ordinary action for money , they ought to expect from the plaintiff direct and clear proof of the allegations in his declaration—the principal of which was , that the defendant had voted . This gave rise to the question , ^ In what did voting consist T At first , from the evidence of Mr . Gray , the Clerk of the House , he ( Sir 3 ? . Pollock ) would have inferred that a member voted when he entered the House from the lobby after a division ; but on consideration he should say that it was not so . Ueither did the act of

      putting down the name constitute the act of voting , in his opinion . It was the act of leaving the House after the question had been put which constituted the act of voting . That was his very strong opinion ; but it was difficult to say that a man had votett unless you could show how _ he voted , and though there was evidence here of three divisions , and the defendant ' s name had been inscribed as many times in the list by Mr . Gray as having voted , still there was no proof that he was in the House when the question was put , nor that he left it on the division taking place to go into the lobby for the purpose of voting ; so that in his opinion there was not that clear proof which ought to have been given , and might have been given , on the part of the plaintiff . But it was for the jury to decide that . "

      Sir F . Pollock was not aware that the plaintiff had given evidence of any arrangements in the House -which would make it certain that Mr . Salomons had left the House in order to proceed to the division . The . jury might have no moral doubt of the fact , but they ought to find for the defendant , unless they were satisfied , not by reasoning and inference , but by actual legal proof , of the commission by the defendant of the offence imputed to him . The Jury retired for five minutes , and on their returning , their foreman , who , it is said , was of the Jewish persuasion , announced a verdict for the defendant . Both parties tendered bills of exceptions to the summing up of the Chief Baron .

      Untitled Article

      POLICE INTERFERENCE IN BONNER'S FIELDS . The subjoined correspondence with the Secretary of State has been handed to us , and we readily give it publicity . 10 , Patriot Square , ^ Victoria Park , Kith May , 1852 . Sik , —I most respectfully inform you , that on Sunday ( this 16 th inst . ) an injudicious , and , in my opinion in common with others , an illegal interference with the rights of Englishmen took place , by the forcible prevention by the police of persons assembling in Bbnner ' is Fields to converse with each other—to exhort and address each other on social , political , and religious subjects , as by tho laws and customs of this country they have a right to do .

      The superintendent of the K division professed to act by tho orders of the Commissioners of Police , which , if so , makes this int erference a most grievous wrong requiring to be redressed , and such proceedings for tho futuro prevented . I most respectfully inquire of you whether tho order to interfere was issued direct from the Homo Office , and by what law , or pretenco of law , such interference has taken place . I am , Sir , respectfully yours , Jas . Savage . To tho Hon . — Wolpole , Her Majesty ' s Secrotary of State for the Homo Department .

      To which tho following reply ( not answer ) was received on tho 1 st of Juno : — ¦ Whitehall , 31 st May , 1852 . gIB }—I am directed by Mr . Secretary Walpolo to acknowledge tho recoipt of your complaint of tho infcorforenco of tho police to prevent persons assembling in Bonnor ' s Fields on Sundays ; ana to inform you that Mr . Walpole has inquired into tho facts of tho caso , and is of opinion that tho interference of tho polieo was not improper . I am , Sir , your obedient servant , S . J . H . JoiXIB'Ii'H , Mr . JamcB Rayngo , 10 , Patriot finuare , Victoria Park ;

      Qy . —Will tho opinion of tho Homo Socrotary bo considered by thopooplo of this country a sufficient warrant for proceedings not sanctioned by law , nnd subversive of thoir rights ? J . S . As our readers know , mounted and foot police , armed with swords , dispersed tho people assembled to preach and teach . On May 23 , the Sunday following the arbitrary reply of Mr . Walpolo , who simply informed tho members for tho Tower Hamlets that no one would bo allowed to preach there , tho fields presented a romarkablo spectacle . " Several thousands of

      portions / ' says tho Daily News , " wore walking about , who , tho moment tho polieo had vacated any spot , collected thoro in groups , discussing and conversing , till the police came again and dinpersed them . Two speakers began to uddreHH tho people ; and , on being forcibly removed by tho police , requested to bo taken into custody : but tho police averred that thoir orders wore to arrout nobody . This denial of an opportunity to tost tho legality of tho prohibition was perploxing . It was difficult to soo how nny kind of publio meeting on any day of tho wcok , could be secure from , repres-

      Untitled Article

      June 19 , 1852 . ] T H E L E A D E R . 579

  • Citation
    • Leader (1850-1860), June 19, 1852, page 579, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1940/page/7/