Justice Aston and Mr. Justice Willes, before the other judges were come down. Yet, I presume, it is to be considered as having been done in court, since the recognizance was undersigned "By the Court."*

The reader will remark that the same inca

because a voter who has sold his vote, or has been even promised a reward for it, must, if the bribery oath is tendered to him, be guilty of perjury, before he can be admitted to poll. He traced the history and gradual progress of election-bribery, and of the different remedies which the House of Commons and the legisla-pacities ensue upon a conviction on a prosecuture had provided against it; and mentioned, particularly, that a very gross scene of corruption which had taken place at Beverley, in Yorkshire, in the year 1727,* had given rise to the statute of 2 Geo. 2, cap. 24.

The Judgment he delivered nearly in the following words:

"The Court has taken into consideration the imprisonment you have already undergone, and they adjudge that you shall pay, each, a fine of 1,000 marks; and that you be imprisoned six months, and until you pay your respective fines.

"As to you, Richard Smith, the Court cannot help expressing their astonishment at what appeared from the mouth of your own counsel, that you continued so boldly to persist in your attempt, and that you have been again returned for the same place. They therefore have thought proper to add to your punishment, that, at the expiration of the term of your imprisonment, you shall give security for your good behaviour for three years-yourself and two sureties-you to be bound in 1,000l. and each of the sureties in 5001,"

In consequence of this judgment, both the defendants were conveyed back to the King'sbench prison, where they continued till the 23d of November following. i. c. for the space of 168 days, or 6 lunar months.†

tion for bribery by way of information at common law, as when the proceeding is by an action under the statute; the disabling words in the act of 2 Geo. 2, cap. 24, sect. 7, being as follows:

"And every person offending in any of the cases aforesaid, from and after judgment obtained against him in any such action of debt, bill, plaint or information, or summary action, or prosecution, or being any otherwise lawfully convicted thereof, shall for ever be disabled to vote in any election of any member or members to parliament, and also shall for ever be disabled to hold, exercise or enjoy any office or franchise to which he and they then shall, or at any time afterwards may be entitled, as a member of any city, borough, town-corporate, or ciuque port, as if such person was naturally dead." Douglas's Election Cases.

"1776, 17th May. The Attorney General came into the court of King's-bench, and moved for judgment against general Smith, for bribing the electors of the borough of Hindon: Mr. Justice Willes stated the evidence against him. As soon as he concluded, serjeant Dary and Mr. Mausfield endeavoured to mitigate the sentence, by shewing how much the general On that day, their fines having been paid had already been punished for his offence, the into the hands of sir James Burrow, the clerk great expence he was at, and likely to be at. of the crown, some days before, Mr. Hollis In answer to what was urged in his favour, the was discharged by the marshal, Mr. Smith Attorney General insisted, that the reasons was brought up to Westminster-hall, and in given in favour of him, only aggravated his the treasury-chamber of the court of King's-guilt. Lord Mansfield then began by express bench, was bound over agreeably to his sentence for three years. This passed before Mr,

ing his concern that the defendant had brought himself into so disagreeable a situation, pursued the Attorney General's idea, that as to the ex pence, the general brought it on himself by procuring a return by corruption; that the voters being willing to receive bribes, was no Journ. vol. 21, p. 24, col. 1. 1 Feb. 1727-8,justification of the giver, that such punishment p. 188, col. 1, 2. 22 Jan. 1728-9, p. 236, col. 1, 2. 25 Feb. 1728-9, p. 249, col. 2. 9. p. 250, col. 1. 4 March, 1728-9, p. 259, col. 1, 2. 8 March, 1728-9.-Douglas.

It is impossible to collect any thing of the particular merits of this case of Beverley from

the entries relative to it in the Journals. Vide

+"A month in law is a lunar month, or 28 days, unless otherwise expressed, not only because it is always one uniform period, but because it falls naturally into a quarterly division by weeks. [Thus in a case in Dyer, 218 b, on the statute of enrolments, the six months were reckoned of 28 days each.]" Blackst. Comm. vol. 2, p. 141, 4to ed.-There is another reason why, in cases of punishment by imprisonment, the computation should be by lunar months; namely, the favour which is always to be shewn to liberty, where the terms are ambiguous and doubtful.-Douglas.

of

should be inflicted as would compel the candi-
date to be honest, that the present case was
the most serious nature.
An officer of the
Clown, on behalf of the public, prosecuted to
conviction. A man endeavouring to get into
the senate by corruption; this crime called for
ample punishment by way of example; it was
the first instance of the kind heard of, and
should be maturely censured, as it would be
impossible to preserve the constitution from
ruin, if courts of justice did not act with si
gour, when such matters came before them.
His lordship then ordered the general for the
present to stand committed, and to be brought

* I was favoured by sir J. Burrow with the account of these circumstances-Douglas

up the first day of next term to receive whatever sentence the Court should think proper to pronounce. Mr. Hollis, the other candidate, standing upon the same ground, was dismissed in the same manner, and both sent to the King's-bench prison.

"The day following, one of the voters at the same election was brought before the same Court, to receive sentence for wilful and corrupt perjury, in his evidence before the House of Commons, when he received sentence to stand on and in the pillory, with a paper on his fore"June 8th. General Richard Smith, and bead signifying his crime, "Wilful and CorThomas Brand Hollis, esq. the late members rupt Perjury," twice in the town of Hindon on for Hindon, were brought before the court of market-days, between eleven and two, the first King's-bench, in order to receive sentence, time to-morrow se'nnight, and the second the having before been convicted of bribery at the Thursday following. And accordingly on last general election, when sir Richard Aston Wednesday the 19th following, he was brought prefaced their sentence with a pathetic speech, from the King's-bench prison to Fisherton in which he expatiated on the enormity of the gaol, Wiltshire, and on Thursday was carried crime, as, by violating the freedom of election, to Hindon, where he was placed in the pillory and corrupting the electors, the British consti- for the first time. He was met on the road by tution, the most perfect in the world, could only a number of his friends, with two flags, and be undone, that the crime of which they had blue ribbons in their hats. The populace been guilty was aggravated by the tendency it treated him very favourably, their attention had to lead the ignorant and unwary to the being taken off, in a great measure, by a percommission of that horrid and foul sin of per-son mounted on a stool, who sung and sold an jury, the only barrier between God and man. From these and other reasons equally forcible, he inferred the necessity of an exemplary punishment, and adjudged them to pay a fine of 1,000 marks each (666l. 13s. 4d.) to the king, and to suffer six months imprisonment, and one of them (general Smith) at the expiration there. of, to enter into a recognizance of 1,000l. himself, and two securities in 5001. each, for his good behaviour for three years.

election ballad, much to their entertainment. He was brought back to Fisherton gaol in the evening, and is to undergo the remainder of his sentence the Thursday following."—Annual Register.

See more concerning these transactions, and the borough of Hindon, in Douglas's Election Cases, vol. 1, p. 173, vol. 4, p. 271. 18 Parl. Hist. 575, et seq.

560. The Trial of an Action brought by STEPHEN SAYRE, esq. against the Right Hon. WILLIAM HENRY Earl of ROCHFORD, one of his Majesty's most Hon. Privy Council, and theretofore one of his Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, for False Imprisonment: Before the Right Hon. Lord Chief Justice De Grey, in the Court of Common Pleas in Westminster-hall : 16 GEORGE III. A. D. 1776. [Published from Mr. Gurney's Short-Hand Notes.]†

Thursday, June 26.

Counsel for the Plaintiff.

Mr. Serjeant Glynn, Mr. Serjeant Adair, Mr. Davenport, Mr. Alleyne, Mr. Arthur Lee.

Counsel for the Defendant.

Mr. Attorney General, Mr. Solicitor General, Mr. Serjeant Davy, Mr. Wallace, Mr. Serjeant Walker, Mr. Dunning.

* I suppose that he was the person mentioned by Mr. Douglas in his Reports of Election Cases, vol. 3, case 26. Seaford Case.

As the original publication contains not the speeches of the Counsel, or the Lord Chief Justice's charge to the Jury, I have inserted in notes the report given of them in the Morning Chronicle newspaper of June 28th, 1776. In the Annual Register for the year, History of Europe, p. 53, is a brief account of the arrest of Sayre.

To this the defendant pleaded, First, the general issue of Not Guilty: And then several other pleas in justification: and his justification is, That he was at that time one of the lords of his majesty's privy council, and one of his majesty's principal secretaries of state; and that, upon an information upon oath, by one Richardson, against the plaintiff, for treasonable practices, he did issue his warrant to arrest the plaintiff for high treason, and to seize his papers; and did issue another warrant to commit him close prisoner to his majesty's Tower: this he pleads in justification. The plaintiff has replied, That this was done in his own wrong: upon that issue is joined which you are to try: we shall bring our evidence and prove our case; and upon that we trust, that the justice of your verdict will give us ample reparation for the injuries we have sustained.

Examined by Mr. Serjeant Adair. What are you?-A shoemaker by trade. What else?-A constable.

Do you remember being at Mr. Sayre's house?—Yes, I was called upon on Monday morning by Mr. Bond, sir John Fielding's clerk, and I went along with him to the king's

In the Morning Chronicle of June 28th, 1776, the opening speech of Mr. Serjeant Glynn is reported thus:

messengers, and from there we went to 'squire Sayre's house.

What messengers?-I don't know their names, two of the king's messengers. For what purpose did you go to Mr. Sayre's house?-They had got a warrant, they said. Did you see that warrant ?—I did not read it, they had it in their hand,

What did you do when you came there?They knocked at the door, the maid-servant came and opened it: they said they wanted to speak with 'squire Sayre about some particular business she went up and told the 'squire, I believe; she came down again, and let us into the parlour on the right-hand, and then the 'squire came down; they shewed him a paper, the warrant I suppose it was, and said they must look into his apartments for some papers. They must search for papers?—Yes.

Did they read the warrant ?-Yes, they read the warrant to him.

What did they do in consequence?-As soon be shewed them all the desks where they were. as the 'squire had settled a-bit, and got ready,

Did they take any thing?-I believe they took two or three away, I cannot say which. Did they search among his papers ?—Yes; I stood by, and the 'squire was by.

Where did they go, and in what manner did they behave?-They behaved very genteel and quiet.

What did they do with his papers?-They read a great many over, and those that they did not want, I suppose, they left.

They examined them ?---Yes.

deducing from the whole such inferences as were most likely to alarm the jury and bring the circumstance home to each man's breast. The Recorder of London, as leading coun- He painted in the liveliest colours the injustice sel for the plaintiff, opened the cause, and stated of issuing a warrant to seize a man's person the grounds of the action to the jury, begin- and papers on an information not less improba ning with an account of the mode of putting ble than ridiculous: he urged the inquisitorial the first warrant in force on the 23d of Octo-stile of the private examination of a man so ap ber, by sending three of the messengers of the secretary of state to Mr. Sayre's house, where they pretended they wanted to speak to him respecting a forged note of 2001. and by that means got possession of his person and conveyed him to lord Rochford's office, after having rummaged his cabinet and seized his papers; reciting the examination of Mr. Sayre before lord Rochford and sir John Fielding, with the refusal of the defendant to accept bail, al though he had changed his ground and committed Mr. Sayre for treasonable practices, notwithstanding that the warrant of apprehension charged him with high treason, and finally mentioning the committing him to safe and close custody, which was rigidly observed, (excepting the compliance paid to a restrictive order for the free access of Mrs. Sayre) although the offence on the face of the commitment was merely a misdemeanour, and therefore bailable.

"The Recorder dwelt on each particular above-mentioned with great force and ability,

prehended, and the manifest malice and sere rity of refusing bail, and committing him close prisoner to the Tower, after the magistrate be|fore whom he was examined, bad found reason to alter his opinion of the fact with which he was charged, and thought proper to change the description of his offence, and to insert in the commitment words of such vague and indeterminate import, as the words treasonable practices.' Having enlarged on the general illegality and evil tendency of such conduct in any man, and more particularly in a secretary of state, he retouched bis picture and increased its effect by shewing how particularly mischievous it was to Mr. Sayre; who, when the event took place, was a banker of great credit, and was now, in consequence, a ruined man. He hoped therefore the jury, from their natu ral feelings and wish to do justice, would see the case in its true light, and then he doubted not they would think the plaintiff materially injured; and make him a just compensation by awarding him ample damages,"

How came you to say that you came about a forged draft, when you were a king's mesYou did not see any thing that passed after-senger armed with a warrant?-Because I wards? No, I was not in the office. wished to see Mr. Sayre.