my application to arreft the judg ment, the judgment fhall not be arrested, but entered up in the King's Bench; whether the fedition does not ftand recorded? !

Mr Juftice Buller. No, it does not, unless the pamphlet be a libel in point of law.

Mr. Erikine True. But can I fay that the defendant did not publish it feditiously, if judgment is not arrested, but is entered in the record of geo?

Mr. Juftice Buller, Gentlemen, this is my fatisfaction. If in what I am faying to you I am wrong in any inftance, they have a right to have a new trial directly for alking. But I must tell you the law is this: if you find the defendant guilty of publishing, without faying any more, the question of libel or not is open to the confideration of the court; but if you fay he is guilty of publishing only, it is an incomplete overdicted yout 1

One of the jury. We certainly mean to leave the question of libel or not to the confideration of the court. fm lamp

1

Mr. Erkine. Do you find the feditione voi• tt h One of the Jury. We give no verdiet upon it.

זי

Mr. Justice Buller. When you understand your verdict yourfelves, I will take it in the manner you ftate it. If you fay guilty of pub lihing only, there must be another trial, because the verdict will be imperfect. I

One of the jury. No, we did not fay that we put the word only firft-Guilty only of publishing Mr. Brikine. I defire, with great fubmiflion, the jury having faid Guilty only of publishing, that it

may fo be recorded.

libel.

Mr. Juftice Buller. See what is attempted to be done,

Mr. Erfkine. There is no impro¬ per attempt upon my part. I afk this of your lordship, and defire an answer, as a judge, whether or no, if, when I come to move in arrest of judgment, and the court fhould enter up judgment, faying, that it is a libel, whether I can afterwards fay, in mitigation of punishment, that the defendant did not publish it feditiously, when he is found guilty of publishing it in manner

and form as ftated? Therefore the jury are made to find a man guilty of fedition, when in the fame mo ment they fay they did not mean fo to do. Gentlemen, do you find the dean guilty of fedition?

One of the jury, We neither find the one, nor the other.

Mr. Price (Affociate.) Do you fay" Guilty of Publishing; but whether a libel or not, you do not find?"

R

1

Mr. Juftice Buller. Is that your meaning?

One of the jury. It is our meaning.

• Several officers of diftin&ion in the land fervice have alio ap plied to me, and offered their fervices to the States General, particularly a field officer of the Connecticut line, in the province of Matlachufet's, and an officer who has lately left the Irish brigade of France, whọ withed to enter into a fervice more agreeable and congenial to his fentiments and principles. Many of the guards have requested to go volunteers. Some Athol Highlanders are on their way to town, who, I make no doubt, will engage in the good Proteftant caule of their high mightineffes,

acquaint you, as prime minifter, with these matters, that you may convince baron Van Lynden of the general good difpofition of the people of thefe kingdoms to comply with his excellency's requeft, and to renew again their old friendthip with Holland, upon the righteous and folid foundation of the Proteftant interest.

I am, Sir, with all due respect,
• Your humble fervant,
'G. GORDON.'

of being employed to ferve againft the emperor, I think it proper to remind you, that whatever steps you have taken, have been without the fmalleft degree of authority or countenance from his majesty's minifters, and that it is for your lord

Sentence of the Court Martial appointed to try Colonel Debbieg, for writing several disrespectful and injurious Letters to the Duke of Richmond, as Mafter General of the Ordnance.

HE court-martial for the trial

"Your lordship's obedient, "Humble fervant,

"W. PITT." Right Hon. Lord Geo. Gordon.

Lord George Gordon's Answer to Mr. Pitt.

"Sir,

"I received your letter of today juft now. It was very rude in you not to answer my two letters fooner. I am glad to hear you fay, that many feamen have been induced to quit their occupation, in expectation of being employed to ferve against the emperor. This fhews the feamen's hearts are warm towards the States of Holland, and that they wish to lend a hand to affift them against their enemies.As foon as you, and the rest of his majefty's minifters, are pleafed to authorize and countenance these honeft endeavours of the feamen to fupport thofe Proteftant ftates, I will make propofals to the Dutch ambaffador, and to the States of Holland, to take them into immediate pay. The confequences may fall on the heads of the king's fervants, if they advise their fovereign to take a part against the Proteftant intereft.

"I am, Sir,

"Your bumble fervant, "G. GORDON." Welbeck-ftreet, Nov. 19, 1784. VOL. XXVII.

Monday laft re affembled at the Horfe-Guards, by his majefty's command, the following fentence was read by the judge advocate, who declared that his majefty had ap proved thereof, and had directed that it be carried into execution.

The court-martial, upon due confideration of the whole matter, are of opinion, that colonel Hugh Debbieg is guilty of each article of the charge exhibited against him, viz.

Of" writing to his grace Charles duke of Richmond, Lennox, and Aubigny, mafter-general of his majefty's ordnance, his commanding officer, feveral unbecoming letters fince the month of June laft, containing indecent and difrefpe&tful expreffions towards him, and groundless and injurious imputations of partiality and oppreflion in the difcharge of his duty as maftergeneral of the ordnance, to the prejudice of good order and military difcipline;"

And of" writing difrefpectfully, in the month of Auguft laft, of the faid duke of Richmond, &c. mastergeneral of his majefty's ordnance, his commanding officer, to majorgeneral James Bramham, the chief engineer, and in terms obviously tending to depreciate the conduct of him the faid mafter-general in the opinion of the faid chief engineer, and of the corps of engineers, to the prejudice of good order and military difcipline.'

[U]

In

-In confideration of the high cha racter of the faid colonel Debbieg, astamnofficer, and his meritorious fervices, which confideration alone Could have induced them to give to lementa fentence for crimes which they mufi conceive to be highly de trimontal, and tending to produce the worst confequences to the forvice, they adjudge, That be, the jaid comtel Hugh Deb leg, be reprimanded in open court, and that he do alfo make his fubmifion to the duke of Richmond, &c. mafterguneral of his majeliy's ordnance, in the following terins probe

My lord duke, diguer Incompliance with the judgment of this court-martial, I do declare my great concern, that I should have made use of expreffions vincomy correfpondence with your grace, smy fuperior officer, which in the opinion of the court tended to the prejudice of good order and military difcipline."

The prefident, lord Howard, then addreffed cot. Debbieg as follows: Sd of Colonel Debbieg, to in addreifing myf If to an officer of fo dong fanding, and fo diftinguished as you have been for your meritorious fervices, it cannot fail to give me the fincereft concern to braves it fall to my lot to conveg to yom a reprimande from the court thartial before wliom you have been broughtwad Lenow Smalt Eisje Skg by his majefty's commaudsition I do fo. Wherein, having confulted the court, Tam todayno you, that they would have ba dread the Mellets of fucká anbeçdiningripirit as that which has fo confpicuoudly thewn itflf in your date correfpondence, which brey have dad. ander beitsconf deration, dif theybdid not perinade themfelves, in regard to the dans

gerous tendency of fuch behaviour to his majefty's fervice, that you will upon cool reflection think as they do, and hereafter regulate. your conduct accordingly.

"The other part, Sir, of the judgment of this court, your fubmiffion to the duke of Richmond, mafter-general of the ordnance, has been already read to you by the judge advocate; and which no doubt you will immediately, and agreeable to that becoming deférence due to their directions, proceed to comply with."

Col Debbieg then read the fub. miffion to the duke of Kichmond, as the court had directed; after which the duke of Richmond addreffed himself to the court as follows:

The judgment of the court in pronouncing every article of my charges well founded, and the imputations against me groundlefs, together with the obfervations which the court has made on the conduct I complained of, have I truft fully juftified the neceffity I was under of appealing to this tribunal.

466

I fatter myself, that in carrying on this profecution, I have not thewn a vindictive fpirit. I hope it is not in my nature. The apology directed by the court, I readily accept from col. Debbieg I trust his future conduct will be regulated by the fentiments which the court has expreffed on what is paft, and I promite col. Debbieg that he thall never trace in my be haviour any ungenerous recollection of this tranfaction."

1

The judge advocate then informed colonel Debbieg, that the fentence of the court having been complied with, he was releafed from his arreft, and then decared that the court-martial was knottedlimpo qusm to buen 92

The

HE

Twas

י

זי

court of King's bench was exceedingly crowded with auditors anxious to hear the fate of Mr. Atkinson. Atten Mr. Atkin fon was conducted into court by the deputy-keeper and tipftaff. In a In a quarter of an hour Lord Mansfield, Mr. juftice Afhurft, and Mr. juftice Buller, took their feats upon the bench (judge Willes being ab fent on account of the death of his brother.) After a few juftifications of bail lord Mansfield called for Mr. attorney general, who imme diately attended, and Mr. juftice Athurft, with great deliberation and folemnity proceeded to pronounce the fentence of the court.

The learned judge first obferved, that hat the defendant stood convicted of perjury, to the fatisfaction of the court and jury, and stated that it arofe from an affidavit made by him to ground a motion for an information against William Bennet, He then read the words in which the affidavit was couched. The india

ment

contained nine different afignments of which he was convicted of fix, viz. 2d, 3d, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 9th. He then explained the feveral charges. or affignments in the order they arofe, and took notice that Mr. Atkinfon's counfel bad particularly objected to the conviction on the 4th, which relpected malt, and the 7th, an article, of wheat, purchased at 34s. 6d and charged at 36s. But admitting that thefe affignments or counts were done away, ftill there were four

remaining, and the malignity of the offence whether to cover one fraud or many, equally tended

to fhew the depravity of the deféndant's mind."a do asfact

a

The counsel had fet up two modes of delence, first, they had created diftinction between fupplies and purchases; and in this inftance the defendant had rendered himself not only the corn-factor, but the cornfeller." The commiffioner mult have been the most unfaithful, or the most ignorant of public fervants, if they had fuffered fuch a practice to prevail." The jury were there fore well warranted in finding their verdict upon the afligaments that were attempted to be defended upon that ground. 1 177 »

The fecond mode of defence was, that all the over-charges was qua lified by a balancing bill. This idea," faid the learned judge, is contrary to the bills themfelves," which were continually varied in their prices. Besides which, the affidavit on which the conviction was founded pofitively avers that no more was charged on the feveral articles, than the price actually paid, which was utterly repugnant to the charge of an article of the 28th of May, 1779. Thefe balancing bills were made out merely at the defendant's difcretion altogether unauthorized by the board, and were fubject to no cheque or controul. When the court defired that the books might be infpected, it was anfwered they were deftroyed: How the defendant had exercifed his difcretion, was plain to the commis fioners and jury, the former having discharged him from his employ ment, and the latter having found him guilty of the crime laid to his charge. There was no plea of defence that the money was paid on account, because the charges were regularly adjusted, and the specific funs to each article.

The