COURT OF KING'S BENCH, WEST

MINSTER, FEB. 8. Prosecution for Perjury. The King v. Thomas Russell Davis. SIR J. Scarlett stated the case for the prosecution. The indictment charged the defendant, a bookbinder at Hertford, with having committed wilful and corrupt perjury in certain evidence which he had given before a committee of the House of Commons, appointed during the last session of Parliament, to decide on the merits of the Hertford election petition. At the last contested election for Hertford, lord Mahon, and lord Ingestrie were the conservative candidates, and Mr. T. Duncombe and Mr. Spalding came forward on the popular interest. The election having terminated in favour of lords Mahon and Ingestrie, Mr. Duncombe and Mr. Spalding presented a petition against their return, which was referred to a committee, who, after an investigation of many days, made a report by which the two noble lords were unseated. Among other allegations in the petition it was charged that bribery had been committed to a very great extent at and before the election, and in support of the petition the defendant, who was a warm partisan of Mr. Duncombe and Mr.

Spalding, was examined as a witness. In his evidence he stated that on Monday, the day of the nomination at Hertford, he had gone between five and half-past six o'clock to the house of Mr. Nicholson, the principal agent of lord Mahon, and had there seen in Mr. Nicholson's office, which he described particularly, both lord Mahonand Mr. Nicholson together; that he showed lord Mahon some bruises on his head, which he said he had received from the bullies and gipsies who were on lord Mahon's side, and required some compensation for them before he would give his vote for his lordship; that lord Mahon himself promised him 10l. for his vote, and that Mr. Nicholson said he would draw his pen across a debt of 31. 15s. which he (Davis) owed to Mr. Nicholson and his partner; that he promised to vote for lord Mahon on this understanding, but that, feeling he had acted wrong, he had, when taken to the poll by one of lord Mahon's adherents, voted for Mr. Duncombe and Mr. Spalding. Now, he (Sir J. Scarlett) would prove this statement to be wholly false. He would call lord Mahon and Mr. Nicholson before the jury, and they would both prove that, neither at the time stated by Davis, nor at any other time, had any such conver

sation as he stated taken place. Besides this positive testimony he would show that Mr. Nicholson was distant five miles from home at the time spoken to by Davis; that Davis's description of Mr Nicholson's office, in which he stated the conversation to have taken place, was incorrect; and that Mr. Nicholson had some time previously made an alteration, which was inconsistent with the description Davis had given of it. The preliminary proof having been gone through, the shorthand writer's notes of the evidence given by Davis before the committee were read.

Lord Mahon-I attended the committee in the House of Commons most days. I was present when the defendant was examined and heard the evidence he gave. To the best of my remembrance, I had never seen him before I saw him in the committee room. I heard the evidence he gave respecting a conversation between him and me, and I solemnly swear that that evidence was entirely false. I have no recollection of having ever been in a room with that man and Mr. Nicholson. I never, in the presence of Mr. Nicholson or in his absence, offered that man 107., if he would give me his vote. I never offered that man or any other man in Hertford, either directly or indirectly or at any time or place, a sum of 101., or any other sum whatever, for his vote. If such an event had occurred as a man showing me his wounds, and asking me for a consideration for his vote, I could not have forgotten it; I can therefore venture to swear that nothing of the kind stated by Davis ever took place. No offer was made by Mr. Nicholson or any other person in VOL. LXXVI.

my presence respecting a balance of 31. 15s. being struck off.

Cross-examined.-From first to last, my election cost me personally between 2,000l. and 3.000l. I did not pay the whole of the expenses; there was another candidate, and there were others who also contributed. To the best of my belief the whole amount spent at the election may have been about 8,000l. or 9,000l. At the election 432 voters voted for lord Ingestrie, and 381 for me. I solemnly swear, that nothing against my principles and conscience, such as attempting to bribe an elector, could possibly have escaped my memory. My memory may be frail on unimportant circumstances, but not in such a case as this, and it is impossible that such a thing as this could have taken place. I have no recollection of any voters having shown me, on the nomination-day, any wounds they had received. I have no recollection of the fact, but I think it not impossible that persons may have shown me wounds they had received, and asked me for something to drink. I will not undertake to swear that no person during the election showed me bruises or wounds which they said they had received in my service; it may have happened, though I have no recollection of it.

Re-examined by Sir James Scarlett. I can undertake to say positively that no person ever showed me in Mr. Nicholson's private room, any wound he had received, or asked me for any compensation of 10l. or any other sum.

Mr. George Nicholson.-I am a solicitor, practising at Hertford. The defendant was indebted to me and my partner in a sum of 31. 15s. There is no truth what

U

ever in the statement that the defendant came to my house on the nomination-day, or any other day, and saw Lord Mahon and myself together, when Lord Mahon promised to give him 10l. for his vote. I did not offer to strike my pen through my demand on Davis. I knew Davis to be a warm supporter of Mr. Duncombe, and I never had any conversation with him about his vote.

Cross-examined.-I believe the whole expense of the election to have been between 6,000l. to 7,0007. I am not at liberty to say whether any other persons besides Lords Ingestrie and Mahon paid any part of the expenses: it is matter of a privileged nature, and I am not bound to disclose it.

Mr. Longmore, the partner of Mr. Nicholson, stated that, after the election, he issued a writ against Davis, to recover the sum due to himself and Mr. Nicholson. Davis called on him to settle the matter, but did not mention the promise he afterwards stated had been made to him by Mr. Nicholson to strike his pen through the debt. Witness did not make any application by letter immediately before issuing the writ, but frequent applications had been made before, and there had been repeated promises to pay. The writ was issued about six weeks after the election was over; but it was not issued, inconsequence of the part which Davis had taken at the election.

Two of the clerks in the office of Messrs. Nicholson and Longmore stated that on Monday, the day of the nomination, Mr. Nicholson went out on horseback before five o'clock, and that Russell Davis did not, to their knowledge, come to the office.

Mr. Nicholson's groom proved

that his master rode out on the nomination-day at half-past four o'clock, and did not return till half-past seven.

The Lord Chief Justice summed up the evidence: and the Jury found the defendant Guilty, but recommended him to mercy, on the ground that great bribery and corruption had prevailed at the Hertford election.

CHESTER.

Trial of Mosley and Garside for Murder.

Joseph Mosley, 34, and William Garside, were indicted for the murder of Mr. Thomas Ashton, at Werneth, on the 3rd of January, 1831.

The three first witnesses deposed merely to the cause of death of the murdered man.

William Mosley, the accomplice.-I am the brother of Joseph Mosley, one of the prisoners at the bar. I have lived at Romiley, about a mile and-a-half from Mr. Ashton's, and four miles from Marple. I have been a boat-man. I knew the prisoner Garside at Marple. I remember meeting Garside and Joseph Mosley at the Stag's Head, at Marple-bridge. on the Wednesday before Mr. Ashton was shot. We had something to drink. Both of them asked me (Garside first) if I had any thing to do. I said I was out of employ, and was going over to Macclesfield to look for work. Garside said I had better stop a few days, and I should have a better job than any I could get at Macclesfield. meet again on the Sunday, at Marple-bridge. I went there between twelve and one o'clock.

We agreed to

Garside and Mosley were there; we remained on the bridge there about half an hour. They told me they were going to meet two men on Compstall Brow, and that I must go with them. While we were standing on the bridge we saw Samuel Middleton and Jones. We went to Compstall Brow, that is not far from Werneth Low, a high hill. We met two men, one was called either Scholfield or Stanfield. I knew them by sight before; Scholfield was a joiner. Joseph Mosley told me to stand a little on one side, while he and Garside talked together with the other two. I did not hear all that was said, but I heard something about "the Unions." They talked together about half an hour. After the other men went away, Garside and Joseph Mosley said, that they had agreed with those two men, that they were to shoot one of the Mr. Ashtons. I said, what was it for and they said, because of the turn-out Unions. I asked what they were to have for it? and they said 10l. They asked me to meet them for that purpose the next day, at Wright's Tower, or if not there, at the Gravel-pits. I at first refused, but was persuaded to consent. On the Monday, about four o'clock, I set out from Romiley to go to the place appointed. I overtook a man named George Parkinson; he walked with me as far as his own house. I did not find the prisoners at Wright's Tower, and went on to the Gravel-pits, where I found them. They had each a pistol loaded; one large, like a horse pistol, and the other a small one. Garside had the large pistol; the small pistol had a bright

barrel. Garside had on a darkcoloured coat (jacket), dark brown cloth trousers, and waistcoat the same. Joseph Mosley was dressed in a dark-coloured waistcoat, and a light coloured coat, like a long shooting coat. I was dressed in a pair of woollen cord breeches, yellow-striped kerseymere waiscoat, and round cloth jacket, which reached about the knees. I had on a hairy cap. While we were at the Gravel-pits, we saw Samuel Taylor, the farmer. Both of them said we were to go round by the turnpike, and along the lane towards Mr. Ashton's factory. When we were going we met several persons. Garside and I changed shoes. He put on one of mine, which had strong nails in it. We changed my cap for his hat. We met a man, and in about twenty or thirty yards more we met a little girl; we also met a boy with a lantern, and after him a man. Joseph went across the road and looked him in the face. Garside asked Joseph if he knew him, and Joseph said no, he did not. I went over the hedge on the right hand side of the lane, and Joseph and Garside went through the Clap-gate into the field on the other side, through which the private road to Mr. Ashton's runs. The ground on the side I was on was higher than the other. could see them sitting down together at the back of the ditch, waiting for Mr. Ashton. Shortly afterwards some one came along the footpath towards the mill, and through the Clap-gate. Garside got up from the ditch before the man got through the Clap-gate; he pointed the piece towards the man, and he gave way and fell

I