188 MlNXJTES OF E V I D E N C E T A K E N B E F O R E T HE Mr. S. Nicholls. 10655. Then I want you to give me an instance where the judge allowed gen- tlemen to get their friends into court, and keep the others out r— I cannot say, hut 18 May 1838. he did lend himself to them. , r 10656. Will you state a single case in which he did lend himselt to them r— I have given you that case of Mr. Jessop. 10657. Chairman.] Have you any other case but that ?— No, I have not. 10658! Mr. Serjeant Jackson.] Now would you think it a becoming thing to cast an imputation of that kind upon a judge, without having a single matter of fact to sustain it ?— I consider it is a very proper thing, for his conduct all through left room for such imputations. 10659. His conduct all through, upon other points, was so bad, that you think it warrants you in imputing to him that particular species of misconduct; is that it? I consider he was a person who gave greater facility to one side than the other. 10660. And that you think warrants you in stating distinctly that he lent his ear to applications by certain gentlemen, to iet their friends into the court and keep the other side out; was that your evidence ?— No ; my evidence was, that one party had a greater facility in getting their friends in than others. 10661. Your evidence was, that some gentlemen had the ear of the court, and availed themselves of it to let some people in and keep others out; is that your evidence now ?— I think now that one party had greater facility, in getting their friends in than the others. 10662. Do you mean to abide by that, that some gentlemen had the ear of the court, and availed themselves of it to get their friends in, and to keep the others out?— I mean to say the presiding barrister did not act impartially, and that one party had a facility in getting their friends in which the other had not. 10663. That facility was derived from the barrister?— From the whole system of the court. 10664. E) o you mean to say it was in any degree derived from the barrister ?— Yes, in some degree. 10665. Then I understand you to say that the barrister lent an ear to certain persons, by letting their friends into court and keeping others out?— Yes; he was more favourable to one side than the other. 10666. By letting some into court and keeping others out ?— Yes. 10667. Now, do you think it becoming, in a man of your station and education, to cast such an imputation upon a gentleman, fulfilling the functions of a jud<? e, without having a single fact of any kind to support that imputation ?— I would not state it unless it was my firm conviction. 10668. But why should you have that conviction without a fact to support it? — Because his general conduct was such as to leave that impression upon my mind. 10669. But supposing that was your impression from other facts, do vou think that would justify it?— He would frequently order the court to be cleared on the one side, aud leave the other side full. 10670. Was there any noise and confusion in the court at that time?— There might have been. 10671. I put it to you, whether he ever ordered any person to be turned out unless there were a noise in court at the time ?— The noise was on the other side. 10672. Did the barrister order either side of the court to be cleared, except when noise and confusion was made ?— On one occasion he ordered the policemen to draw their bayonets and clear the court; and Mr. Curran stood upon a bench and said " the Government ought to be ashamed to send such an ' ermined idiot' to administer the laws." 10673. Do you consider that is an answer to mv question ?— I consider your question led to such an answer. 10674. But do you consider that to be an answer to it?— I did think it an answer.—[ The question was read to the Witness.] 10675. Do you think it is an answer to my question now you have heard the question and answer read ?— It is not a very direct one. 10676. Now I repeat the question to you; do you mean now to charge the registering barrister with having in any instance ordered the court to be cleared, except when there was a noise and disturbance in the court?- There was noise at the time.