the Mississipi is the outlet would lose a charge, he appears to have received

great part of their value. Who does not see in this fact a great cause of disunion? On this side the mountains, there are twelve hundred miles of coast to blockade; but you, gentlemen prairie-owners, are like a rat that has but one hole to g out and to come in at. You express your deep-rooted attachment to your adopted country, and I am sure you are sincere; but, still I may be allowed to doubt, whether you would cheerfully wear bear-skins, and gnaw your meat off the bones, for the sake of any commercial right that the nation might go to war about. I know that you would not starve; for coffee and tea are not necessary to man's existence; but, you would like to sell your flour and pork, and would be very apt to discover reasons against a war that would prevent you from selling them. You appear to think it very wicked in the Atlantic people to feel little eagerness in promoting the increase of population to the westward; but you see, that in this want of such eagerness, they may be actuated by a real love for their country. For my part, I think it would have been good policy in the Congress not to dispose of the western lands at all; and I am sure it would have been an act of real charity.

Having now performed what I deemed my duty towards my countrymen, and towards this country too, I will conclude my letter with a few observations, rela tive to mills, which may be of use to you; for, I know, that you will go on; and, indeed, I most sincerely wish you all the success that you can wish yourself, without doing harm to others.

TRIAL.

THE subject of the following trial has deeply interested, and indeed, it has agitated for months past the whole of the western part of Surrey. The result was, it seems, hailed at Godalming with all those demonstrations of joy which are usually exhibited on account of some great national triumph! If Mr. MELLERSH has suffered pain at the thought of being dragged into court on such a

ample compensation in the testimony of universal respect, an expression of which the occasion has called forth.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.

THE KING AGAINST MELLERSH.

This was an indictment against Mr. Mellersh a most respectable banker and solicitor at Godalming, for certain perjuries alleged to have been committed by the defendant in an answer put in by him to an amended bill in

the Court of Chancery, wherein he swore that a certain sum, secured by the bond of a Mr. Richard Smith, dated in December 1827, and given to Mr. Mellersh in his own name, was given and paid by the said Richard Smith for Mr.Mellersh individually, and not for the firm of Mellersh, Kidd, and Kidd, bankers, at Godalming.

Sir JAMES SCARLETT addressed the jury on the part of the prosecution, and proceeded to

call his witnesses. After the bill and answers were put in aud read, the prosecutor, Mr. Benjamin Kidd, was called. and he produced a memorandum and two letters in Mr. Mellersh's hand writing to a contrary effect to that which

was sworn in the answer. One of the letters was a mutilated document, and the prosecutor could not say when he received it, when he mutilated it, though he admitted he had torn it; what were the contents of that which he tore off; but he admitted that he had known of the existence of that and the other documents ever since the partnership had been dissolved, which was subsequent to the date of the bond, and yet had executed a deed of dissolution, which professed to contain a statement of all the debts due to the partnership, in which, however, this was not stated; that he bad filed his first bill in Chancery without at all alluding to it, although the bill was filed for the purpose of getting in all the outstanding accounts, and that it was not alluded to until

he filed his amended bill, stating in it that the bond was a recent discovery, and which was not filed until Smith, the person who had given and paid the bond, had died and could give no evidence upon it. He admitted he had quarrelled with the defendant; that on the bill of indictment being found he had given instructions to Mr. Binns, his attorney, to publish au account of it in the papers; that he had moved for a bench warrant instantly for the arrest of the defendant; that he had goue to Union Hall-office to get it backed by the magistrates; that the office being closed he had gone to the magistrates, to whom he was known, to get it backed by them; that he and his attorney Binns went down in the night together to Godalming to be there to see the defendant taken the next day, when a large fair (Saint Catherine's Hill) was to be held in the neighbourhood; that he had exulted in it and boasted of it in various places; that he felt for his friend, and yet he did exult that he had him in his power; that he had published

it at Catherine Hill Fair; that he had said to one person that the defendant had managed it badly-he should have sworn so and so, and he would have been safe; and to another that he might have sworn a different way, and he would have also been safe; and that he had often, up to the dissolution, talked to the defendant about the sum that was coming to the partnership from the bond; that he had felt a great desire to see the bond, and yet had never asked to see it, although he had had copies of all the other partnership securities.

The next witness called was a man of the name of William Poulter, who admitted having been in the service of Benjamin Kidd, but since the finding of the bill had started as a land surveyor, appraiser, auctioneer, &c. He stated that he had heard the defendant over and over again state that the bond was for the partnership, and that it was sure to be available; but that whenever he addressed the defendant he was violent, and declared that Kidd should never have a farthing. He admitted that he had gone the day after the bill was found to Chiddingfold, and there stated that the defendant had had a bill found against him for perjury, and that all the devils in hell and all the angels in heaven could not save him from conviction. That he had heard that Sir James Scarlett, Mr. Adolphus, and another, the three mosteminent counsel in England, had said that the defendant would be transported for seven years, and that his property would be confiscated, and that he had the means of compromising on condition that defendant would go twenty mites from Godalming and not practise as a solicitor or banker within that distance; that he had a great friendship for the defendant Mr. Mellersh; and that the prosecutor Mr. Benjamin Kidd, had, on one occasion since the finding of the bill, paid more than 501. for him when he was arrested, being the debt and costs; that he had made over all his property for the benefit of his creditors, but as yet nothing had been realized.

Several other witnesses were called to prove the formal part of the prosecutor's case, but whose testimony did not go to the merits.

When Mr. John Smith was called, he stated that he was one of the executors of Richard Smith, the obligor in the bond, and that Richard Smith was his uncle. That on one occasion, when his uncle and Mr. Mellersh were together, and previous to the execution of the bond, he came into the room where they were; that the defendant Mr. Mellersh said to him, "John, your uncle wishes to pay me what I have lost by your brother Richard, but I won't take it, as I am afraid it would injure his other nephews and nieces; but I tell your uncle, that if he means to give any thing to Richard at his death I shall have no objection to take it out of his share." That witness thanked the defendant, and went home and told his (witness's) wife that Mr. Mellersh hadacted very like a gentleman.

Mr. James Limbert, the other executor of

the obligor, was then called, and he proved that he was clerk to Messrs. Melersh and Co., solicitors, and had been so for upwards of twenty years. That he was present when Mr. Richard Smith executed the bond, and that he was the attesting witness to it. That the bond was given to Mr. Mellersh individually, and that, on its being executed, was put by Mr. Mellersh with his own private papers. That no charge was made for preparing the bond, but that Mr. Mellerslı paid two pounds for the stamp out of his own private pocket. That in February, 1833, by the desire of Mr. Mellersh, he took the bond with an account of the interest then due to Mr. Smith, who, after looking at the account, said he was very glad to pay the money, as he always meant that Mr. Mellersh should not be a loser by his nephew Richard's misconduct, and be considered he was paying a debt of honour to an old friend. That he gave a cheque for the amount in Mr. Mellersh's name, and burnt the boud. That he communicated what passed to Mr. Mellersh when he returned home, and repeated to him whilst he was preparing his answer.

The Attorney-General addressed the jury on the part of the defendant, and stated that it was clear the bond was a voluntary bond on the part of Mr. Smith, the obligor. That he was not a creditor of the partnership. That it was given to Mr. Mellersh individually, and that the name of the firm of the Kidds was never mentioned. That Richard Smith, the obligor, was the personal friend of the defendant, and not of the prosecutors. That it had been distinctly proved in evidence that the obligor paid the money for Mr. Mellersh individually, and as a debt of honour, to save an old friend from loss in consequence of the misconduct of his (Smith's) nephew; and that from the whole tenor of the transaction there could be no doubt of Richard Smith's intention. He commented in the most severe and indignant terms on the conduct and testimony of the prosecutor Benjamin Kidd and his witness Poulter, and stated, that although he felt satisfied that in point of law the defendant could not be convicted on the evidence, still he could not avail himself of that objection, as nothing would satisfy the defendant short of an acquittal by a jury upon the merits of the case. The defendant had then an. array of witnesses consisting of several peers, the Lord Mayor of London, many magistrates, and country gentlemen, merchants, bankers, solicitors, and others who spoke to his character for integrity, veracity, and honour, in terms of the most flattering commendation, and in a way that has been seldom witnessed in a court of justice.

The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Denman, then proceeded to address the jury as follows:

Gentlemen of the jury, this is an indictment for perjury which has been preferred against a gentleman of the name of Thomas Meilersh, the perjury being supposed to have been com

mitted in an answer in Chancery to a bill of his guilt, and therefore I must add (conwhich charges him with not having performed nected as he was with other persons), he apspecifically a covenant for recovering money pears to have been actuated by motives which due to the partnership in which he had been appear to me to do him no credit. It was an engaged. The partnership consisted of him- object with Mr. Kidd that Mr. Mellersh should self, Mr. Benjamin Kidd, and Mr. Richard not continue to carry on his business any Kidd, who separated about the year 1828; and longer (which was that of an eminent banker) in the deed of separation each partner was to in the town in which he was so highly redo the best he could to obtain the debts due to spected, and the way in which the object was the firm. And the charge is, that he untruly endeavoured to be effected was under the prestated, in an amended answer in Chancery to tence of some favour to be shown to him, the a bill filed against him, and afterwards amend- proceedings were not to go any further-that ed, that Richard Smith did, in the month of is, he is to submit to the infamy of acquiescing December 1827, execute a bond, in the penal in the charge without being brought to public sum of 390l., to secure the sum of 1951. and trial on the condition that he would retire, and interest for his own individual benefit; would not appear again in this part of the actually for the benefit of the prisoner (the world. Now, gentlemen, I put this circumdefendant), and in which Benjamin Kidd and stance strongly before you in the first instance Richard Kidd, the partners of this gentleman, for the purpose of making this observation. had no interest. Now, in the first place, it is It appears to me that the evidence by which said that the bond was untruly sworn to have this offence is sought to be proved against the been given on his own account; and in the defendant does not depend, in any material second place, that the bond was untruly sworn to have been paid on his own account, but that on the contrary it was given to him for the benefit of the partnership, and the amount was paid to him for the use of the said partnership. Now, gentlemen, you have heard a

degree at least, upon the conduct of the prosecutors; their motives have been extremely culpable, and worthy of the highest reprobation, yet it may not affect the evidence upon which reliance may be placed to make this charge out, because the evidence principally,

character given of this gentleman (who is a if not entirely, is evidence in the hand-writing professional man), which is of the very highest of Mr. Meltersh himself, and there can be no description that any man in society can possi- doubt that the writing is his, and therefore bly receive; and I must state further to you, whatever bad motives, and whatever merce

when you are trying a case of this nature, you ought to bear in mind that you are trying a person who has conducted himself in so excellent a way as to enjoy the good opinion of persons as numerous and respectable as could possibly be called to give a character to any

nary and unworthy views they might have been actuated by, and which could be laid before you of their conduct, still the evidence which really goes to affect him with the charge is quite independent of any proposition as to their conduct, and therefore those circum

man. I do not go through the particulars stances cannot affect it at all. A person of the now, gentlemen, and probably shall not, be- name of Richard Smith, who is called before cause you cannot possibly have forgotten you as one of the witnesses, had given his bill them, and the impression that has been made upon you is doubtless well founded; and on the other hand I think I may observe to you generally that the circumstances of this prosecution do not appear to have been founded on the best motives, and conducted on the fairest principles; and I think I may say, without the fear of contradiction, that a good deal of the contrary feeling has been shown, because Mr. Benjamin Kidd has shown a good deal of angry feeling and vindictiveness which, sitting in this place, I think it impossible for me to hear with out reprobation; and it was shown in this way, namely, when the bill of indictment was preferred at the Quarter Sessions of the peace for Middlesex, Mr. Kidd, instead of allowing it to find its own way in the world, as I think he ought to have done, and allowing it to come on for trial in this court, took the most extravagant pains, and manifested the most eager desire to make the thing public, and he took the trouble to go about the country in a most unusual manner, trumpeting about the fact that the jury had found a true hill against Mr. Mellersh, which could only have the effect of putting him upon his trial, and was no proof

to the bankers at Godalming, consisting of three persons, the two Kidds and Mr. Mellersh. This bill, bearing date on the 14th of November, 1825, by which three months after date he calls upon Lloyd to pay to his order a sum of 1921. 4s. 9d., which was discounted at the bank, and that the fact appears that Smith had it from the bank under the pretence of handing it over to Lloyd's assignees (he having become a bankrupt) for their benefit, and for the benefit of the creditors of the concern; and that it appears instead of handing it over to them he gives it to a person of the name of Sandell, who was a stationer in London, and he procured from him upon this bill something to the amount of half the value; paper to the amount of 10s. in the pound was what he received, and the fact was, that he committed a gross breach of trust with reference to this bill, which he obtained half the value of, instead of doing what he ought to have done; so that he had got the full value from the bankers, and they never got anything in return for it. It appears, in consequence of that, that Mr. Mellersh sees the uncle of this man-the uncle was his friend and his client and it appears that he made

1

some application to him, and that the uncle Kidd, and he was very properly and minutely undertook to pay the debt which the nephew cross-examined with respect to this. He gave had incurred, and to give a bond for that pur-an account of it, which I own, speaking genepose. So it appears from the memorandum rally of transactions with regard to pieces of and letters which have been put in, and which are in the hand-writing of the defendant, and these documents you will have to pay particular attention to. The first of them is the memorandum which Mr. Kidd says Mr. Mellersh put into his hands on the occasion when he was going to town, and you will see what sort of memorandum it is, and there is this writing upon the foot, Richard Smith obtained the bill which the Bank held a security for 1927. 15s. 6d. for the purpose of showing it to Sandell to prove that Lloyd was indebted in that sum; but Smith, after making this false presence, went and delivered up the bill to Sandell for paper supposed to be equal to 10s. in the pound -namely, 961. 7s. 9d. Some of the paper Smith had, but a part was left in Sandell's hands: now Sandell should deliver up that paper or say what he would pay for it. Those are the instructions which Mr. Mellersh puts into the bands of Kidd on some occasion when he went to town, and clearly before the uncle had given compensation for this bill. I must observe here that it was quite in the option of Smith, the uncle, to do anything of that sort that he might think proper; and further that he was not bound to pay the debts of his nephew, and if so he was clearly at liberty to deal with the whole of the partners or auy one partner if he chose; and you will re-plete writing, which has been elicited from collect it is proved that Mr. Mellersh was his the evidence. Now, the paper is in these

attorney, and therefore possibly he might have been the person that the uncle chose to secure. Now this appears to be part of some other matter; there are lines between it, and you will see it appears that that is not the whole, but that there is no doubt that it is all that could be supposed to be wanted with reference to this question, for there is the memorandum of what Mr. Kidd had to do when he got to London. Now, gentlemen, I should observe here upon this question, that it seems to me upon the ground that there is not sufficient legal evidence in this case, that there is legal evidence before you of the facts of this matter, because, if these papers in the result convince you that Mr. Mellersh has upon his oath stated what is untrue, it appears to me, coming from more witnesses than one, they are properly conveyed to you. I say this with a double purpose, because, if there is a conviction in this case, the learned counsel will distinctly take a note of it in case an objection should arise, and in case I should be incorrect; and on the

paper, does not appear to me to be improbable: -he says he was about to wipe his razor, and upon looking at it he saw something that he thought of some importance, and therefore he thought he would keep this paper. He never thought of it, and he kept it in a drawer, and from time to time looking at it; never used it; and he always kept it; and lately, for safe custody, put it into the hands of his wife, and that was the way in which it was preserved; that is, in short, the general terms of his statement. That which he thought not important he tore off; and, looking simply at the fact of the safety, it does not strike me (but that is for your cousideration) as any thing improbable. Now, with regard to this piece of paper: in the first place, I should have thought it extremely proper that any person who thought it worth while to keep a piece of paper of this kind ought altogether to have preserved it whole, or have made an accurate copy of the whole, so as to show distinctly what it was that this paper contained; because, it is proper to say, you have only here a paragraph taken out of a letter, which cannot be deemed so satisfactory as the inspection of the whole, or at least a copy, where that is not possible. So that, gentlemen, in the first place, you are to consider this, not as a com

words, "I saw Mr. Richard Smith, the uncle, to-day, and he said, we should not lose the amount of the bill of 1921. 15s., and talked that I should make his will, and secure it; but I mean to get him to give a bond payable at his death with interest, and it will come to us then." So that it appears most undoubtedly he is speaking of this as a joint loss which had fallen on the partnership, which there is no doubt it had. He says, Smith has promised we shall not lose the amount of the bill of 1921. 15s., and talked that I should make his will and secure it. That however is unsatisfactory, because a will is always revokable; and then he says, but I mean to get him to give a bond payable at some future time. So that you observe, gentlemen, he speaks of us and we in a manner which in the first place points to it as a security for three, and not for himself alone. Well, gentlemen, you have heard a great number of questions put upon that paper: in the first place Kidd states he has no recollection

other hand, if you should think the defendant whatever of what was in the paper; whether not guilty, it will be much more satisfactory it contained anything relating to the subject to every body that the acquittal shall proceed of the trial he forgets, and he cannot tell. upon your views of the merits, and not upon Then he is asked a great deal with respect to the mere legal machinery which operates the purpose for which he kept it; and it is upon the Court. Now, gentlemen, the second quite obvious he only kept it considering it of document is one which is presented under some importance, which it could only be as very peculiar circumstances: it has been torn showing the joint interest of all the three partin half, and kept in a shaving-box for a consi- ners. How is it he never asked Mr. Mellersh derable series of years in the custody of Mr. to let him see the terms in which the bond was

*

given to him, and the particulars that took | any time call upon him to state that it was on place? Still more so I should say, how is it their account; nor do they furnish evidence when they were separating, and arranging, of that description. I think there are various

and collecting their debts, that he never brought forward this paper and the other documents to show the debt from Smith? That was a considerable debt to them all. And ultimately when the prosecutors made their charge in the bill in Chancery, that the partnership agreement had not been completed, why did they not charge Mr. Smith's debt us one of the things which had not been taken into account? That question has been very ingeniously argued by the learned counsel at the bar, as it appears to me. You will confine the observation as to the conduct of Kidd as showing, if he could not draw the inference from these papers then, that there was the joint obligation, how cau they prove it in a case coming now, at a distance of so many years, and after so many opportunities of looking at those papers? How can you be called on now to infer from them that a gentleman of this very high character shall actually have committed perjury? Now, gentlemen, there is also in the other paper, in which he writes to him upon the subject of this same bond after he had actually obtained itthat letter is in the terms yon have heard, and which I will again read-he mentions something about the fish, and then he says, "Richard Smith, senior, has signed the bond for 1951. to me individually, &c. &c." He wishes it not to be considered that the bond had been given by the uncle, in the name of the firm, in order to guard against its being connected with the bankruptcy. Now, gentlemen, I find it impossible to say that that would not naturally excite in the mind of Mr. Kidd the expectation that this gentleman had taken the bond undoubtedly for the benefit of the firm. He says in the postscript, "Richard Smith's bond carries in terest." There is nothing that gets rid of that

ways of considering this case; for it is quite possible, notwithstanding the statements in writing with reference to the bond, and notwithstanding Mr. Mellersh expressed his intention that it should be for the benefit of the partnership, it is quite probable that it still may have been intended for the benefit of Mr. Mellersh alone; and it is very probable as to that fact that explanations were given between December, 1827, when this last note was sent, and the period when they began to speak about the common concerns and the dissolution of the partnership, which completely proved that it was for Mr. Mellersh's own benefit. The dissolution took place in November, 1828, or rather, I believe, a little earlier; then it was the partnership was dissolved, and the deed of that date was put in, in which there is a schedule containing a list of what debts were due to the firm, and no notice is taken of this debt; and dertainly if the partners considered that Smith was liable on his bond, or at least if Mellersh was a trustee for them all, one would have thought that was the proper time to have noticed it: they would then, too, have naturally made a demand of the bond; that it was not made we have distinct evidence; if it had been made, it is quite possible that some explanation might have been given which would have led to an inquiry of Smith in his lifetime; and we do not even know that Mr. Kidd has not so satisfied any curiosity that might have been excited by that note. Therefore, that note which has been given in, proves in my mind, nothing material. On the 14. of November, 1828, Mr. Mellersh writes a letter to Mr. Kidd, in these words "Sir, on the other side is an account of the outstanding debts due to the old concern, &c. &c." It is written in rather cold language after the inti