taking me home; somebody said it was all right, and he went on quietly; after a short time, he said he saw how it was; when he got to the house, he asked that somebody might go to his wife that evening, and let her know where he was; he said it would be a shocking thing, as there would be nobody to attend his school in the morning; he was promised some one should go; he wrote a letter, but I don't know what became of it; he was as quiet and collected as any one in the room.

Cross-examined. The people were coming out of chapel when I was sent for; the watch-house was next door to the chapel; I don't know what disturbance there was in the chapel; I don't know that he foamed in the mouth; he threw his arms about, but not to strike any one; I did not see that he excited alarm, or put any one in bodily fear; I did not think it necessary to pinion him, for he very soon became quite cool and collected; I cannot say whether his neckcloth was off; some water was brought to him; he drank several times. On my oath he did not say the water was poisoned by his brother; he did not drink at first, but I did not hear him use any such expression. I cannot swear that Knight did not attempt to feel his pulse; he might do it without my seeing him in a mob of people; about half an hour was occupied before he was put in the coach. I saw Mr Hawker, who belongs to the chapel, there. Mr Alexander Fletcher is much respected, and followed by a very respectable congregation.

William Markland, the younger, corroborated the evidence of the preceding witness, and added, that he received instructions to call upon the plaintiff's wife. He told him the name of the street, the number of the house, and every other particular, in

the coolest and most collected manner. The witness did not think the

plaintiff insane.

Mr Samuel Fox.-I have two asylams for lunatics; I came home about half past ten on the Sunday evening; but hearing the patient was gone to bed comfortably, I did not disturb him; I saw him next day, when he was incoherent, and labouring under a nervous debility of mind; he gave me a hurried and unconnected detail, as I conceived, of his grievances; he was with me till the following Monday, during which time I had an opportunity of judging of his mind; he was not insane; I had no occasion to use any restraint; it is usual to have a paper signed by some of the relatives of lunatics, besides a certificate of the medical person; such a paper was sent me on the Monday; I saw Mr A. Fletcher either the first or second day after his brother's confinement; before then I had authorized his wife to see him; orders had been given by the defendant that his wife was not to see him; they were together many hours in the room. My daughter and the plaintiff read classical authors together. Mr A. Fletcher gave me some papers, the most important one of which I showed to Mr Robert Fletcher; I am not clear whether I had it back; I suppose not, as application has been since made to me for it by the defendant; I have searched, but cannot find it; Mr A. Fletcher read the contents of it to me; Mr A. Fletcher said that he considered his brother as labouring under frequent paroxysms of insanity, and at those periods he flew to liquor, which rendered him a complete madman, and unsafe to have the management of his person; but probably, if he were to go to some other country, he might be weaned from the effects of liquor, and that it would be better for him

generally; I am not clear in what capacity he wished him to go, but I think he mentioned Van Diemen's Land; I understood the defendant to say that the plaintiff's wife was as fond of drink as himself, and rather as an accessary to it; on the third day I informed the defendant that I did not think his brother insane; on the first morning I thought he was incoherent, but that might have been the effect of liquor, operating on a mind otherwise sound; I have made up my mind since, that it was; Mr A. Fletcher never called for any answer to the paper which he gave me, and never came afterwards; that was on the Wednesday. I have never seen anything but what was perfectly correct on the part of Mr Robert Fletcher, except when his breath has given me reason to believe that he had been drinking. I will not attempt to draw the nice distinction be tween drunkenness and madness.

The certificates, and a letter from Mr Alexander Fletcher, desiring Mr Fox to receive the plaintiff in his house, were put in in evidence.

Mr J. Hopke.-I am a surgeon, and reside in Radcliffe-Highway. In the month of July, 1822, I was requested by a Mr Crow to see the plaintiff for the purpose of examining him, that I might give a certificate for the plaintiff to be received into a private madhouse. I did see him by the desire of the defendant. I afterwards saw the defendant, and told him that I found the plaintiff quite rational; that he said there was a dispute between him and his brother respecting property, and that I saw no reason to sign a certificate. I asked the defendant whether there was any truth in the statement that there was a dispute between him and his brother respecting property? The defendant said there was some truth in it. I then

said that there was the less reason for giving a certificate.

The questions put by Mr Robert Fletcher to the defendant were read. They related to books of accounts, and money left by their uncle. Some of the questions were answered, and some were passed over, and some of the answers professed ignorance.

Mr Robert Hedges. I am assistant of the last witness. The plaintiff attended me as an instructor in the classics up to within one or two days of his being taken to Mr Fox's asylum. I had opportunities of observing the state of his mind, and never entertained any idea of his being insane. I went and paid him a visit at Mr Fox's, and found him perfectly collected, and as much master of himself as I was.-[This witness stepped back to state that he knew Mrs Fletcher, upon whom some aspersions had been cast, and he knew nothing at all of her that would prevent him from choosing her as a companion for his wife. The reflections he had heard cast upon her had quite harrowed up his feelings.]

John Nicholson, one of the head scholars in the plaintiff's school, stated that he had about forty or fifty scholars. The school began to decline after the plaintiff's confinement at Mr Fox's. It declined to twelve scholars, and then he gave up the school. Two guineas a-quarter were paid for me.

Mrs Adams produced a letter. It was from the defendant to the plaintiff, and was dated the 22d of December, 1822. It requested that the witness would call on the plaintiff, and propose to him to leave the country, promising, if he would do so, the defendant would assist him.

Mr Ebenezer Temple stated that he lived in the defendant's house. He remembered Mr Robert Fletcher call

ing at the defendant's house, in July last, and applying to see the defend ant. He could not say whether the door was shut against him, but he did not see him.

Cross-examined.-About a week before the plaintiff was taken to Mr Fox's I was at the defendant's at Homerton. I heard a knocking at the door. There was nobody at home but myself and the servant, who went down, and she would not let him in. He then went round to the garden, and he said he would not leave the premises until he had stabbed the d-d hypocrite. He was going to pull off his breeches, but I went out and persuaded him not to do so, and he buttoned them up again. He rolled upon the ground and foamed at the mouth. I considered him insane. As we were going down the lane he said he would pull the hair off my skull, and I ran a little way from him. He used violent threats against his brother, and laughed and cried alternately. He spoke sometimes in the same breath, both kindly and with threats of his brother. I have seen him conduct himself in chapel-not on the 20th of July, but at other times-most offensively. He called his brother to come forth in Latin, "In the name of God, I call thee, my brother." He impressed me with a belief that he was insane. This happened about two Sundays ago.

The Chief Justice.-Brother Taddy, how can you go on after this?

Mr Serjeant Taddy.-It is a ques

stood there was not the least taunt on his client.

Mr Serjeant Vaughan was in his Lordship's hands.-Mr Serjeant Taddy, after some little delay, said, that he consented to his Lordship's proposal.

The Chief-Justice said it was the best course.

Mr Serjeant Vaughan said a few words on the forbearance and the spirit of lenity manifested by the defendant; and he almost trembled for the consequence of that lenity.

Mr Serjeant Pell for the defendant.-Mr Knight said that under the circumstances he would consent to withdraw a juror.

The Chief-Justice perfectly agreed with the observations that had fallen from Mr Serjeant Vaughan as to the conduct of the plaintiff Fletcher, and observed, that if the cause had proceeded much farther, it was probable that this unfortunate plaintiff would have had to pay those costs from which he would now be exempted; and he hoped that still something would be done for him. No imputation could rest on Mr Knight. His Lordship also eulogized the conduct of Mr Fox.

A juror was then withdrawn.

TRIAL OF JAMES AFFLECK, FOR BLASPHEMOUS PUBLICATIONS.

tification to carry the verdict.

The Chief-Justice suggested that even now it would be best to withdraw a juror.

Mr Serjeant Pell, who appeared separately for Mr Knight, thought he ought to have a verdict, but he would undertake not to ask for costs. He was anxious that it should be under

July 31.

On Monday James Affleck was placed at the bar, charged with vending seditious and blasphemous publications.

When the clerk was about to read the indictment, the Lord JusticeClerk observed, that, in consideration

The Jury having returned a verdict of Guilty in terms of the prisoner's confession,

Mr Jeffrey rose to address the Court in mitigation of punishment; the learned gentleman founded his hopes of the leniency of the Court being extended to his client on his candid confessions and the contrition he had shown for the imprudence of which he had been guilty, and on which he was anxious to avoid a protracted discussion. Fortunately for the country the offence might be considered a new one, a trial for blasphemy not having taken place in that Court in the memory of man. The prisoner early in life became a militiaman ; that force having been disembodied, he assisted his brother, who was a grocer in this city, and afterwards he commenced for himself in the same line. Had the trial gone on, very respectable evidence would have been adduced of his inoffensive character. He had been visited by heavy domestic calamity, which exhausted the profits of his trade, and induced him to commence bookseller in a certain line, hoping to overcome his difficulties; and he (Mr J.) was not there to disguise that the publications he sold were objectionable, but he had not in any part of his previous life been concerned in such traffic. The prisoner was not altogether ignorant

of the nature of them, as he was aware his speculation was hazardous, but his ignorance of the trade might be allowed to be some palliation. The books libelled on were to be found in the catalogues of the most respectable booksellers ; this he did not mean to say formed any ground of defence, or could alter the law, but surely it might tend to mitigate the punishment. The prisoner had voluntarily given up the whole of the obnoxious publications, and had assured his Majesty's Advocate of his determination to refrain altogether from vending such works, and if the Court, consistent with its duty, could pass from severity of punishment, it would have the assent of the public prosecutor. The prisoner, at considerable pecuniary hazard, did shut up his bookselling shop and reading-room, and resumed his grocery business, trusting by industry to obtain a livelihood for his family, consisting of a wife and several children. The learned gentleman, in conclusion, hoped the Court would consider the offence sufficiently marked to the world, and humbly trusted, that as his client, up to the time of committing the of fence, had maintained a good character, the ends of justice might be answered by the publicity of the conviction.

The Lord Justice-Clerk gave great praise to the learned gentleman for the course he had adopted, as one more safe could not have been taken.

Lord Hermand rejoiced in the event of this trial, and thought that, all circumstances considered, moderate punishment would be the best, and he should therefore propose, that the prisoner be imprisoned for three calendar months in the jail of Edinburgh, and find security for his future conduct in the sum of 100%.

Lord Gillies expressed his high approval of the candid, proper, and be

coming defence, and was happy to concur in the proposed lenient punish

ment.

Lord Pitmilly was happy the Court had been relieved by the judicious and sensible defence of the prisoner's counsel, which had enabled them to do that which, otherwise, they could not have done.

Lord Succouth expressed the astonishment and horror he had felt on perusing the indictment, and thought the prisoner was much obliged to the learned gentleman. His Lordship was happy to concur in the proposed sentence, and trusted no mistaken view would be taken of the case, for on recurrence of the offence it would be absolutely necessary to visit the party with exemplary punishment.

Lord Meadowbank said the prisoner had made the only atonement in his power, and an eminent counsel had given it the weight of his authority.

The Lord Justice-Clerk also felt happy in the result of this trial, which he trusted would have a salutary effect. The case was the only one of the kind during a long period, and was of a very aggravated nature; for what man who looked at the law, or the happiness and prosperity of the country, but must reflect with astonishment and horror that there could exist such a spirit. The prisoner had deviated from the path of duty, and had lent himself to others; but fortunately he had seen his error, had become sensible of the crime he had committed, and had pleaded guilty. The learned gentleman had taken an extremely beneficial course for the interest of the prisoner and the country by his good sense and proper statement, and his Lordship trusted it would have due effect in preventing others from committing similar offences. A vigilant eye will be on the watch; the law will be as promptly carried into effect as in England, and

VOL. XVII. PART II.

no such excuse will be admitted, as it will not then be in the power of the Court to award a lenient punishment. The present was the first case of the kind in this part of the kingdom, and he trusted it would be the last. His Lordship severely condemned the publications libelled on, as obscene, blasphemous, and infamous. In conclusion, he said he saw no reason to doubt the sincerity of the prisoner's contrition, who, he trusted, would avoid in future to embark in such a dangerous trade.-Sentence of imprisonment for three months was then passed, at the expiration of which the prisoner was to find security for his future good conduct in the sum of 100l.

WEXFORD ASSIZES.

Wednesday, August 4.

TRIAL OF JOHN CARROLL, POPISH PRIEST, AND OTHERS, FOR MURDER OF A CHILD.

This morning, Mr Justice Johnson entered the court precisely at half past nine.

Mr Sheil appeared, to put off this trial until next morning.

Counsel for the crown would not accede to the postponement.

John Carroll, Nicholas Wickham, James Devereux, Patrick Parel, Nicholas Corrish, and Walter Scallan, the three latter of whom had surrendered since the previous day, were then placed at the bar.

It was stated that the prisoners would not join in their challenges.

Mr Driscoll. Then we must try them separately. The other prisoners were withdrawn from the bar, and Father Carroll alone allowed to remain.

The panel was here called over. It

I