Law Report.
This action against the Proprietor of Th.e Morning Chromicle for a libel, excited greatinerest, ant caused the Court to be crowdea at an early hour. Mr. GURNEY, Dir. CAMBELL, Alr. CHITTY, and Mr. WILDE, were Counsel for the plaintiff; the ATTORNEY- GENERAL, Mr. SCARLETT, Mr. DEN2MAN, Alr. BROUGHA31, and Dlr. PLATrT for the defendant. Dfr. WILDE opened the pleadings. The declaration stated that the plaintiff had established a lace-fateory, and had taken children apprentices from parishes to learn the work; and that defendant publisbed a libel of him, relatin. to the management of those chil- dren. To this dedaration, the d1efendant pleaded-first, the general issue; and secondly, a justification that the matters of the alleged. libel were true. Mr. Gut.NEY opened the case on the part of 'the plaintifF, wbo now sought redreps for a verv serieus injury against the defendant, who w.as sole proprictorof Tic Mornii,gChronicle. Dlr. Banks, the plaintiff, carried on a trade in lace, in heapside, and bad establish. ,ed a manufactory at Bermondsey. At this manufactory the lace was worked in a tambour frame, an operation of much delicacy, re- quirinF the exercise of some taste, rendering cleanliness absolutely requisite,and, on the whole, far from undesirable as an emplovment for parish children. To this occupation parish officers were naturaUy disposed to apprentice children; they sent officers to visit the manu- faeto-y aad, on the report which they received, were convincedi that the situation was proper for these whom it was their duty to guard. The officers of the parish of Alar.ylebone iA particular, which might almost be called a model of a parish, where the comforts ef the poor and the interests of the public were protected with peculiar carc, had sent children on trial,, slad directed a fminute inspection of the premises, and, being fully satisfied with the result, applied to Mr. Griffiths and Mlr. Jloskins, two magistrates of the district, for their allowance of the binding of several children to Mr. Banks. Those gentlemen had some doubts on the subject, and wished that further time should be allowed: the managers of the poor did not think delay necessary or desirable, and accordingly ordered applica. tion to be made to two other magistrates. In consequence of this dctermination. Air. Turnour and Mr. Bouverie wereapDlied to- and, under their samction, the binding was effiected. Uion tbis, Ar. Griffiths expressed great displeasure; and, on his suggeslin, a meeting of' magistrates was appointed for the 27th of October to examine the tactorv. 51r. Banks made no objection to receive them: he stated that, in point of strict right; they could not insist on visiting his remises, because, acordinK to an opinion which he had taken, he w as not within the operation of Sir R. Peel's hill; but he was not only willing but anxious that they should have the fullest opportunity to examine the whole of the premises. They did so; dhe opinion which they formed was never publicly expressed;; but some of diem undoubtesity were highlv gratified by what they SaW. In feet, the work was far from severe; the children were under the superintendence of a respectable house- keeper; and the greatest care was taken of their health and morals. t of this transaction, th e attack wfas framed of which Mr. Banks had to complain-a most invidious aiid unfair statement it un- doubtedly was, and accompanied bv very injurious comments, it was probably the work of some interested encmy who might be dis- covered in tlie course of the caugse; but if the cditors of ncwspapers would lend tbeir col.umns to the malignant feelings of others, t ey must be held liable for the ipjuries which they inflicted. The arti. cle appeared in the Aloriting Ci rotiiel of the 14th of November, and was headed '- Parish Aporentices" to catch the eye. It began thus-"1 A case relating to parish apprentices, which occurred some days ago, deservesmore notice than it has yet received. The factsare these :-Several very little girls, not exceedinig nine years old, were brought by the parish-officers of Alarylebone, for the purpose of beiiig bound to the ppgrietor of a very large lace-rnanufactory in the countv of Surrey. Theproprietor was present, and was ques- tioned as to the mode of work, and the treatment the poor children would experience whilst under his care. The answers were such, that the magistrates considered the subject to be of that imp'ortance. that it required investigation: and they declined executing the in. dentures, and told the parishn officers, that nothing ought to be done till proper inquirv had been made. IHowever, thseiuarish-officers had the children taLen before otber magistrates, and bound in due form of law. Tbis proceeding having reached the ear of MIr. Griffiths, before whomthe case had originaly come, an appointment was made with the magistrates of the different police-offices to visit the manu- &actorv. and to ascertain the mode and hours of work the children were required to submit to. Accordingly, the m.agistrates proceeded to the manufactory. The deputation was met on the pre- mises bv the princidial of the establish-'uent. The mnagistrates made -himn-ac.ruaintea with the nature,of their i and -itW2sS at irst contended that they had no authority to interfere; but this objec- tion was overruled, and the inspection proceeded." This was (s2; d Ilr. (Gumey) a gross misrepresentadon-no objection was inade- but, on the contrary, though Air. Banks did not considet himself legaly under the control of the magistrates, he invited them tQ go over the whole premises. The artice proceeded-" There weze up- wards of 30 little girls, about half that number not more than nine Years of age"-(a direct falsehood; for out of 30 children then emi. ployed in the manufactory, only five were under 10)_-" employed at rames, over whicl they sat in a bent position, woxting figures upon net, and this for 12 hours every day'.' This was also untrue; for the tiine allotted for work was scarcely raore.-than 10 hours a day; and of theae. two hours were allowed fbi reveation and food; whereas Sir Robert Peel's bill, wvhickFapplied only to mach severer laboar, specified 12 hours of actnue work. The writer proceeded-4 "The magistrates warmly expressed their disapprobation that Ct ?h dres of tbeir tender ages sbould he employed so msay hons in t i davy and recommended some relaxatlon." It was not true that they warmly expressed their disapprobation: Mr. Griffiths might, because, having come in a passion, he did not get cool; but the others were far otherwise disposed. The learned counsel then read the rest of the article, which reprobated in strong terms the emploympent of young children in such a business without education, and with scanty food and clothing; and cornciued. by expressing his confidence that the defendant would fail in establishing his justification, and that the jury .would vindicate the plaintiff's character, by giving him ad ample comnpensation in damages. Mr. Uhaumbe.s, one of the magistrates for Surrey, who sat within the bar in an evident state of great infirmity and agitation, request- ed that lie might be caUed first, and was accordingly, out of the or- der ofthe case,examined by Alr.CAres'EPLL.-He said-On the 22d of October last I inspected the manufactory of ihe plaintiff at Ber- mondsey, in company with other magistrates, in order to see if it was proper for parish apprentices. I thought the children's bed- rooms were too crowded, and not snfficientlv-ventilated; but the si- tuation of the house was very airy. |Here Mr..Chamberi became exceedingly agitated, and said tbat he had left a brother dying, and was in a very afflicted state both of body and mind. The oItRD CH tEF JUSTICE said, that if Mlr. Chambers's evidence was essen- tial to the cause, he would discharge the jury. That gentleman, however, entreated that this course might not be taken, and express. ed his readiness to proceed; the counsd on both sides stating that theywould troublebhim withas fewquestionsas.posible.J. He&sid. Since I inspected the manufsAory, Ibave bound several parish chidren to Mr. Banks; but I have require, from time to time, certificates from him of an extension of premises, before I would as- low of the'apprenticeship of more children. Cross-examined by tbeATToRNEY-GEyOERAL-I think two-or three children slept in a bed: I do not recollect which. Mr. (Grif. fiths, the surgeon, sacomsnnied us, and made a. report: 1 do tot know where it is. Alr. Banks had. no wift, which we thought Sr objectionl; but le sbowedt 6srespectble woman, who acted as bousekeeper; sad oasimred us -be would miLkearrazgements for the instruction of the children,' Whether -tbey had been so instructe4 remaodftbe offie tBi we wfresatisHeathit we muigheaifelv bind the children to the triae. M.Sykes, from thle Stump-office, Ioduced tke affidavit of the dfendant, in which be described himneif as printer, publisher, and Sole yrerietor of the Mor-ning Chronicle. ne , FornissochJro,eick of the 14th of November, 1823, was put fl1, aild tfle rtcevead. The -principal pssages have been already acet forth, as Part of Mr. Gurney'g sneecb. M~r. 'WIlamBnssi..I aitie brother of the plaintiW, and superintend his factory at Bermondsev. Lace is not manufactured, bu t Is s worked there lIn July, 1823, we began to take appiren. tiict5 On the 27th of October. we had about 30-; ten had bees bound, five were about to be fro'm the parish of Mlaryleoe n th einiuning 1,5 were on trial. Tihe youngest was about 94 years Old thtre 'was. o-nlv that child under 10 years of age. Thern were 1fior 17 between 10 an~d 11 ; the rest were older ; the eldesl was 14. The premises wvere formerly used for the employment 01 the Poor in the Deaf and Dumb Asylum. All the siunrerintenjlents. ec5Pt msl and o-ne other, were females, of whom there were ninme or ten, with ahbousekeeper. The hours of work were, in summei from "even in the morning, and in winter from eight in the morn. 11og till eighbt in the evening; but as candles were never used in thi Tnomin neimesbegalater iiiwinter. Half an hour was al. low Obe~~e;an i huand haffor dinner; and half oi qureso nhour for tea The'work was cleanly, and if th chidrn wrenotao Itinured thie work. The children had mill sad bred in te morn ngmeat for dinner five days, and stoup tw* in teevamg,teaor mle.The housekeeper wag directed to give thi chidre aswinh a tey couild eat. Bibles, Testaments, 1'rayer vide oter boksfor moral instruction, and copy-books, were pro for he ci]drn. Te housekeeper heard them read till wi Procured a schoLatrfrte purpoge, (which we did as soon a! POSibl,)I blive vey dy.IA frame was produced, and the wit, nes decried he ttiude hiwhich the children were placed a wor atthefraie,and showed that they might perform it at an., SlOe, ndsitingorstandingat pleasure. On Sundays, thechildrei attededthepadih curc of t. aryiiagdalen, Bermondsey sc. compnie by feale. Two of the chiildren by turais performee? do. medc 'orkin hebouse. They mended their own clothes, fo 'whch imewasallwed. I waw present at a meeting of magistrate on te 27h o Octber when four or jive inspected the factory. M5r CambIers '. Wyatt, Mfr. Griffiths, Mlr. Broderip, and Air. Gait% l-ell, vwas Shre tIr emr wXas the medical attendant appointed t4 Suspect the helho the children from the first. The Magistrate loocedl over thewoe some of them seemed to express disasatisfac tdon at the em lomet I tbelieve Alr. Griffith moamt M1r.Wys? ome little; ' ontreco!lect hearing any of the others. MIi 'Wyatt thought some of the children seemed young, and some of th s3tools were too hiigh, and the children leaLnt too much over thb framem-..a habit for which there is no necessity, and which we cor sect aa ofteni as we observe it. Somnething might have been said re sPectwIg the proriety of anadditional window in the attir,wbiehwa CrOss..examined.- believe Af r. Chambers ex-pressed his diseatis factiOn a,t he place not being sufficiently ventilated., arstd the chil deco sleepin three ltt aileda. No copies of Sir Robert Peel's act 47 Gleo. 11L, c. 75, were hung up in the factory. Cotton is. usqed ii n large proportion in the manuifacture of the lice. Ont the 27th o ~Octir; There were frames worked horizontally. Before that day, ennlot swear the children were taught writing. They read after n.tbse evening. No room was at that time set apart as a school ro but one had been provided since. Our arrangemnentst were nto nYUIlele. Piveof thel5dapprenticeson trildwerefromSt.George'. P.54 t. ne badla scrofuleuis complaint whaen she came! ailiv 'e0stback to the parish ; I did not see that they were dirty an( dsse.Since.the '27th of October, the children only sleep two ii abed; the factory has been more ventilated, a schoolmaster anc rMUam rVided, and the children instructed in the hours of work An additional winidow had been ordered in August, but not put up I do not recollect my brother teeIling me that he sa-w this article ii Thte Times, andI several otherpapers, before he saw it in the Charonzicle Re.examinedl...We have 52 apprentices, increasing- the accommo datlOn with the nuambers. We were interrupted in consequence o the newspapers ; Parish-officers visited u.s; antd we met w1ith objec tiODs unyfil they were remnoved by inspection. M rs. Elizabeth Dowrling, a woman of very respectable appearance whro herself had brought up a family of ten chilidren, said she be camne hOusekeeper of thefatr on the 18th of August. The cliil sire had proper food, reg=ulate accordiog to their age and appetite they were kept very clean ; and she heard them read, and read ti themi, and sornetimes explained the Bible in the evening. Thern were prayers overv evening. The children attended ehuxeb twice or onnday, and had religious instruction in the evening. They wert healthy; she constantly took the same care of them as of her ows children;- necessary clothin y was supplied to themn. On cro'ss.examninaein, Air. SckAat.-zTr asked the witness wbet'he She intended to remaini til the children wer out of their apprentice ship ? Shereplie hy skn " Can You promise mie, Sir, I shal. live so long.? whizs excited mnuch faughter. Sarah Annan, a young womatt af rather elegan~t appearance, on, of the teachers of work at the factonr, corroborated the evidence o. M1r. Banks as to the hours of work~ and stated that the childrer 'were allowed to play after dinnier. TIhe sloping of the frames wal an invention of Jr. Banks. Colonel Gaitskell, a magistrate for Surrey, said, that soon affei the establishment of the mainufactory', he went to visit it, in coin. pzny of AMr. Nottage, on the application of the parish officers The children then were clean and healthy ; but the Magistrates did nool greatly admire their sitting horizontailv, and 'were told it could easily be remedied by changing the Ieeto of. efae.T went without niotice, anid were immedilately. admitted. On the 22e] of October he went again with the other Magistrates. The ch'ilarer seemed then clean and healthy, but some objections were taken te the ventilation and to the numbe-rin thiebeds. They made aminute examninatio'~i inquired as to instruction, and objected to three lyins in a bed. Ilhey suggesteil some few aerto,'whic'h Mir. Bank! s.aid he should be mnost willing to ma'ke. They told him he camin under Sir TL. Peel's act; he said, if he did he 'would comoply witi its regulations, but he took an opinion, and then'stated that he found he was not. It was an excellet situaation for a manufactory It October blrl. Banks tolelMr. Ake duth?leabouId . 3e.v at anv time to se'n Some of the miagistrates were at die pre, misei before his arrival. Crossexwmined-Notne of the thildre-n appeared under nine some seemed a'bOut that age. All the magistrates 11 expressed theii disapprobation that children of so tender age shiould be emnployed so many ho ",and recomimended some relaxation. A paper was drawn up by1Ifr. Chaml5er%, which alsigned. Mr. (3riffiths and Mlr. Wyatt saidl they should not direct children to be bound to Mr. Banks till some alteration was made. The chief objection was, 'what 'was to become of the girls after they had terved. their time Mr. Banks said they could eamr from, 7,..~ 'or the, to 17si. or lBs. week, ac-cording to thteir proficseiicv. Mtr. Nottage. the magistrate who acmaidM.Gi8el agreed with him in opinion,.copne r lieel Mrs. Wright, who worked ini the mannu'actory, at mending, ani was herself a married woman, apreed with the preceding witnesses, as to tJhe good regulation of the children. Mlr. Philip Hlurd, the attorney for the plaintiff, who attended al the manufactory whetn it waa visited by the magistrates, was callec to provas that there was no opposition ofVered to the magistrates' ad' mission. He stated that he infoirmed Air. Broderip, that his client had received an ojnion thatbhe was not within Sir R. P eel's act. hut that it was not taken with s--siaw to -prevent the inspectioni ofirmagis- trates, who were invited to inspet the premises. Air. GuRtKEv said, that he had the childreii here who were there oni the 27th of October, except those refused, to show what tiseis apgearancea was, and begged that room might be made for them. Mlr. v uJ 3anks stated they were all heie, except three who had slight colds. A crowd of little girls, decently dressed, and generally looking heltyappeared in Court, a-ad seemed much p leasedwt h oy dai ~he smnallest appeared about 9 years old. ?r. Edward Whitting-tn, mnessenger to the workhouse of AMary. lebone, statedI that he was direeted by the maniagers to go to the nma. nufactory to Make inepuimes as to thec managemnent of the chidren, and the conduict of Air. Banks. He thought the place spacious, cleanly, desirable, and so reported ; in consequence of which they atmtdtyet five children hound. They first ple at the Po. lc-egiHigh-street r the children were tnoatpptheend bound, the magistrates beingz-desirou8 of further inquiry, and of tie atteudana oftehesurgeon to see the premises. Thewitness said inqutiryhad been already made, and the managers directed himr to apply to M'r. Tnt. nour and Mr. B3ouwerie, and by their directions the children were bound. The indenture wasread, and appeared tobedated.afterthe publication charged to be libellous. The Hon. and Rev. Edward Turnott, tdie mag istrate who joiin. edl in binding the children, said lie went over tle whole manufac. tory on Sunday, the Ilth of January, and was perfectly satisfied 'with the place, and appearance of the childreni. This was the case tot the plaintiff: The A'YToiENE,Y4GIENEIALsedhinitted that the plaintifftmust bec nonsuited, as'hechad alleged in his declaration that the children vereapprrentkce before the publication of the article ; and in every, -coaut., the article was said to he published "ofa nid cnotetning the said apprenticeship," sio that there was a f.stal miasdescription running thAnigh the whole. ?r,. GuRtEy, Mlr. CAXPMS'LL, and Mlr. CHrTTY argued that the objection taken was not fatal. Before the Losb CsstvF JejsTrcg had decided this point, a mmmunlcatio, took place between the Counsel, after which r,eTToRFL-4y.GR?,,aL said that his client had noobjectian to ta twhat now wasin sufficiently apparent,that the mann. factory of Mr. Blanks was now conducted in the most proper and ')spdable manner; and that he had always been ready to adopt every, suggestion made for its improvement, whether by magistrater, or. others Mr. GU'RNEY iaCid, that as the action was only brought for the ,'indicaion of the plaintiff's character, and as that object was scc,omplished, he would Press the case no further, but would with. -".3rZw a juror-A Juror was accordingly withdta~wn. BLACGREGGOR V. LowE. was an action by Sir Gregor Af-agreggor againist Mfr. Lowe, * Th CosatoNSEXGEAST o~nedthe plaintiff's case. The ~s~e o te paitif wa, o dub, wllknown to thetiury, who no dubt newthathe ttemtedto effect a' sa tcmeXt at rdyas. or ie srvie o thi stte e proposed to raise a loan, nd appoisited the defentant as his agent One inaiWnzeet of 30,oool. was actually paid; but the subscribers declined to complete their ayments, and the deposit waS forfeited. It could be proved that Air. Lowe received 10,0001. on account of this loan which he had not paid over, and which whatever might be the state of accounts between Sir (regor and tic giibseribers, he was dearly homid to re- fund to bis5 principal. Mr. James Nli&,S of the firm of Mills and Robinson, was called to prove that the defendant producel to him receipI for the instal- Meats off 161.on the loan and that large sums of money were naid by the subscribers. As xe was proceeding, The LoRD CutlEF JUSTICE looked at one of the papers, and sbactving. that the loan purported. to be raised " for the service of the State of Poyais," asked 'whether there was any " State of Poyais" at the time when the loani was raised; as he was of opinion tilat unless this was proved, the plaintiff could not succeed. To prove that there was `'-A State of Poyals" at the time of the loan, Mir. WVilliam John Richardson was called. He said, that Abere was a settlement at Poyais in 1823: a Governor and Llcute. vant-Governor We-e appointed by Sir Gregor Macgregor, and par. ties wtnt out to settle. The LoRD CNIIEF JUSTICE.-WVere you ever there yourslf? No,D ra Lord: I know tbat people went out, and that somne came home. LA laugh.) The- RD CHXr3 JUSTaC}E.-I am glad to hear that any of them cause home. (Renewed laughter.) I TheConttoN :SEZGEA2fTproposed tosbowthatMir. Lowehad utnself spon of'theState ofPoyais, which, as ^aiostehim,wouldi La~U cycota, be decisive. I The Loan, CHnDF' JUSTSC._- Ithinknot, even as againsthin,. zisawhole be abubble{-if theloan beraised-for thewsericeof a tae wichk did not exist-a court of justice wfll not lend its aid to a v,inip1toCvt ftand, frm hs aBernts The Oommom SE?ftGrAT 1111bMIttea, amd tlieplaiatlf l'wsolts. THE XISrG V. TAGG,AILT ANDI BASCOM.L Mlr. TINDAL siated that thiS was ati indictment charin the defendants, James Tagart, Es.q., and Hcnry Bascomb,with taking' a eromise from John, Morgan for the payment of money on the ap- pointment of Frederick Bennett to be a cadet int t'he seevice of the East Indlia Company. The ATTottNEY.GENTEfAL stated. the case for the prosecutiont, which was founded on the statute of 9 :George Ill., making it cri- minal for any, one to receive a-promise Of money on the appointment of another to asituation in the East India Comnpany's service. He described the defendant, Mr. Taggart, as a genitletnan residing at Chiselhumt, andt the defenda'nt Baseorob as his confidlential servant; and stated that he should clea-rly prove that Bascemb contrActed fot 1001. to obtain a cadetship for a young mnan named Pritchard-that Mir. Tag.gart exerted his influence to procure it with success-and that Pritchard dlying, Bascomb exerted himself to procure the sub. stitution of a Fredericlk Bennett for him on similar terms, and that this was effected on the application of Mlr. Taggart. To show a guilty lenowledge in ~lr. Tagyiart, he should prove, that in bis first application for Pritellani, h srbdbmas his godson, when be wIs in truth, no relatiort.that he also represenlted Bennett, to whom he was a stranger, as a young man whom he knew-that in a con- versation with Mlorgan after the appointment, he said-" You re- collect I am to know nothing ot what passes between vou and Bas- cotnb"--ana that, after Bassoab hadbeen dis-appointed~ in procuTing the money, in consequence of the bankruptcy of Mlorgan, he dis- played great anxiety to obtain it for his servant, and mnuch disap- pointment at his failure. Mlr. John Bebb said he was a Director of the East India Corn. pany, re.electeel for the last time in April, 1821. Soon after hi: election he receivedn, letter purporting to come from Mlr. TIaggart, to which he returned an answer. In August following, he received two letters fromn himi, one enclosed in another. (The letter of tin 17th of August, proved by Mir. Moergan, was read, requesting Mlr Bebb to ruse the enclosed which recommended his godson, Mfr. PritcharT.to a cadetsbip; alnd begging that if he was unable to pro- cture one f'ir. this year, tie would put down his name for ise foUowinp. Year. The othier letter contained ai detailed recommeRdation. of Air, 1'ritchard as htis godson2). On the 22d of August Mr. Bebb retern. ed an answer, promising to dlo all in his powcr to forward Mlr. Tag- gairt's wishes. Hie afterwards -received other letters from AMr. Tag. gart, pressing for the appointmnent in earnest terms (which werc readl). Afterwards Mr. Taggart informed the witness, that Mfr. Pritchard was dead, anad solicited the appointment for Alr.Frederic1~ Bennett. (A leItter frmM rT. Taggait to Mr. Bebb of the 6tY of Mlay, 1822, was read. He obser~ied, " That idthougji his godsor was a more spirited young man than his youing friend Air. Binnett. yet he hoped Air. Bennett would make a good officer.) MVr. Bebi signedlthea-pjintmnent of lr. F. Bennett toa cadetship, on the re. commendation ofAlr. Taggart, on the 28th of Mlay, 18-22. An order of the Directors of the East India Company was read- t'hat any person discovered to have obtained an appointment bymone3 should lIme it, whethar he knew of the corruption or not. Cross-ex&aine5adZ.Nlrt. Taggart was psets the mniddle life, Scarei 70, to judge from his appearance. He had two stars against bi, nanae in the list of Proprietors. John A15Ta saild-f--I asfominerly attached to the naval service I have long tnown AMr. Traggart, with whom Baacomib haus lived long as steward. In 1820 I was in Glamorganshire, aind there be. came acquainted with a young man namned Pritchard. I wrot: to Bascomb repecting him to use his interest with Alr. Taggartor his behalf for a sum ofmoney. (The letter was read.) Mlr. Mlor- gan proceeded. I had an interview on my return with Bascomub or the subject. ilfr. Pritchard was no connexion of MVr. Taggart. Aliter Nir. 'Pritchard's death, a proposition was maae, through Alr. Holland, that Mlr. Frederick Bennett should take his place, and that 1001. should be given. I afterwards saw M5r. Bascomab, and told him if the substitution could be effected, I wouxld do the same as for the other. Before thislIsawAMr. Taggart in town, and thee mentioned my wish to substitute Bennett for Pritchard. I said if was a pity the appointment should be lost, and it would be a very kind act(f lie would interest himsgelf for Bennett. Ilentered iniothe young man's history, and he censented. I do not think he knew Bennett before that timne. Before the young mnan sailed for Indig, I -vent with him to Chisclhurst, that he might thank Mlr- Tazgar: and w3e walked with him in the garden. During the walk, he talkedliboutl3ascomb and said, " I have nothitig to do w ith any ~in ewe o atBascomb. I replied, "Certainlynot; ox from Ilir. Holland. I did not pay it over to Bascomb. but gave him a promissory note for the sum and interest, which I expected would be paid. I afterwards became bank-rupt, and the note wao not paid. A lettcr fromn Alr. TsWgare to Morgan, dated April, 1823,was read. expresing a hope that it there was a surplus in his property he would secure it to Bascomub, whbom he had wronged, speaking of the " cruel (disappointment" which he had suffiered, and expressing a hope thal Mir. Beninett wvould pay Bascomob to prevent consequences, and all intention to see AMr. Bennett himself. Anothier letter, dated MWay, 182 3, from the same gentleman to MoIrgan, was also read, in rather a hostile tone, pmressing a sttlement of thte note which he gave to Bascomb, end Bascom-b paid away. Cross-examined by 1AIr. SCAALETTr.- had been intimate witli Bascomub 15 years. I have used his influence with Taggart, tc obtain accommnodations ; he has inifluesice over hirm. Mir. Taggart is between Go and 70, and seldom moves without Bascomb. He has considerable fortune. These letters were given up with. Out mny privity, end I destroyed the others. In Blascomb's original answer to my first letter, he said he could aRol think of mentioning thse offr of money to Air. Taggart, T never mentioned money to Mfr. Taggart before the promissory note. I owe Air. Taggart 3l501., for which he had security. I re- ceived the money two days before I gave the note, which was aite, the appointment. MVr. aggart is not a mercenary man; he is ex- tremnely generous, ready to assist sitnot any one 'whose ease re- quires it. The letter from Mforgan to Bascomb, enclosing the note, wa. read, It also enclosed abill,and requested Bassconib's interest with Taggart to dliscount it. James Holland, a grocer in Tottenham-court..road, said--! knew de-RftrdiAt~,,,,tt istiouw-l3-, -1 -prli-a-to .'.lr- 3orgatn, and aferards paid him I100 sovereigns, in pursua-nce of an arranigemen t, as soon as Mlr. F. Bennett had sailed. I intredauced him to MIr. Taggart, at (larraway's, in April, 182-2; and soliciteel lisa interest to get his name inserted for the cadetship, instead of Pritchard's, I tald Air. Taggart that the young man was respectably connected. anid that I would trumish him withi good recommendations at Cal- cutta. Mlr. Tagg-art asked hini questions, expressed himself pilea~seg with his appearance, anid prointsed to use hiis infiuetice to Procure the appointinentL Alr. Charles Bennett, brother Of the cadet, proved that he paid 1001. to Mlr. Holland for Mir. Morgan. after his brother had sailed. He was afterwards present at an interviewv with AMorgan and Bas. comb, and Mfr. Sabine, the attorney, when Bascomnb was pointed out as thle person who ought to receive thle money, hud when Sabine proposed that he should idvaoce the mnonecy to enable Mlr. Bascomb to take the note gjen. him by AMorgan, wvhich he declined. A letter fromn Mlr. Taggrt to the witness was read, requesting ini. forniatioR by what ship his brotlher sailed, andl to what residec he was gone, as he had forgotten these circumstanc,anmih e asked respectinig them by Air. Bebb. Another letealofmMr Tagg-art was read, reqiteting a mieeting the next dyo atr0 imp rtance. This was the case for the prosecution. Mlr. SCARLETT addresed the jury on behalf of Mfr. Taggart. Ilie expressed his deep regret thiat, in consequence of'the latenes, of the hour, numerous witnesses r ho would have crowded round himi to testify their opinion Of hisa generosity and his lhonour, had left the court, in the aersuasion that the tri wonld not be called on. Mle felt assured th't when thie jutry considered thiecharge actually mnade- not thtat AMr. Taggart had concealed the &uilty bargain of his ser- vant after its completion, but that he lent huniseif to it in its incep. tion and progress,-they would think that there was no evidence to affect himn. He wa- an old bachelor, infirmi in health, and unider the influenice of a confiaentiai servant. Was it not natural that he should exert his inifluence at the desire of that servant without any knowledge of his real motive? The iurv intimated that they thought so, and scenie'l disposed to gieM. Scarett no further trouble. The igORIs CHIIEF' JUSTICE said that there were one or two oh. servations on MrT. Taggart's letters, which he should submit to the jury. Air. SCA'aLYTT saitd he well understood what his L,ordship meant; anid tmndoubtedly there were expressions in those Ictetera., which were not strictly true. But was it not probable that he adopt.. ed the rug,esions of his favourite valet in the first instance, and af. terwards,rV,m feelings 'of regard for himi, and, perhaps, blameabie weakness, endeavoisred to proltect himn from the conisequences of his own folly? Thwe learned Counsel examined the evidence with mi- nuteness, and conitended that its whole bearing tended to prove that this was the true construction of the coniduct of hiis honourable, ge- nerous, anid liberal-minded client. The Comraom SERGEA?JT addressed the jury for the defendant Bascorub; and after submiftting that he could not be foitndI guilty atone (which was over-ruled by the Chief Justice), uirged that the case against him depended mainly on the evidence of MVorgan, an accmplice ; who, pretending to be favourably disposed towards the defiendants, was artfuilly contriving to cast on them the coneeqmsences of his own guilt. The LOaD CHIEF- JUSTICE summed up the evidence, stating that the question as to Mrf. Ta- gart was, whether he knew' of the promaise to Basromb before the mnoue was paid, andI ats to Bas- comb, whether he received such roie. rThe Jury retired at six o'clock, and in a qtiarter of an hour re- turned, and delivered a verdict thlat Mfr. Taggart was Arot Guilty, and Bascrorb Guilty1. _ LAWFv RFPORT. COURT OF KING'S BA-4CJL - 0ra BANI;. 1'. f't-Vilr-'