Lord Broughampresented a petition from two persons who were confined in Chester Castle since August last, on a conviction for having used inflammatory language at a meeting, and for which they were to be imprisoned for twelve months, after being duly convicted in due course of law. The 509 petition stated a variety of things, but not to trouble their Lordships, he would only recommend it to their best attention. He begged to state that it was committed to him in a letter from a respectable solicitor residing at Manchester, and the statements rested only on his authority, and, therefore, he was not answerable for them. If true, it would appear the Justices present were not well advised, that the practice of the law required that the person to be committed, should be present at the examination of the witnesses against him, that he might hear the evidence and have the power of cross-examining them. This it was stated, the magistrates did not do; but the petitioner, who was a medical man, said the witnesses were severally introduced, and instead of being examined in the usual way, and giving their answers subject to cross-examination, a paper was read over to them by the magistrate's clerk, and they were asked whether the statements which purported to be evidence taken down before was true. This was not the proper way, for the examination was not taken in the presence of the parties, and it was one thing to read over a paper, and another to examine, and thus subject them to cross-examination. The other ground of complaint was, that the party, when called upon, was proceeding to state his defence, but was told he must speak so slow that the clerk, who could not write short hand, might take down every word he said, that it might be used in evidence against him. That was a very great mistake; for the use to be made of the defence was not that of having evidence against him, but to influence it in his favour; and he really hoped no party would again be required to utter his defence in such a way, since many would thereby be obliged to hold their peace. No person was more cautious than himself in interfering with the administration of justice; but he had thought it proper to state these facts to their Lordships, and he submitted they were well worthy of their consideration.
TheMarquess of Normanbysaid, that he had a considerable correspondence with the sitting justices on the subject. As far as the case had come before him, he thought the magistrates were justified in the course they had taken. He would, however, make further inquiry on the
§ matter, and lay the results before their Lordships.
§ Adjourned.