IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) h // <,^.*^!^ A < pelure, on d n 32X f ■ ■■f- : 2 3 t a t „. 4 s 6 SEP i9ign ^3 ^sHrni tX-y^^- --*•• REPORT or THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORDS OF THE COMMITTEE 0? HIS MAJESTY'S MOST HONOURABLE PRIVY COUNCIL, ON CERTAIN COMPLAINIS AGAINST LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR FANNING, A\D OTHER OFFICERS OF l>li MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT IN THE ISLAND CI' ST. JOHN. ( 5 ) jit the Court at Saint James's^ the I ft of Auguft 1792, PRESENT THE KING'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY, Vifc. Macartney, Mr. Secretary Dundas, Mr. Steele. Earl of Chatham, Lord Grenville, Lord Hawkeibury, "WHEREAS there was thi^ day read, at the Board, a Report from a Committee of the Lords of His Majcfty's Moft Honorable Privy Council, dated the 14th of laft month, in the words following; viz. YOUil ( 6 ) " YOUR MAJESTY having been pleafed, by *' your Older in Council, of the 29th of July, 1791, *' to refer unto this Committee a letter from the Right *' Honorable Henry Dundas, one of your Majefty'a ** Principal vSecretarics of State, to the Lord Preildent •* of the Coun..il, tianfmitting a memorial of the *' proprietors of land in the illand of St. John, in the " gulph of St. Lawrence, and merchants trading *' thereto and therein, complaining of Edmund ** Fanninc;, Efq. Lieutenant Governor, Peter Stewart, *' Ell]. Chief Jullice, Jofcpli Aplin, Efq. Attorney •' General, and \V iljiam Townfhend, Efq. CollcAor *' of theCuftomsand Naval Officer, in the faid ifland *' of St. John i to which memorial were iikewife ** fu!)joincd fpccific charges againft the faid fcveral •'officeis; and liumhiy praying your Majcfty to *' grant the Petitioners fucli fpeedy and cficftual " relief as fliould feeni expv-dient for them : — The ** Lords of the Committee, in obedience to yonr ** Majcfly's faid order of reference, did, on the 9th •* of St^ptember, 1791, take the faid memorial and *' fpcciiic cliargcs into confidcration, and were at- *' tend(.d by iho Complainants, who laid before the *' Conuuittec fundry dcpoiltions and proofs, in *' llipport of thcii faid charges ; and the Committee *' thciciipon thought proper to order, that a copy of *' the faid memorial and fpccific charges, as alfo of 3 the ( 7 ) " the faid dcpofitions and proofs, fliould be trajif- *' mitted to the faid Edrnuiid Fanning, Erq. to be " by him connnuiiicatcd to the faid J'ttcr Stewart, *' Efq. and the other parties complained of; witii *' direftions that they Ihould feverally return their *' anfvver thereto, in writing, with fuch further *♦ depofitions and proofs on both fides as they might *♦ think fit to offer : and the anfwers to the faid *' fpccific charges, and the depofitions and proofs *' taken on both fides, having been accordingly tranf- ** mitted and laid before the Committee, they have " met feveral times, and liave been attended by *' Counfel on both fides ; and having maturely con- *' fid'jrcd the charges againll your Majefty's faid •' ofllcers, with their anfvvcis tJicrcto, and the •* evidence on both fides, their Lordlhips do agree *' humbly to report to your Majcfly, that, before they ** proceed to examine the matter of thefc charges, " they think it proper to flate the manner in which' ** thcv arc brou''ht lieforc them : — The memorial *' prefented to your Majelly carried the appearance *' of a complaint in the names of a coiinderable *• number of merchants and proprietor? belonging *' to the ifland ; but before it came to be heard, out of " eighteen that originally affemblcd to confiucr of ** this bufincfs, twelve of this meeting begged their *' names might be vvithdiawn, as the complaint had *' been ( 8 ) ** been preferred without their confcnt ; fo that fix* *' only vemahicd as prolccutors, the reft difovvuing '* the whole proceeding." ** The f^cncral charge againft tlic Defendants is, •* tli:it they, the Lieutenant Governor, the Chief *' Jullice, the Attorney General, and the CoIle£tor ** of the Cufloms, had formed a dcflruftivc Com- *' bination to govern the Uland at their plcafure ; *' and, with this view, had jointly, as well as fc- *' paratcly, opprefTed all thofc who oppuled them • " folves to the arbitrary dcfi^ns of the ofTicers of this *' govcrnmc'nt; and the nic:;iorial ftatcs thcfe pcrfons *' ihiou^hout as afFociatcs and coiifederatc.;." " Havin<5 laid this general charge, the m:morlal *' niocecd:^ to Hvcifv the fcvcral crimes ihev have *' commuicd, under diiiiat^l heads ; :dl of which ** nic lirou';!it as proofs of the great and general ** c!;:i".;C of the aforef.iid Combination." "* That ;"!, J(fipli Ki.k;r),in, Brewer, in St. Giles's; R.-iiTiuel y.fl.iicy, '1' a man, IJcdford Strcer, Covcnt (j::ri!vn ; Joha Jlarii';, n W t'lt in tin; City, nn-.v a Binkrupt; rJl l.ite part, rif-rs of Jfiin Cimbiid^'^c; Alexander rietclicr, Ciiicf of the P.itterfon Faction, in the in-iiul ; Joliii Hill, formcily a B!ack- iinith at Topdiam, and lately a tndcr to tlie ifl-.d, and :k fuilous pirtiCin nf the Pattt-rloii Fa£\ii)iii and Jolin Cambridge, formerly an oblcurc Chni--:nakt: in St. Martin's Lane, and now a 'i:?Azx t'l tl.c !fl"vJ. " This ( 9 ) " This charge, if proved, is a high mifdemeanour." ** The Committee therefore cxpefted to have feen *' either exprefs proof of the alleged combination ** or fome circumftances from whence a ftrong pre- *• fumption of fuch combination muft arife ; but *' no evidence of this fort has been producd :— •* On the contrary, it does not appear, from any ** thing in this whole accufation, that any two of *' thcfc gentlemen ever exchanged a word with each " other, except when they met in Council; nor is *' there any proof of fuch a combination, from ** words or writing, fpokc or written, by any of *' thefe Defendants; fo that the proof refts altogether ** upon the fcparate fa£ts that are alleged." *' And as this is the real or pretended ground of ** the whole accufation, if the fa£ts, brought forward ** to prove it, have no fuch political connexion, the *• charges Ihould have been feparate, and each delin- ** quent made refponfible only for his own a£ls ; ** whereas, by this joint charge, they are made to *' unite in a common defence, and ;ae neceflarily •* drawn into a joint vindication of each other's *' conduft, in matters that have no relation to their ** own cafe." B The I '0 ] ^^ The Committee ih:n^ upon the JlnBell ** review of all the Jpec I fie charge ^^ are of •* opinion^ no^ only tbiit the cprregate of ** them is vo.d of any proof of Jueh a Com* *• hiriation as is al/eretiy lutl that the fpecifc •* changes, t 'hen feporatcly, arc fit '/v anpivercd^ *' ANI) THAT THE V/iiOLL: ACCU- ** SATION IS GROUNDLESS; and this •* li'ii! appear by cxatninincr each change by *' /V/t7/', IV hie h, together i^iih their own opi- ** «/(?«, the Committee beg leasee humbly to *' lay before ymr Mfefly^'' F I 11 S 1' C H A R G E. *' Tl.e Li'.i'.t'.'nant Governor is accufc-J for dif- *• folvinj, the Alloailily upon his iiift arrival. — The *• Committee are of opinion he tliJ right, bcciufc *' that was the very AHcmhly which, in conjundlion ** with Li'-utcuant Governor rattcifon, had paifed *' an n£l to contlrni the falcs made under the illegal •' conlifcatioiis, in difobcdi-^nce to your Maj-jfty's *' orders." (( SECOND C II A R G E. " T'iKit, when upon the tlcclion of Members upon ihii firll diirolulion the bhcrilF had rcturncJ, *' tluc [ " 1 '• that the poll Ind bocii dillurhccl liy military Iii« *' tcrfcrciicc, and tliat lie could not vcntuic to re- (( turn them as duly defied, the I.ieutciiaiu Ciovcr- ** nor is accufcd for ifloing a new wiit tor a fttlh •* ck-aion." ** At this time the whole yMFcinhly, conflfliiip; of ** eighteen members, were all chofen, under one *• writ, by all the voters in the illand ; and the ob- ** jedlion made by the Sheriff went to the whole re- *' turn, fo that there could be no judge of this return, " thcclcaion of all being equally impeached." ** Upon this new cafe the Lieutenant Governor *' ordered a cafe to be laid before th- Chief Juftice, *' and the Attorney General, for their opinion. The *' Chief JuHice thought the whole void ; and that *' there ought to be a new eIe<5\ion. The -Attorney ** General differed. 'I'hc Commiitee are clearly of " opinion, that the opinion of the Chief furticc was *' corre(':tly light ; but thefc acculeis criminate the " Lieutenant (jovernor for not following the opi- *• nion ot the Attorney General, Which was wrong, *' and bring this as a proof of au unlawful com-. ♦' binatiua." B THIRD -f- Caiclrcchi, [ 12 I THIRD CHARGE. ** That he altered the mode of Eleftion without «* authority." *' Inftead of one ele£lion of the whole number, ♦* unde: one writ, the Lieutenant Governor dircded ** the eleftion to be made, under fix different writs, *' and divided the rcprefcntation, by which four were ** to be chofen, for each of the three counties, and *' two for each of the rnvalties of George Town, *• Prince's Town, and Charlotte Town." *' It is clear, that the mode, iirft adopted by Lieu- *' tenant Governor Pattcrfon, was in no refped con- '* formabic to your i\iajcfty*s inftrufiions; and it is *' as clear, that the other mode, directed by Lieulc- *' nant Governor Fanninj^, is perfe»flly agreeable to *' thofe inftrui^inns, and was not taken up by liini- *' fclf, but unanimoufly recommended by the Coun- " cil, and has never been complained of fince." " Another charpc broup,ht to prove the faid com- *■ bination, is, that the Lieutenant Governor did •' unlawfully difplacc the SherifF, Mr. Mac Millan ; *• and appointed for that year, namely, the year 17S7, " three C 13 ] •* three difFcrent perfons, Mr. John Stewart, Captam *' Hayden, and Mr. Robertfoii." *' When Lieutenant Governor Fanning arrived in *• the ifland, to take the government upon him, *' upon Mr.Pattcrfon's difmilTion, he was oppofed by " the latter." •* Mr. Mac Millan, the Sheriff, being a friend of *' Lieutenant Governor Pattcrfon, would not attend " at the Council Chamber, to hear the proclamationi *' read, which contained a notice to '.li!' inhabitants *' of his appointment ; but departed from thence la *' defiance of your Majefty's inftruflions. For this, ** as well as other objetSlions, Lieutenant Governor **.Fanning removed him from the office ; which he *' conceived he might do, if there had been no fuch ** objeftion againft him ; for, by the law of the ifland, " the Shrievalty, which is an annual office, is to be *' appointed in this manner. The Senior Judge de- " {'.vers a hft of three perlbns, on a particular day ; ** one of which three the Lieutenant Governor is ** to fix upon for the execution of the office. Mr. *' Mac Millan's year was expired, and the Senior *' Judge had not delivered his lifl: of three perfons. *' Therefore, the appointment devolved upon the *' Lieutenant Governor, as your Majefty's Repre- *< fcnialive." «' The r M ] *' The two fiiR accepted the oiTlce upon coiidl- " tioii to rc'iga it, which they did ; and then the' ** third was appointed tor the remainder of the year; *' and they all in their turn gave the proper fecuiity." *' A\u], though it is alleg'^d by the complainants *' that thcfe appointments were made for the purpofe *' of ohtaininr- a return of members to fcrvc his own *' purpofes, there is no other evidence of fuch a nio- ** tive but the mere allegation ; and it is mofi: pofi- *' tivclv deniei!, not onlv by the Lieutenant Governor, '* but bv C'aptan Hnyden, who was the Sheriff and *' returning olliccr who made the void return." " Then, again, the Lieutenant Governor is accufed " for proroguing the AfTembly returned in I'jZji *' and at lall dillblvinc: them." " The Lieutenant Governor anfwcrs, and it is *' nor denied, tliat tlicre was no bufinefs, durin^- " t!iat ti.-nc, tliat made it expedient to call them to- **gerhcr-, that, upon their full meeting, though " tlicv fat thirty days, they had palled but one bill; *' that every meeting is exj)enrivc to the Cjovernment, *' a3 v.cil a^ to the members ; and that no apphcation *' wa:; evtr made tohi, i, during all that time, to call f them together. And, as to the dinblution, it ap- 2 <' pears *' pears that one third of t!;c Afi'Jtnbly was either ab- *' lent or dilqualifiecl ; tli:it the Ipcakcr was too ill to "attend; and that, upon rulmiittinf? this flate of •' the AfTcni'jIy to t!ic Council, they v/crc unani- " moiifly of opinion, that rhc Affembly ought to bcdif- ** folved ; lb ihat here, a.; well as in all the antecedent *' cliargcs, the Council are implicated in the fame *' Clinic, as equally combining; lo fcivc the Licute- '* nant Governor's Faftion." " 71ic laft charge atrainfl the Lieutenant (jovcrnor, * to piovc the comhii^aiion, is, th^t he prorogued ' the hift AfTemMy, in 1790, upon the day appointed ' for the tii;d of an clciiion petition, againll three ' of the pcrfons returned for King's County, though * the V i'nclTes for the petitioners were aflembled at ' a conhdeiable exuentc." " It is alleged, by the T>ieutenant Governor, that " this prorogation was not of his motion, but rc- *' quelled by the AflTemhly ; that the rcafons flated in " the Alfcmbly for dehring this prorogation were, *' that there iiad been a fuddcn thaw, which, if it *' continued, would make it dangerous for the mem* *' hers to return to their own homes ; that the public *' bulinefs was fmilhed ; and that feveral declared they ** would liiy no longer ; and, in latH-, two gentlemen " went ^^S^s^ [ i6 ] ** went home that very day, and another the day* ** after ; that it was probable, if the Committee fat •' to try the eleftion, there would not in the end be " a fufficient number left to prefent the bills, and the *' bufinefs of the whole Scflion would be loft ; and ** that the Council had requefted him to comply with «' the wilhes of the Aflcmbly." *' None of thcfe fa£ls arc denied, or the reafoning •• anfwered. And it is proper to obfcrve here, that »* the Petitioners againil this return for King's *' County, inftead of proceeding to the trial of this ** eleftion at a fubfequent feffions, withdrew their «' Peiition." ** Another charge againft the Lieutenant Gover- "nor, is, that he, having a (hare in all confifcations «* from breaches of the laws of trade, and frauds on " the cuftoms, appointed the Controller of the Cuf- *' toms to be Sheriff; thereby veiling the power of *' returning juries to try thefc caufes ; in which he, *' himfelf, with the Lieutenant Governor, were to *• be fubllantially parties iaterefted." *• This cha'-gswas abandoned at the hearing by the *• Council. It is totally unfupported with pro^^/* •* The Lieutenant Governor, however, in his dc- *' fence. [ '7 ] ^' fence, produced precedents of other perfons hold- " ing both the offices i and it appears, belide, in fad, " that there was not one jury impanncllcd bv Mr. •' Douglas, to try any fuch caufe, during the whole " of his Shrievaky." " Having gone through the fevcral charges againfl " the Lieutenant Governor, the Committee will *• proceed to confider thofe againll the Chief Jullicc, *' witli as much brevity as the nature of the cafe will *' admit." " The firft three charges relate to a tranfaftion in ♦* the time of Lieutenant Governor Tattcrfon, and " cannot be connct'ted with any of thefe, which are ** brought to prove n Combination with Lieutenant ** Governor Fanning." " That tranfaftion came before this Board, and " took up a great deal of time, and ended at IhII; in ** an order to difmils fevcral perfons from their ** offices. The Complaint was for illeg;illy confifcat- *• ing lands belonging to feveral of the proprietors ; ** and difol)cdience to your Vlaj (ty's orders, to lay he- *' forethe Alfcmblya diajght of a bill to remedy this K ;n i .,nft ; n.> .»> //^ /> f f/i'ci^, / C " Upon [ i8 j *' Upon that occafion the Chief Judice was at firft ** named as one of the dchnqucnts ; but afterwards, ** they being fatisfied that the Chief Juftice had con- ** ftantly oppofed that mcafure, they ilruck out his *' name. And now the Complainants attempt to re- •' vive thofe proceedings, upon the ground of fome ** words, faid to be fpoken l)v him at the time he op- •' pofed the meafure in Council, which, whether *' true or fall'e, the Committee think ought not to *' be brought forward at fuch a diftance of time, after *' the whole Is clofed, for no better purpofe than to *' cenfurc a pcrfnn, whom the former Complainants, *' who were the injured proprietors, and more in- *•■ tereftcd than any of the prell'iit accufcrs, have in ** effed acquitted, by dropping the profecution againfi: *' him." *' The fourth charge was pafTcd by, as it had ah'eady ** undi.rgo!ic an exaniinatio.i at this Board." *' Which brings thcConnnittee tothe fifth charge." •' The introdu'-lion to this part of the acculation ** Ij fo remaik.ible, that the Committee think it nc- *' cc.raryto llate it verbatim." ** That the Chief Juftice, being joined in fli^ion *' v.'ith the piefcnt Lieut'^'iruU Governor, tlTc"XtTor- " nr y General, and the CoUcdor of the Cuftoms, " has [ »9 3 •* has made his office of Chief Juftice Inft rumen tat to " the purpofe of that fa£lion, by perverting the law *' in his judgements, difregardliig and refufing evi- •' dence, fcreening and protedting the Attorney Ge- *• neral againfl the accufations brought before him in *' his Court, and mifdirccling :ind influencing juries " to give verdids, unfavorable and unjuft, to thofe *' who did not fall-in with the views of their faflion, ** in defiance of law and fa6t." *' Thefc the Memorialifts acknowledge to be ge- *' neral accufations ; but they are ready and able to ** prove it in many precife and fpecific articles, ** from which tiicy fcleft, and particularly charge, *' thefc which follow." " The Committee did not cxpc£l that the Com- * plainants, after they had felcfted thefc fpecific * fa£ls, to prove their general charge, would have * produced general evidence of the Chief Juftice's ' general condu6l in the adminiflration of juftice ; ' but that, alter proving thcfe fele£l particulars* ' they would have left the general charafter of his * mal-adminiilration to be inferred from thcfe in- ' fiances." Ca " A ge- [ 20 ] «* A general charge of mifcondui^, nnfnpported by ** fai^s, would have been njciflcd ; but, as the Com- ** plalnants, in tlie introduclioii to their fpecific ** charge, have arranged his general mlfcondud as a «< Judge, the Chi.-f Juilicc has thought it nccef- *• lary, in his defence, to examine a multitude of wit- *' neflcs to his general demeanour in that office. Rc- *' fides this, the Complainants have, by additional ** evidence, proJ.uced lihewilc a multitude of new ** depofitions, many of them containing new fa£ls ; *' all of which, on both fides, the Committee have *' laid afide for the reafon given at the clofe of this ** report, and have proceeded to examine the fpecific «' faas/' ifl Fa£t. That, in an indi£lmcnt of afTault and *' battery againft one Lavvlor, lie fummed up the *' evidence partially againfl the Defendant ; but that, •* however, the Jury acquitted him." ** Five of the Jury, together with Mr. J. Robin- ** fon, his colleague, deny the charge ; at the fame •* time, they acknowledge that others of the Jury *' fupport it; and fome, even of thofe who before had *' difprovcd it, were prevailed on afterwards to con- *♦ tradia their iirft affidavit," « Thh i t " ] *' This charge, of partial rumming up, couM only '• be proved by flatiiig the evidence on botli fides, ** and the fpeciilc charge to the Jury; which not *' bciiip; done, the Committee difmils this charge as *' not proved." " The fccond fpecific charge againfl the Chief <' Tufticc i:-. for partiality in favour of the Attorney «' General, in the hearing of a charge preferred •• againft him by iMr. Cambridge. Here again all *' the evidence is general." «' Some of the articles, they fay, the Chief Juftice *♦ would hear; others he would not, without fpccify- " ing any. That the Attorney (General ufed impro- «» per language to Mr. Cambridge, and was not rc' " proved." «' But, though the Chief Juflice might have pafllct over this charge as fpccifying nothing; yet he has ' anfwered it, by ftating the nature of this hearing, *' which chiefly confided of mal-praftice, in taking *• double fees, ccc. That he heard the whole com- *♦ plaint, without any partiality ; in which he is fup- ♦• ported by Mr. Robinfon, and Major Gray, the *' two afliftant Jullices ; who add, that, with rcfpcft *' to improper language, there was much on both *' fides, fo tint the Court was obliged to interfere." a " This < [ 22 ] «' This Chnrgc, therefore, the Committee think " proper to pa(s over." «( THIRD SPECIFIC CHARGE. ** That he fufTorecl, in a caufe of Dcbrifay and Pattcrfon, improper evidence to be given, 5cc. The *' aiiiwcr i";, that in that caulb the Chief JulUcc was *' a Witncls, aiid therefore abdained from giving any *' opinion, or taking any part in it as a Judge ; and *' this is confirmed by Major Gray, the AilKiant *' Judge, who fwears that he hJmfelf I'ummed up the *' Caufeto the Jury.'* *' Fourth fpcclfic charge againft the Chief Juftice, *• for an illegal opinion, in rtfufing to admit the evi- *' dence of a fctoff." *' The anfwer Is, the judgement is appealed *« from." ** The Committee take leave to obferve, that this " caufc has been fmcc heard before a Committee of *' Council ; who were of opinion, the Chief Juflice's ** deciiion, as the caulb llood upon the pleadings Dc- *• low, was ftri(^tly and legally right; but that, under *' the circumilantes of the cafe, the Defendant »' lliould, 1^^ [ 23 ] ** fliould, upon payment of cods, 1)c adir.Ittcd to ** plead a fct-off; and that, for that purpofc, tho *' caufe fliould be remitted : wh'ch report your Ma- ** jelly has been plcafcd to confirmt" FIFTH SPECIFIC CHARGE. ** This is for admitting a deed in evidence, without ** proof, as an ancient deed. This, like the others, •' may or may not be an erroneous opinion. The ** Chief Jufticc, however, offered to fcal a bill of ** exceptions, which was not accepted ; but the Dc- •' fendant, Mr. Cambridge, was not hurt ; for, the *' Jury found a vcrdift in his favour. Afterwards, *' upon motion, a new trial was granted ; and *^ the verdi£l in the fecond trial went for the Plaintiff. " If the party has been injured, his lemcdy is in the *' courts of law." " Sixth fpecific charge is for threatening one of the ** Jury with punithment, if he did not agree witli his *' brothers. Here, too, is a flat contradidion in the *' evidence. Mr. Rohinfon, the Affiftant Judge, with " fix of the Jury, fwcar they heard no fuch words ; ** and, in the opinion of the Committee, the weight *' of the evidence is in favor of the Chief Juilice." SE- [ 24 ] SEVENTH SPECIFIC C 11 A R G E, *' The Chief Jufiicc is accufcd, for rcfuflng, upon * motion, to grant a i\ow trial, in a caufc, Cam- * hriJgc agaiiiA CIa;l«.. The cafe was, after the Jury ' iiad delivered their verdict, the Counfel for the ' Defendants piayed leave lo appeal ; which was * granted, aiul entered upon record. The Chief ' Juftice was of opinion, the caufc was removed by ' the appeal, and not l)ctore the Court. 1 he Lieu- ' tenant (Jovcinor, upon application, faid the caufe * was net before him ; yet, in point of law, the ' Committee apprehend the caufe was removed by ' the allowance oi the appeal ; and the hands of the * Court tied -jp till the appeal was withdrawn, which ' was not done. T his, however, at the moll, was ' but an error in judgement." EIGHTH SPECIFIC CHARGE. " This is a cliarc;e a^ainft the Chief Tuftice, for *' refufmg to Ixir a ciiallenjte made to one of the ♦•jurors by the defendant Mr. Cambridge, though, " at the fame time, he admitted a challenge, made by " the Profccutor, to be tiicd." ^Ir. C 25 ] " Mr. Cambridge's challenge was upon ti.e gfouhj *• of affinity J which was known at tlic time the Ip , jal *' Jury was ftruck in the prcfcnce of the patties and •• their attorneys, and therefore came, in the opi- «• nion of the Chief Juftice, too late." ** The i>1'' m'>io I to the other was, that he was a <♦ fervantto Mr. ^.amhridgc; but that was not known *' at the ti n ; the proof, however, failed, and he •' was fworn." " This too, if illegal, might have been corre6>ed *' by a motion for a new trial ; and the vcrdidl would *' have been fet alide." COMPLAINT AGAINST THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. *' There arc five charges againfl: the Attorney Ge- '* neral.'* *' The Committee will begin with the fifth, as it ** will throw a light upon the others." ** Thii rontains two Icparatc fa£ls." t *' Firft, That, being employed for Cambridge and ** Bowley to foreclolc a mortgage, he, the Attorney !> "General, [ 26 1 " General, promifcd Mr. Walter Berry, a juniot ** mortgagee, lb to draw the bill that he might eafily "defeat it; and that he would iiii^rucl Mr. Berry " how to do it." *' Second, That Mr. Spcncc, the Mortgngeor, having *' entered into a Bond to Cambridge and Bowlcy, he, '* the Attorney General, their Counlel, did advifc *' the fame Mr. Walter Berry to fell the Mortgaged 's '' goods, to prevent their execution." *' Thefe two fafts are proved only by Mr. Walter •' Berrv." *' The Attorney General has given a full aii- " fwer to all this acculhtion, by a narration of the •' whole tranfadion ; and the cafe is proved by indif- *' putablc documents." " It appears, by this cafe, that the Attorney Cc- ** ncral performed his duty to liis cli_nt fkilfuliv, *' and honcrtlv ; and at Lift obtained a file- of the •' Mortgageor's goods, JVJtwithftanding the fraudulent *' laic made of tlr:m by Mr. Walter Berry, the w'r- " nefs, wlio was then Sheriff, to difappoint K'ltii'. *' Cambridge and Bowley, who never fulpccicd th.c •' Atrorncy General of betraying their caufe, l)ii' *' brought a complaiul before thr Lieutenant Ciov(.r- i.or C 27 ] ** nor and Council againft this Mr. Walter Berry, •* not only for the fraudulent falc, but for oppofing *' the Coroner with force and fire-arms in the cxecu- *' tionofa writ to feize and fell the goods belonging ** totheMortgageor. Mr Berry, in his dcfcnce,charged, ** as he has done here, the Attorney General, for hav- ** in(T advifcd the fraudulent fale ; but, after a full *' hcarinr^, the Council not onlv condemned Mr. *' Walter Berry, but difmilfcd him from his ofFice ** of Sheriff, and cleaved the Attorney General from " this imputation. The fame Mr. Walter Berry, " afterwards, in a fubfequent memorial, acknow- ** ledges his fault, and begs pardon, not only for his *' mifcondui^, but for his reflexion and falfc charge *' againft the Attorney General." " All thi: while Cambridge and Bowlcy were upon *' good terms with the Attorney General, and ene- *' mics to Mr. Berry ; and, in this very proceeding, " not onlv acquicfced in the acquittal of the Attor- *' ncy General, but profecuted this Mr. Berry to a ** difmillion of him from his office of Sheriff. Bur, afterwards, when they quarrelled with the Attor- « ncy General, they took up this very ' ^'alter Berry, ♦* whom they thcmfelves had difcreditcd, to be their ♦♦ friendly wiiiiefs, not to exculpate himfelf frorn ** his own miicondudt, but to revive lus original ij D2 '* charge it: [ 28 ] " charge againft the Attorney General, who had been *' acquitted by the Council." ** This charge is, therefore, entirely groimdlefs." ** The fourth charge, which the Committee took " next under their confidention, is limilar to the ** former.'* *' That the Attorney General, as Counfel and At- ** torney forCaiiibiidgc and Dowlcy, not only deferted ** the caufe he was concerned in for them, but dif- ** clofcd his Client's fccrets ro Mr. Grandin the Ad- *' verfary's Attorney, and inflrucled him how to de- ** feat the Piaiaiiirs in the recovery of their demand." *' Thi^ is proved by Mr, Macgowan, the fubfequent *' Attorney for Cambridge and Bowley ; and by Mr. *' Grandin, the Adverfary's Counfel.'' " But the affidavit is quite as general as the charge, *' neither flating the a(5lion, nor pointing out any one *' particular wherein the Attorney General had dif- *' clofcd his Client's fcctets ; or how, or in what '* manner, he had inftru^led the Adverfary's Counfel *' to defeat the Plaintiffs' demand." «'0n C 29 ] ** On the contrary, the Attorney General not only ** denies the charge, butftates the caufc, the hiftoryof " the proceedings, the reafon why he dcfiftcd from " being any longer concerned for Mefl". Cambridge *' and Bowley, and the afliftance he gave Mr. Mac- ** gowan, the fubfequent Attorney, how to proceed, *' by giving him all the light he could upon the fub- *' jed, and delivering up to him all the papers," ** And Mr. Grandin, the only witnefs, to prove •* his revealing his Client's fecrets, has been flruck •* off the Roll of Attorneys for mifconduft." ** This account of the tranfadion is not replied <♦ to ; and the principal fafts are confirmed by Mr. " Charles Stewart." 1*1 I *• This charge is, therefore, groundlcfs.'* THE THIRD CHARGE. " *' That one Samuel Braddock, having retained the *' Attorney General, he, in part, conduced his " caufe ; and afterwards deferted him, and conduced ♦' the caufe of his adverfary.'* •* The If' \ ' [ 30 ] ** The nnfwcr to tliis is a denial, accompaiiicd witli •' a iiariative of tlic aJvic;3 lie pave Mr. Ihacldock, " upon an iipplication to him, and rffufing to be con- *' cerncd for him." *' The fact difputcd in this charge is the gift of a ** guinea, as a retaining fee." •' Walter Bcrrv, the witnefs mentioned in the fifth *' charge, is the only witnefs to this ta£l." •* The guinea, nccording to his account, was not *' paid in fpcci-:-, \v\t credited in an account between *' him aad Aplin ; fo that Hraddock knows no more «* of this UcX than Walter Bcrrv told him." .II' *« Ther.fi: of the evidence turns upon the affirma- *' tion, cj denial, of Herry and JJraddock, of the " payment of this retaining fee." *' The cxaniination of this fa*^ came twice before «' tire Supreme Court. Or.ce, at a time after the ac- ^- tion v;as cor.inicnced, durnig the fufpcnfion of Mr. ^' Ch;tf !u''iccStcvv;irt, when Ihaddock demanded, in *' Court. I'..' .lUOanceof tlie Attorney Cieneral ; and *' called Air. ;)-rry,l!ie;i in Court, to prove the retainer. '^ Air. Ci.a;ks Stewart fwears, that at this time Mr. •' Berry [ 3t ] : Berry denied the aflertion of Braddock, who laiJ^ Berry had intbrincd huii he had retained Aphn." •' This i^ not denied, in the reply, by either Berry " or llii.duock.'* •* Tlie otlicr time thif, came before the Court was *' upon the coniphiint of Mr. Caiuhridgc againil tlic *' Attorney General, when Mr, Mewait was rcilouu. *♦ Upon this cccaiion the fad difputcd is, whether *' Ihaddock declared he had, or that he had not, been *' retained." *' To tl:c former declaration four witncfTes have «' made aiFul.'.vit ; to the latter, o;dy two, Mr. Rc- •« binfon t!ie Alviilant judge, and Mr. Mallard ; but *' the Committee, knowing none of the paities, arc ** not abh" to determine which are to be believed, iSo < money was paid ; but ciedit given for it, \:\ a:i ac- ' count iKtwecn licrry and the Attorney Cicncral-, ' nor is it laid whether the fee wa> given for advice. 4 C i »' or as a retainer in the caulr. 'i his f;:ft depends *' altogether upon the evidence of berry, above-mcn- " tioned, wh.o, as Mr. Charles Stewart has fvvorn, *• has himfclf contradided this very fafi." " Tlie Committee are therefore of opinion, this *• charac is net proved." u Ti,.- ':l i '•■ I; 1 . : i\ f 32 3 ** The firft and fecond charges are confined ia *» words fpoken by the Attorney General } the firft, " in a convcrfation with Mr. John Hill ; the fecond, " in a convcrfation with Mr, Robertfon." *' By the firfl: fct he is charged with faying to Mr* *' Hill, that, as Cambridge and Bowley had taken *' part againft fuch men as the Governor wifhed to *' have choicn, he adviled the faid Hill to take ad- •• vanta[?,e of thac a^ainft them, by extending his *' trade, as they would be obliged to leave the ifland." *' ifl-, The words are denied by the Attorney Ge- *' ncral, who gives a very particular account of the *' meeting between lliem, with all the convcrfation " that pniTcd ; none of which is denied in reply by *• Mr. Hill." ♦' 2d, Hcrry, to whom Mr. Hill favs he told " this convcrfation the moment he left the Attorney ♦' General, is not brought forward to conhnvi it." " The fet of word.-i in the fecond charge is a de- *' claration to Mr. Robertfon in a private conver- ♦' fation." *' xMr. [ 33 1 " Mr. Robertfon having, as Sheriff, attached the " goods of one Mamvaiing, the Attorney General *' cxprelTed a wonder that the other creditors of *' Manwaring fubmittcd to the operation of the *' Law, and taking Robertfon aiide faid, by keeping *' in with thefe fellows we could ahvays have a jury *' to our minds." <* The Committee do not well undcrilard the «* nicanincr of thefe words, *' who tlicfe fellows are'' " that are alluded to ; there arc none fpokcn of but *' the ether creditors of Manwaring; and how they <' Ihould be able to procure friendly juries the *•' Comaiitree cannot coninrchend." told ** The words arc denied by TvTr. Aplin ; and Mr. " Robe'tfon, who i^: the only witncfs produced to *' prove them, can hardly be bLlicvcd, when we " compare a Ictkr written by him to the fame At- " torncy General a ycnr afterwards, wherein he, *' \ipon the vaeaiicy of the Attorney's (Mhce, ad- *' vifcs Mr. Aplin to apply for it, laying, he may «' command his ii'.tjrclts, and will chcaifully facri- ♦* ike a monih lo ir, if necelliu-y." " This friendly ofTer of hi^ fu vices, to recommend ♦' a man to the liiR oiFicc at the lar, is hardly con- E ♦' fiftent 1 ! Hi. i I 3+ ] *' fiflcnt with a belief that the fame mail had ufcct •' word.'i thnt, ia his opinion, made him unlit to *'■ piadifc at the bar in any fituation." " The Committee, upon the whole, are of opi- •* nion, that tliefe, as well as all the other charges, " arc iuliv anJ hiii'v anfwcrcd." (< And they beg leave to clofc with this remark, *' tliat admitting them all to he true, there is not " among them one that has the leaft reference to " a!:yl'.'.ch Combination, as tlic Complainants make *' \]'.? r ii)uiid-woik of tlieir accufatioii a■. :th th' '.n, that Cam!)ridge and Bowly were to be •' har:a!V. .1, :\ud forced to quit tiie illaiul ; thar l/j, " a-; iKiv.d otiiccr, could promote, or obflruiSt, his 1 1 d'.l'. . •' Aud [ 35 ] ! 1 : ** And Mr. Steele Is produced as a witncfs, to prove " other declarations, that, as Hill had relufcd his aid " to tho party, he, the Collcdor, would diftrcfu *' him to the utmoft of his power." " Thcfc words, if they had been followed by a6ls, *' and thofc aiSls proved, would certainly have made *' good the gci\cral charge of a fadious confpiracy «' in all the Defendants ; but no fuch are produced *' before the Committee." na \ *' The words, if true, arc certainly the evidence of * a very protligatc and corrupt heart ; and, though ' they are by no means fufficicnt to criminate the * other parties, would, as againft the Colkdor him- *' J'^lf, though they are words and no more, prove *' him unfit to fcrve your iMajeily in any capacity *' whatlbcvcr." !i ■ iy «' But thcv arc as fully and pofiflvcly denied, as *' they arc changed ; and, in that cafe, tlic oaths on " both fides being equivalent, the charge cannot " be conlidcred as proved." «' BcliJcs, the Colle£lors, denial U materially aided «« bv the evidence of Mr. Owen ; who lays, he was, ♦' durin"- Mr. Townlhend's viiit at Lewis Town, \l 2 '* WUCIC :n ili r 36 ] *' where this convcifatioii is faiJ to Imvc paffctl, in *' company with the Collc£lov at all times when *' thvV wcic topeilicr, at hreaklaft, dinner, anJ " flipper, and never heard one word of politics *' pr.l's between them.'* ** I'^pon tlic whole, the Committee arc of opi" *' ::ion, wiilch ihcy hini'bly beg leave to lubmit to *' vf>iir Majtily, that the complaint ought to be *' difmincd." «< '1'} i ;ic Committee cannot conclude, without " takitig notice vt a verv mnvarrantablc attempt of *' the Ccmr.l.iinanis to introduce a vaft body of " evidence againd tlie Defendants, which they had " no opportunity of aniV.ciinp;. — \\ lu n the com- " plaint fi-.f: ca;nc to this J]o;ud, with the aihdavits ' in rt;r>po!t of it, ti e C'Mv.mittcc ordered it to " be liaiur.iittcd to tliJ ]ila;ul ; ::\\\d the Di-fendants *' vwv.", wiiiiip. a cert: in time, to deliver tlieir •' a:v'\ cr, tor^tlicr with a ccpv of tlirir cvidcnc.\ •' to tlic Coniplriinant';, v, Iio liad ihe liberty to rcpiv, " and tlicy were to deliver tiieir reply within a ccr- " t:i;n timt ; ap.d tlie:i ihc \v!u)!c was to be immc;- ** mediately font over to l.n^^laad. Underthis liberty 2 " of 1 1 r 37 J " of reply, thc"compIaiiiants thonc;lit fit to load their *' fird accufation witli new matter and i.evv fu£lb *." *' But the Committee have taken no notice of " thefe addition?! complaints.'* HIS MAJESTY, fakwg thcfiid Re^ port into confidcration^ wa^ plaijccl^ nz'ith the advice of Lis Privy C-uncily to otprove tbereoj ; and io ordcr^ that the I'aid fevcral CompLunts be, and they are hereby^ difmij^ed this Board* STEPHEN COTTERELL. " f. ^ y '(I ,'. ;^f.) * The grcatcft part of this additional evidence has fince been found to be fabricued by the malevolent and unprincipled agcDts of tlie Conr'plainants 5 for, on a very general ciofs-exa- mination, the witncifLS examinid by them have depofcd, that they never fwore, or meant to fwcnr, to the fat^.s contained in the ("lid atlditioiial afTuiavit', brought forward by the Complain- ants, And it was verv unfortunate, that thefe crofs-cxaminations did not arrive till iho lic-iring was over: fur they would have difcloftd to their L'juilliips and the uorld tlie moft malicious and wicked plor, on the p-^rt of the Complainants, and their cmiirarits, to runt '.lie Dttpndants, that was ever dcvifcJ by tlie maliy-nitv of m.uikind. I fciil